A version of this editor’s note together with a detailed ‘Intelligence Brief’ dissecting Cornell’s 238-page report appeared in Higher Education Leadership Intelligence on October 7, 2026.
In April we published The Yale Decoy, arguing that tuition-dependent universities should not adopt Yale’s report on public trust as a strategic roadmap. On September 22, Cornell’s Committee on the Future of the American University released its answer: a 238-page report, a vision statement, and a formal endorsement from the provost. The provost’s endorsement described the report as a chance to ”help define a new model for the American university.”
Within days, Cornell was in the news for a different reason. In mid-September, a former student filed a civil lawsuit against the university, the Chi Phi fraternity, her sorority, and seven current and former students. She alleges she was drugged and sexually assaulted by multiple men in October 2024. The story broke in Cornell’s own student newspaper: on September 18, The Cornell Daily Sun published an investigation, nearly two years in the making. The Times has since reported on more than 1,000 pages from the university’s internal inquiry.
None of this was news to Cornell when the Committee on the Future of the American University committee convened. On November 26, 2024, its interim president had issued a public statement on ”serious and deeply disturbing allegations of drug abuse and sexual violence,” while a Title IX investigation opened in January 2025 and held hearings that May. The provost convened the committee in September 2025. The report runs 238 pages and draws on a year of deliberation and engagement with more than 6,000 stakeholders. Nowhere in it do the words ”fraternity,” ”Greek,” ”Title IX,” ”sexual assault,” or ”sexual violence” appear.
Despite that glaring and questionable omission, the report is a substantially better document than Yale’s, and we credit it below. But its silence on student safety is also the clearest case of the pattern our intelligence brief examines: candor about the sector’s problems and selectivity about Cornell’s own. Some readers have already proposed it as a model. An Inside Higher Ed essay urged institutions rebuilding public trust to follow Cornell’s lead, while The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board faulted the report for casting universities as victims of forces they helped create. Mid-tier leaders should take Cornell’s questions, leave its answers, and add the questions Cornell left out.
Mid-tier university leaders should read Cornell’s report closely and adopt almost none of its remedies. Its first half is the most candid account of the sector’s structural problems that an elite institution has published this year. It names cost, AI-driven labor displacement, federal funding contraction, master’s-program sprawl, and the admissions arms race. It even admits the limits of Cornell’s own financial self-knowledge.
Its second half is a set of commitments sized for a land-grant Ivy with an 8.4 percent admit rate and a global brand. It explicitly closes off the four cheapest structural levers available to a tuition-dependent institution. It spends its operational specificity on faculty working conditions while routing the price question to a different task force that does not yet exist. And it says nothing about the student-safety failures that now define Cornell in the national and international press. The committee disclaimed transferability but Cornell is marketing it anyway. Trustees and senior leadership at other institutions will read the marketing.
The Intelligence Council’s full Brief on Cornell’s report may be accessed here.
About
Adil Husain is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of business media company The Intelligence Council, and Managing Director of the global advisory firm Emerging Strategy. You can reach him here for a conversation: adil@intelligencecouncil.com
Higher Education Leadership Intelligence is for presidents, provosts, CIOs, and institutional decision-makers leading through enrollment, funding, and tech disruption.