© 2010 – Royall & Company How 100 Institutions Managed Their Way to Enrollment Success in 2010 Richard Whiteside Dean, Strategic Enrollment Management Royall & Company

© 2010 – Royall & Company Presenter Richard Whiteside joined Royall in 2006 after 37 years in enrollment management and academic affairs, the last thirteen years as Dean of Admission and Vice President for Enrollment Management at Tulane University. Dean Whiteside was a leader in Tulane’s post-Katrina recovery and rebuilding program. He is the editor of Student Marketing for Colleges & Universities (2004). Dr. Whiteside is a frequent presenter at a variety of professional meetings and is considered a leading voice in matters related to direct marketing in college recruitment, enrollment planning and strategy, the strategic use of financial aid, and the implementation of strategic enrollment management programs in colleges and universities. He holds a Ph.D. in Educational Leadership from the University of Connecticut, two M.S. degrees from The Johns Hopkins University (Applied Behavioral Sciences and Student Personnel Services), and a B.A. from Manhattan College. Richard Whiteside, Ph.D.

© 2010 – Royall & Company Dedicated exclusively to helping colleges and universities achieve their enrollment and financial goals through the use of direct marketing recruitment.

© 2010 – Royall & Company Full-service direct marketing agency Founded in 1983 Located in Richmond, Virginia 220 full-time staff members 200+ institutional partners 94% year-to-year retention

© 2010 – Royall & Company The survey Electronic survey Determine the outcomes for Royall & Company clients Understand what strategies contribute to success Share success strategies with other institutions

© 2010 – Royall & Company The respondents Count% Independent % Public1511.5% %

© 2010 – Royall & Company The respondents Count% Independent % Public1511.5% % Religiously affiliated5239.7% No religious affiliation7960.3%

© 2010 – Royall & Company The respondents Count% Independent % Public1511.5% % Religiously affiliated5239.7% No religious affiliation7960.3% Rural2216.8% Suburban5743.5% Urban5239.7%

© 2010 – Royall & Company Overall results – input & conversion Funnel Volumes ChangesChange # of inquiries+ 13% # of applications+ 17% # of admitted+ 12% Conversion Ratio ChangesChange Inquiry to applied+ 1% Accept %- 1.7% Yield, admitted to deposited-.7%

© 2010 – Royall & Company Overall results – average outcomes 131 institutions Change Change in deposits+ 7% SAT average score change Net revenue+ 13% Discount rate-.6%

© 2010 – Royall & Company But some did better than others Bottom Quartile 2 nd Quartile 3 rd Quartile Top Quartile Entering Class Results # of deposits- 9%+ 1%+ 9%+ 26% Net Tuition- 1%+ 7%+ 16%+ 30% Quartiles based on change in deposits 2009 v 2010

© 2010 – Royall & Company Key differences between groups Bottom Quartile 2 nd Quartile 3 rd Quartile Top Quartile Inquiries indexed Applications Indexed Admitted students Accept rate58%52%57%59% Tuition increase5% % receiving grants, indexed Average grant, indexed Discount rate44.8%35.8%42.4%40.5% Average grant$13,946$13,469$14,156$14,069

© 2010 – Royall & Company Key differences between groups Bottom Quartile 2 nd Quartile 3 rd Quartile Top Quartile Inquiries indexed Applications Indexed Admitted students Accept rate58%52%57%59% Tuition increase5% % receiving grants, indexed Average grant, indexed Discount rate44.8%35.8%42.4%40.5% Average grant$13,946$13,469$14,156$14,069

© 2010 – Royall & Company Success did not depend on location! MidwestNortheastSouthWest Entering Class Results # of deposits+ 5% + 6%+ 14% Net tuition+ 10%+ 14%+ 9%+ 20% Region

