The University of Colorado believes the Republican presidential debate it hosted in October was the largest media event in the campus’s 140-year history — and says it has the numbers to back it up.

A university-commissioned analysis found the debate’s publicity value to be between $4.1 million and $4.2 million, well above the $764,102 that the university spent to host 14 Republican presidential hopefuls on Oct. 28 at the Coors Events Center.

CU expenses for GOP debate $764,102 total spent $54,517 for communications and information technology $352,057 for police, safety and security $316,345 for site preparation $41,182 for other expenses, such as transportation, parking staff and meals Source: University of Colorado

‘Earned media’ value of GOP debate for CU $4.1 to $4.2 million estimated total value $3.87 million from news stories that mentioned some detail about CU-Boulder $250,000 to $332,500 for time-lapse clips of campus during debate introduction Source: University of Colorado

The event’s publicity value, also called its earned media value, was calculated based on advertising rates, the number of times CU was mentioned and the duration of exposure.

The analysis cost $10,000, which the university did not include in its debate expenses.

Hill+Knowlton Strategies, a global public relations firm based in New York City, estimated that CU earned $3.87 million in media value based on articles that mentioned CU by name and gave some detail about the university, according to a summary report compiled by CU.

CU also said it earned $250,000 to $332,500 for a short, scene-setting clip of the campus, the university seal, the Flatirons and a Ralphie statue shown during an introduction to the debate, which was broadcast by cable business news network CNBC and attracted 14 million viewers.

All told, the debate was featured in 4,529 news stories between July and November last year, many of them mentioning CU-Boulder, and there were more than 10,000 social media engagements across CU’s Facebook, Instagram and Twitter pages.

Twitter followers increased 171 percent and Facebook likes increased 354 percent on the day of the debate, the analysis found. CU’s website saw the smallest gains, with a 23 percent increase in new users the week of the debate compared to the same week in 2015.

The debate also engaged the campus and the community through lectures, watch parties, alternative political rallies and a visit by Democratic presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley.

Overall, the debate was worth it, said campus spokesman Ryan Huff.

“We were pretty confident that the earned media equivalent would outpace our spending and it did by more than five times,” Huff said. “We feel good about the opportunity to not only have our students and community civically engaged but to also increase our visibility to new audiences.”

Huff added that 19 faculty experts in subjects such as political science and economics were interviewed by local, national and international media outlets.

There’s no specific way to track other outcomes — change in number of applications to CU-Boulder, change in donations, alumni engagement — but Huff said the university will look for those stories anecdotally.

“There’s somebody across the country or across the world that had never heard of the University of Colorado before but they heard of us that night and maybe they did some more research on us,” Huff said. “How many people that was, I don’t know, but you certainly increase your visibility when you host a high-profile event like this.”

Spending breakdown

CU says it spent $54,517 on communications and information technology; $352,057 on police, safety and security; $316,345 on site preparation; and $41,182 on other expenses, such as transportation, parking staff and meals.

Officials said insurance rebates covered the costs — no tuition, student fees or taxpayer money was used for the debate.

Huff said the university budgets a certain amount of money each year for expected insurance claims. If actual claims come in below the projected amount, the savings are set aside for campus safety-related projects, such as, in this case, protecting 14 presidential candidates.

At times, students and faculty were critical of the university’s decision to host the debate and pay for many of the event’s expenses.

At a faculty meeting last fall, a professor said the university’s “obsession with branding” was getting in the way of its academic mission, while students protested the lack of seats inside the Coors Events Center.

Other schools and cities, however, stood by their decisions to host high-profile political events, saying they had other, intangible benefits, such as increasing alumni engagement.

Economic impact

The same study found that the debate had a local economic impact, too.

Around 200 state residents, 500 journalists, 200 Republican National Committee members and 350 CNBC employees and campaign staffers descended on Boulder for the debate, spending between $424,400 and $628,100, according to the public relations firm.

Mary Ann Mahoney, executive director of the Boulder Convention and Visitors Bureau, said her group did not measure the economic impact of the debate but heard from a variety of hotels that they saw some debate-related guests.

Mahoney also said the bureau website saw a “specific spike” in visits during the days leading up to and following the debate. She said 500 to 1,000 extra people around town would not have a noticeable impact on Boulder.

“It did seem like around the university there was a buzz,” she said. “But when you get 500 people in town and they’re dispersed, you just wouldn’t really notice they were here.”