UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)
x		ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011

or

o		TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from         to         

Commission file number 001-32417

Education Realty Trust, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Maryland		20-1352180
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(IRS Employer Identification No.)

530 Oak Court Drive, Suite 300 Memphis, Tennessee		38117
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)

Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code (901) 259-2500

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of Each Class		Name Of Each Exchange On Which Registered
Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share		New York Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer o		Accelerated filer x
Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)		Smaller reporting company o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes o No x

As of June 30, 2011, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second quarter, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $612 million, based on the closing sales price of $8.57 per share as reported on the New York Stock Exchange. (For purposes of this calculation all of the registrant’s directors and executive officers are deemed affiliates of the registrant.)

As of March 1, 2012, the registrant had 93,117,547 shares of common stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

To the extent stated herein, the Registrant incorporates by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, or Annual Report, portions of its Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed subsequently with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Our disclosure and analysis in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents that are or will be incorporated by reference herein contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. Forward-looking statements provide our current expectations or forecasts of future events and are not statements of historical fact. These forward-looking statements include information about possible or assumed future events, including, among other things, discussion and analysis of our future financial condition, results of operations and funds from operations, our strategic plans and objectives, cost management, occupancy and leasing rates and trends, liquidity and ability to refinance our indebtedness as it matures, anticipated capital expenditures (and access to capital) required to complete projects, amounts of anticipated cash distributions to our stockholders in the future and other matters. Words such as “anticipates,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,” “estimates” and variations of these words and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, some of which are beyond our control, are difficult to predict and/or could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or forecasted in the forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking statements involve inherent uncertainty and may ultimately prove to be incorrect or false. You are cautioned to not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Except as otherwise may be required by law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise forward-looking statements to reflect changed assumptions, the occurrence of unanticipated events or actual operating results. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including, but not limited to:

2

This list of risks and uncertainties, however, is only a summary of some of the most important factors and is not intended to be exhaustive. You should carefully review the risks described under “Item 1A. — Risk Factors” below. New factors may also emerge from time to time that could materially and adversely affect us.

3

EDUCATION REALTY TRUST, INC.    FISCAL 2011    FORM 10-K

PART I
Item 1. Business.			1
Item 1A. Risk Factors.			9
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.			22
Item 2. Properties.			23
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.			27
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.			27
PART II
Item 5. Market For Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.			28
Item 6. Selected Financial Data.			31
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.			35
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.			59
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.			60
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.			95
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.			95
Item 9B. Other Information.			95
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.			95
Item 11. Executive Compensation.			95
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.			96
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.			97
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.			97
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.			97
Signatures			98

4

PART I

Item 1. Business.

Our Company

Education Realty Trust, Inc., or we, us, our, EdR or the Trust, is a self-managed and self-advised real estate investment trust, or REIT, incorporated in July 2004 to develop, acquire, own and manage collegiate housing communities located near university campuses. We were formed to continue and expand upon the collegiate housing business of Allen & O’Hara, Inc., a company with over 40 years of experience as an owner, manager and developer of collegiate housing. We selectively develop collegiate housing communities for our own account and also provide third-party development consulting services on collegiate housing development projects for universities and other third parties. As of December 31, 2011, we owned 37 collegiate housing communities located in 21 states containing 22,666 beds in 7,340 apartment units located on or near 34 university campuses. As of December 31, 2011, we provided third-party management services for 23 collegiate housing communities located in 11 states containing 11,534 beds in 3,779 apartment units located on or near 19 university campuses.

All of our assets are held by, and we conduct substantially all of our activities through Education Realty Operating Partnership, LP, our Operating Partnership, and its wholly- owned subsidiaries, EDR Management Inc., or our Management Company, and EDR Development LLC, or our Development Company. The majority of our operating expenses are borne by our Operating Partnership, our Management Company or our Development Company, as the case may be.

We are the sole general partner of our Operating Partnership. As a result, our Board of Directors effectively directs all of our Operating Partnership’s affairs. We own 99.0% of the outstanding partnership units of our Operating Partnership, and 1.0% of the partnership units are held by the former owners of our initial properties and assets, including members of our management team.

University Towers Operating Partnership, LP, or the University Towers Partnership, which is our affiliate, holds, owns and operates our University Towers property located in Raleigh, North Carolina. We own 72.7% of the units in the University Towers Partnership, and the remaining 27.3% of the units in the

University Towers Partnership are held by the former owners of our initial properties and assets, including members of our management team.

REIT Status and Taxable REIT Subsidiaries

We have elected to be taxed as a REIT, for federal income tax purposes. With the exception of income from our taxable REIT subsidiaries, or our TRSs, income earned by the REIT is generally not subject to income taxes. In order to qualify as a REIT, a specified percentage of our gross income generally must be derived from real property sources, which would exclude our income from providing development and management services to third parties as well as our income from certain services afforded to our tenants. In order to avoid realizing such income in a manner that would adversely affect our ability to qualify as a REIT, we provide some services through our Management Company and our Development Company, with our Management Company being treated as a TRS. Our Management Company is wholly owned and controlled by our Operating Partnership, and our Management Company wholly owns our Development Company. Our Development Company is a disregarded entity for federal income tax purposes and all assets owned and income earned by our Development Company are deemed to be owned and earned by our Management Company.

Business and Growth Strategy

Our primary business objective is to achieve sustainable long-term growth in cash flow per share in order to maximize long-term stockholder value. We intend to achieve this objective by (i) acquiring collegiate housing communities nationwide that meet our focused investment criteria, (ii) maximizing net operating income from the operation of our owned properties through proactive and goal-oriented property management strategies, (iii) building our third-party business of management services and development consulting services and (iv) selectively developing properties for our own account.

Our business has three reportable segments that are indentified by their distinct customer base and service provided: collegiate housing leasing, development consulting services and management services. For a discussion of revenues, profit and loss and total assets by segment see “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Note 11, “Segments” to our accompanying consolidated financial statements.

1

Acquisition and Development Strategy

Acquisitions

We seek to acquire high-quality, well-located communities with modern floor plans and amenities. Our ideal acquisition targets generally are located in markets that have stable or increasing collegiate populations and high barriers to entry. We also seek to acquire investments in collegiate housing communities that possess sound market fundamentals but are under-performing and would benefit from re-positioning, renovation and/or improved property management. We consider the following property and market factors to identify potential property acquisitions:

Conversely, subject to appropriate market conditions, we may dispose of certain non-strategic collegiate housing communities. We continually assess all of our communities, the markets in which they are located and the colleges and universities they serve, to determine if any dispositions are necessary or appropriate.

Joint Ventures

Starting in 2011, we began entering into joint venture agreements to develop, own and manage properties near the University of Alabama, Arizona State University and the University of Mississippi. We will have the majority ownership

interest in each property. This strategy enables us to accretively diversify our portfolio by expanding into geographic markets where we are not currently present with lower capital requirements than if we acquired the properties on our own. In some cases we hold a minority ownership interest in properties and earn a fee for the management of the properties. We expect to continue pursuing joint venture arrangements in the future.

Developments

We develop collegiate housing communities for our ownership, and we plan to increase self-development activity going forward. The On-Campus Equity Plan, or The ONE Plan^SM, is our private equity program for universities, which allows universities to use the Trust’s equity and financial stability to develop and revitalize campus housing while preserving their credit capacity for other campus projects. The ONE Plan^SM offers one service provider and one equity source to universities seeking to modernize on-campus housing to meet the needs of today’s students. The Trust has completed the development of a wholly-owned collegiate housing community located on the campus of Syracuse University in Syracuse, New York. The Trust owns and manages the community under a long-term ground lease from Syracuse University. In February 2011, Syracuse University selected the Trust to develop a second collegiate housing community under The ONE Plan^SM. The Trust is also currently developing a high-rise apartment community near the campus of the University of Texas at Austin under The ONE Plan^SM. EdR will own and manage the community under a long-term ground lease from the University of Texas. In December 2011, we were selected by the University of Kentucky to develop, own and manage a 600- bed on-campus undergraduate honors housing community under The ONE Plan^SM.

The ONE Plan PLUS was created by EdR to improve those situations where the cost of real estate taxes may make it difficult to provide the desired quality housing at affordable rent levels. The same business structure and criteria apply as with The ONE Plan^SM, but with the exception that, instead of acquiring a leasehold interest, we secure a second mortgage to make financing the project balance feasible, along with conventional construction financing. As a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit corporation, the university/other third party is often exempt from real-estate taxes, resulting in lower rental rates for residents as well as higher annual ground lease payments for the university. In July of 2010, we entered into an agreement to develop, finance and manage a $60.7 million, 20-story, 572-bed

2

collegiate housing complex at the Science + Technology Park at Johns Hopkins Medical Institute. The Trust will develop and manage the building, which will be constructed on land owned by Johns Hopkins University and leased to a subsidiary of East Baltimore Development, Inc., a nonprofit partnership of private and public entities dedicated to Baltimore’s urban revitalization. This is the first community developed by the Trust under the ONE Plan PLUS. We believe the Trust will continue to enter into more partnerships under The ONE Plan^SM and ONE Plan PLUS due to our years of success in the collegiate housing business. The ONE Plan ^SM and ONE Plan PLUS allow us to provide the perfect opportunity to universities to develop new housing and boost enrollment with a plan tailored to specific needs while simultaneously preserving the university’s credit capacity.

We currently have nine active, owned and participating developments. This includes wholly-owned developments at the University of Connecticut and University of Colorado.

Operating Strategy

We seek to maximize net operating income of the collegiate housing communities that we own and manage through the following operational strategies.

Maximize property profitability.  We seek to maximize property-level profitability through the use of cost control systems and our focused on-site management personnel. Some of our specific cost control initiatives include:

Maintain and develop strategic relationships.  We believe that establishing and maintaining relationships with universities and developers, owners and brokers of collegiate housing properties is important to the ongoing success of our business. We believe that these relationships will continue to provide us with referrals that enhance our leasing efforts, opportunities for additional acquisitions of collegiate housing communities and contracts for third-party services.

Proactive marketing practices.  We have developed and implemented proactive marketing practices to enhance the visibility of our collegiate housing communities and to optimize our occupancy rates. We study our competitors, our residents and university policies affecting enrollment and housing. Based on our findings at each property, we formulate a marketing and sales plan for each academic leasing period. This plan is closely monitored and adjusted, if necessary, throughout the leasing period. We intend to continue to market our properties to students, parents and universities by emphasizing collegiate-oriented living areas, state-of-the-art technology and infrastructure, a wide variety of amenities and services and close proximity to university campuses.

Develop and retain personnel.  We staff each collegiate housing community that we own or manage with a full-service on-site property management team. Each of our property management teams includes Community Assistants who plan activities and interact with residents, enhancing their college experiences. We have developed policies and procedures to train each team of on-site employees and to provide them with corporate-based support for each essential operating function. To retain employees, we have developed an incentive-based compensation structure that is available to all of our on-site personnel.

Third-Party Services Strategy

In addition to developing communities for our ownership and managing our owned collegiate housing communities, we seek to provide development and management consulting services for universities and other third-party owners who rely upon the private sector for assistance in developing and managing their collegiate housing properties. We perform third-party services in order to enhance our reputation with universities and to benefit our primary goal of owning high quality collegiate housing communities. We perform third-party services for collegiate housing communities serving some of the nation’s most prominent systems of higher education, including the University of North Carolina, the California State University System and the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education. In order to comply with the rules applicable to our status as a REIT, we provide our third-party services through our Development Company and our Management Company. Unlike the income earned from our properties under the REIT, the income earned by our Development Company and our Management Company is subject to regular federal income tax and state and local income taxes where applicable.

