Top Metros for Postsecondary Education Administrators: New York Leads Overall as San Jose and Augusta Offer the Highest Pay

Across the top LaborCove metros for postsecondary education administrators, no single location dominates every metric. New York-Newark-Jersey City ranks first overall and has the largest reported employment, while San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara posts the highest median salary among the ranked metros. Several metros offer median salaries above the national figure of $104,590, while Chicago-Naperville-Elgin is slightly below that benchmark but remains in the top five based on its overall Geography Score and employment scale. The results underline that LaborCove’s Geography Score reflects a combined view of factors, not salary alone. High-salary metros like Augusta-Richmond County and Madison rank below New York and Boston because their scores are lower in the current LaborCove framework. For education administrators weighing options, the data shows clear trade‑offs between higher pay levels, larger employment counts where reported, and the relative standing captured in each metro’s Geography Score.

Before comparing metros, it helps to know the national baseline for education administrators, postsecondary (11-9033). National median annual salary is $104,590, and national employment stands at 180,470. The occupation’s national projected employment growth is 1.7%, indicating a modest projected increase across the U.S. overall. These national statistics provide context rather than a metro‑level forecast. None of the metro data supplied for this article includes a local projected growth rate, so the 1.7% projection applies only to the national occupation. When this article compares metros to the national figures, it is describing current reported pay and employment relative to that broader U.S. snapshot.

New York-Newark-Jersey City ranks #1 among the supplied metros, with a LaborCove Geography Score of 76.20. It also has the largest reported employment count at 7,550 and a median salary of $137,800. That median is higher than the national median of $104,590. Boston-Cambridge-Newton holds the #2 rank with a Geography Score of 67.56, median salary of $131,130, and employment of 6,770. Its median salary is also above the national level. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim ranks #3 with a Geography Score of 63.15, median salary of $125,230, and employment of 6,050, again with a median salary above the national benchmark. Comparing these three metros, New York has the highest Geography Score and the largest reported employment, while Boston reports a higher Geography Score than Los Angeles. New York’s median salary of $137,800 is higher than both Boston’s $131,130 and Los Angeles’s $125,230 in the supplied data.

San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara illustrates that a very high salary does not guarantee the top overall rank. This metro sits at #4 with a Geography Score of 57.40, despite reporting the highest median salary in the supplied list at $154,140 and employment of 1,450. Its median salary is higher than the national median of $104,590 and higher than New York’s $137,800. Augusta-Richmond County offers another example. It reports a median salary of $177,150, which is higher than San Jose’s $154,140 and the highest salary among the listed metros. Yet it ranks #9 with a Geography Score of 51.97 and employment of 190. Madison and Kenosha also show high salaries—$133,080 and $129,620 respectively—paired with Geography Scores of 53.22 and 51.10 that place them below New York, Boston, and Los Angeles in the rankings. These comparisons show that LaborCove’s Geography Score incorporates more than just headline pay: metros with higher median salaries can still receive lower scores than metros with comparatively lower salaries in this dataset.

Chicago-Naperville-Elgin ranks #5, with a LaborCove Geography Score of 54.59, median salary of $101,070, and employment of 6,270. Chicago’s median salary is slightly below the national median of $104,590, yet its Geography Score places it above several metros that report higher salaries. Among metros with supplied employment data, Chicago’s employment count is smaller than New York’s 7,550 but larger than the counts for Boston (6,770), Los Angeles (6,050), Washington (4,200), Philadelphia (4,330), San Jose (1,450), and Augusta-Richmond County (190). Washington-Arlington-Alexandria ranks #6 with a Geography Score of 54.13, median salary of $125,460, and employment of 4,200. Its median salary is higher than both the national median and Chicago’s $101,070. However, Washington’s Geography Score is slightly lower than Chicago’s in LaborCove’s rankings. Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington at #8 combines a Geography Score of 53.12, a median salary of $117,980, and employment of 4,330, with a median salary above the national figure.

Madison ranks #7 with a LaborCove Geography Score of 53.22 and a median salary of $133,080. Employment is not supplied for Madison in the current data, so this analysis cannot compare its employment count to other metros. Even without that figure, Madison’s median salary is higher than the national median and higher than Chicago’s $101,070. Kenosha holds the #10 rank with a Geography Score of 51.10 and a median salary of $129,620. As with Madison, employment is not supplied. Within the supplied salary data, Kenosha’s median is higher than the national median of $104,590. Augusta-Richmond County, ranked #9, combines the highest reported median salary at $177,150 with a Geography Score of 51.97 and employment of 190. Together, Madison, Kenosha, and Augusta highlight metros where LaborCove’s rankings reflect high pay relative to the national figure, but with either smaller reported employment (in Augusta’s case) or employment not supplied (for Madison and Kenosha).

The top metros for postsecondary education administrators in LaborCove’s results differ along three main quantitative dimensions: median salary, reported employment counts, and Geography Score. New York-Newark-Jersey City sits at the top of the rankings with both the highest Geography Score and the largest reported employment, while other metros such as San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara and Augusta-Richmond County stand out for higher salaries but lower Geography Scores. Because LaborCove does not supply metro-level projected growth rates, this article does not draw conclusions about future local expansion or contraction. Instead, it focuses on how the current reported data compares across metros. When evaluating where to live and work, postsecondary education administrators can use these numbers as a structured way to distinguish metros that emphasize higher median salaries, larger reported employment scale, or stronger overall Geography Scores in the present data. Ultimately, the best metro for any individual will depend on how they weigh these measurable labor‑market characteristics alongside personal and professional considerations outside the scope of this dataset.

LaborCove’s metro rankings for education administrators, postsecondary are built from authoritative U.S. labor‑market data combined with LaborCove’s own Geography Score methodology. National figures for median annual salary, employment, and projected employment growth describe the occupation across the United States as a whole. For this article, the underlying occupational employment and wage data refer to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) reference period of May 2025. The 1.7% projected employment growth cited here is a separate national projection and is not an OEWS observation. At the metro level, LaborCove’s evidence includes each area’s median annual salary for this occupation, its employment count where available, and a LaborCove Geography Score used to rank metros. Geography Scores summarize multiple underlying factors in a single value, but this article does not infer how much each component contributes to the final score. Because no metro‑level projected growth rates are supplied, the analysis does not assign or imply any future growth rate to individual metros. LaborCove recommends using these rankings as one structured input alongside professional goals, personal circumstances, and qualitative information about each metro. The data can clarify differences in pay, employment scale, and relative ranking, but it does not predict any individual’s likelihood of being hired or advancing in a particular location.