Building a Fundraising Case for Financial Aid

Transcription

1 Building a Fundraising Case for Financial Aid Marjorie Hass, President Austin College Kathy Kurz, Vice President Scannell & Kurz, Inc. CIC Presidents Institute 2012

2 Introduction How can we make data driven, strategic decisions about awarding financial aid? How can this same data be used to to strengthen the case to potential donors? 2

3 Overview of Austin College 3

4 Economic Diversity of Incoming Freshman FA 2008 FA 2009 FA 2010 FA 2011 Percent of class that are Non-filers 20.38% 16.71% 15.36% 15.32% 4

5 Competitive Environment College/University Tuition & Fees Fall 2010 SAT 25-75% U.S. News Ranking 2012 (America's Best Colleges) St. Edward's University $28, Regional Univ. (West) #21 Austin College $31, National LA Colleges #64 Trinity University $31, Regional Univ. (West) #1 Baylor University $31, National Universities #75 Texas Christian $32, National Universities #97 Southwestern $33, National LA Colleges #71 Hendrix College $34, National LA Colleges #86 Rice University $35, National Universities #17 Southern Methodist $39, National Universities #62 5

6 Austin College First-Year Graduates 6

7 Competitive Scholarship Challenge 7

8 Old Model Complex array of competitive scholarships available, maximum award provided full tuition. Decisions made using a time-intensive faculty review committee. Process created winners and losers among prospective students. (For fall 2009, over 175 students applied, but only 40 were invited to on-campus interviews.) Not conducive to implementation of an accurate net price calculator. 8

9 Turning to Scannell & Kurz Enrollment management consulting firm Core business is developing effective financial aid, recruitment and retention strategies. Recommendations driven by data analysis, understanding of institution s market position, review of recruitment and awarding practices. 9

10 Collecting the Right Data To guide decisions about changes in financial aid awarding strategies, Austin College used predictive modeling to identify the price sensitivity of various subpopulations. This modeling clarified the role played by various factors, including grant, in influencing enrollment behavior. It also allowed Austin College to simulate the impact of alternative awarding strategies on class size, profile, and NTR. 10

11 Sample Simulation Summary Table Changes from Baseline Higher merit lower need-based Lost TEG not replaced Enrollment Institutional Grant -$422,000 -$480,000 NTR up $160,000 up $102,000 Discount -2.6 points -2.6 points Avg. SAT up 2 points up 2 points % Female no change no change % Minority no change no change % In-state no change no change # TEG

12 Revised Approach 12

13 Changes in Awarding Policy Under the new approach, merit awards range from $9,000 to $18,000. These changes resulted in a lower discount rate and more net tuition revenue. Ethnic and socioeconomic diversity has also increased. The changes also resulted in an enhanced ability to raise funding for scholarship support. 13

14 Engaging Constituencies 14

15 Using Data to Build a Fundraising Case Can show the impact of changing merit criteria or amounts on the number of high quality students that would enroll. Can show the impact of losses in federal or state aid. Helps donors see very specifically how their contributions can impact enrollment results. Note: simulations can be run that would speak specifically to the interests of particular donors. 15

16 Other data of interest to donors After the elimination of full tuition scholarships, the College still enrolled almost the same number of students with SAT scores of 1400 or higher. Top students can participate in a leadership program in freshman year and then can apply for research grants as sophomores. Donors have been very interested in funding these project-oriented grants. 16

17 Other data of interest to donors The number of admits with high levels of unmet need and yield rates (or retention rates) on those students. In fall 2011, Austin College admitted 49 students with need after grant in excess of $20,000. Only 6 of those students enrolled, for a yield rate of 12%. On the other hand, 32% of admits with unmet need of $15,000-$20,000 enrolled. 17

18 Other data of interest to donors Changes in yield rate for high quality students when grant is increased. In fall 2011, yield rates increased from 10% to 17% for students with SAT scores of 1350 or higher and GPAs of 3.25 or higher when grants were increased by 22%. 18

19 Other data of interest to donors Changes in the percent of students demonstrating need as a result of the economic climate. For example, the percent of Austin College s freshman class demonstrating need increased from 66% to 72% between fall 2010 and fall Percent of total institutional aid expenditures that are funded versus unfunded. 19

20 Other data of interest to donors Annual unfunded expenditures on student employment, and data on the impact of student employment on retention or recruitment. 20

21 Other data of interest to donors Yield rates on awards involving alumni Austin College alumni can nominate students to be considered for an alumni recognition award. Yield rates on this program are very high almost 50%. Building a culture of giving This program has provided a tangible example of how alumni giving can benefit students. The privilege of nominating strengthens the case for converting nominators to donors. 21

22 Initial Impact on Fundraising at AC Programmatic changes in competitive scholarships Design of data-driven, strategic messaging Inclusion and engagement across groups with fundraising potential (generating excitement among trustees, alumni board, alumni associations, etc.) 22