Rethinking Admission Strategy

It's tough out there, but a change in mindset from the top can move the needle

I spent many years of my adult life worrying about enrollment. Not just as a head of school, but also as a senior administrator. When I reflect back on this, I don’t think - “Faulstich, what were you so worried about? That was a waste of energy.”  Mostly, I understand why it was such a central worry and I am just glad it is not part of the background hum in my current day to day.

I choose to use the word “worry” purposefully. For me, worry has an implication that includes things outside of your control, unlike, say, the word “concern.” I was worried, more or less, despite what influence or power I had in the process as academic dean, assistant head or head of school about many things outside my control. And as a participant in the admission process in the first two roles and then being ultimately responsible for the outcome as head, I was certainly not powerless.

Because there is an element of mysterious alchemy in the admissions process as a whole. Independent schools only serve roughly 10% of the United States school age population. So of course, in theory, there are so many potential candidates out there!

But it just doesn’t work that way. And although that is not what this post is primarily about, I wanted to make the point that genuine, sustainable enrollment movement is done slowly, strategically and deliberately over time and the goals should be incredibly thoughtful, data driven and perhaps most importantly, realistic for your school and its context. Tuition has become astronomical and demographics are a rapidly growing problem, particularly in the northeast, but I still believe you can move the needle. And strategies and tactics you don’t choose to pursue are almost as important as the ones you do. 

So why did I spend 20 plus years worried about enrolling a school even though I’ve never held a job in admissions? As a senior administrator responsible for program, enrollment dictated not only what program could be provided (both academically and at Walnut Hill, artistically). Some examples: we couldn’t have a functional music program that was 75% high level pianists. Or you over enroll the popular theater program but then don’t have performance opportunities to go around. Male dancers are necessary in classical ballet. And arts program directors who do not have the students to execute on their mission are never easier to supervise. 95% of what those leaders are about are their students. And then there is the annual concern about serving the wide range of academic needs that the arts students come in with, from all over the world. And that was not always so easy on the morale of talented academic teachers.

And every year there were tensions between how much financial aid to give out to get these great kids to enroll while not making the whole enterprise insolvent. While this was the province of the head, CFO and DEM, it impacted everyone.

As head of school, the central concern was having a student population of mission matched kids who would thrive and enough tuition revenue to operate the program you both promised. And have enough left over to invest in new pilots and programs and people to be a vital, 21st century learning environment. Not to mention to fund all the unglamorous things like paving and new HVAC and roofs.

One thing that I don’t think admissions and enrollment leaders get enough credit for is that, even with a healthy endowment, they are responsible for bringing in the vast majority of operating revenue. We can’t live without our annual funds but tuition revenue is the core. 

We can’t operate without students and we can’t operate without revenue - the lifeblood of our institutions.

(And are you paying your director of development more than your director of enrollment management? Just a question…)

And I think school leaders “get” the importance of hiring talented and professional admissions leadership, but I also think they often aren’t quite sure how to effectively partner, support or manage these very important members of the senior team. I don’t know if they fully appreciate that it goes beyond getting the right search consultant who will get the right pool of candidates who will then produce a magician to fix any enrollment ailments.

(And I’m being cheeky with the salary comment above but it’s not just about money and what you’re paying your DEM. After all, the markets are what the markets are and directors of development are generally paid more in the independent school world than DEMs despite the fact the DEM is responsible for more year by year, grind-it-out, essential revenue.)

I looked up DEM and director of admission job descriptions to get some clues as to how we can better set these crucially important roles up for success. Unlike the director of communications job descriptions, they are not generally so unrealistic, requesting the sun, the moon and the stars as skill sets. But there were some interesting trends.

The one that stood out most to me was that very few named “responsibility for net tuition revenue” as a central aspect - or any aspect - of the position. There was one search firm that consistently did. (Bravo to you!)

(“Net tuition revenue” - this is tuition revenue minus the percentage discount awarded as financial aid = NTR. Not every school functions on this model, but again - that’s not the main focus of this post.)

