NAIS 10 Year DASL Benchmarks Markers of Success

NAIS 10 -Year “DASL Benchmarks” Markers of Success Patrick F. Bassett@Heads. Up. Ed. com

Markers of Success #1: Robust Income Streams = Data Proxy for Sustainability Day School: NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons (See Boarding) Years Our School: 2003 – 2004 2007 2008 2013 – 20142015 Income : Day Net Tuition 76. 1% 78. 6% 78. 0% xx. x% Income : Day School Other Programs Income : Day School Investments Income : Day School Giving 3. 7% 4. 2% x. x% 5. 1% 3. 8% 4. 1% x. x% 7. 8% 6. 7% 8. 2% x. x% 69. 5% 65. 1% 69. 1% xx. x% 1. 2% 30. 3% 34. 9% 1. 4% 0. 8% 29. 5% x. x% xx. x% Expenses: Day Salaries & Benefits (#901 ) Expenses: Day Technology* Expenses: Prof Development Expenses: Day All Other

Markers of Success #2: Diversity = Proxy for Inclusivity: Race + Ethnicity NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Our School: Years 2003 – 2007 2004 2008 Day School Students of Color (#400) 19. 6% 22. 3% 28. 1% xx. x% Boarding Students of Color (#400) 16. 2% Day School International (#201) 3. 1% 3. 2% 3. 0% 11. 9% 17. 3% 21. 7% xx. x% Boarding International Enrollment (#201) 2013 – 20142015 16. 9% 22. 2% xx. x%

Markers of Success #3: Financial Aid = Data Proxy for Socio-Economic Inclusivity DAY: NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Our School: (See BOARDING) Years 2003 – 2007 - 2013 – 20142004 2008 2014 2015 Day School Students Need-Based Aid (#700) Day School Student Tuition Remission (#701) Day School Students on Merit Aid (#702) Day School Student on Full Need (#703) Day School Students Total on Aid 15. 1% 17. 1% 21. 6% xx. x% 4. 4% 4. 6% 5. 0% xx. x% 4. 7% 5. 5% xx. x% 7. 5% 6. 4% 4. 9% xx. x% 25. 2% 26. 4% 32. 6% xx. x%

Markers of Success #4: Tuition = Data Proxy for Pricing Strategy NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Our School: Years 2003 – 2004 2007 2008 2013 – 20142015 Day School Median Tuition Grade 9 (#500) Boarding Median Tuition Grade 9 (#500) Income : Day School Net Tuition (#900 ) $15, 988 $19, 925 $24, 450 $xx, xxx $30, 000 $39, 000 $48, 600 $xx, xxx Income : Boarding Net Tuition (#900 76. 1% 78. 6% 78. 0% xx. x% 55. 6% 56. 8% 66. 5% xx. x%

Markers of Success #5: Endowment Indicators = Data Proxy for Financial Security NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Our School: Years Endowment per student Day Schools Endowment: Debt Day Schools Endowment per student Boarding Schools Endowment: Debt Day Schools 2003 – 2007 2004 2008 2013 – 20142015 $11, 411 $xx, xxx 0. 96 x. xx $56, 092 $xx, xxx 2. 63 x. xx

Markers of Success #6: Annual Giving & % of Participation = Data Proxy for Constituent Loyalty Table 1102 NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Years: Annual Giving per Student & % Participation Giving per Student: Day Our School: 2003 – 2013– 14 2014 Boarding 2015 Day 2004 $1, 232 Median Gift by Faculty & % of participation $272 8. 0% $890 69. 5% $134 95. 5% $3, 302 $565 17% $1404 48% $173 69. 2% $x, xxx $xxx. x xx. x% Median Gift by Trustees & % of participation (Table $4030 100% $8402 100% $xxx. x% Giving per Student: Boarding Median Gift by Alumni/ae & % of participation Median Gift by Parents & % of participation Woodberry Forest School Alumni % Giving: 64%

Markers of Success #7: Funnel Shape = Proxy for Brand Strength & Selectivity NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Our School: Years 2003 – 2007 - 2013 – 20142004 2008 2014 2015 Boarding Applications per Enrollee (#601) 3. 6 4. 2 4. 0 x. x Boarding Accepts per Enrollees (#601) 1. 8 1. 9 1. 7 x. x Day School Apps per Enrollees (#601) 2. 8 2. 7 x. x Day School Accepts per Enrollee (#601) 1. 5 x. x

Markers of Success #8: Low Attrition = Data Proxy for Customer Satisfaction NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Our School: Years 2003 – 2007 - 2013 – 20142004 2008 2014 2015 Day School Average Attrition (#602) Boarding Average Attrition (#602) 9. 4% % 10. 6% 9. 4% xx. x% 11. 6% 10. 2% 9. 7% xx. x% Re-marketing to Current Families?

Markers of Success #9: Student: Staff Ratios = Data Proxy for “Productivity” NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Our School: Years Day School Student : Teacher Ratio (#813) Day School: Students : All FTE Staff Ratio Boarding Student : Teacher Ratio (#813) Boarding: All Student : All FTE Staff Ratio 2003 – 2007 - 2013 – 20142004 2008 2014 2015 9. 1 7. 0 9. 0 6. 9 9. 1 x. x 5. 1 x. x 7. 9 x. x 3. 1 x. x

Markers of Success #10: Salaries = Data Proxy for the 3 Rs for Talent NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Our School: Years Faculty Salary: Low 2003 – 2013– 14 2014 Boarding 2015 Day 2004 Faculty Salary: Median $38, 231 $32, 000 $xx, xxx $54, 230 $49, o 88 $xx, xxx Faculty Salary: High $ 79, 905 $76, 000 $xx, xxx With whom do you compete on salaries? Does money motivate and drive teachers – or anyone else for that matter? How might a school re-shape its compensation model? Bands, Tiers, & Pay for Performance.

Real-world test: distribution of. Markers families of across all five Success #3: socio-economic Data Proxy quintiles (national or local). What happens when the economy and market for Inclusivity – Socio-Economic (Return to Day) take a dive? Price becomes “elastic” BOARDING: NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons Our School: Years Boarding Students Need. Based Aid (#700) Boarding Students Tuition Remission (#701) Boarding Students on Merit Aid (#702) Boarding Students on Full Need (#703) Boarding Students Total on Aid 2003 – 2007 - 2013 – 20142004 2008 2014 2015 31. 8% 33. 2% 37. 5% xx. x% 3. 6% 3. 7% 4. 2% x. x% 6. 3% 8. 4% 11. 1% xx. x% 17. 9% 18% 17. 0% xx. x% 41. 7% 45. 3% 52. 8% xx. x%

Markers of Success #1: Robust Income Streams = Data Proxy for Sustainability BOARDING: NAIS 10 -Year Comparisons (Return to Day) Years 2003 – 2007 2004 2008 Income Net Tuition (#900 ) Income : Other Programs Income Investments Income : Giving Expenses: Boarding Salaries & Benefits(#901 ) Expenses: Technology Expenses: 55. 6% 56. 8% 66. 5% xx. x% (China Effect) 5. 9% 18. 3% 10. 2% 54. 7% 4. 8% 20. 7% 11. 6% 53. 3% 4. 8% 11. 6% 10. 3% 57. 9% xx. x% 1. 3% 1. 4% 1. 3% x. x% 0. 5% x. x% 41. 7% xx. x% Prof Development Expenses: All Other Our School: 2013 – 2014 2015 44. 0% 46. 7%