Together we stand, without data we fall how focusing on NTR can build team between admissions and

financial aid

Christine Saadi, Alvernia University Jen Wick, Scannell & Kurz

AGENDA

Partnership between Admissions and Financial Aid

Using Data to Set Awarding Policy Case Study

WHY IS A PARTNERSHIP IMPORTANT? Communicating affordability Providing excellent customer service Developing mutually supportive

processes Ensuring strategies that support

enrollment goals

FOCUS ON NTR,

NOT JUST CLASS SIZE OR THE AID BUDGET

Admission’s goal is not just the number and mix of students

Financial Aid’s goal is not just staying in budget

Keeps admissions and financial aid on the same page

Remember to think long term – new students’ discount rate will affect the overall discount rate

USE DATA, NOT ANECDOTE

TO ESTABLISH AID POLICIES

Keeping an “ear to the ground” plays a role, but that should not be the foundation of your awarding strategies.

Using analytical approaches to understanding student responses to your aid offers is where your strategy needs to begin. Table analysis Predictive modeling Simulation tools

TO ASSESS HOW EFFECTIVELY YOUR AID PROGRAM IS CURRENTLY RESPONDING TO MARKET FORCES, THERE

ARE 4 KEY QUESTIONS TO ANSWER

1. Are we perceived as worth the price we’re charging?

2. Have we convinced our families that we are affordable?

3. How much aid do we need to spend to meet our enrollment goals?

4. How can we be sure we are spending our aid wisely?

QUESTION #1: ARE WE PERCEIVED AS WORTH

THE PRICE WE’RE CHARGING?

Monitor trends in your pool Identify your competition Benchmark against the competition Define your institutional advantage Gather and share outcomes data

SAMPLE BENCHMARKING

College/University

Tuition&

Fees2013-14

Estimated Net Tuition

& Fees

FreshmanDiscount

Rate2011-12*

Fall2013

AcceptRate

Fall2011SAT

25-75%

U.S. News Ranking 2013

(America's Best Colleges)

Institution A $32,776 $13,897 57.6% 69.5% 950 - 1170 NLAC below 150Institution B $34,484 $19,449 43.6% 79.7% 950 - 1170 NLAC #100-150Institution C $41,510 $27,231 34.4% 43.3% 1120 - 1340 NLAC #51-99Institution D $43,270 $18,520 57.2% 70.2% 1065 - 1320 NLAC #51-99Institution E $44,210 $27,101 38.7% 39.9% 1220 - 1370 NLAC top 50Institution F $44,360 $29,588 33.3% 38.5% 1240 - 1390 NLAC top 50Institution G $44,551 $25,439 42.9% 41.9% 1190 - 1370 NLAC top 50

Sources - College/University website, U.S. News & World Report and IPEDS* Discount rate has been calculated using IPEDS data which, on occasion, have been found to be inaccurate.

QUESTION #2: HAVE WE MADE THE CASE FOR AFFORDABILITY?

Do you lose your overlap with public institutions as you progress through the admissions cycle?

Has the distribution of applicants by socioeconomic level changed over time?

How does the level of need and unmet need impact yield rates and retention rates?

QUESTION #3: HOW MUCH AID DO WE NEED TO SPEND TO MEET ENROLLMENT GOALS?

It DEPENDS!!! If at capacity, the focus should be

trade-offs. If not at capacity, the priority has to be

maximizing net tuition revenue. The institution’s long-range strategic

plan needs to include a plan for enrollment.

BUT WHAT DRIVES THE DISCOUNT RATE? Market Forces (i.e., the competition) Changes in Ability to Pay

Trends in family contributions Percentage of students applying for aid

Changes in Willingness to Pay Yield by need level and grant level

Changes in Outside Support Retention by Need Level and Grant Level How you build your pool Institutional Goals

Commitments to diversity, quality, etc.

NET TUITION REVENUE TABLE -- TUITION $21,000

EFC Non Filers > 30k 20-30k 15-20k 10-15k 5-10k 0-5k Average

Highest 12,511 12,304 11,975 9,056 5,609 4,960 4,866 8,382 High 17,254 17,237 14,543 10,772 7,888 7,423 7,018 11,270 Medium 18,737 18,997 16,075 10,926 9,128 8,082 8,134 13,178 Lower 20,023 20,104 15,614 11,730 9,740 9,479 9,066 14,018 Lowest 20,044 20,049 16,433 11,651 10,798 10,355 9,684 14,633 Average 18,896 18,071 13,243 10,974 8,813 8,161 7,734 12,665

Quality

QUESTION #4: HOW CAN WE BE SURE WE ARE SPENDING OUR AID WISELY?

