A faculty committee convened by Yale president Maurie McInnis released a sweeping report Wednesday on the collapse of public confidence in higher education, offering a blunt assessment of the sector’s failures on cost, admissions, free speech, and governance. The findings, a year in the making, represent one of the most self-critical examinations any elite university has publicly undertaken. The report arrives as Yale and its Ivy League peers are under pressure from multiple directions—not just a skeptical public, but a federal government that has used funding as a direct lever against campus autonomy.

“We believe the issue of declining trust is real, urgent, and must be addressed,” the committee wrote in its opening letter to McInnis.

The numbers back them up. Just a decade ago, 57% of Americans said they had a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in higher education. By 2024, that figure had fallen to a historic low of 36%, according to Gallup and Pew polling cited in the report. Though trust ticked upward slightly in 2025, 70% of Americans still say higher education is “heading in the wrong direction.” And no corner of academia faces more skepticism than the Ivy League—the very institutions that have long positioned themselves as the gold standard.

The report identifies three primary culprits behind the trust collapse:

• Runaway costs
• An opaque and inequitable admissions system
• A campus climate increasingly hostile to free expression

The committee was careful to note that the rot runs deeper than any single issue. “In recent years, universities have been expected to be all things to all people—selective but inclusive, affordable but luxurious, meritocratic but equitable,” the report states. “Rather than build public support, this diffusion of purpose has contributed to distrust.” In other words, you can’t please everyone and risk making no one happy instead.

Skyrocketing tuition costs

On cost, the committee pulls no punches. Yale’s full cost of attendance this year is $94,425, in a country where the median family income sits below $84,000. In a national poll, 86% of respondents said “too expensive” described Yale. The committee concedes that the university’s high-tuition, high-aid model—under which roughly one in five undergraduates attends on a full ride—has quietly made Yale more accessible, but argues the system is “complicated, unpredictable, secretive, and highly variable.” The result: Nearly half of Americans don’t even believe financial aid of that magnitude exists.

Yale moved to address that perception gap in January, announcing it would eliminate tuition for families earning less than $200,000 and cover the full cost of attendance for families earning less than $100,000—a policy set to take effect for incoming students in fall 2026. More than 80% of American households would qualify for at least partial scholarship coverage under the new rules, the university said. The committee’s report, however, found that messaging failures are as damaging as policy failures—and that Yale must do far more to make its affordability story legible to the public.

Admissions process questioned

The admissions chapter may generate the most controversy. With Yale’s acceptance rate at 4.2% for the class of 2030, the committee questioned whether the holistic review process—long defended as a tool for assembling a diverse, talented class—is actually delivering on its promises. Citing research by economists Raj Chetty, David Deming, and John Friedman, the report notes that applicants from the top 1% of the income distribution are substantially more likely to gain admission than equally credentialed middle-class peers. Legacy preferences and recruited athletics account for much of that disparity. Still, elite universities have had more than two years since those findings were published to act on them; the Yale committee’s report suggests most of that window was squandered.

Self-censorship on campus

Free speech and self-censorship drew equally sharp scrutiny. A 2025 Yale survey found that nearly a third of undergraduates don’t feel free to express their political views on campus—up from 17% in 2015. The committee also flagged a troubling new development: Postdoctoral fellows and international students report hesitating to speak about even their own research, for fear of government retaliation.

That fear is grounded in documented reality. Over the past year, the Trump administration froze $2.2 billion in federal grants to Harvard after it refused to comply with White House demands to limit campus activism; later threatened to cut all federal funding; and opened a task force probe into $8.7 billion in total Harvard contracts and grants. The chilling effect has rippled across the Ivy League, with postdocs and international researchers at multiple institutions reporting heightened anxiety about speaking publicly on their work.

The committee issued 20 recommendations spanning admissions reform, greater budget transparency, curbs on administrative bloat, and a renewed commitment to Yale’s 1974 Woodward Report principles on free expression. It urged the university to move beyond performative gestures. “Building trust will require sustained attention to what the public wants and needs from its system of higher education,” the report states.

The committee submitted its findings unanimously—a signal, perhaps, that elite academia is finally willing to say out loud what the public has long believed.

For this story, Fortune journalists used generative AI as a research tool. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing.