(The Epoch Times)—The University of Southern California (USC) has announced it will lay off staff and embark on other cost-cutting measures as it faces a $200 million deficit, as well as state and federal funding cuts, that interim President Beong-Soo Kim described as creating a “volatile external environment.”
In a July 14 memo sent to faculty and staff, Kim detailed how the decision was made due to considerable shifts in federal funding, as well as a likely decrease in international student enrollment.
“The ultimate impact of these changes is difficult to predict, but for a university of our scale, the potential annual revenue loss in federally sponsored research funding alone could be $300 million or more,” she wrote. “We cannot rely on the hope that federal support will revert to historical levels.”
USC is one of many universities now facing cuts that have historically relied on federal funds for research, hospitals, and student financial aid.
“To deal decisively with our financial challenges, we need to transform our operating model, and that will require layoffs,” wrote Kim, who did not outline how many people might be laid off.
Alongside cuts in federal financing, USC faces a structural deficit in which its revenue has fallen short of expenses, a trend that has gone on for several years.
The university implemented temporary measures in March 2025, including budget reductions and a pause in hiring. USC ended Fiscal Year 2025 facing an operating deficit in excess of $200 million. In Fiscal Year 2024, the university posted a $158 million deficit. The university is home to the USC Marshall School of Business, which is often ranked among the nation’s top business schools.
“Left untamed, this recurring, structural deficit erodes cash reserves, constrains future planning and capital needs, and is simply unsustainable,” Kim stated.
The university has taken other steps to address the deficit, such as ceasing some third-party services, while instituting discretionary spending and travel controls.
Kim says that the school is committed to further cuts, such as selling unused properties, eliminating redundant operations, and lowering compensation for the university’s best-paid employees. USC created a website to pool ideas from students and faculty on how best to tackle its financial challenges.
“While important steps, these measures will not be enough by themselves to reverse our structural deficit and weather the new federal environment,” Kim wrote in the letter. “Nor is it feasible to rely on increased tuition revenue, draw more from our endowment, or take on additional debt.”
USC is one of many schools facing a rapid environmental change in higher education, as federal cuts affect institutions across the country.
Meanwhile, California’s higher education system is not only facing federal cuts. The California state budget for the 2025–2026 fiscal year reduced state spending on the University of California (UC) system by approximately $130 million. The reductions could result in fewer courses and reduced academic support, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.
The state says that UC’s spending priorities are higher than available funding, leading UC to make changes to hiring, freezing, and cutting expenditures.
“Though UC does not yet know how it would respond to the deferrals, it would face more disruptive budget adjustments if it increased spending in 2025‑26 and then the deferred payments were eliminated or postponed,” wrote the Legislative Analyst’s Office in February. UC has been directed to increase enrollment without increased state funding.
Mary Croughan, University of California–Davis provost and executive vice chancellor, wrote about the effects the cuts would have on the Northern California campus.
“We have worked diligently for many years to address our core funds structural deficit,” wrote Croughan in March. “We have made progress, but not without real costs for our community. People are tired of doing more with less. Morale has suffered.”
Nonetheless, she wrote that state budget cuts, federal cuts, and increasing campus costs would likely increase the university’s structural core funds deficit.
UC–Davis also instituted a hiring freeze this spring amid funding cuts for the University of California system in the 2025–2026 California state budget.
UC–Davis Chancellor Gary S. May wrote in March about the significant cuts in federal research funding that UC–Davis is facing, specifically addressing a proposed cap on expenses federal funds will cover at the facilities and administration level.
“A proposed 15% cap on NIH reimbursement for facilities and administration costs, or F&A, would be devastating, equating to a loss of $70 million in research funding at UC Davis if the rule were applied to this year,” he stated.
University of California–San Diego Chancellor Pradeep K. Khosla addressed in February the change to federal research funding. He writes that these changes could lead to $150 million less flowing to UC–San Diego annually.
“Given the potential for financial impacts as a result of anticipated federal and state budget cuts, we are creating contingency plans to address potential deficits and taking steps to reduce expenditures,” Khosla wrote.
Safeguarding Your American Dream: Discover the Power of America First Healthcare
In today’s economy, healthcare costs remain one of the biggest threats to financial stability and family security. Americans work hard to build a better life, yet rising medical expenses can quickly erode savings, force tough trade-offs, and even push families toward debt or bankruptcy. Medical bills continue to rank as the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States, with millions facing underinsurance or unexpected out-of-pocket burdens that no one plans for. Many turn to government-run marketplace plans under the Affordable Care Act, hoping for relief, only to discover that what appears affordable on paper often delivers higher long-term costs, limited real protection, and coverage that may not align with personal values or family needs.
America First Healthcare stands out as a private insurance agency dedicated to helping conservatives and families secure better coverage and better rates through customized, values-aligned options. By conducting free insurance reviews, the agency uncovers hidden gaps in existing policies and connects clients with private alternatives that emphasize personal responsibility, small-government principles, and genuine affordability—often delivering up to 20% savings while providing stronger protection for the American Dream.