3

Third-party development consulting services

We provide third-party development consulting services primarily to universities seeking to modernize their on-campus collegiate housing communities but also to other third-party investors. We typically are notified that we have been awarded development consulting services projects on the basis of a competitive award process and thereafter begin work on the project. In the case of tax exempt bond-financed projects, definitive contracts are not executed until bond closing. Our development consulting services typically include the following:

By providing these services, we are able to observe emerging trends in collegiate housing development and market acceptance of unit and community amenities. Our development consulting services also provide us with opportunities to obtain additional third-party property management contracts. Of the 21 clients we have provided development-consulting services to

since 2000, we currently offer third-party management services contracts for 12 clients with 9 property owners alternatively electing to manage the communities in-house under their existing infrastructure. In 2011, our fees from third-party development consulting services represented 4.7% of our revenues, excluding operating expense reimbursements.

Since 2000, we have provided third-party development consulting services to clients for projects totaling over $1.3 billion in value. We are currently providing third-party development services pursuant to signed definitive contracts with projects under construction at East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania, Mansfield University of Pennsylvania and Johns Hopkins University. The aggregate project cost of these three projects is estimated to be approximately $155.2 million.

Third-party management services

We provide third-party management services for collegiate housing communities owned by educational institutions, charitable foundations and others. Our management services typically cover all aspects of operations, including residence life and student development, marketing, leasing administration, strategic relationships, information systems and accounting services. These services are comparable to the services that we provide for our owned properties. We typically provide these services pursuant to multi-year management agreements. These agreements typically have an initial term of two to five years with renewal options of like terms. We believe that providing these services allows us to increase cash flow with little incremental cost by leveraging our existing management expertise and infrastructure. For the year ended December 31, 2011, our fees from third-party management services represented 5.4% of our revenue, excluding operating expense reimbursements.

4

The following table presents certain summary information regarding the collegiate housing communities that we managed for other owners as of December 31, 2011:

Property		University				# of Beds				# of Units
On-campus properties
University Park – Calhoun Street Apartments			University of Cincinnati				749				288
Reinhard Villages			Clarion University of Pennsylvania				656				180
University Park			Salisbury University (Maryland)				578				145
University Park – Phase II			Salisbury University (Maryland)				312				108
Bettie Johnson Hall			University of Louisville				490				224
Herman & Heddy Kurz Hall			University of Louisville				402				224
Billy Minardi Hall			University of Louisville				38				20
Community Park			University of Louisville				358				101
University Village			California State University — San Marcos				623				126
Arlington Park Apartments			University of Northern Colorado				394				179
Centennial Hall			SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry				454				213
Total on-campus							5,054				1,808
Off-campus properties
Granville Towers			University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill				1,328				363
Honeysuckle Apartments			Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania				407				104
Evergreen Commons			Lock Haven University of Pennsylvania				408				108
Campus Village			University of Colorado — Denver				690				210
Upper Eastside Lofts			Sacramento State University				348				134
100 Midtown			Georgia Tech and Georgia State				332				118
The Courtyards			University of Michigan				896				320
Vulcan Village I			California University of Pennsylvania				432				108
Vulcan Village II			California University of Pennsylvania				338				91
University Village (1)			University of North Carolina — Greensboro				600				203
The Reserve on Stinson (1)			University of Oklahoma				612				204
Wesley House			University of California — Berkeley				89				8
Total off-campus							6,480				1,971
Totals (for both on- and off-campus)							11,534				3,779

Our Operations

We staff each of our owned and managed collegiate housing communities with a full-service property management team. We typically staff each property with one Community Manager, a marketing/leasing manager, a resident services director, a maintenance supervisor, one on-site resident Community Assistant for each 50-85 residents and general office staff. Each property management team markets, leases and manages the community with a focus on maximizing its profitability. In addition, each property management team is trained to provide social and developmental opportunities for residents, enhancing the residents’ college experiences as well as the desirability of our communities.

We have developed policies and procedures to carefully select and develop each team of on-site employees and to provide each team with corporate-based support for each essential operating area, including lease administration, sales/marketing, community and university relations, student life administration, maintenance and loss prevention, accounting, human resources/benefits administration and information systems. The corporate level personnel responsible for each of these areas support each Community Manager’s leadership role and are available as a resource to the Community Managers around the clock.

Residence Life and Student Development

Our corporate director of residence life and student personnel development designs and directs our residence life program. Our programs are developed at the corporate level and

5

implemented at each community by our Community Assistants, together with our other on-site personnel. We provide educational, social and recreational activities designed to help students achieve academic goals, promote respect and harmony throughout the community and help bridge interaction with the respective university. Examples of our residence life and student development programs include:

The Community Assistants perform key roles in the administrative functioning of the community and interface with residents through constructive programs, activities and listening to resident interests and concerns. Our on-site leadership selects residents to serve as Community Assistants who meet criteria established by our corporate director of residence life and student personnel development.

Marketing

We begin our annual marketing campaign by thoroughly segmenting the student population attending each of the primary universities where our collegiate housing communities are located, and compiling market surveys of comparable collegiate apartment properties. With this information, we formulate a marketing/sales strategy that consists of a renewal campaign for current residents and a broader campaign directed at the eligible student population. We assess university regulations regarding housing requirements to avoid targeting

markets in which significant numbers of students are not eligible to live off-campus until they achieve certain credit hour levels.

We typically begin our renewal campaign between November and January of each year. Signage, social networking, direct mailings to the students and their parents, appreciation parties and staff selling incentives are key elements of the renewal campaign. The Community Assistant team plays a key role in communicating the renewal message throughout its assigned property area. We use a database of current resident demographic data to direct sales information to primary feeder high schools, particularly where new freshmen are eligible to live off-campus. Other database criteria include gender, high school location, prior apartment community, academic class standing, field of study and activity preferences.

We appeal to the greater university population through theme-based newspaper advertising campaigns, open house activities, housing fairs conducted by the university, web-based advertising and social networking media. Our professional leasing and marketing staff targets certain university-sponsored on-campus events to distribute handouts displaying our logo and offering incentives to visit our sales center. Wherever possible, our collegiate housing communities appear on university websites in listings of off-campus housing options, together with banner advertising where available.

Leasing

Our standard lease begins in August and runs for approximately 11.5 months, ending July 31 or early August to coincide with the university’s fall academic term. The primary exception to our standard lease term is our University Towers community, which we generally rent on nine-month academic year leases. Our standard lease is an agreement between the student and parental guarantor, and the specific collegiate housing community. All leases are for a bed in a private or shared bedroom, with rights to share common areas within the unit and throughout the community. The “individual lease” is a strong selling attraction as it limits a student’s liability to the rental for one bedroom instead of burdening the student with shared liability for the entire unit rental amount.

We lease our units by floor plan type using internally-generated occupancy spreadsheets to maximize full leasing of entire units, avoiding spotty vacancies particularly in the four-bedroom units. We offer roommate-matching services to facilitate full occupancy. We develop waiting lists and monitor popular floor plans that fill to capacity early in the leasing season. If any fully

6

vacant units remain available after the beginning of any academic semester, we seek to lease such units on a temporary basis to university-related visitors and our tenants’ parents and family members, or keep them available for future leasing to students.

Unlike conventional apartment communities that have monthly move-outs and renewals, our collegiate housing community occupancies remain relatively stable throughout the academic year, but must be entirely re-leased at the beginning of each academic year. Because of the nature of leasing to students, we are highly dependent upon the success of our marketing and leasing efforts during the annual leasing season, generally November through August. Our leasing staff undergoes intensive annual professional training to maximize the success of our leasing efforts.

We typically require rent to be paid in 12 equal monthly payments throughout the lease term, with the first installment due on July 15. Residents of University Towers and residence halls that we manage for third parties typically pay their annual rent in two installments on July 1 and December 1. We replace contracted residents who fail to pay the first installment with people on our waiting list or from walk-in traffic while the market is still active with students seeking housing at the commencement of the academic year.

Strategic Relationships

We assign high priority to establishing and nurturing relationships with the administration of each of the primary universities where our collegiate housing communities are located. Our corporate staff establishes this network, and on-site management then sustains it with follow-up by corporate staff during routine visits to the community. As a result of our strategic relationships, universities often refer their students to our properties, thus enhancing our leasing effort throughout the year. These networks create goodwill for our collegiate housing communities throughout the university administration, including departments of admissions, student affairs, public safety, athletics and international affairs.

Most universities promote off-campus housing alternatives to their student population. It is our intention to be among the most preferred off-campus residences and for universities to include our communities in listings and literature provided to students. We seek to obtain student mailing lists used by universities and to be featured in web-based collegiate housing listings wherever permitted by the institution and incorporate these initiatives into our marketing efforts. Our Community

Managers make scheduled personal visits to academic departments at the universities to further our community exposure at this level.

In addition to our university relationships, our management team has developed long-standing relationships with developers, owners and brokers of collegiate housing properties that allow us to identify and capitalize on acquisition opportunities. As a result, we have generated an internal database of contacts that we use to identify and evaluate acquisition candidates. As it is our intention to develop a diverse portfolio of collegiate housing communities, we also develop strategic relationships with equity investors in order to pursue acquisitions through joint venture arrangements.

Competition

Competition from universities

We typically compete for student tenants with the owners of on-campus collegiate housing, which is generally owned by educational institutions or charitable foundations. Educational institutions generally do not have to pay real estate taxes and borrow funds at lower interest rates, while we and other private sector operators pay full real estate tax rates and have higher borrowing costs. The competitive advantages of on-campus collegiate housing also include its physical proximity to the university campus and captive student body. Moreover, many universities have policies requiring students to live in their on-campus facilities during their freshman year.

On-campus housing is limited, however, and most universities are able to house only a small percentage of their students. As a result, educational institutions depend upon, and may serve as referral sources for, private providers of off-campus housing. In addition, off-campus housing facilities tend to offer more relaxed rules and regulations than on-campus properties and therefore tend to be more appealing to students. Off-campus collegiate housing offers freedom from restrictions, such as quiet hours or gender visitation limitations, and is especially appealing to upperclassmen who are transitioning towards independence.

Competition from private owners

We compete with several regional and national owner-operators of off-campus collegiate housing, including two publicly-traded competitors, American Campus Communities, Inc. (ACC) and Campus Crest Communities, Inc. (CCG). We also compete with privately held developers and other real estate firms and in a number of markets with smaller local owner-operators. Currently, the industry is fragmented with no

7

participant holding a dominant market share. We believe that a number of other large national companies with substantial financial resources may be potential entrants into the collegiate housing business. The entry of one or more of these companies could increase competition for residents and for the acquisition, management and development of collegiate housing properties.

Environmental Matters

As a current or prior owner, manager and developer of real estate, we are subject to various federal, state and local environmental laws, regulations and ordinances and also could be liable to third parties resulting from environmental contamination or noncompliance at our properties. Environmental laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the contaminants, and the costs of any required investigation or cleanup of these substances can be substantial. The liability is generally not limited under such laws and could exceed the property’s value and the aggregate assets of the liable party. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination at our properties also may expose us to third-party liability for personal injury or property damage, or adversely affect our ability to sell, lease or develop the real property or to borrow using the real property as collateral. These and other risks related to environmental matters are described in more detail in “Item 1A. — Risk Factors” below.

Employees

As of December 31, 2011, we had approximately 1,077 employees, including:

Available Information

EdR files periodic and current reports, proxy statements and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. All filings made by EdR with the SEC may be copied and read at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC also maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC as EdR does. The website address of the SEC is http://www.sec.gov.

Additionally, a copy of our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to the aforementioned filings, are available on EdR’s website, www.educationrealty.com, free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after EdR electronically files such reports or amendments with, or furnishes them to, the SEC. The filings can be found in the SEC filings section of our website. EdR’s website also contains its Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and the charters of the committees of the Board of Directors. These items can be found in the Governance section of our website. Reference to EdR’s website does not constitute incorporation by reference of the information contained on the website and should not be considered part of this Annual Report. All of the aforementioned materials may also be obtained free of charge by contacting the Investor Relations Department at Education Realty Trust, Inc., 530 Oak Court Drive, Suite 300, Memphis, Tennessee 38117.

