The Trump administration has floated the draft of an agreement with several high-profile colleges — a sort of deal in which the universities would make a series of commitments in admissions, speech on campus, hiring, and other areas, in return for vaguely defined “federal benefits.”
“Institutions of higher education are free to develop models and values other than those below,” the proposed agreement reads, “if the institution elects to forego federal benefits.”
The Chronicle received a copy of the compact sent to the University of Virginia, as well as a cover letter addressed to Paul G. Mahoney, UVa’s interim president. Signing the compact would signal to the government that a college was “pursuing federal priorities with vigor,” UVa’s letter states.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Arizona, and the University of Southern California confirmed to The Chronicle that they had received the compact but had no further comment. The University of Texas system’s board chair issued a public statement confirming that UT-Austin was a recipient.
The Wall Street Journal first reported on the offer, titled “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” and said other recipients included Brown University, Dartmouth College, the University of Pennsylvania, and Vanderbilt University. None of those institutions responded to The Chronicle on Thursday.
The compact looks a bit like the agreements the government has signed — or has tried to sign — with universities like Columbia and Harvard. One major difference is that this document reportedly went out simultaneously to nine universities, not one at a time. It was sent to colleges that have already signed deals and to colleges that have so far not received complaints of antisemitism or other discrimination from the federal government.
Neither the White House nor the Department of Education provided comment. An automated email from the department said that staff “are currently in furlough status” because of the government shutdown.
The cover letter sent to UVa was signed by Linda McMahon, the education secretary; May Mailman, an adviser to President Trump; and Vincent Haley, another adviser. In return for signing the contract, there would be “multiple positive benefits for the school, including allowance for increased overhead payments where feasible, substantial and meaningful federal grants, and other federal partnerships,” the letter says.
The letter asks for “limited, targeted feedback” and sets an October 20 deadline to respond. Mahoney, UVa’s interim leader, has started a working group to consider the compact, Brian T. Coy, a spokesperson, wrote in a statement.
So far, the most explicit response has come from Texas. “The University of Texas system is honored that our flagship — the University of Texas at Austin — has been named as one of only nine institutions in the U.S. selected by the Trump administration for potential funding advantages under its new ‘Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,’” Kevin Eltife, chair of the University of Texas system’s Board of Regents, said in a statement. “We enthusiastically look forward to engaging with university officials and reviewing the compact immediately.”
Analysis
By Chronicle Staff
October 2, 2025
Stakeholders at another recipient were less enthused. “There’s a lot in this compact that is very easy to twist into draconian restrictions,” said Lorena S. Grundy, vice president of the University of Pennsylvania’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors.
Grundy’s interview with The Chronicle and a statement from the Penn chapter together laid out some of their specific fears. One is that the compact says the Department of Justice would monitor compliance, opening the university up to having funding pulled at the sole discretion of the government. Another is the compact’s definitions of sex and gender, which could hurt Penn’s queer populations.
Faculty advocates are also worried that the compact asks universities to forbid “support for entities designated by the U.S. government as terrorist organizations,” a policy that they feel is easy to weaponize. “We have seen that the federal government is labeling any pro-Palestine activist speech or scholarly work as pro-Hamas when it isn’t,” Grundy said.
“Basically this is a continuation of the theme that we have been witnessing since the beginning of this second Trump administration, and that is that if universities don’t acquiesce to the administration’s ideological agenda, then they will be punished,” said Kelly Benjamin, a spokesperson for the national AAUP. Sending the compact to just a handful of colleges is part of a “divide and conquer” tactic, Benjamin said. “These nine universities that were sent this, we urge their governing boards and presidents to resist and to oppose this.”
An expert at one higher-ed group questioned whether the compact was legally enforceable.
“Any sort of criteria you attempted to place into a grant program that gave an advantage for aligning with the administration’s priorities would probably not hold up in court,” said Jon Fansmith, senior vice president for government relations at the American Council on Education.
He questioned how the scientific grant-making process, in which experts score proposals on their scientific merits, could incorporate the compact’s provisions. Other grant programs, as well as direct student loans and Pell Grants, have eligibility standards that are set in law, and it’s not clear if the compact can circumvent that.
And would signing be worth it? It might not always be, Fansmith suggested. The compact asks colleges to hold tuition flat for five years and to admit undergraduate classes composed of no more than 15 percent international students — terms that might cost some colleges more than the funding they’d get back.
