Methodology

Heritage researchers began by surveying state policy affiliates to get a sense from partners on the ground about which colleges and universities are good options for conservatives. State policy affiliates are state-level nonprofit think tanks affiliated with the State Policy Network (SPN). (SPN serves as a network for conservative and libertarian think tanks focusing on state-level policy solutions.) Researchers also reviewed existing research guides that have already surveyed the existing college landscape, such as The Newman Guide and several iterations of the Choosing the Right College: The Intercollegiate Studies Institute Guide.

Researchers further developed a list of metrics against which to measure each college and university. Those metrics include school climate; a curriculum review; return on investment; the four-year graduation rate; binary measures, such as whether the school has a bias reporting system, departments of ethnic or gender studies, or requires diversity statements in hiring; the number of conservative versus liberal clubs; the yield rate; and the prevalence of DEI administrators.

• For school climate, we reviewed the following: The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) surveys undergraduates about their perceptions of and experiences with free speech on their campuses. We pulled the data from FIRE’s 2024 College Free Speech Rankings and reviewed the following three questions for various colleges and universities: “FIRE Q2: How comfortable would you feel doing the following on your campus? Expressing disagreement with one of your professors about a controversial political topic in a written assignment,” “FIRE Q3: How comfortable would you feel doing the following on your campus? Expressing your views on a controversial political topic during an in-class discussion,” and “FIRE Q12: How clear is it to you that your college administration protects free speech on campus?” We also reviewed whether a college or university had adopted the Chicago Statement, a model free speech policy statement, via data collected by FIRE.
• For the curriculum review, we reviewed the data derived from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni’s (ACTA’s) “What Will They Learn?” dataset. ACTA grades institutions from “A+” to “F” based on whether the schools “require all undergraduates to complete courses in Composition, Literature, Foreign Language, U.S. Government or History, Economics, Mathematics, and Natural Science that meet carefully defined criteria.”
• For the return on investment component, we reviewed the data on the average administrative cost per student. How Colleges Spend Money tracks the administrative cost per student as a “measure of expenditures per student for day-to-day executive operations of the institution, not including student services or academic management.” We also looked at the average post-graduation income using the “median earnings” data collected by College Scorecard.
• For the graduation rate, we examined at the data provided by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on its College Navigator webpage. We used the four-year graduation rate for full-time students pursuing bachelor’s degrees and, more specifically, for the cohort that began its studies in 2017.
• For the binary measures, such as whether the schools have a bias response team, departments of ethnic or gender studies, or require diversity statements in hiring, we looked at the following data: Speech First maintains a database of colleges and universities that have bias reporting systems. In identifying departments of ethnic and gender studies, we searched the university webpages of various colleges and universities to determine whether they had departments of ethnic and gender studies. We reviewed employment pages to find whether they required statements of diversity from applicants.
• For the number of conservative versus liberal clubs, we reviewed individual college profiles from Campus Reform. This organization collects information from colleges and universities on the number and type of student political organizations available.
• For the yield rate, we reviewed the data available from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) via its College Navigator page. We used the “percent admitted who enrolled” for the total number of students for undergraduate admissions in fall 2023.
• To determine the prevalence of DEI administrators per 100 faculty members, we reviewed the data from Heritage’s data visualization chart titled “Universities Bloated with ‘Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion’ Staff.” We pulled the “DEI per 100 faculty” numbers for the various colleges and universities. The “DEI per 100 faculty” represents the number of DEI administrators per 100 faculty members at each college or university.

In addition, we reviewed a list of programs and centers at various universities and colleges designated by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) as “Hidden Gems” or “Oases of Excellence,” or that are home to a Jack Miller Center Partner Program. Hidden Gems are designated by ACTA to have honors, major, minor, and certificate programs that “guide students through a high-quality and coherent interdisciplinary education across the liberal arts.” The Oases of Excellence are programs and centers at various colleges and universities that ACTA believes “share a commitment to educating students for informed citizenship in a free society by maintaining the highest academic standards, introducing students to the best of the foundational arts and sciences, teaching American heritage, and ensuring free inquiry into a range of intellectual viewpoints.” The Jack Miller Center maintains a list of partner programs that it develops on numerous college campuses, which are “dedicated to teaching American political thought and history.”

After reviewing and analyzing the above information, we categorized relevant colleges and universities into three groups: “Great Option,” “Worth Considering,” and “Not Recommended.”

We concluded that the universities and colleges listed as “Great Options” were solid choices for families that value freedom, opportunity, and civil society. They provide rigorous academics, maintain independence from extensive DEI bureaucracies, and offer a solid return on investment through competitive post-graduation incomes and high four-year graduation rates. Additionally, they foster free expression, making them ideal for those seeking academic excellence and ideological balance.

The colleges and universities listed as “Worth Considering” include programs designated by the ACTA as “Hidden Gems” or “Oases of Excellence,” or are home to a Jack Miller Center Partner Program. Although these institutions may not be as strong a choice for conservative students as the “Great Options,” they are distinguished by their robust programs and centers that foster rigorous academic study, the pursuit of truth, and a shared commitment to preparing students for informed citizenship in a free society.

The universities and colleges listed in the “Not Recommended” category display a pervasive hostility toward diverse viewpoints and lack robust core curricular requirements, undermining a well-rounded education. The institutions are often heavily influenced by ideologically driven administration agendas and DEI bureaucracies, frequently resulting in limitations on freedom of expression. Moreover, these universities typically demonstrate weak returns on investment, evidenced by lower graduation rates and diminished post-graduation income.