Lessons Learned (a.k.a. Sanity-Savers) Excellence Discount Rate - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Lessons Learned (a.k.a. Sanity-Savers)

Excellence Discount Rate Diversity

39% Admissions 1. Financial aid 2. Enrollment 3. 27% management Marketing 4. Cooking 18% 5. Other 6. 8% 6% 2% 1 2 3 4 5 6

66% Once a year 1. Twice a year 2. More often 3. Rarely 4. Never 5. 20% 10% 2% 2% 1 2 3 4 5

52% Yes 1. No 2. 34% I’m conflicted 3. 14% 1 2 3

 Align the institution.  Long-term vision  Institutional strategy and goals  Office strategy, policies, and practices  Achieve balance by weighing benefits of various outcomes.  Address inevitable conflicts of values and goals  Negotiate trade-offs at the senior administrative level  Base decisions on evidence and projected outcomes  Communicate decisions throughout the institution

39% A lot – a big increase 38% 1. Some – a modest 2. increase None – we can stay 3. 21% where we are None – okay to reduce 4. enrollment 2% 1 2 3 4

 Protect quality and quantity.  Enrollment increases can serve immediate need for net revenue  But notable sacrifices in quality can reduce enrollment potential in longer term  Let reputation and value proposition lead  Avoid rapid enrollment increases.  Community often cannot provide same level of service  Discount rate is accelerated  Lack of readiness for growth can lead to increased attrition

0% Extremely 1. 4% Very 2. 22% 29% Somewhat 3. Not very 4. Not at all 5. 45% 1 2 3 4 5

Extremely 1. Very 0% 0% 2. 23% 27% Somewhat 3. Not very 4. Not at all 5. 50% 1 2 3 4 5

 Help families plan for a four-year commitment.  Many are too focused on first year  Student indebtedness is emerging as a huge issue  Consider friendlier aid policies for returning students.  Review satisfactory progress policies  Calculate positive net revenue outcomes from retention-boosting, need-based aid supplements  Communicate institutional response (if any) to reductions in state grant programs

34% Extremely 1. 29% Very 2. Somewhat 3. 20% Not very 4. Not at all 5. 14% 4% 1 2 3 4 5

44% 44% Always 1. Often 2. On occasion 3. Not at all 4. 13% 0% 1 2 3 4

46% Much more frequent 1. Somewhat more 2. frequent 28% About the same 3. Somewhat less often 20% 4. Much less often 5. 4% 2% 1 2 3 4 5

 Build on families’ persisting commitment to higher education.  CDIS survey confirms high value of higher ed  Mass media is not our friend  Reward families that invest in your institution.  Is your mission distinctive, clear to you, and evident to your students/families?  Do you know what families expect from their educational experience at your institution?  How do you focus resources to invest in/deliver value to your students?

Reasonably 1. 5% transparent Selectively 2. 39% 55% transparent We don’t have a clue 3. 1 2 3

Reasonably 1. 21% transparent 38% Selectively 2. transparent Families don’t have a 3. 40% clue 1 2 3

 Begin internally.  Reasonable transparency on the health of the institution is critical  Establishment of appropriate understanding of urgency helps to address challenges more rapidly  Deliver/Improve on marketing promises.  How are new students/families negatively surprised?  How does information feed back to admissions and financial aid?

High Need Moderate Low/No No Need Student Name Hannah Need Molly Need Lindsay Nora Smith Net Price $7,550 $42,500 $47,599 $56,866 IM Net Price $9,900 $42,288 $44,096 $56,917 568 Group Net Price $1,830 $36,230 $51,980 $56,340 $34,654 $38,454 $38,454 $38,454 Public Flagship Net Price $31,428 $55,512 $55,512 $55,512 UC Berkeley Net Price