8

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Risks Related to Our Properties, Our Business and the Real Estate Industry

Adverse macroeconomic and business conditions may significantly and negatively affect our cash flows, profitability and results of operations.

The United States is currently experiencing an economic downturn that has resulted in higher unemployment, weakening of consumer financial condition, large-scale business failures and tight credit markets. Our results of operations may be sensitive to changes in overall economic conditions that impact tenant leasing practices. A continuation of ongoing adverse economic conditions affecting disposable tenant income, such as employment levels, business conditions, interest rates, tax rates, fuel and energy costs and other matters, could reduce overall tenant leasing or cause tenants to shift their leasing practices. At this time, it is difficult to determine the breadth and duration of the economic and financial market problems and the many ways in which they may affect our tenants and our business in general. A general reduction in the level of tenant leasing could adversely affect our growth and profitability.

We own, directly or indirectly, interests in collegiate housing communities located near major universities in the United States. Accordingly, we are dependant upon the levels of student enrollment and the admission policies of the respective universities, which attract a significant portion of our leasing base. As a result of the overall market quality deterioration, many students may be unable to obtain student loans on favorable terms. If student loans are not available or their costs are prohibitively high, enrollment numbers for universities may decrease. The demand for, occupancy rates at, rental income from and value of our properties would be adversely affected if student enrollment levels become stagnant or decrease in the current environment. Accordingly, a continuation or further worsening of these difficult financial and macroeconomic conditions could have a significant adverse effect on our cash flows, profitability and results of operations.

Our performance and the value of our real estate assets are subject to risks associated with real estate assets and with the real estate industry.

Our performance and ability to make distributions to our stockholders depends on our ability to generate cash revenues in excess of expenses, scheduled debt service obligations and capital expenditure requirements. Events and conditions

generally applicable to owners and operators of real property that are beyond our control may decrease cash available for distribution and the value of our properties.

These events include:

Our results of operations are subject to the following risks inherent in the collegiate housing industry: leasing cycles, concentrated lease-up period, seasonal cash flows and increased risk of student defaults during the summer months of 11.5 month leases.

We generally lease our properties under 11.5 month leases, but we may also lease for terms of nine months or less. Furthermore, all of our properties must be entirely re-leased each year, exposing us to increased leasing risk. We may not be able to relet the property on similar terms, if we are able to relet the property at all. The terms of renewal or re-lease (including the cost of required renovations and/or concessions to tenants) may be less favorable to us than the prior lease. If we are unable to relet all or a substantial portion of our properties, or if the rental rates upon such reletting are

9

significantly lower than expected rates, our cash flow from operations and our ability to make distributions to stockholders and service indebtedness could be adversely affected.

In addition, we are subject to increased leasing risk on properties that we acquire that we have not previously managed due to our lack of experience leasing those properties and unfamiliarity with their leasing cycles. Collegiate housing communities are typically leased during a leasing season that begins in November and ends in August of each year. We are therefore highly dependent on the effectiveness of our marketing and leasing efforts and personnel during this season. Prior to the commencement of each new lease period, mostly during the first two weeks of August but also during September at some communities, we prepare the units for new incoming tenants. Other than revenue generated by in-place leases for returning tenants, we do not generally recognize lease revenue during this period referred to as “Turn” as we have no leases in place. In addition, during Turn, we incur significant expenses making our units ready for occupancy, which we recognize immediately. This lease Turn period results in seasonality in our operating results during the third quarter of each year. As a result, we may experience significantly reduced cash flows during the summer months at properties leased for terms shorter than twelve months.

In addition, students leasing under 11.5 month leases may be more likely to default on their rental payments during the summer months. Although we typically require a student’s parents to guarantee the student’s lease, we may have to spend considerable effort and expense in pursuing payment upon a defaulted lease, and our efforts may not be successful.

We rely on our relationships with universities, and changes in university personnel and/or policies could adversely affect our operating results.

In some cases, we rely on our relationships with universities for referrals of prospective tenants or for mailing lists of prospective tenants and their parents. The failure to maintain good relationships with personnel at these universities could therefore have a material adverse effect on us. If universities refuse to make their lists of prospective student-tenants and their parents available to us or increase the costs of these lists, the increased costs or failure to obtain such lists could also have a material adverse effect on us.

We may be adversely affected by a change in university admission policies. For example, if a university reduces the number of student admissions, the demand for our properties

may be reduced and our occupancy rates may decline. In addition, universities may institute a policy that a certain class of students, such as freshmen, must live in a university-owned facility, which would also reduce the demand for our properties. While we may engage in marketing efforts to compensate for such policy changes, we may not be able to effect such marketing efforts prior to the commencement of the annual lease-up period or at all.

It is also important that the universities from which our communities draw tenants maintain good reputations and are able to attract the desired number of incoming students. Any degradation in a university’s reputation could inhibit its ability to attract students and reduce the demand for our communities.

We face significant competition from university-owned collegiate housing and from other private collegiate housing communities located within close proximity to universities.

Many students prefer on-campus housing to off-campus housing because of the closer physical proximity to campus and integration of on-campus facilities into the academic community. Universities can generally avoid real estate taxes and borrow funds at lower interest rates, while we and other private-sector operators pay full real estate tax rates and have higher borrowing costs. Consequently, universities often can offer more convenient and/or less expensive collegiate housing than we can, which can adversely affect our occupancy and rental rates.

We also compete with other national and regional owner-operators of off-campus collegiate housing in a number of markets as well as with smaller local owner-operators. There are a number of purpose-built collegiate housing properties that compete directly with us located near or in the same general vicinity of many of our collegiate housing communities. Such competing collegiate housing communities may be newer than our collegiate housing communities, located closer to campus, charge less rent, possess more attractive amenities, or offer more services, shorter lease terms or more flexible leases. The construction of competing properties or decreases in the general levels of rents for housing in competing properties could adversely affect our rental income.

We believe that a number of other large national companies may be potential entrants in the collegiate housing business. In some cases, these potential competitors possess substantially greater financial and marketing resources than we do. The entry

10

of one or more of these companies could increase competition for student tenants and for the acquisition, development and management of other collegiate housing communities.

We may not be able to recover our costs for our development consulting services.

We typically are awarded development consulting services business on the basis of a competitive award process, but definitive contracts are typically not executed until the formal approval of the transaction by the institution’s governing body at the completion of the process. In the intervening period, we may incur significant predevelopment and other costs in the expectation that the development consulting services contract will be executed. These costs could range up to $2.0 million or more per project and typically include architects’ fees to design the property and contractors’ fees to price the construction. We typically seek to enter into a reimbursement agreement with the institution that requires the institution to provide a guarantee of our advances. However, we may not be successful in negotiating such an agreement. In addition, if an institution’s governing body does not ultimately approve our selection and the underlying terms of a pending development, we may not be able to recover these costs from the institution. In addition, when we are awarded development consulting business, we generally receive a significant percentage of our fees for development consulting services upon closing of the project financing, a portion of the fee over the construction period and the balance upon substantial completion of construction. As a result, the recognition and timing of revenues will, among other things differ from the timing of payments and be contingent upon the project owner’s successful structuring and closing of the project financing as well as the timing of construction.

Our contractual obligations arising under third-party development consulting agreements expose us to risks related to the total project cost and on-time completion of the project.

We typically enter into development agreements with universities and other third-parties as “developer at risk.” At the same time, we enter into guaranteed maximum price contracts with a general contractor for the construction of the project. In our capacity as “developer at risk,” we usually guarantee that a project will be completed within a certain maximum cost. Any additional costs which are not the responsibility of the contractor, under their guaranteed maximum price contract, or the result of changes by the university or other third-party, would be our responsibility to fund. We also typically guarantee that a project will be completed and ready for occupancy by a

date certain in order to meet housing needs for a particular school term. If completion of a project was delayed beyond such date certain, we would be exposed to claims for liquidated damages, which would usually include, but may not be limited to, the cost of housing prospective residents of the community until it was available for occupancy. Although we generally transfer such risks to the general contractor who is responsible for the construction activities of a development project, if we were to experience significant cost-overruns or were to become subject to such a claim or claims, our financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows could be materially and adversely impacted.

We may not be able to recover internal development costs.

When developing collegiate housing communities for our ownership on university land, definitive contracts are not executed until the formal approval of the transaction by the institution’s governing body at the completion of the process. In the intervening period, we may incur significant predevelopment and other costs in the expectation that a ground lease will be executed. These costs could range up to $1.0 million or more and typically include architects’ fees to design the property and third party fees related to other predevelopment services. If an institution’s governing body does not ultimately approve the lease we will not be able to recover these predevelopment costs.

We may be unable to take advantage of certain disposition opportunities because of additional costs we have agreed to pay if we sell the University Towers collegiate housing community in a taxable transaction.

We issued University Towers Partnership units for our interest in University Towers. So long as the contributing owners of such property hold at least 25% of the University Towers Partnership units, we have agreed to maintain certain minimum amounts of debt on the property so as to avoid triggering gain to the contributing owners. If we fail to do this, we will owe to the contributing owners the amount of taxes that they incur. In each case, the amount of tax is computed assuming the highest federal and state rates. As a result, these agreements may preclude us from selling the restricted property at the optimal time.

11

Our growth will be dependent upon our ability to acquire and/or develop, lease, integrate and manage additional collegiate housing communities successfully.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to identify real estate investments, including joint ventures, that meet our investment criteria, that we will be successful in completing any acquisition we identify or that any acquisition we complete will produce a return on our investment.

Our future growth will be dependent upon our ability to successfully acquire new properties and enter into joint ventures on favorable terms, which may be adversely affected by the following significant risks:

As we acquire additional properties, we will be subject to risks associated with managing new properties, including lease-up and integration risks. Newly acquired properties may not perform as expected, and newly acquired properties may have characteristics or deficiencies unknown to us at the time of acquisition.

We may be unable to invest our capital resources on acceptable terms or at all.

Our ability to achieve our expected levels of financial performance will depend significantly upon our ability to invest efficiently our available capital resources in accretive transactions. Although we seek to maintain a pipeline of suitable investment opportunities, we cannot assure you that we will be able to identify any acquisition and/or development opportunities or other investments that meet our investment objectives or that any investment that we make will produce a positive return. Moreover, our investment pipeline is generally subject to numerous uncertainties and conditions that make it difficult to predict if or when any such potential transactions will be consummated. Accordingly, we may be unable to invest our available capital resources on acceptable terms within the time period that we anticipate, or at all, and these delays could result in additional dilution and may cause our financial results, including funds from operations, or FFO, per share, to fall short of analyst expectations. Moreover, we have significant flexibility in investing our capital resources, and we may use the resources in ways with which our stockholders may not agree or for purposes other than those that we originally contemplated.

Our ownership of properties through ground leases exposes us to the loss of such properties upon breach or termination of the ground leases.

We have acquired an interest in certain of our properties by acquiring a leasehold interest in the property on which the building is located (or under development), and we may acquire additional properties in the future through the purchase of interests in ground leases. As the lessee under a ground lease, we are exposed to the possibility of losing the property (or building we may be developing) upon termination of the ground lease or an earlier breach of the ground lease by us.

We have limited time to perform due diligence on many of our acquired properties, which could subject us to significant unexpected liabilities and under-performance of the acquired properties.