© 2010 – Royall & Company Success did not depend on size! LT 200 * GT 950 Entering Class Results # of deposits+21%+ 9%+ 4%+ 6%+ 7% Net tuition+28%+ 17%+ 7%+ 13%+ 15% Freshman Class Size * These 16 smaller institutions are not included in the analysis of the data for institutions with freshman class sizes greater than or equal t0 200

© 2010 – Royall & Company Or quality! 989 – – – – Entering Class Results # of deposits+ 10% + 7%+ 1% Net tuition+ 10%+ 14%+ 15%+ 5% SAT Ranges & Averages

© 2010 – Royall & Company Affiliation didn’t matter either! Catholic Other Christian No religious affiliation Entering Class Results # of deposits+ 7%+ 6%+ 7% Net tuition+ 14%+ 13%+ 12% Religious Affiliation

© 2010 – Royall & Company Privates and publics did well! PrivatePublic Entering Class Results # of deposits+ 7%+ 6% Net tuition+ 13%+ 8% Control

© 2010 – Royall & Company All kinds of schools succeeded! RuralSuburbanUrban Entering Class Results # of deposits+ 6%+ 7% Net tuition+ 8%+ 16%+ 11% Campus Environment

© 2010 – Royall & Company Success depended less on who you are than what you did!

© 2010 – Royall & Company 3 “Keys” That Drove Success 1. 10% increase in inquiries 2. 10% increase in admitted students 3. Net increase in cost of attendance within $500 of 2009

© 2010 – Royall & Company The more the institution did, the greater the results! Bottom Quartile 2 nd Quartile 3 rd Quartile Top Quartile Entering Class Results # of deposits- 9%+ 1%+ 9%+ 26% Net Tuition- 1%+ 7%+ 16%+ 30% 10% or more increase in inquiries

© 2010 – Royall & Company The more the institution did, the greater the results! Bottom Quartile 2 nd Quartile 3 rd Quartile Top Quartile Entering Class Results # of deposits- 9%+ 1%+ 9%+ 26% Net Tuition- 1%+ 7%+ 16%+ 30% 10% or more increase in inquiries 10% more admitted

© 2010 – Royall & Company The more the institution did, the greater the results! Bottom Quartile 2 nd Quartile 3 rd Quartile Top Quartile Entering Class Results # of deposits- 9%+ 1%+ 9%+ 26% Net Tuition- 1%+ 7%+ 16%+ 30% 10% or more increase in inquiries 10% more admitted Net cost increase < $500

© 2010 – Royall & Company How did those in the top 3 quartiles get the numbers they wanted? 10% More Inquiries 10% More Admitted Net Cost < $500 Search Pricing strategy possible because of the increase in admitted student population Senior Search Application Program

© 2010 – Royall & Company How did they do it?

© 2010 – Royall & Company Current Inquiry Pool for Next Class Royall Application Program Search & Senior Search – Impact At Each Stage of Engagement Pre-Qualified High School Seniors (Next Entering Class) Admissions Processing Royall Senior Search Program Pre-Qualified High School Sophomores & Juniors (Future Classes) Royall Fulfillment & Brochure Program Royall Search Program Inquiry Pool for Future Classes Future Impact – 2012 & 2013 Junior / Sophomore Search Immediate Impact –Senior Search and Inquiry Pool Marketing Enrolled Freshman Compound Impact Senior Search and Inquiry Pool Marketing Future Impact – 2013 & 2014 Junior / Sophomore Search Inquiry Pool for Future Classes

© 2010 – Royall & Company The impact of Senior Search was significant Senior Search Added for 2010 Class All Other Schools Difference Entering Class Results # of deposits+ 13%+ 5%+ 8% Net Tuition+ 21%+ 10%+ 11% Inquiries+ 17%+ 10%+ 7% Applications+ 36%+ 11%+ 25% Discount rate 38.6%41.7%(3.1%) 27 Institutions added Senior Search in

© 2010 – Royall & Company Institutional Responsibility Senior Search - responsibilities Search Mailing & Search Response Fulfillment & Invite Application Process Application

