See, that's what I mean: you just do not understand higher education.
Both of these are NOT "windfall profits". They are donations, and are generally used to support the programs agreed upon by the university and the donors. A profit would be an instance where the tuition charged more than the cost of providing the programs offered. This almost never happens. Nearly all donations are restricted funds. If they spend the money on something other than (for example) the Lester B. Phreet School of Business and Economics or the Maude R. Hardyburger Library, the university will get sued. They usually have some way of sneaking a bit of the bequests into a part of the utility bills and such, but normally most of the money will be spent as agreed upon.
If the university has to share its donations and bequests with the student body, then the rich fatcats who donate will not donate at all. They can always find someone to put their names on prominent buildings and stuff. Often, they want a building or a program named after them. When they get old, they realize that the fortune they made in trash collection, real estate development, peddling cars, groceries, clothes or whatever does not leave them with a sense of triumphant accomplishment, so they make bequests, and they are very picky (as you would be) about how their money (they feel it was hard-earned money, even if it wasn't, just like everyone feels) is spent.
Where there is abuse in higher education, it tends to be in the salaries and perks offered to administrators or a very small, very select few professors, usually of the guest sort. Henry Kissinger taught one course at Harvard to fewer than 20 grad students and received more income than most other professors who taught up to ten times as many students with three or four courses to prepare for.
He was frequently absent as well.
His entire salary, however, did not involve wasting a dime of Harvard's money, as it was paid by the Rockefellers.