When we enter into an agreement to acquire a property, we often have limited time to complete our due diligence prior to

12

acquiring the property. Because our internal resources are limited, we may rely on third parties to conduct a portion of our due diligence. To the extent these third parties or we underestimate or fail to identify risks and liabilities associated with the properties we acquire, we may incur unexpected liabilities, or the property may fail to perform in accordance with our projections. If, during the due diligence phase, we do not accurately assess the value of and liabilities associated with a particular property, we may pay a purchase price that exceeds the current fair value of the assets. As a result, material goodwill and other intangible assets would be recorded, which could result in significant charges to earnings in future periods. These charges, in addition to the financial impact of significant liabilities that we may assume, could materially and adversely impact our financial and operating results, as well as our ability to pay distributions.

Certain losses may not be covered by insurance or may be underinsured.

We carry insurance covering comprehensive liability, fire, earthquake, terrorism, business interruption, vandalism and malicious mischief, extended coverage perils, physical loss perils, commercial general liability, personal injury, workers’ compensation, business, automobile, errors and omissions, employee dishonesty, employment practices liability and rental loss with respect to all of the properties in our portfolio and the operation of our Management Company and Development Company. We also carry insurance covering flood (when the property is located in whole or in material part in a designated flood plain area) on some of our properties. We believe the policy specifications and insured limits are appropriate and adequate given the relative risk of loss, the cost of the coverage and industry practice. There are, however, certain types of losses (such as property damage from riots or wars, employment discrimination losses, punitive damage awards, or acts of God) that may be either uninsurable or not economically insurable. Some of our policies are subject to large deductibles or co-payments and policy limits that may not be sufficient to cover losses. In addition, we may discontinue earthquake, terrorism or other insurance on some or all of our properties in the future if the cost of premiums for these policies exceeds, in our judgment, the value of the coverage discounted for the risk of loss. If we experience a loss that is uninsured or that exceeds policy limits, we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those properties. In addition, if the damaged properties are

subject to recourse indebtedness, we would continue to be liable for the indebtedness, even if these properties were irreparably damaged.

We could incur significant costs related to government regulation and private litigation over environmental matters.

Under various environmental laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, or CERCLA, a current or previous owner or operator of real property may be liable for contamination resulting from the release or threatened release of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum at that property, and an entity that arranges for the disposal or treatment of a hazardous or toxic substance or petroleum at another property may be held jointly and severally liable for the cost to investigate and clean up such property or other affected property. Such parties are known as potentially responsible parties, or PRPs. Environmental laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the contaminants, and the costs of any required investigation or cleanup of these substances can be substantial. PRPs are liable to the government as well as to other PRPs who may have claims for contribution. The liability is generally not limited under such laws and could exceed the property’s value and the aggregate assets of the liable party. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination at our properties also may expose us to third-party liability for personal injury or property damage, or adversely affect our ability to sell, lease or develop the real property or to borrow using the real property as collateral. We do not carry environmental insurance on any of the properties in our portfolio.

Environmental laws also impose ongoing compliance requirements on owners and operators of real property. Environmental laws potentially affecting us address a wide variety of matters, including, but not limited to, asbestos-containing building materials, storage tanks, storm water and wastewater discharges, lead-based paint, wetlands and hazardous wastes. Failure to comply with these laws could result in fines and penalties and/or expose us to third-party liability. Some of our properties may have conditions that are subject to these requirements, and we could be liable for such fines or penalties and/or liable to third parties for those conditions.

13

We could be exposed to liability and remedial costs related to environmental matters.

Certain properties in our portfolio may contain, or may have contained, asbestos-containing building materials, or ACBMs. Environmental laws require that ACBMs be properly managed and maintained, and may impose fines and penalties on building owners and operators for failure to comply with these requirements. Also, certain properties may contain, or may have contained, or are adjacent to or near other properties that have contained or currently contain storage tanks for the storage of petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. These operations create a potential for the release of petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. Certain properties in our portfolio contain, or may have contained, elevated radon levels. Third parties may be permitted by law to seek recovery from owners or operators for property damage and/or personal injury associated with exposure to contaminants, including, but not limited to, petroleum products, hazardous or toxic substances and asbestos fibers. Also, some of the properties may contain regulated wetlands that can delay or impede development or require costs to be incurred to mitigate the impact of any disturbance. Absent appropriate permits, we can be held responsible for restoring wetlands and be required to pay fines and penalties.

Some of the properties in our portfolio may contain microbial matter such as mold and mildew. In addition, if any property in our portfolio is not properly connected to a water or sewer system, or if the integrity of such systems are breached, or if water intrusion into our buildings otherwise occurs, microbial matter or other contamination can develop. When excessive moisture accumulates in buildings or on building materials, mold growth may occur, particularly if the moisture problem remains undiscovered or is not addressed over a period of time. Some molds may produce airborne toxins or irritants. If this were to occur, we could incur significant remedial costs and we may also be subject to material private damage claims and awards. Concern about indoor exposure to mold has been increasing, as exposure to mold may cause a variety of adverse health effects and symptoms, including allergic or other reactions. If we become subject to claims in this regard, it could materially and adversely affect us and our future insurability for such matters.

Independent environmental consultants conduct Phase I environmental site assessments on all of our acquisitions. Phase I environmental site assessments are intended to evaluate

information regarding the environmental condition of the surveyed property and surrounding properties based generally on visual observations, interviews and certain publicly available databases. These assessments do not typically take into account all environmental issues including, but not limited to, testing of soil or groundwater or the possible presence of asbestos, lead-based paint, radon, wetlands or mold. The results of these assessments are addressed and could result in either a cancellation of the purchase, the requirement of the seller to remediate issues or additional costs on our part to remediate the issue.

None of the previous site assessments revealed any past or present environmental liability that we believe would be material to us. However, the assessments may have failed to reveal all environmental conditions, liabilities or compliance concerns. Material environmental conditions, liabilities or compliance concerns may have arisen after the assessments were conducted or may arise in the future; and future laws, ordinances or regulations may impose material additional environmental liability. We cannot assure you that costs of future environmental compliance will not affect our ability to make distributions or that such costs or other remedial measures will not be material to us.

We may incur significant costs complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar laws.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, or the ADA, all public accommodations must meet federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. Additional federal, state and local laws also may require modifications to our properties, or restrict our ability to renovate our properties. For example, the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, or FHAA, requires apartment properties first occupied after March 13, 1990 to be accessible to the handicapped. We have not conducted an audit or investigation of all of our properties to determine our compliance with present ADA requirements. Noncompliance with the ADA or FHAA could result in the imposition of fines or an award for damages to private litigants and also could result in an order to correct any non-complying feature. We cannot predict the ultimate amount of the cost of compliance with the ADA, FHAA or other legislation. If we incur substantial costs to comply with the ADA, FHAA or any other legislation, we could be materially and adversely affected.

14

In connection with the acquisition of certain of our properties, the previous owner disclosed to us in 2004 that, in June 2001, the United States Department of Justice, or DOJ, had notified the previous owner of an on-going investigation regarding possible violations of the ADA and the FHAA. The previous owner disclosed to us in 2004 that DOJ had reviewed the property plans for certain of its properties, that DOJ had not issued a report regarding its review, that in October 2002, DOJ had indicated to the previous owner that the investigation was being delayed for an undetermined period of time, and that DOJ had not contacted the previous owner between 2002 and August 2004. In February 2010 DOJ served a subpoena on us seeking access to one of the purchased properties in connection with a complaint filed by DOJ in March 2009 against the previous owner. The investigation has not been resolved and, at this point, no conclusion can be reached regarding what will be required to conclude it or whether it will result in a dispute or legal proceedings between us and DOJ or the previous owner. Noncompliance with the ADA and the FHAA could result in the imposition of injunctive relief, fines, awards of damages to private litigants or additional capital expenditures to remedy such noncompliance. We are unable to predict the outcome of the DOJ’s investigation.

Reporting of on-campus crime statistics required of universities may negatively impact our communities.

Federal and state laws require universities to publish and distribute reports of on-campus crime statistics, which may result in negative publicity and media coverage associated with crimes occurring in the vicinity of, or on the premises of, our on-campus communities. Reports of crime or other negative publicity regarding the safety of the students residing on, or near, our communities may have an adverse effect on both our on-campus and off-campus communities.

Joint venture investments could be adversely affected by our lack of sole decision-making authority, our reliance on co-venturers’ financial condition and disputes between our co-venturers and us.

We have co-invested and anticipate that we will continue to co-invest with third parties through partnerships, joint ventures or other entities, acquiring non-controlling interests in or sharing responsibility for managing the affairs of a property, partnership, joint venture or other entity. In such event, we do not have sole decision-making authority regarding the property, partnership, joint venture or other entity. Investments in partnerships, joint ventures or other entities may, under certain circumstances, involve risks not present were a third party not involved,

including the possibility that partners or co-venturers may become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required capital contributions. Partners or co-venturers also may have economic or other business interests or goals that are inconsistent with our business interests or goals and may be in a position to take actions contrary to our preferences, policies or objectives. Such investments also will have the potential risk of our reaching impasses with our partners or co-venturers on key decisions, such as a sale, because neither we nor the partner or co-venturer would have full control over the partnership or joint venture. Disputes between us and our partners or co-venturers may result in litigation or arbitration that would increase our expenses and prevent our management team from focusing its time and effort exclusively on our business. In addition, we may in some circumstances be liable for the actions of our third-party partners or co-venturers.

Illiquidity of real estate investments could significantly impede our ability to respond to adverse changes in the performance of our properties.

Because real estate investments are relatively illiquid, our ability to promptly sell one or more properties in our portfolio in response to changing economic, financial and investment conditions is limited. The real estate market is affected by many factors, such as general economic conditions, availability of financing, interest rates and other factors, including supply and demand, that are beyond our control. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sell any property for the price or on the terms set by us or whether any price or other terms offered by a prospective purchaser would be acceptable to us. We also cannot predict the length of time needed to find a willing purchaser and to close the sale of a property.

We may be required to expend funds to correct defects or to make improvements before a property can be sold. We cannot ensure that we will have funds available to correct those defects or to make those improvements. In acquiring a property, we may agree to transfer restrictions that materially restrict us from selling that property for a period of time or impose other restrictions, such as a limitation on the amount of debt that can be placed or repaid on that property. These transfer restrictions would impede our ability to sell a property even if we deem it necessary or appropriate.

15

Risks Associated with Our Indebtedness and Financing

We depend heavily on the availability of debt and equity capital to fund our business.

In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we are required under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, to distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding any net capital gain. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement but distribute less than 100% of our net taxable income, including any net capital gains, we will be subject to federal corporate income tax on our undistributed taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we pay out to our stockholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under federal tax laws. Because of these distribution requirements, REITs are largely unable to fund capital expenditures, such as acquisitions, renovations, development and property upgrades from operating cash flow. Consequently, we will be largely dependent on the public equity and debt capital markets and private lenders to provide capital to fund our growth and other capital expenditures. We may not be able to obtain this financing on favorable terms or at all. Our access to equity and debt capital depends, in part, on:

If we cannot obtain capital from third-party sources, we may not be able to acquire properties when strategic opportunities exist, satisfy our debt service obligations or make cash distributions to our stockholders, including those necessary to maintain our qualification as a REIT.

Current market conditions could affect our ability to refinance existing indebtedness or obtain additional financing on acceptable terms and may have other adverse effects on us.

The United States credit markets have in the recent past experienced significant dislocations and liquidity disruptions, including the bankruptcy, insolvency or restructuring of certain

financial institutions. These circumstances have impacted liquidity in the debt markets, making financing terms for certain borrowers less attractive, and in certain cases have resulted in the unavailability of certain types of debt financing. Although we believe that our Master Secured Credit Facility and Third Amended Revolver (each defined below) are sufficient for our current operations, any reductions in our available borrowing capacity, or our inability to renew or replace these facilities when required or when business conditions warrant, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, if prevailing interest rates or other factors at the time of refinancing result in higher interest rates upon refinancing, then the interest expense relating to that refinanced indebtedness would increase. Higher interest rates on newly incurred debt may negatively impact us as well. If interest rates increase, our interest costs and overall costs of capital will increase, which could adversely affect our transaction and development activity, financial condition, results of operation, cash flow, the market price of our stock, our ability to pay principal and interest on our debt and our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders.

