The Key — Penn’s Planning for Growth in an Age of Uncertainty
The media is constantly reminding us of the threats facing higher education. But Penn’s Trustees appear optimistic about the university's future.
Last week, the Board of Trustees Facilities and Campus Planning Committee reviewed the half-a-billion dollar, much-needed plan to transform David Rittenhouse Laboratory (DRL) into a state-of-the-art classroom, research, office, and student life complex. The project will cost roughly $520 million, making it the most expensive renovation in Penn’s recent history.
Reactions from the Trustees were overwhelmingly positive. Rather than questioning whether the university should proceed, trustees asked if the project could go further to accommodate Penn’s growth for decades.
The Trustees pressed the planning team about expanding the design: Why are we building only seven floors? Could the structure be designed now to accommodate expansion later? What is the tallest we could possibly make the building? Is money the only barrier to building even higher?
One trustee asked: “How much would it cost to add one, two, or three extra floors?”
Those questions stand out because they come at a moment when universities are facing significant financial and structural uncertainty.
Much of the rhetoric about higher education focuses on the conflict between universities and the federal government or fears of dwindling research funding. Penn’s leaders often reiterate the harmful ramifications of the looming endowment tax, expected to cost Penn over $350 million over the next five years.
In January, Provost John L. Jackson and EVP Mark Dingfield announced 4% budget cuts across Penn’s schools and centers as a proactive savings measure. This move reflected warnings from university leadership that although Penn’s financial position entering 2026 was stronger than expected, significant uncertainty lay ahead.
Beyond financial pressures, Penn and its peers also face deeper structural challenges. Artificial intelligence will soon force an evolution in the system. Penn appears to be positioning itself at the forefront of AI education, introducing new majors and Masters programs in the engineering school and concentrations for Wharton undergraduates and MBAs. Through strategic initiatives like Penn Forward and SAS Horizons, leaders across the university are signaling that they know AI will challenge Penn’s current model. Yet there is still no clear blueprint for how the university will adapt.
Uncertainty is now a defining feature of American higher education. That is precisely why the Trustees’ attitude is notable. The group is aware of these headwinds, yet they continue to advocate for Penn’s expansion and plan for a prosperous, long future.
It may not be possible to expand the Physical Science building more than planned. Although zoning rules do pose some limitations, the biggest issue is funding. However, the discussion itself sends a strong signal that the Trustees, some of Penn’s most important leaders, are hopeful that the university will continue to grow.
This optimism should not be mistaken for a concrete plan. Emerging truly prosperous over the next era will require a coordinated approach from a university that is notoriously siloed by school and division. It will require strong and visionary leadership, a challenge given Penn’s recent turnover and reputational strain.
Perhaps most of all, Penn’s long-term success depends on buy-in and drive for it to endure. Last week’s discussion of the Physical Science building demonstrates that enthusiasm and ambition are alive among the Board of Trustees.
The Almanac
Curated highlights from this week’s Penn news
Penn awaits judge’s ruling in EEOC subpoena enforcement case
On Tuesday, Penn, intervening faculty and student groups, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) presented arguments before a federal judge in Philadelphia. The judge did not issue an immediate ruling, and the decision could later be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals and potentially the Supreme Court.
In 2023, EEOC Commissioner Andrea Lucas opened an investigation into Penn over potentially antisemitic employment practices. Last November, the EEOC sued Penn, alleging non-compliance with a subpoena requesting lists of employees involved in departments, affiliation groups, and clubs at Penn related to Judaism or Jewish life, as we’ve discussed previously.
Penn is joined by intervening faculty and student groups, including the Jewish Law Students Association of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (JLSA), the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), and the Penn Association of Senior and Emeritus Faculty (PASEF), in opposing the subpoena. Although the school's administration, faculty, staff, and student groups rarely align on major issues, this case has drawn unusually broad support from across Penn’s Jewish community.
As the New York Times reported, the judge appeared “skeptical” of Penn’s arguments. Judge Pappert repeatedly emphasized that his ruling would be narrow, addressing only whether the EEOC’s request for names and contact information of Penn employees falls within the EEOC’s jurisdiction. Interveners argued that the investigation could be conducted in a “less burdensome” way, while also warning that the subpoena could infringe on Jews’ rights to free assembly and freedom of religion.
So what? Penn’s ability to fulfill its mission of academic excellence depends on maintaining a campus environment where community members feel free to exercise their First Amendment rights without fear of retaliation. Critics of the EEOC’s subpoena argue that requests for lists of employees affiliated with Jewish organizations could chill participation in campus groups.
Penn receives “B” grade on ADL Campus Antisemitism Report Card
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) released its 2026 university rankings for campus antisemitism. Penn’s “B” rating (“Better than Most”) demonstrates measurable improvement from a “C” in 2025 (“Corrections Needed”) and a “D” in 2024 (“Deficient Approach”).
Penn’s rating was based on three categories. In the category of Jewish Life on Campus, Penn received the highest rating for every criterion, including “active Hillel, Chabad, or other Jewish student organization.” The school was rated “Above Expectations” for Publicly Disclosed Administrative Actions, completely fulfilling 10 out of 13 total benchmarks including “clear process for reporting antisemitic incidents” and “Title VI office and/or coordinator.”
However, the report assigned Penn “High” concern for Campus Conduct and Climate Concerns, citing antisemitic and anti-Zionist incidents, hostile anti-Zionist student groups, and hostile anti-Zionist staff and faculty activity. The report card did not specify the complete list of incidents, student groups, staff, or faculty referenced.
Penn is not alone in improving in its ADL rating over the past few years. In 2024, less than a quarter of schools received “A” or “B” grades. In 2026, 58% of schools received grades in that range.
So what? The ADL’s review points to several recent developments on campus — from the Department of Education’s 2023 antisemitism investigation to the 2024 “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” and the 2025 defacement of a mezuzah. The report also highlights Penn’s efforts to improve the campus climate for Jewish students, including steps taken to implement recommendations from the 2024 University Task Force on Antisemitism. While the ADL does not fully disclose its methodology, the organization’s conclusion is clear: it views Penn as a better environment for Jewish students than in recent years.
New program boosts support for veterans and military affiliated students at Penn
This week, Penn announced a new partnership with Service to School (S2S), a nonprofit that helps veterans and US military service members apply to, and succeed at, top universities across the country. The program provides application guidance, mentorship, and resources on campus.
Through the partnership, Penn will join the S2S VetLink program, meaning its undergraduate admissions team will take a “closer look” at S2S applicants. Other VetLink partners include Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, MIT, Princeton, Stanford, UChicago, and Yale.
So what? In its announcement, Penn framed the partnership as part of a broader effort to strengthen support for veterans and service members in both admissions and campus life. The timing is notable. Last week, the Pentagon announced it will no longer fund Service Members’ education at 22 universities, including Brown, Columbia, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, MIT, and Princeton. Notably, Penn was not a part of that group and will continue to receive Pentagon funding. Initiatives like this may help Penn strengthen its relationship with the military community and policymakers.
Thank you for reading the Franklin’s Forum newsletter! We love connecting with our readers — send us your thoughts and questions, Penn news, and ideas for future issues. If you enjoyed this edition, please spread the word by forwarding it to friends and classmates.