Are you under-funding need-based grant programs?

Are you focusing institutional aid too heavily on merit programs or is the merit aid focused on the wrong applicant segment?

How much revenue is lost by offering entitlements?

The competition is offering aggressive merit programs; should you respond?

CLEARLY THE NEED FOR A DATA-DRIVEN APPROACH

TO ANSWERING THESE QUESTIONS HAS NEVER BEEN MORE IMPORTANT

The challenge will be to balance often conflicting enrollment goals.

There is a need for more sophisticated means to fully understand the tradeoffs and the impact of various strategies.

Institutions can’t afford to get it wrong.

DATA-DRIVEN DISCOUNTING

Are there market segments where the “universal truths” don’t hold?

NEED Yield

AID(FREE $)

Yield

DATA-DRIVEN DISCOUNTING: SAMPLE YIELD TABLE

$0$1-

$5,000$5,000-$10,000

$10,000-$15,000

$15,000-$20,000 > $20,000

> $12,000$9,000-$12,000 55/100 55%

Gift Aid $6,000-$9,000 20/80 25%$3,000-$6,000 8/40 20%$1,001-$3,000

$0

Need

Tuition = $15,000

COST BENEFIT ANALYSISCurrent NTR

55 * ($15,000 - $10,500) = $247,50020 * ($15,000 - $7,500) = $150,000 8 * ($15,000 - $4,500) = $ 84,000

$481,500Projected Enrollment (Average total grant $10,500)

220 * 55% = 121Projected NTR

121 * ($15,000 - $10,500) = $544,500

PREDICTIVE MODELING Predictive modeling, also known as

econometric modeling, allows you to better understand these tradeoffs and present alternatives to institutional decision-makers

Modeling allows you to test assumptions and interactions before taking action

GOALS OF ECONOMETRIC MODELING Identify factors that are important in the

enrollment decision Determine the impact of institutional grants

on the probability of enrolling Determine the revenue-maximizing levels of

grants Identify alternative financial aid packaging

strategies Simulate the results of alternative admissions

and aid strategies and policies

SAMPLE SIMULATION SUMMARY

Predicted Class

(Baseline)Simulation

#1Simulation

#2Simulation

#3Simulation

#4Enrollment 312 305 278 296 342Institutional Grant $2,136,000 $1,903,000 $1,153,000 $1,654,000 $2,105,000NTR $4,229,000 $4,327,000 $4,516,000 $4,396,000 $4,883,000Discount 33.5% 30.6% 20.3% 27.3% 30.1%Avg. SAT 934 930 930 929 930% Female 62% 61% 62% 61% 61%% Minority 19% 19% 20% 20% 20%% In State 81% 82% 83% 82% 82%% Pell Eligible 30% 31% 31% 31% 32%

Freshman Simulation Summary Table

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES THAT ARE OF VALUE IN MANAGING

FINANCIAL AID STRATEGICALLY:

• Watch and analyze trends• Know what the competition is doing –

benchmark• Track the behavior of subpopulations –

their yields and mean values as well as retention rates

• Utilize econometric modeling techniques to test tradeoffs between goals

CASE STUDY: ALVERNIA UNIVERSITY Private, Catholic university located in

Eastern PA Fall 2013 total enrollment:1500

400 new freshman/115 transfers Average SAT – 985 Male/Female Ratio – 28% Male/72% Female Out of state enrollment – Approx. 28%

ORGANIZATION

VP for Enrollment

Management

Dean of Admissions &

Student Financial Planning

Directorof Admissions

Direct Reports

15

Director of Student Financial Planning

Direct Reports

8

COLLABORATING ON AFFORDABILITY MESSAGES

Designing the right Net Price Calculator What is your goal for use: meet Dept of Ed

requirements or as an enrollment tool? Simplicity vs. accuracy Work with Admissions to create NPC Get your marketing department involved Front-and-center or buried on website

Alvernia advantage

USING PREDICTIVE MODELING TO DEVELOP AID STRATEGIES

Nursing & OT packaging vs. other programs Decision to change OT in 2011

2010 % need met ranged 40% to 55%2011% need met ranged 35% to 45%OT packaging changes