The allure of marketplace plans is easy to understand: open enrollment periods, premium tax credits for many households, and the promise of “comprehensive” benefits mandated by law. Yet recent data reveals a different reality, especially after the expiration of enhanced premium subsidies at the end of 2025. Enrollment for 2026 dropped by more than one million people compared to the prior year, with many shifting to lower-tier bronze plans to keep monthly premiums manageable.
These plans feature significantly higher deductibles—averaging around $7,500 nationally—and greater cost-sharing requirements. Families who once paid modest amounts after subsidies now face average premium increases of $65 or more per month, even as they accept plans that leave them responsible for thousands in upfront costs before meaningful coverage kicks in.
High deductibles create a dangerous barrier to care. Studies show that people in such plans are less likely to seek timely treatment for chronic conditions, attend preventive screenings, or fill necessary prescriptions. A seemingly minor illness or injury can balloon into major expenses when patients delay care until problems worsen. For a family of four, a single hospitalization, cancer diagnosis, or unexpected surgery can easily exceed the deductible, triggering coinsurance and out-of-pocket maximums that still leave substantial bills. One recent analysis noted that some proposed changes could push family deductibles toward $31,000 in future years, further exposing households to financial risk.
Beyond the numbers, marketplace plans often carry structural limitations. Coverage for certain critical services may include waiting periods or narrower networks that restrict access to preferred doctors and specialists. Preventive care is required to be covered without cost-sharing, but everything else—lab work, imaging, specialist visits, or ongoing treatment—typically waits until the deductible is met. This reactive model contrasts sharply with the proactive, holistic approach many families prefer, especially those focused on wellness, early intervention, and maintaining health to enjoy life rather than merely reacting to illness.
Values alignment represents another growing concern. Government-influenced plans operate within a framework shaped by federal mandates and political priorities that may not reflect conservative principles of limited government, personal freedom, and ethical stewardship. Families who want to direct their healthcare dollars toward providers and benefits that honor traditional values sometimes find marketplace options feel misaligned, forcing a compromise between affordability and conviction.
Private alternatives, by contrast, offer year-round flexibility without the restrictions of open enrollment windows. Independent agents can shop across a wider range of carriers to design plans tailored to specific family needs—whether that means lower deductibles for frequent medical users, broader provider networks, or add-ons that support wellness and preventive services from day one. Clients frequently report more stable premiums that do not automatically escalate each year, along with genuine cost savings once the full picture of deductibles, copays, and coverage depth is considered.
Take the experience of real families who made the switch. Amanda C. shared that her new plan felt “way better” than what she had through the marketplace. Johnny Y. noted his previous coverage kept increasing annually until he found a more stable private option. Sofia S. expressed delight with her plan and began recommending it to others. These stories echo a common theme: when families move beyond one-size-fits-all government marketplaces, they often discover customized protection that better safeguards both health and finances.
Founder Jordan Sarmiento’s own journey underscores the stakes. In 2021, a six-day hospitalization generated a $95,000 bill. Under a well-structured private “Conservative Care Coverage” plan, his out-of-pocket responsibility would have been just $500. That stark difference illustrates how thoughtful planning and private options can prevent a medical event from becoming a financial catastrophe.
Practical steps exist for anyone questioning their current coverage. Start with a no-obligation review of your existing policy to identify gaps—high deductibles, limited critical-care benefits, or escalating premiums. Compare total projected costs (premiums plus potential out-of-pocket expenses) rather than monthly premiums alone. Consider family health history, anticipated needs, and lifestyle priorities. Private agencies can present side-by-side options that include stronger wellness incentives, broader access, and plans built on shared values of self-reliance and freedom.
In an era when healthcare inflation continues to outpace general cost-of-living increases, relying solely on marketplace solutions carries growing risk. Families who proactively explore private alternatives frequently achieve meaningful savings while gaining peace of mind that their coverage truly works when needed most.
America First Healthcare makes this exploration straightforward through its free review process. Families and individuals receive personalized guidance to close coverage holes, reduce unnecessary expenses, and secure plans that align with conservative principles—protecting wallets, health, and the American Dream without government overreach. Many who complete a review discover they can enjoy better benefits for less, often saving up to 20% while gaining the customization and stability that marketplace plans struggle to deliver.
Ultimately, protecting your family’s future requires looking beyond the marketing of “affordable” government options. By understanding the long-term costs hidden in high deductibles, shifting coverage tiers, and values mismatches, Americans can make empowered choices. Private, values-driven insurance offers a smarter path—one that rewards diligence, supports wellness, and delivers real security. For those ready to move beyond the limitations of traditional marketplace plans, a simple review can reveal options designed to serve families, not bureaucracies. The American Dream thrives when individuals and families retain control over their healthcare decisions, and thoughtful private coverage plays a vital role in making that possible.