If we are unable to secure additional financing or refinancing on favorable terms or our operating cash flow is insufficient, we may not be able to satisfy our outstanding financial obligations under our mortgage and construction debt. Furthermore, if financing is not available when needed, or is available on unfavorable terms, we may be unable to take advantage of business opportunities or respond to competitive pressures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. A prolonged downturn in the credit markets may cause us to seek alternative sources of potentially less attractive financing. Such sources may not then be available and may require us to adjust our business plan accordingly or significantly cutback or curtail operations and development plans. In addition, these factors may make it more difficult for us to sell properties or may adversely affect the price we receive for properties that we do sell as prospective buyers may experience increased costs of debt financing or difficulties in obtaining debt financing.

In addition, we mortgage most of our properties to secure payment of indebtedness. In 2012, $48.1 million or 13.4%, of our mortgage and construction debt reaches maturity. If we are unable to service the debt, including in the event we are not successful in refinancing our debt upon maturity, then the properties securing the mortgages could be foreclosed upon or

16

transferred to the mortgagee, or we might be forced to dispose of some of our properties on disadvantageous terms, with a consequent loss of income and asset value. A foreclosure of a mortgaged property could also cause cross defaults under the Master Secured Credit Facility or the Second Amended Revolver. A foreclosure or disadvantageous disposal on one or more of our properties could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our stock.

Our use of debt financing reduces cash available for distribution and may expose us to the risk of default under our debt obligations.

Our charter and bylaws impose no limitation on the amount of debt we may incur. Our debt service obligations expose us to the risk of default and reduce (or eliminate) cash resources that are available to operate our business. The Third Amended Revolver contains customary affirmative and negative covenants and provides for potential availability of $315 million upon satisfaction of certain conditions. The amount available to us and our ability to borrow from time to time under this facility is subject to certain conditions which includes borrowing base calculations that limit availability based upon the underlying value of the collateral and the satisfaction of specified financial and other covenants, which include, without limitation, limiting distributions to our stockholders. If the income generated by our properties and other assets fails to cover our debt service, we would be forced to reduce or eliminate distributions to our stockholders and may experience losses. Our level of debt and the operating limitations imposed on us by our debt agreements could have significant adverse consequences, including the following:

A change in U.S. government policy with regard to Fannie Mae could materially impact our financial condition.

In 2009 the U. S. Treasury removed the $200 billion cap on the amount of financial aid available for Fannie Mae and extended its conservatorship of Fannie Mae through 2012. The Treasury also capped Fannie Mae’s retained mortgage portfolio limitation at $900 billion and required that this portfolio be reduced on a phased basis beginning in 2010. Through expansion of its off-balance sheet lending products, we believe that Fannie Mae’s balance sheet limitations will not restrict its support of lending to the collegiate housing industry and to us in particular. Should loan availability be reduced, it could impact the value of collegiate housing assets and impair the value of our properties, and we would seek alternative sources of funding. We anticipate that additional capital may be available only at a higher cost and have less attractive terms, if available at all.

A change in the value of our assets could cause us to experience a cash shortfall, be in default of our loan covenants, lose management control or incur a charge for the impairment of assets.

We borrow on a secured basis under the Master Secured Credit Facility and the Third Amended Revolver. A significant reduction in value of the assets secured as collateral could require us to post additional collateral or pay down the balance of the facilities. While we believe that we have significant excess collateral and capacity, future asset values are uncertain. If we were unable to meet a request to add collateral to these facilities, this inability would have a material adverse affect on our liquidity and our ability to comply with our loan covenants. We may determine that the value of an individual asset, or group of assets, was irrevocably impaired, and that we need to record a charge to write-down the value of the asset to reflect its current estimated value based on its intended use.

17

Our collegiate housing communities have previously been, and in the future may be, subject to impairment charges, which could adversely affect our results of operations and funds from operations.

We are required to periodically evaluate our properties for impairment indicators. A property’s value is considered impaired if management’s estimate of the aggregate future cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges) to be generated by the property, based on its intended use, is less than the carrying value of the property. These estimates of cash flows are based on factors such as expected future operating income, trends and prospects, as well as the effects of interest and capitalization rates, demand and occupancy, competition and other factors. Ongoing adverse market and economic conditions and market volatility make it difficult to value our collegiate housing communities. These factors may result in uncertainty in valuation estimates and instability in the estimated value of our collegiate housing communities which, in turn, could result in a substantial decrease in the value of the communities and significant impairment charges.

We continually assess our collegiate housing communities to determine if any dispositions are necessary or appropriate. No assurance can be given that we will be able to recover the current carrying amount of our collegiate housing communities in the future. Our failure to do so would require us to recognize additional impairment charges for the period in which we reached that conclusion, which could materially and adversely affect us and our results of operations and funds from operations.

Variable rate debt is subject to interest rate risk.

We have mortgage and construction debt with varying interest rates dependent upon London InterBank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus an applicable margin. In addition, our Third Amended Revolver bears interest at a variable rate on all amounts drawn under the facility. As of December 31, 2011, we had a total of $72.7 million outstanding in variable rate debt, or approximately 20% of our total debt. We may incur additional variable rate debt in the future. Increases in interest rates on variable rate debt would increase our interest expense, unless we make arrangements which hedge the risk of rising interest rates, which would adversely affect net income and cash available for payment of our debt obligations and distributions to stockholders.

We may incur losses on interest rate hedging arrangements.

Periodically, we have entered into agreements to reduce the risks associated with changes in interest rates, and we may continue to do so in the future. Although these agreements may partially protect against rising interest rates, they may also reduce the benefits to us if interest rates decline. If a hedging arrangement is not indexed to the same rate as the indebtedness which is hedged, we may be exposed to losses to the extent which the rate governing the indebtedness and the rate governing the hedging arrangement change independently of each other. Additionally, nonperformance by the other party to the hedging arrangement may subject us to increased credit risks.

Broad market fluctuations could negatively impact the market price of our common stock.

As with other publicly traded equity securities, the value of our common stock depends on various market conditions, which may change from time to time. The stock market has recently experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have affected the market price of many companies in industries similar or related to ours and that are outside of management’s control. These broad market fluctuations could adversely impact the market price of our common stock. Accordingly, the market price of our common stock could change in ways that may or may not be related to our business, our industry or our operating performance and financial condition. Furthermore, our operating results and prospects may not meet the expectations of public market analysts and investors or may not be comparable to companies within our industry and with comparable market capitalizations. Any of these factors could lead to a material decline in the market price of our common stock.

Additional issuances of equity securities may be dilutive to stockholders.

The interests of our stockholders could be diluted if we issue additional equity securities to finance future developments or acquisitions or to repay indebtedness. Our Board of Directors may authorize the issuance of additional equity securities without stockholder approval. Our ability to execute our business strategy depends upon our access to an appropriate blend of debt financing, including revolving credit facilities and other forms of secured and unsecured debt, and equity financing, including the issuance of common equity.

18

We may reduce the amount of dividends declared on our common stock.

In order for EdR to continue to qualify as a REIT, we are required to distribute annual dividends generally equal to a minimum of 90% of our REIT taxable income, computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and our net capital gains. However, in the event of material deterioration in business conditions or tightening in the credit markets, among other factors, our Board of Directors may decide to reduce the amount of our dividend while ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Code related to REIT qualification.

Risks Related to Our Organization and Structure

To maintain our REIT status, we may be forced to limit the activities of our Management Company and Development Company.

To maintain our status as a REIT, no more than 25% of the value of our total assets may consist of the securities of one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries, such as our Management Company and our Development Company. Some of our activities, such as our third-party management, development consulting and food services, must be conducted through our Management Company and Development Company for us to maintain our REIT qualification. In addition, certain non-customary services such as cleaning, transportation, security and, in some cases, parking, must be provided by one of our taxable REIT subsidiaries or an independent contractor. If the revenues from such activities create a risk that the value of our Management Company and other TRSs, based on revenues or otherwise, approaches the 25% threshold, we will be forced to curtail such activities or take other steps to remain under the 25% threshold. Because the 25% threshold is based on value, it is possible that the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, could successfully contend that the value of our Management Company and other TRSs exceed the 25% threshold even if our Management Company and other TRSs accounts for less than 25% of our consolidated revenues, income or cash flow, in which case our status as a REIT could be jeopardized.

Our charter contains restrictions on the ownership and transfer of our stock.

Our charter provides that, subject to certain exceptions, no person or entity may beneficially own, or be deemed to own by virtue of the applicable constructive ownership provisions of the Code, more than 9.8% (by value, by number of shares or by voting power, whichever is more restrictive) of the outstanding shares of our common stock or more than 9.8% (by value, by

number of shares or by voting power, whichever is more restrictive) of the outstanding shares of our capital stock, including both common and preferred stock. We refer to these restrictions collectively as the “ownership limit.” Generally, if a beneficial owner of our shares exceeds the ownership limit, such owner will be effectively divested of all ownership rights with respect to shares exceeding the limit and may suffer a loss on such investment.

The constructive ownership rules under the Code are complex and may cause stock owned actually or constructively by a group of related individuals and/or entities to be owned constructively by one individual or entity. As a result, the acquisition of less than 9.8% of our stock (or the acquisition of an interest in an entity that owns, actually or constructively, our stock) by an individual or entity, could, nevertheless cause that individual or entity, or another individual or entity, to own constructively in excess of 9.8% of our outstanding common stock and thereby subject certain shares to the ramifications of exceeding the ownership limit. Our charter, however, permits exceptions to be made to this limitation if our Board of Directors determines that such exceptions will not jeopardize our tax status as a REIT. This ownership limit could delay, defer or prevent a change of control or other transaction that might otherwise result in a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders.

Certain ownership limitations and anti-takeover provisions of our charter and bylaws may inhibit a change of our control.

Certain provisions contained in our charter and bylaws and the Maryland General Corporation Law may discourage a third party from making a tender offer or acquisition proposal to us, or could delay, defer or prevent a change in control or the removal of existing management. These provisions also may delay or prevent our stockholders from receiving a premium for their shares of common stock over then-prevailing market prices. These provisions include:

19

The Maryland business statutes also impose potential restrictions on a change of control of EdR.

Various Maryland laws may have the effect of discouraging offers to acquire us, even if the acquisition would be advantageous to our stockholders. Our bylaws exempt us from some of those laws, such as the control share acquisition provisions, but our Board of Directors can change our bylaws at any time to make these provisions applicable to us.

We have the right to change some of our policies that may be important to our stockholders without stockholder consent.

Our major policies, including our policies with respect to investments, leverage, financing, growth, debt and capitalization, are determined by our Board of Directors or those committees or officers to whom our Board of Directors has delegated that authority. Our Board of Directors also establishes the amount of any distributions that we make to our stockholders. Our Board of Directors may amend or revise the foregoing policies, our distribution payment amounts and other policies from time to time without a stockholder vote. Accordingly, our stockholders may not have control over changes in our policies.

The ability of our Board of Directors to revoke our REIT election without stockholder approval may cause adverse consequences to our stockholders.

Our charter provides that our Board of Directors may revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election, without the approval of our stockholders, if it determines that it is no longer in our best interests to continue to qualify as a REIT. If we cease to qualify as a REIT, we would become subject to federal income tax on our taxable income and would no longer be required to distribute most of our taxable income to our stockholders, which may have adverse consequences on the total return to our stockholders.

Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited.

Maryland law provides that a director or officer has no liability in that capacity if he or she performs his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be advisable and in our best interests and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. In addition, our charter eliminates our directors’

and officers’ liability to us and our stockholders for money damages except for liability resulting from actual receipt of an improper benefit in money, property or services or active and deliberate dishonesty established by a final judgment and that is material to the cause of action. Our bylaws require us to indemnify directors and officers for liability resulting from actions taken by them in those capacitates to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. As a result, our stockholders and we may have more limited rights against our directors and officers than might otherwise exist under common law. In addition, we may be obligated to fund the defense costs incurred by our directors and officers.

Our success depends upon key personnel whose continued service is not guaranteed.

We depend upon the services of our key personnel, particularly Randy Churchey, President and Chief Executive Officer, Randall H. Brown, our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Thomas Trubiana, our Executive Vice President and Chief Investment Officer, and Christine Richards, our Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Churchey’s considerable experience as a senior executive officer of publicly traded real estate companies, including REITs, prior service to EdR as a member of the Board of Directors and familiarity with our operational and organizational structure are critical to the oversight and implementation of our strategic initiatives and the evaluation of our operational performance. In addition, Mr. Brown possesses detailed knowledge of and experience with our financial and ancillary support operations that are critical to our operations and financial reporting obligations as a public company. Mr. Trubiana has been in the collegiate housing business for over 30 years, and has developed a network of contacts and a reputation that attracts business and investment opportunities and assists us in negotiations with universities, lenders and industry personnel. Ms. Richards possesses detailed knowledge of our property operations that is critical to the oversight of our communities’ performance and has considerable experience in the collegiate housing industry. We will continue to need to attract and retain qualified additional senior executive officers as we grow our business. The loss of the services of any of our senior executive officers, or our inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

20

Any weaknesses identified in our system of internal controls by us and our independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 could have an adverse effect on our business.

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires that public companies evaluate and report on their systems of internal control over financial reporting. In addition, our independent registered public accounting firm must report on management’s evaluation of those controls. In future periods, we may identify deficiencies in our system of internal controls over financial reporting that may require remediation. There can be no assurances that any such future deficiencies identified may not be material weaknesses that would be required to be reported in future periods.

Federal Income Tax Risks

Failure to qualify as a REIT would have significant adverse consequences to us and the value of our stock.

We intend to continue to be organized and to operate in a manner that will allow us to qualify as a REIT under the Code. We have not requested and do not plan to request a ruling from the IRS that we qualify as a REIT. If we lose our REIT status, we will face serious tax consequences that could substantially reduce the funds available for distribution to our stockholders for each year that we fail to qualify as a REIT because:

In addition, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, we will not be required to make distributions to stockholders. As a result of all these factors, our failure to qualify as a REIT could impair our ability to expand our business and raise capital and would adversely affect the value of our common stock.

Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations. The complexity of these provisions and of the applicable Treasury Regulations that have been promulgated under the Code is greater in the case of a REIT that, like us, holds its assets through partnerships and limited liability companies. The determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control may affect our ability to qualify as a REIT. In order to qualify as a REIT, we must satisfy a number of requirements, including requirements regarding the diversification of our assets and the sources of our gross income composition of our assets and two “gross income tests.” To satisfy the sources of gross income requirements, we must derive (a) at least 75% of our gross income in any year from qualified sources, such as “rents from real property,” mortgage interest, distributions from other REITs and gains from sale of such assets, and (b) at least 95% of our gross income from sources meeting the 75% gross income test above, and other passive investment sources, such as other interest and dividends and gains from sales of securities. Also, we must make distributions to stockholders aggregating annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding any net capital gains. In order to meet these requirements, we may be required to forgo investments we might otherwise make. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our performance. In addition, new legislation, regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions may adversely affect our investors, our ability to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes or the desirability of an investment in a REIT relative to other investments.

We may be subject to federal and state income taxes that would harm our financial condition.

Even if we maintain our status as a REIT, we may become subject to federal and state income taxes. For example, if we recognize a gain from a sale of dealer property or inventory or if our Management Company enters into agreements with us or our tenants on a basis that is determined to be other than an arm’s length, that gain or income will be subject to a 100% penalty tax. If we believe that a sale of a property might be treated as a prohibited transaction, we will attempt to structure a sale through a taxable REIT subsidiary, in which case the gain from the sale would be subject to corporate income tax but not the 100% prohibited transaction tax. We cannot assure you, however, that the IRS would not assert successfully that sales of properties that we make directly, rather than through a taxable

21

REIT subsidiary, were sales of dealer property or inventory, in which case the 100% penalty tax will apply. In addition, we may not be able to make sufficient distributions to avoid corporate income tax and/or the 4% excise tax on undistributed income. We may also be subject to state and local taxes on our income or property, either directly or at the level of our Operating Partnership or the University Towers Partnership or at a level of the other entities through which we indirectly own our properties that would aversely affect our operating results.

An investment in our common stock has various tax risks, including the treatment of distributions in excess of earnings and the inability to apply “passive losses” against distributions.

Distributions in excess of current and accumulated earnings and profits, to the extent that they exceed the adjusted basis of an investor’s common stock, will be treated as long-term capital gain (or short-term capital gain if the shares have been held for less than one year). Any gain or loss realized upon a taxable disposition of shares by a stockholder who is not a dealer in securities will be treated as a long-term capital gain or loss if the shares have been held for more than one year and otherwise will be treated as short-term capital gain or loss. Distributions that we properly designate as capital gain distributions (to the extent that they do not exceed our actual net capital gain for the taxable year) will be treated as taxable to stockholders as gains from the sale or disposition of a capital asset held for greater than one year. Distributions we make and gain arising from the sale or exchange by a stockholder of shares of our stock will not be treated as passive income, meaning stockholders generally will not be able to apply any “passive losses” against such income or gain.

Future distributions may include a significant portion as a return of capital.

Our distributions have historically exceeded, and may continue to exceed, the amount of our net income as a REIT. Any distributions in excess of a stockholder’s share of our current and accumulated earnings and profits will be treated as a return of capital to the extent of the stockholder’s basis in our stock, and the stockholder’s basis in our stock will be reduced by such amount. To the extent distributions exceed both the stockholder’s share of our current and accumulated earnings and profits and the stockholder’s basis in our stock, the stockholder will recognize capital gain, assuming the stock is held as a capital asset. If distributions by us result in a reduction of a

stockholder’s adjusted basis in its stock, subsequent sales by such stockholder of its stock potentially will result in recognition of an increased capital gain or reduced capital loss due to the reduction in such stockholder’s adjusted basis in its stock.

The tax imposed on REITs engaging in “prohibited transactions” may limit our ability to engage in transactions which would be treated as sales for federal income tax purposes.

A REIT’s net income from prohibited transactions is subject to a 100% penalty tax. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property, other than foreclosure property held in inventory primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. Although we do not intend to hold any properties that would be characterized as inventory held for sale to customers in the ordinary course of our business, subject to certain statutory safe harbors, such characterization is a factual determination and no guarantee can be given that the IRS would agree with our characterization of our properties or that we will always be able to make use of the available safe harbors.

If our Operating Partnership fails to maintain its status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, its income may be subject to corporate-level income taxation.

We intend for our Operating Partnership to maintain its status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes; however, if the IRS were to successfully challenge the status of our Operating Partnership as a partnership, our Operating Partnership would be taxable as a corporation. In such event, this would reduce the amount of distributions that our Operating Partnership could make to us. This could also result in our losing REIT status and becoming subject to a corporate-level income tax. This would substantially reduce our cash available to pay distributions to our stockholders. In addition, if any of the entities through which our Operating Partnership owns its properties, in whole or in part, loses its characterization as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, it would be subject to taxation as a corporation, thereby reducing distributions to our Operating Partnership. Such a re-characterization of an underlying property owner could also threaten our ability to maintain REIT status.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

22

Item 2. Properties.

General

As of December 31, 2011, our wholly-owned portfolio consisted of 37 communities located in 21 states containing 22,666 beds in 7,340 apartment units located near 34 universities.

Thirty-six of our 37 communities are modern apartments, with clusters of low-rise buildings that consist of collegiate housing units with fully-furnished private bedrooms and one or more bathrooms centered around a common area consisting of a fully-furnished living room, fully-equipped eat-in kitchen, and washers/dryers. University Towers is a high-rise residence hall that has a cafeteria on the premises and no individual kitchens in the units. We provide food services through our Management Company to residents of University Towers. Our collegiate

housing communities typically contain a swimming pool, recreational facilities and common areas, and each bedroom has individual locks, high-speed Internet access and cable television connections.

Our wholly-owned collegiate housing communities typically have the following characteristics:

Communities

The following table provides certain summary information about our wholly-owned communities as of December 31, 2011, which are included in the collegiate housing leasing segment discussed in Note 11, “Segments” to our accompanying consolidated financial statements. All communities are owned in fee with the exception of University Towers, University Village on Colvin, GrandMarc at the Corner and GrandMarc at Westberry Place, which are operated pursuant to ground leases.

23

24

25

Mortgage and Construction Indebtedness

The following table contains summary information concerning the mortgage and construction debt encumbering our wholly-owned communities as of December 31, 2011:

Property		Outstanding at December 31, 2011				Interest Rate				Maturity Date				Amortization
		(in thousands)
University Towers		$	25,000				5.99	%			7/1/2013				30 Year
The Avenue at Southern/The Reserve at Columbia/ The Commons at Knoxville/College Grove			58,131				6.02	%			1/1/2019				30 Year
The Reserve at Perkins			14,940				5.99	%			1/1/2014				30 Year
The Lofts			27,000				5.59	%			5/1/2014				30 Year
College Station at W. Lafayette/The Pointe at Penn State/The Reserve at Star Pass			69,555				6.02	%			1/1/2016				30 Year
Campus Lodge			34,017				6.97	%			5/1/2012				30 Year
Pointe West			10,041				4.92	%			8/1/2014				30 Year
The Reserve on Frankford			7,485				4.96	%			1/1/2015				30 Year
The Reserve at Saluki Pointe – Phase I			10,312				1.38	%			6/28/2012				30 Year
The Reserve at Saluki Pointe – Phase II			4,135				2.28	%			6/28/2012				30 Year
University Village Apartments on Colvin			8,766				1.38	%			9/29/2013				30 Year
Carrollton Crossing/The Commons on Kinnear			16,920				5.45	%			1/1/2017				30 Year
River Pointe/Cape Trails/The Reserve on South College			22,705				5.67	%			1/1/2020				30 Year
The Oaks on the Square			928				2.48	%			10/30/2015				(1)
East Edge			11,630				2.68	%			7/1/2014				(2)
GrandMarc at Westberry Place			36,930				4.85	%			1/1/2020				30 Year
Total debt /weighted average rate			358,495				5.44	%
Unamortized premium			9
Total net of unamortized premium			358,504
Less current portion			(52,288	)
Total long-term debt, net of current portion		$	306,216

The weighted average interest rate of the mortgage and construction indebtedness was 5.44% as of December 31, 2011. Each of these mortgages is a non-recourse obligation subject to customary exceptions. The loans generally do not allow prepayment prior to maturity. However, prepayment is allowed in certain cases subject to prepayment penalties.

26

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

In the normal course of business, we are subject to claims, lawsuits and legal proceedings. While it is not possible to ascertain the ultimate outcome of such matters, in management’s opinion, the liabilities, if any, in excess of amounts provided or covered by insurance, are not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not Applicable.

