Co-authored by William Broussard

A controversial decision to develop a data center at Fisk. __________ History Month at FAMU. Morris Brown fires and rescinds its decision to fire its president within weeks. Howard University replaces its president with a former president.

A year of occasional national-headline-grabbing scandals at HBCUs occurred primarily at institutions with established presidents, amid a much slower-than-usual year of executive turnover, heralding a potential shift in the pace of mid-year changes that threaten the stability and momentum of HBCUs.

Controversial changes in executive leadership rocked institutions such as Michigan State and Clemson, Ohio State University, and the Universities of Wisconsin. HBCUs, which in recent years saw over 30 executive leadership changes, emphasized leadership development and future executive training as important themes in producing workforce-ready graduates, leadership in diverse fields, and innovative program development to bolster recruitment.

HBCUs announced twenty (20) executive leadership changes in 2025-2026, the lowest number of announcements since we began compiling this report in 2015-2016 (view all past reports here). Those announcements are detailed below:

HBCU executive leadership remains in a period of significant transition, but the story is a bit more nuanced than simply saying “turnover is getting worse.” Based on an updated dataset of HBCU institutions, the average presidential tenure is now approximately 54 months, or 4.5 years, still significantly below the 2023 American Council on Education-published average of 5.9 years.

The median, however, is only 35 months, or just under three years. That median is important because a small number of very long-serving presidents pull the average upward. In practical terms, the typical HBCU president is still relatively early in their tenure.

The 4-year HBCU data may be the most important control group. Among 88 4-year institutions, the average tenure is approximately 46.4 months (3.9 years), with a median of 32.5 months. That means the dominant institutional category in the sector is still, in many cases, led by presidents who are in the early stages of building cabinets, aligning boards, stabilizing enrollment, managing financial pressures, and moving from transition to execution.

There is also a meaningful public/private distinction. Across all institutions, public HBCUs have an average tenure of 56.7 months, compared with 51.3 months for private HBCUs. However, the median gap is sharper: public HBCUs show a median tenure of 41.5 months, compared with 27 months for private HBCUs. Among 4-year institutions specifically, public HBCUs average 52 months, while private HBCUs average 41.2 months. This suggests that private HBCUs remain more heavily concentrated in early-tenure leadership.

The gender disparity is also worth close examination, as detailed in a recent EDU Ledger report. Men hold roughly two-thirds of the presidencies in the dataset, while women hold about one-third. However, tenure length by gender does not differ dramatically in recent data. Across all institutions, the average tenure for men and women is essentially identical at approximately 54 months. Among 4-year institutions, men average 47.8 months and women average 43.3 months. The representation gap is more pronounced than the tenure gap when comparing male and female executive leaders.

One of the most notable changes from last year is interim leadership. The updated dataset shows eight interim presidents, representing about 7.7% of the institutions reviewed. All eight are at 4-year institutions, and seven of the eight are at private HBCUs. That is still significant, but it is lower than the interim count we cited last year. Fewer interim leaders do not necessarily mean the crisis has passed, but they may indicate that several institutions have moved from emergency transition to permanent appointments.

Notably, more than half of the institutions in the dataset have presidents with less than 3 years of tenure. Specifically, 57 of 104 institutions, or roughly 55%, are led by presidents in their first three years. Among 4-year HBCUs, that figure rises to 52 of 88 institutions, or roughly 59%. This suggests that the sector is not merely experiencing turnover; it is living through a period of broad presidential onboarding.

The HBCU presidency remains volatile, but the current story is less about constant vacancy and more about early-tenure leadership. The sector is being shaped by presidents who are still in the first chapter of their administrations, and the next two to three years will determine whether these transitions produce institutional stability or another cycle of disruption.

With strong headwinds challenging recruitment and retention of college-aged students across the country, and increased federal scrutiny, funding reductions, and rescissions, the challenges mount for early-stage executive leaders in many settings.

Several themes emerge from the data, including:

1. The HBCU presidency is getting younger in tenure, even where seats are technically filled.
2. The first three years may now be the defining window for HBCU presidential success or failure.
3. Private HBCUs appear to be carrying a disproportionate share of early-tenure and interim leadership, though from 2024-2025, the number of interim leaders at year end reduced from 16 to 6.
4. Gender representation remains a major issue, while the updated tenure data does not show women serving dramatically shorter terms than men.
5. Interim leadership appears lower than last year, but its concentration among private 4-year institutions is still worth examining.
6. Long-tenured leaders continue to distort the average tenure, so median tenure may be the better measure of sector stability. Conversely, institutions such as Spelman, Texas College, and Tougaloo’s new hires pull down the average tenure, since they are within months of their respective new presidencies.

In conclusion, we recognize that this year’s data suggests less significantly that “the house is on fire” and more “the sector is in the fragile implementation phase after a wave of leadership change.”

The question now may be: are HBCUs building the conditions for newer presidents to succeed, or is more turnover around the corner, given that the college presidency faces historically significant, overlapping challenges? As ever, alumni and advocates of HBCUs must continue to support leaders who demonstrate initiative and lead with courage in these times, while rising to the challenges posed by meddlesome boards and unsupportive legislatures, which present themselves almost without cessation in many contexts.