2010 2011 2012OT Fresh 32 49 41

Tuition $819,840$1,307,81

0$1,152,51

0Inst Aid $368,350 $429,330 $457,500NTR $451,490 $878,480 $695,010DR 0.449 0.328 0.397

Ave Pkg$11,510.9

4 $8,762 $11,159Total Pkgd 32 49 41

COMBINED GOALS: FOCUSING ON NTRSAMPLE NTR BUDGET MODEL

2011  Tuition and fees $26,770    

Total Institutional Grant Aid

Number of

Students Receiving

Grant

Discount Rate

Net Tuition Revenue

Gross Tuition Revenue

Average Grant Award # in Class

Estimated Conv. Of Students

% Getting Aid

         Freshmen $3,928,106.00 371 0.385 $6,271,264 $10,199,370 $10,588 381  0.97Freshmen attended before $669,713 81 0.288 $1,659,277 $2,328,990 $10,160 87 0.22 0.93Sophomore $3,033,560 313 0.342 $5,827,310 $8,860,870 $10,160 331 0.71 0.95Junior $2,548,920 307 0.283 $6,472,570 $9,021,490 $8,393 337 0.99 0.91Senior $2,618,633 337 0.268 $7,152,417 $9,771,050 $8,290 365 1.13 0.92Totals $12,798,932 1409 0.319 $27,382,838 $40,181,770 $9,084 1501   Deflation Factor = 96% for students; 97.4% for Grant AidAnnulized totals $12,466,160 0.323 $26,108,339 $38,574,499 1,441

Estimated 2012  Tuition and fees $27,975    

Total Institutional Grant Aid

Number of

Students Receiving

Grant

Discount Rate

Net Tuition Revenue

Gross Tuition Revenue

Average Grant Award # in Class

Estimated Conv. Of Students

% Getting Aid

         Freshmen $4,450,207 402 0.388 $7,019,399 $11,469,607 $11,076 410  0.98Freshmen attended before $954,441 90 0.344 $1,816,728 $2,771,169 $10,588 99 0.26 0.91Sophomore $3,424,987 323 0.363 $6,001,352 $9,426,338 $10,588 337 0.72 0.96Junior $3,194,842 314 0.345 $6,064,767 $9,259,609 $10,160 331 1.00 0.95Senior $2,970,410 354 0.267 $8,153,990 $11,124,399 $8,393 398 1.18 0.89Totals $14,994,886 1484 0.340 $29,056,236 $44,051,122 $10,106 1575   Deflation Factor = 96% for students; 97.4% for Grant AidAnnulized totals $14,605,019 0.345 $27,684,058 $42,289,077 1,512

COMBINED GOALS: FOCUSING ON NTRSAMPLE NTR BUDGET MODEL

Conversion of student population from year to year 2009 Actuals 2010 Actuals 2011 Actuals 2012 Averages AU Ave Used 2012-2015

Freshman Attended Before 0.27 0.24 0.22 0.25 0.26Sophomore 0.72 0.78 0.71 0.74 0.72Junior 1.05 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.00Senior 1.19 1.11 1.13 1.15 1.18

Percentage of the class receiving grant2009 Actuals 2010 Actuals 2011 Actuals 2012 Averages AU Ave Used 2012-2015

Freshman 0.97 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.98Freshman Attended Before 0.78 0.91 0.93 0.88 0.91Sophomore 0.91 0.94 0.95 0.93 0.96Junior 0.91 0.94 0.91 0.92 0.95Senior 0.87 0.81 0.92 0.87 0.89

Annual Tuition Increase 2012 1.045*used as estimate for increase of tuition through 2015

SUCCESSFUL ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT MUST INCLUDE A

PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN ADMISSIONS, FINANCIAL AID, AND THE DATA.

Making the case for affordability and value Supportive, efficient processes and quality

customer service Effective strategies to achieve enrollment

goals

QUESTIONS?

CHRISTINE SAADI

Director, Student Financial Planning

Alvernia University400 Saint Bernardine Street

Reading, PA 19607(610) 796-8356

Christine.Saadi@alvernia.eduwww.financialaid@alvernia.edu

JEN WICK

Enrollment Management Consultant

Scannell & Kurz71-B Monroe AvenuePittsford, NY 14534

(585) 381-1120

wick@scannellkurz.comwww.ScannellKurz.com