27

PART II

Item 5. Market For Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

Market Information

Our common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “EDR.” There were approximately 602 holders of record of the 93,117,547 shares outstanding on March 1, 2012. On the same day, our common stock closed at $10.40. The following table provides information on the high and low sales prices for our common stock on the NYSE and the dividends declared for 2010 and 2011:

		High				Low				Distributions Declared
Fiscal 2010
Quarter 1		$	6.19			$	4.78			$	0.050
Quarter 2			7.38				5.47				0.050
Quarter 3			7.48				5.87				0.050
Quarter 4			8.09				7.09				0.050
Fiscal 2011
Quarter 1		$	8.28			$	7.24			$	0.050
Quarter 2			8.78				7.89				0.070
Quarter 3			9.52				7.16				0.070
Quarter 4			10.34				8.04				0.070

Since our initial quarter as a publicly-traded REIT, we have made regular quarterly distributions to our stockholders. We intend to continue to declare quarterly distributions. However, we cannot provide any assurance as to the amount or timing of future distributions. For a description of restrictions on EdR regarding the payment of distributions, see “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources —  Revolving Credit Facility and Other Indebtedness,” “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Distributions,” and Note 10, “Debt,” to our accompanying consolidated financial statements.

To the extent that we make distributions in excess of our earnings and profits, as computed for federal income tax purposes, these distributions will represent a return of capital, rather than a dividend, for federal income tax purposes. Distributions that are treated as a return of capital for federal income tax purposes will reduce the stockholder’s basis in its shares (but not below zero) and therefore can result in the stockholder having a higher gain upon a subsequent sale of such shares. Return of capital distributions in excess of a stockholder’s basis generally will be treated as gain from the sale of such shares for federal income tax purposes.

Amended and Restated Dividend Reinvestment and Direct Stock Purchase Plan

In June 2008, the Trust adopted the Amended and Restated Dividend Reinvestment and Direct Stock Purchase Plan, or DRSPP, which offers the following:

Shares of common stock purchased under the DRSPP will be either issued by EdR or acquired directly from third parties in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. Subject to certain conditions and at our sole discretion, the discount from market prices, if any, on all shares of common stock purchased directly from us will range from 0% to 5%.

We will determine the source of shares available through the DRSPP based on market conditions, relative transaction costs and our need for additional capital. To the extent the DRSPP acquires shares of common stock directly from EdR, we will receive additional capital for general corporate purposes.

28

During the three months ended December 31, 2011, in connection with the DRSPP, we directed the plan administrator to purchase 484 shares of our common stock for $4,419 in the aggregate in the open market pursuant to the dividend reinvestment component of the DRSPP with respect to our dividend for the fourth quarter of 2011. We also directed the plan administrator to purchase 607 shares of our common stock for $5,700 in the aggregate in the open market for investors pursuant to the direct stock purchase component of the DRSPP. The following chart summarizes these purchases of our common stock for the three months ended December 31, 2011.

Period		Total Number of Shares Purchased(1)				Average Price Paid per Share				Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs				Maximum Number (or Approximate Dollar Value) of Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs
October 1 – 31, 2011			129			$	9.28				—				—
November 1 – 30, 2011			648			$	9.12				—				—
December 1 – 31, 2011			314			$	9.55				—				—
Total			1,091			$	9.27				—				—

29

COMPARISON OF 60 MONTH CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN^*
Among Education Realty Trust, Inc., The S&P 500 Index
And The MSCI US REIT Index

The following graph compares the cumulative total return of our common stock to the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, or the S&P 500, and to the Morgan Stanley Capital International U.S. REIT Index, or the MSCI US REIT Index.

		Period Ending
Index		12/31/06				12/31/07				12/31/08				12/31/09				12/31/10				12/31/11
Education Realty Trust, Inc.			100.00				80.65				41.30				41.20				68.20				92.29
S&P 500			100.00				105.49				66.46				84.05				96.71				98.76
MSCI US REIT			100.00				83.18				51.60				66.36				85.26				92.67

We cannot assure you that our share performance will continue into the future with the same or similar trends depicted in the graph above. We will not make or endorse any predictions as to future share performance.

The performance comparisons noted in the graph shall not be deemed incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating by reference this Annual Report on Form 10-K into any filing under the Securities Act or under the Exchange Act, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate this graph by reference, and shall not otherwise be deemed filed under the Securities Act and/or Exchange Act.

30

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

None.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data.

The following table sets forth selected financial and operating data on a consolidated historical basis for EdR.

The following information presented below does not provide all of the information contained in our financial statements, including the related notes. You should read the information below in conjunction with the historical consolidated financial statements and related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

31

STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS DATA

		Year Ended December 31,
		2011				2010				2009				2008				2007
		(In thousands, except per share data)
Revenues:
Collegiate housing leasing revenue		$	109,404			$	96,510			$	93,359			$	90,754			$	84,257
Other leasing revenue			—				—				—				1,357				2,683
Third-party development services			4,103				2,483				8,178				8,303				5,411
Third-party management services			3,336				3,189				3,221				3,672				3,391
Operating expense reimbursements			8,604				14,519				9,722				10,796				9,330
Total revenues			125,447				116,701				114,480				114,882				105,072
Operating expenses:
Collegiate housing leasing operations			50,610				46,293				45,582				45,855				41,261
General and administrative			16,522				17,401				15,752				16,348				14,561
Depreciation and amortization			29,105				25,021				22,787				22,923				25,462
Ground lease expense			5,498				1,528				207				105				—
Loss on impairment			7,859				—				—				388				—
Reimbursable operating expenses			8,604				13,603				9,722				10,796				9,330
Total operating expenses			118,198				103,846				94,050				96,415				90,614
Operating income			7,249				12,855				20,430				18,467				14,458
Nonoperating expenses			19,662				20,565				18,949				24,112				21,606
Income (loss) from continuing operations before equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated entities, income taxes and discontinued operations			(12,413	)			(7,710	)			1,481				(5,645	)			(7,148	)
Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated entities			(447	)			(260	)			(1,410	)			(196	)			(277	)
Income (loss) before income taxes and discontinued operations			(12,860	)			(7,970	)			71				(5,841	)			(7,425	)
Income tax expense (benefit)			(95	)			442				1,905				1,102				256
Loss from continuing operations			(12,765	)			(8,412	)			(1,834	)			(6,943	)			(7,681	)
Discontinued operations:
Income (loss) from operations of discontinued operations			(398	)			(34,490	)			(5,257	)			(1,132	)			681
Gain on sale of collegiate housing property			2,388				611				—				—				1,644
Income (loss) from discontinued operations			1,990				(33,879	)			(5,257	)			(1,132	)			2,325
Net loss			(10,775	)			(42,291	)			(7,091	)			(8,075	)			(5,356	)
Less: Net income (loss) attributable to the noncontrolling interests			239				(233	)			164				(128	)			60
Net loss attributable to Education Realty Trust, Inc.		$	(11,014 )			$	(42,058 )			$	(7,255 )			$	(7,947 )			$	(5,416 )
Earnings per share information:
Income (loss) per share – basic and diluted
Continuing operations			(0.17	)			(0.15	)			(0.05	)			(0.24	)			(0.28	)
Discontinued operations			0.02				(0.58	)			(0.13	)			(0.04	)			0.08
Net loss per share		$	(0.15	)		$	(0.73	)		$	(0.18	)		$	(0.28	)		$	(0.20	)
Weighted average common shares outstanding – basic and diluted			75,485				57,536				40,496				28,513				28,103
Distributions per common share		$	0.24			$	0.20			$	0.36			$	0.82			$	0.82
Amounts attributable to Education Realty Trust, Inc. – common stockholders:
Loss from continuing operations, net of tax			(12,979	)			(8,691	)			(2,157	)			(6,859	)			(7,646	)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax			1,965				(33,367	)			(5,098	)			(1,088	)			2,230
Net loss		$	(11,014 )			$	(42,058 )			$	(7,255 )			$	(7,947 )			$	(5,416 )

32

BALANCE SHEET DATA

		As of December 31,
		2011				2010				2009				2008				2007
		(In thousands)
Assets:
Collegiate housing properties, net		$	860,167			$	698,793			$	749,884			$	733,507			$	732,979
Other assets, net			117,642				37,887				54,729				44,140				34,481
Total assets		$	977,809			$	736,680			$	804,613			$	777,647			$	767,460
Liabilities and equity:
Mortgage and construction notes payable		$	358,504			$	367,631			$	406,365			$	442,259			$	420,940
Other indebtedness			—				3,700				—				32,900				11,500
Other liabilities			46,175				30,567				22,004				20,559				19,080
Total liabilities			404,679				401,898				428,369				495,718				451,520
Redeemable noncontrolling interests			9,776				10,039				11,079				11,751				14,879
Equity			563,354				324,743				365,165				270,178				301,061
Total liabilities and equity		$	977,809			$	736,680			$	804,613			$	777,647			$	767,460

OTHER DATA (UNAUDITED)

		As of December 31,
		2011				2010				2009				2008				2007
		(In thousands, except per share data and selected property information)
Funds from operations (FFO)(1):
Net loss attributable to Education Realty Trust, Inc.		$	(11,014	)		$	(42,058	)		$	(7,255	)		$	(7,947	)		$	(5,416	)
Gain on sale of collegiate housing property			(2,388	)			(611	)			—				—				(1,644	)
Impairment losses			7,859				33,610				3,173				2,021				—
Loss on sale of collegiate housing assets			—				—				—				512				—
Collegiate housing property depreciation and amortization of lease intangibles			29,101				29,940				28,522				28,819				32,490
Equity portion of real estate depreciation and amortization on equity investees			412				479				512				496				424
Equity portion of loss on sale of collegiate housing property on equity investee			256				137				—				—				—
Noncontrolling interests			244				(233	)			164				(128	)			60
Funds from operations available to all share and unitholders		$	24,470			$	21,264			$	25,116			$	23,773			$	25,914
Other adjustments to FFO:
Development cost write-off, net of tax benefit			—				—				—				417				—
Acquisition costs			741				1,467				—				—				—
Ground lease straightline			4,208				984				—				—				—
Reorganization/severance costs, net of tax			—				447				—				—				—
Loss (gain) on extinguishment of debt			757				1,426				(830	)			4,360				174
Impact of other adjustments to FFO			5,706				4,324				(830	)			4,777				174
FFO on participating developments:
Interest on loan to participating development			1,598				329				—				—				—
Development fees on participating development, net of costs and tax			887				128				—				—				—
FFO on participating developments			2,485				457				—				—				—
Core funds from operations available to all share and unitholders(2)		$	32,661			$	26,045			$	24,286			$	28,550			$	26,088

33

34

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, or MD&A, is designed to provide a reader of our financial statements with a narrative on our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and certain other factors that may affect our future results from the perspective of our management. Our MD&A is presented in twelve sections:

We believe our MD&A should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes included in Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, and the Risk Factors included in Item 1A. of this Annual Report.

Unless otherwise noted, this MD&A relates only to results from continuing operations. The years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 reflect the classification of the following communities’ financial results as discontinued operations: College Station (sold in April 2009); Reserve at Clemson (sold in November 2010); The Gables, Western Place, Berkeley Place and the Pointe at Southern (all sold in December 2010); Troy Place, The Reserve at Jacksonville, The Reserve at Martin, The Chase at Murray and Clemson Place (all sold in January 2011); Collegiate Village (sold in April 2011); and Clayton Station (sold in June 2011).

Overview

We are a self-managed and self-advised REIT engaged in the ownership, acquisition, development and management of high-quality collegiate housing communities. We also provide collegiate housing management and development consulting services to universities, charitable foundations and other third parties. We believe that we are one of the largest private owners, developers and managers of high-quality collegiate housing communities in the United States in terms of total beds both owned and under management.

We earn income from rental payments we receive as a result of our ownership of collegiate housing communities. We also earn income by performing property management services and development consulting services for third parties through our Management Company and our Development Company, respectively.