© 2010 – Royall & Company Search Creates pipeline of inquiries who are two times more likely to apply and 2.5 times more likely to deposit that comparable names not searched Access to the 50%+/- of the names available only during the sophomore or junior year

© 2010 – Royall & Company Institutional Responsibility Search - responsibilities Search Mailing & Search Response Paper, , Login Fulfillment Search Response Paper, , Login Fulfillment Build & Evolve Relationship Build & Evolve Relationship Invite Application

© 2010 – Royall & Company The Power of Royall Inquiry Development Programs 18 Colleges 832,122 Names Purchased Control Group 60,868 No Action Taken Test Group 771,254 Searched More than 2.25 students from this group enrolled For every student from this group that enrolled…

© 2010 – Royall & Company The lift is apparent at every stage of the process Applied Deposited Accepted 2X More Likely to Apply 2X More Likely to Be Accepted 2.5X More Likely to Deposit and for all types of students Men Minorities Women 2X More Likely to Deposit 2.5X More Likely to Deposit 3.0X More Likely to Deposit

© 2010 – Royall & Company Juniors 3,647,264589,41479,60947,31311,495 16%14%59%24% ContactedInquiredAppliedAcceptedEnrolled Sophomores 1,725,850376,60638,55125,9515,767 22%10%67%22% Students searched as sophomores showed average application SAT scores = 1278 Students searched as juniors showed average application SAT scores = 1240 Students searched as seniors showed average application SAT scores = 1200 Seniors 448,85354,68420,2239,3461,542 12%37%46%17% Searching Across Years Is Highly Productive Names acquired from The College Board

© 2010 – Royall & Company ContactedInquiredAppliedAcceptedEnrolled Sophomore 1,253,662257,86926,04015,2924,278 21%10%59%28% Sophomores responding to Search and applying showed average ACT scores = 26.6 Senior 407,88440,44615,6457,2581,097 10%39%46%15% Seniors responding to Search and applying showed average ACT scores = 26.7 Searching Across Years Is Highly Productive Names acquired from ACT

© 2010 – Royall & Company The Power of a Royall Application Development Program 30,000 inquiries were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Control Group 15,000 Regular Institutional Application Outreach Control Group 15,000 Regular Institutional Application Outreach Test Group 15,000 Royall Application Outreach Test Group 15,000 Royall Application Outreach

© 2010 – Royall & Company The Power of a Royall Application Program ACT 25.8 ACT 25.6 ACT 27.0 ACT 27.3 ACT 26.4 ACT 26.7 For every 100 students from the control group that enrolled, 176 students from the test group enrolled

© 2010 – Royall & Company Using Royall Application increased number of in and out-of-state students In-State Deposits = 118Deposits = 183 Out-of-State Deposits = 46Deposits = 130

© 2010 – Royall & Company Other key findings Institutions that reduced commitment to recruitment likely to be in bottom quartile Keeping cost increases low for those receiving grants is critical Bottom Quartile 2 nd Quartile 3 rd Quartile Top Quartile Average net increase in tuition cost to the family $2,000$1,500$0$500

© 2010 – Royall & Company Continued The best performers distributed applications, acceptances, merit-based awards and need- based awards 10 – 14 days earlier than those institutions that did not perform well! Their deposits are more likely to be refundable through May 1. Less likely to be Common Application members More likely to mail an institutionally branded application

© 2010 – Royall & Company Why Royall & Company? 15.1% Search Response (Our Average in 2009) 37% Conversion Rate (R & C Average for Senior Search Inquiries) 57 Points Higher on SAT Scores (Applications from Search Responders vs. Other Sources) 25% More Applications (From Students You Will Accept)

© 2010 – Royall & Company Questions? Richard Whiteside Dean, Strategic Enrollment Management Royall & Company 1920 E. Parham Road Richmond, VA (804)