Most school investment material stops at the equity story. It sets out the market, the fee level, the margin at maturity and the exit, and says almost nothing about the borrowing that sits underneath. That is a strange omission, because the debt decides more about how a school project behaves than the business plan does. It sets how much equity is needed, how long the sponsor has to wait, and what happens when enrolment runs a year late.
This is an operator’s view of how school debt works, at both levels an investor deals with. Large groups borrow at the corporate level, against a portfolio, while a single school is financed at project level, which is where most GSE clients actually sit.
School groups carry more debt than people expect
Anyone comparing a single school project against the listed and private school groups should know how those groups are financed, because the multiples quoted in the market come from businesses running balance sheets that a first-time investor would find alarming.
The large leveraged operators in the Gulf and Europe have borrowed at levels approaching seven to eight times EBITDA, funded through syndicated term loans and secured notes instead of ordinary bank lending, and arranged across groups of regional, Islamic and international banks. Listed operators are more conservative, generally sitting between three and five times earnings, and they tend to deleverage through equity raises when expansion pushes them past that.
For an investor, that shows education is treated as a borrowable asset class by serious lenders, which is not true of every sector with good margins. It also means the multiples used to value schools are drawn from businesses whose returns are amplified by that leverage, so an unlevered project compared against them will look worse than it is.
A single school is financed as property
At project level the picture changes completely, because a lender looking at one school is lending against land and a building, and the credit question is whether that asset stands up if the operator fails.
The reason is that a half-full school with a licence attached is close to unsellable as a going concern. There is no ready buyer, the asset cannot be repurposed quickly, and the value in an operating school sits in the enrolment, which is the thing that disappears first when a project gets into difficulty. The security is therefore the property, with debt sitting in the property company, the operating company paying rent, and the lender’s exposure is to the building rather than to the school.
That structure explains something that confuses many first-time investors. Break-even occupancy has to be measured after rent, and a leased school and an owned school are different investments even when they look identical to a parent. Lending against the operating company alone is rare, and where it happens it is usually secured by something else entirely.
The money comes from fewer places than an investor expects
At project level the funding is rarely one lender writing one cheque. It comes from some combination of the developer’s own balance sheet or landholding, a regional commercial or Islamic bank lending against the completed asset, and in the Gulf frequently a landowner or government-linked developer who takes the property risk while an operator takes the operating risk.
International project finance is largely absent below a certain deal size. The ticket is too small and the diligence cost too high for a lender that would happily fund a hospital or a hotel. An investor expecting a competitive process among specialist education lenders will usually find there is no such market to run a process in.
What this means in practice is that the sponsor’s own covenant matters more than the project’s. Corporate or personal guarantees are common, and in many markets they are the real gate. A lender that cannot rely on the school will rely on the person behind it.
The damage is done by a funding shortfall
The failure GSE is most often called in to fix is a project that funded its capital budget and did not fund its operating losses through the ramp. A breach of covenant, where there is one, comes later.
A new school is expected to lose money for its first two or three years. Those losses are as much a part of the cost of the project as the building, and they are the part most often left out of the raise, usually because the enrolment curve in the model was drawn to make the funding work and bears little relation to what a real school achieves.
What happens next is predictable: money runs short in year two, and the school cuts marketing and delays staff appointments, which are the only two levers available quickly. Both cuts land in the years when enrolment for years three and four is being decided. The ramp then runs further behind, the shortfall deepens, and by the time any covenant is tested the harm has already been done. Covenants are a late indicator in school projects, which is why a lender’s comfort with the covenant package should never be read as comfort with the plan. The pattern behind this is set out in GSE’s article on why school projects fail financially.
What to have in place before approaching a lender
Five things separate a project that gets funded on sensible terms from one that gets funded expensively or not at all.
A feasibility study with a demand base a lender can test. This means catchment, competitor capacity, fee positioning and the evidence behind the enrolment assumption, and it is a different document from a market overview.
An enrolment curve the sponsor will stand behind in writing. The willingness to commit to it in the loan documents is the test of whether anybody believes it.
The operating losses through to break-even funded as part of the raise. This is the single most common omission and the most expensive one.
A signed operator agreement matters to a lender, because one assessing a school with no named operator is assessing a building site with an optimistic forecast attached.
Site control, with the licensing pathway confirmed, completes the list. Regulatory approval that arrives late delays opening by a full academic year, because a school can only open in August.
The debt decides the equity story
How a project is financed determines how much equity is required, when it can be returned, and how much room the school has when enrolment runs late. A sponsor who treats the debt as something to arrange after the plan is written usually discovers the plan has to change to fit the debt.
The more useful sequence is the other way round. Establish what the school can realistically enrol and charge, work out what that supports in rent and debt service, and size the raise around the answer, including the losses along the way.
Read next
- International Education by the Numbers, Part Two: Filling the School. Year one enrolment, the ramp curve and break-even occupancy.
- Cap Rates and Yield in Education Real Estate. What the property side of a school is worth to an investor.
- Why Most New School Projects Fail Financially. The failure pattern this article describes, in full.
- What is an Education Management Organisation? What a lender is buying when an operator is named.
To talk about your school project, reach us through the contact page.