We have elected to be taxed as a REIT for federal income tax purposes.

Our Business Segments

We define business segments by their distinct customer base and the service provided. Management has identified three reportable segments: collegiate housing leasing, development consulting services and management services. We evaluate each segment’s performance based on net operating income, which is defined as income before depreciation, amortization, ground leases, impairment losses, interest expense (income), gains (losses) on extinguishment of debt, equity in earnings of unconsolidated entities, noncontrolling interests and discontinued operations. The accounting policies of the reportable segments are described in more detail in the summary of significant accounting policies in the notes to the accompanying consolidated financial statements. Inter-company fees are reflected at contractually stipulated amounts.

Collegiate housing leasing

Collegiate housing leasing revenue represented approximately 89.9% of our revenue, excluding operating expense reimbursements, for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Unlike multi-family housing where apartments are leased by the unit, collegiate-housing communities are typically leased by the bed on an individual lease liability basis. Individual lease liability limits each resident’s liability to his or her own rent without liability for a roommate’s rent. The number of lease contracts that we administer is therefore equivalent to the number of

35

beds occupied instead of the number of apartment units occupied. A parent or guardian is required to execute each lease as a guarantor unless the resident provides adequate proof of income and/or pays a deposit, which is usually equal to two months rent.

Due to our predominantly private bedroom accommodations, the high level of student-oriented amenities, the fact that units are furnished and in most cases, rent includes utilities, cable television and internet service and because of the individual lease liability, we believe our communities can typically command higher per-unit and per-square foot rental rates than most multi-family communities in the same geographic markets. We are also typically able to command higher rental rates than on-campus collegiate housing, which tends to offer fewer amenities.

The majority of our leases commence mid-August and terminate the last day of July. These dates generally coincide with the commencement of the universities’ fall academic term and the completion of the subsequent summer school session. As such, we are required to re-lease each community in its entirety each year, resulting in significant turnover in our tenant population from year to year. In 2011 and 2010, approximately 72.6% and 70.0%, respectively, of our leased beds were to students who were first-time residents at our communities. As a result, we are highly dependent upon the effectiveness of our marketing and leasing efforts during the annual leasing season that typically begins in November and ends in August of each year. Our communities’ occupancy rates are therefore typically stable during the August to July academic year but are susceptible to fluctuation at the commencement of each new academic year.

Prior to the commencement of each new lease period, mostly during the first two weeks of August, but also during September at some communities, we prepare the units for new incoming tenants. Other than revenue generated by in-place leases for returning tenants, we do not generally recognize lease revenue during this period referred to as “Turn,” as we have no leases in place. In addition, we incur significant expenses during Turn to make our units ready for occupancy. These expenses are recognized when incurred. This Turn period results in seasonality in our operating results during the third quarter of each year.

Development consulting services

For the year ended December 31, 2011, revenue from our development consulting services represented approximately 4.7% of our revenue, excluding operating expense

reimbursements. We provide development consulting services primarily to colleges and universities seeking to modernize their on-campus collegiate housing communities but also to the Trust and other third-party investors. Our development consulting services typically include the following:

Fees for these services are typically 3 – 5% of the total cost of a project and are payable over the life of the construction period, which in most cases is one to two years in length. Occasionally, the development consulting contracts include a provision whereby the Trust can participate in project savings resulting from successful cost management efforts. These revenues are recognized once all contractual terms have been satisfied and no future performance requirements exist. This typically occurs after construction is complete. As part of the development agreements, there are certain costs we pay on behalf of universities or third-party investors. These costs are included in reimbursable operating expenses and are required to be reimbursed to us by the universities or third-party investors. We recognize the expense and revenue related to these reimbursements when incurred. These operating expenses are wholly reimbursable and therefore not considered by management when analyzing the operating performance of our development consulting services business.

Management services

For the year ended December 31, 2011, revenue from our management services segment represented approximately 5.4% of our revenue, excluding operating expense reimbursements. We provide management services for collegiate housing communities owned by educational institutions, charitable

36

foundations, the Trust and others. Our management services typically cover all aspects of community operations, including residence life and student development, marketing, leasing administration, strategic relationships, information systems and accounting services. We provide these services pursuant to multi-year management agreements under which management fees are typically 3 – 5% of leasing revenue. These agreements usually have an initial term of two to five years with renewal options of like terms. As part of the management agreements, there are certain payroll and related expenses we pay on behalf of the property owners. These costs are included in reimbursable operating expenses and are required to be reimbursed to us by the property owners. We recognize the expense and revenue related to these reimbursements when incurred. These operating expenses are wholly reimbursable and therefore not considered by management when analyzing the operating performance of our management services business.

Trends and Outlook

Rents and occupancy

We manage our communities to maximize revenues, which are primarily driven by two components: rental rates and occupancy rate. We customarily adjust rental rates in order to maximize revenues, which in some cases results in a lower occupancy rate, but in most cases results in stable or increasing revenue from the community. As a result, a decrease in occupancy may be offset by an increase in rental rates and may not be material to our operations. Periodically, certain of our markets experience increases in new on-campus collegiate housing provided by colleges and universities and off-campus collegiate housing provided by private owners. This additional collegiate housing both on and off campus can create competitive pressure on rental rates and occupancy.

Our communities’ occupancy rates are typically stable during the August to July academic year but are susceptible to fluctuation at the commencement of each new academic year. The same-community portfolio opened the 2011/2012 lease term 94.9% occupied, a 112 basis point improvement over the prior lease term, with a 4.6% increase in net rental rates. This compares to the 2010/2011 lease term that opened with a 2.3% improvement in occupancy and a 2.0% improvement in net rental rates. Preleasing for the 2012/2013 lease term is 259 basis points ahead of the prior year with the same-community portfolio 35.2% preleased. The results represent averages for the Trust’s portfolio which are not necessarily indicative of every community in the portfolio.

Individual communities can and do perform both above and below these averages, and, at times, an individual community may experience a decline in total revenue due to local university and economic conditions. Our management focus is to assess these situations and address them as quickly as possible in an effort to minimize the Trust’s exposure and reverse any negative trends.

Development consulting services

The Trust has historically earned more than $5.0 million annually in third-party development revenue. However, as a result of a deterioration in the credit markets, which began in late 2008, financing for new projects became harder to obtain, and the Trust’s third-party development revenue declined from $8.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 to $2.5 million in 2010, and the Trust currently expects 2012 revenue to be as low as $0.4 million. Beginning in the summer of 2010 our development team began seeing improvement in the credit markets and an increase in interest from colleges and universities considering new collegiate housing. We also continue to receive requests for proposals on new development projects. This improvement in the development consulting market over the prior year is evidenced by the Trust’s active development projects, two third-party developments and one participating development, and a 65% increase from 2010 in third-party development revenue to $4.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.

The amount and timing of future revenues from development consulting services will be contingent upon our ability to successfully compete in public colleges and universities competitive procurement processes, our ability to successfully structure financing of these projects and our ability to ensure completion of construction within agreed upon construction timelines and budgets. To date, we have completed construction on all of our development projects in time for their targeted occupancy dates.

Collegiate housing operating costs

The Trust implemented focused cost control measures in late 2008 that drove a same-community operating expense decline of 4.6% for the year ended December 31, 2009 and helped keep operating expenses relatively flat during 2010 with an increase of approximately 0.1%. For the year ended December 31, 2011, same-community operating expenses increased approximately 2.9% from 2010, which includes a 2.2% increase in direct operating expenses and a 5.9% increase

37

in fixed costs primarily due to the impact of real estate tax refunds recorded in the second and third quarters of 2010.

General and administrative costs

In the first half of 2010, we began a reorganization plan, and as a result, saw a 2.8% reduction in general and administrative expenses (“G&A”), before reorganization, development pursuit and acquisition costs, when compared to the same period in 2009. Historically, we have presented all G&A costs, including regional and corporate costs of supporting our communities, in G&A in our accompanying consolidated statement of operations. However, beginning in 2012 we intend to report the costs to manage our owned portfolio as part of our collegiate housing operating costs and not as part of G&A. We believe the new presentation will improve comparability within the industry and provide a better reflection of the total cost to operate a property. For the year ended December 31, 2011, G&A costs of $15.9 million, before reorganization, development pursuit costs and acquisition costs, increased $1.0 million or 6.4% when compared to the prior year. This increase is primarily attributable to payroll and benefits associated with the growth of the development consulting services segment.

Asset repositioning and capital recycling

As previously reported, we completed the sale of five communities in January 2011. These transactions culminated a significant repositioning of our portfolio that began in the fourth quarter of 2010. The five communities had over 1,900 beds and were at mostly smaller universities with limited barriers to entry. With a total sales price of approximately $46.1 million, the dispositions reduced outstanding debt by $16.1 million and provided net cash proceeds, after costs, of approximately $29.7 million (see Note 5 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements).

In the second quarter of 2011, we completed the sale of two non-core assets, Collegiate Village, serving Macon State University, and Clayton Station, serving Clayton State University, for an aggregate sale price of $28.0 million (see Note 5 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements). The net proceeds of just under $28.0 million was used to fund development and acquisition activity and for general working capital purposes.

In the first quarter of 2011, we executed an agreement with the Edwards Companies to develop, own and manage a new collegiate housing community at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa. The Edwards Companies is developing and

constructing the housing, which will be owned jointly by the two companies. We are the majority owner and managing member of the joint venture and will manage the community once completed.

During 2011, we completed the following collegiate housing community acquisitions (see Note 4 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements):

Our weighted average capitalization rate for these acquisitions was 6.4%, ranging from 6.0% to 7.4%, based on estimated annual net operating income. Capitalization rate is defined as the ratio of net operating income (estimated GAAP revenues less property operating expenses for the year acquired) less estimated capital expenditures, to the purchase price on the date of acquisition.

In June 2011, we executed an agreement with Summa West, LLC to develop, own and manage a new collegiate housing community near Arizona State University — Downtown Phoenix campus. Financing was finalized in March 2012;

38

therefore, we are proceeding with the project. We are the majority owner and managing member of the joint venture and will manage the community once completed.

In December 2011, EdR was selected to negotiate the potential revitalization and expansion of more than 9,000 residence hall beds at the University of Kentucky (UK). Phase I includes the development, construction and ownership of a 601-bed, on-campus undergraduate honors housing community, to be available for occupancy by the fall 2013. In February 2012, a 50-year ground lease for the phase I development was approved by the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees. Simultaneously, formal discussions began regarding phase II, which is expected to include EdR assuming management of all the university’s 6,000-bed housing portfolio in 2013. Phase II also includes planned phases of construction and demolition of the existing portfolio in order to add modern accommodations and attractive new living communities to the UK campus. Upon completion of both phases in the next seven years, UK’s total bed count is anticipated to be close to 9,000 beds that will be privately funded and owned on land leased from the university. This project will be financed through The ONE Plan^SM.

In January 2012, we completed the purchase of The Reserve on Stinson near the University of Oklahoma in Norman, Oklahoma for a purchase price of $20.6 million. We had a 10% equity interest in the community and managed the community prior to the acquisition. The Reserve on Stinson has 612 beds and is less than a half mile from campus.

Also in January 2012, EdR partnered with Landmark Properties for the development of a 668-bed cottage-style community at the University of Mississippi. The development, which will be the first cottage-style community in EdR’s portfolio, is expected to cost $36.7 million and is targeted for a summer 2013 delivery.

We believe these transactions helped the Trust recycle capital from non-strategic assets to vibrant, younger collegiate communities at larger universities. We believe these steps improved the quality of the Trust’s portfolio and position the Trust for better long-term growth potential.

We currently have six active, owned and participating developments that are all progressing on or ahead of schedule, which include projects at the University of Texas, University of Connecticut, Syracuse University, University of Alabama, Arizona State University-Phoenix and