Is this because we all still would rather pretend this position is really about being the face of the school who welcomes families warmly and then shuts themselves in a conference room for a week to “shape a class”? Is it because we’re “families” and many families don’t talk about money? Are we uncomfortable that money is even attached to mission driven work we pursue to benefit children?

However - I would predict that if the person who is hired brings in a lot of wonderful kids and families and misses the NTR goal by a mile, there are going to be at least serious conversations if not a firing on the horizon.

Mention the NTR responsibility.

So there’s bad news and good news.

The bad news:

• Admissions is crucially important and an increasingly tough business for indy schools. It seems to me even in the schools that have no problem with a robust pool, finding success in every aspect of enrollment during a cycle is ever more complex.

• Many talented, midcareer indy school admissions professionals have left the field. Honestly, I think it is a miracle any experienced admissions pro is not burnt out given the rock they need to roll up the hill every year, often to a chorus of criticism. And I wonder where the pipeline is to develop enthusiastic talented young people into the field. I’m imagining young faculty are not looking over at admissions and thinking “that looks like such an interesting and dynamic career!” Maybe I’m wrong? 

But there is (not insignificant) good news:

Heads of school can shift the mindset from “find the magician” to “how do I partner with this role to set her up for success?” What does that mean, exactly?

• It means knowing your basic data and knowing what gaps need to be closed. It means learning about how admissions works if you are unfamiliar and understanding what all the admissions-relevant data means. (Funnel? Yield?) As one example, it means being able to ask questions about said data when the DEM presents it to you to enlarge your understanding and identify at what points specific tactics can make an impact. You can move the needle and the first step is identifying the needle that has the most ability to be moved. That requires both the HOS and the DEM.

• It means understanding NTR and what shifts in the discount rate could mean to the bottom line. And where, as HOS, you want to invest this “financial aid” to strengthen a program that may eventually attract more tuition capable families or the college list, etc.

• It means facilitating a solid collaboration and good communication between the DEM and the CFO. It may mean nudging both the DEM and CFO in one direction or another to get to compromise. Sometimes they both act like divas. Sometimes you act like a diva. It’s totally worth it in the end.

• It means having a DEM and a Director of Communications who are both talented and can respect each other’s lanes and expertise while finding professional satisfaction in how one’s work can amplify the other’s. And their work together elevates not just the end results of the admissions cycle but the school’s whole brand. If the head treats the director of comms as a pro, it’s fantastic role modeling and it sets the tone.

• And from the very beginning, it’s asking the questions “How do I want to frame this position? And “How honest do I want to be about our challenges?” (Answer: pretty damn honest, at least in your interview with the candidate.) If the framing is that you are looking for a strong collaborator to set up for success, you may have a better outcome than if you are looking for a magician.

There is so much I wrote that didn’t make the final cut. Admissions/enrollment is such a complicated, urgent and central area. So perhaps more in the future. Stay tuned.

And some final thoughts about job descriptions and searches in general.

We’re in a tight job market. Some schools are also in positions where their locations are another obstacle to a large candidate pool. It’s tough out there.

Maybe it’s time to rethink the tone of job descriptions in general. Maybe it’s time to think hard about a mindset of partnering.

When I became a head of school I had two kinds of reactions. I had the “they are so lucky to have you” reaction and the “you are so lucky to be there” reaction. Most people are nice, so it was more of the first than the second, but you can see the difference. Reading most job descriptions feels like, “You would be so lucky to be here.”  I think there is a way to communicate the standards of your search AND frame the job in a way to invite candidates to want to join you in your great educational adventure. What’s in it for them and why would you be so lucky to have them?

Just a thought. Perhaps a future post.

It’s June, baby. I know many of you admissions people have a summer of work ahead of you but June always struck me as a little breathing room to reflect.  You have my respect and gratitude. You always made me less lonely in my worry and often, you work hard/play hard types really know how to blow off steam.

Julie