My name is Jenny Cook-smith, and I am so pleased to see such a loud, a large crowd, and maybe a loud crowd join us today for our session on case insights on alumni engagement as you can imagine. We have a really full session for you today. So I'm just gonna jump right in couple of things again. You found the chat. So that's fantastic, just from a housekeeping perspective. Let's keep the chat for interactivity. So a place that if you want to chime in and say, Hey, we're seeing that Tre share with your colleagues there, let's keep the for specific questions for our team here at case, and we'll do some introductions in just a moment. I can't promise we'll get to all of your questions with such a large group, but we absolutely will make sure to follow up. Now I'll introduce our presenters momentarily, but I did want to give a special shout out to Leah Prince, who is going to be providing the sort to us and to you behind the scenes. Leah will be launching the polls and she's also recorded our session today. I know that's a question that you all often have. I literally think that might have just come up. We will be sending both the recording and today's presentation out to all of you that are joining us are all of you that actually register. So I guess the last thing I'll say before I have my colleagues introduce themselves is on behalf of all of us. The case. Just extra special gratitude for the institutions that have taken part in this survey, because it is really only through your participation that we now have benchmarks for alumni engagement. And I think that's incredibly exciting. And and I know it's a lot of time and resources on your point. So again. Thank you so much. So without further ado, I am very excited to be joined by 2 of my colleagues today, and Kaplan and Nick Campesi. So I'm going to let Anne and Nick introduce themselves, and. Okay. I'm Anne Caplan. I have been directing the voluntary Supportive Education Survey for case and another organization since 1998. Now that I am at case I'm also the manager of the Alumni Engagement Survey, which has come a long way, and I'm very happy to be part of that project. Great thanks, and Nick. I'm Nick and PC. I. And recent to case for joining last summer. But I primarily work on the some of the data analysis and the summary benchmarking reports and strategic benchmarking reports which we will show you today. Great thanks, Nick, and I am. I lead our solutions. Team with an insights, and that to me means our job is how we bring value to you as members through data. And that's really what we'll be focusing on today. I am almost at my fourth year at case which is really hard to believe, and I will tell you that it is this work around the alumni engagement metrics, and particularly the global scale of them that drew me to case. And so this is one of my favorite topics and so thrilled to have a chance to talk to you about that today. So the way our session is going to work is we'll start with just some foundational information, both about case insights as well as our case. Insights on alumni engagement or many of you know it as the alumni engagement metrics. We all love an acronym, so aeem I. Well, then, Nick and and I will share 5 key takeaways from this most recent cycle of data. One quick note on that, because certainly timing matters when we look at some of the trends. This is a global survey. But we we can't make everybody do the same. Fiscal year. Right? Everyone's on different cycles, as it relates to the start and end of your calendar year, or well, we're on the same calendar. The start and end of your academic year, and some due to just keep that in mind that you know. We'll pull out some of the global differences. But every thing will be based on what you're own institutions and regions. This school year is, we will then transition over to what I mentioned earlier. How do we take and use this data? So we'll talk about some concrete action steps throughout this. We're gonna highlight, some things that you can go to find more resources some places you can go learn on your own. I have put our website throughout. And I will note that we actually have a resources slide that we won't necessarily show today. But when you get the presentation we'll have all of the links. So before I turn things over to, and I simply thought it might be helpful to take a moment and talk about this topic, as it relates to the larger goal. Within case insights. So case insights is actually a new term. We have recently rebranded from Am. Atlas, and case insights provide you with the data standards and research that you need as part of we think of as an integrated advancedment program. And we do that by providing key benchmarks for philanthropy, alumni engagement. Of course, today's topic and campaigns. We've also partnered with the opportunity and inclusion center. Here at case to provide solutions for diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging, and we'll come back to that a little bit in today's session. And I'm excited to announce that we have created a task force. That bill is building a roadmap for 81 benchmarks for marketing and communication. So similar process that we went to to launch this survey in this project several years ago. One reminder of that. All of this work is governed by that big yellow sunshine of our case. Global reporting standards. And you know, as a profession, it's really critical that we do have a common way of counting, measuring, and benchmarking, and the standards really led us to just that. But again, today is really all about the alumni engagement metrics. So I'm going to pass things over to Ann to tell you more. Thanks, Jenny. So the findings from the last survey that covered the 2022 fiscal year was the fourth year that we were running the Survey. But it's really only the third year that the survey was largely unchanged. So, it gave us a little more year over year capacity to benchmark. We had 349 institutions, supply data, and all of the all of the data that we're supplied are globally applicable. So, if you go to our data portal and you run a report, you can assume that people have made an effort to report each. Item the same way. Obviously not currency, but everything else. This report that you're seeing the cover of on the screen is now on the case website at that insights Link, and you can download. It doesn't cost anything to download. That's moving to the next slide. So I've been working on a Us. Higher education surveys, who are most of my professional career, and one of the metrics that we sort of hung on to was a something that's called alumni participation, which is the percentage of contactable alumni who make philanthropic gifts. But the Am. Survey has not only gives us an opportunity to see other ways, individuals interact with their own mobile, but but how much more, how much richer and more well developed affiliation is when you expand, what you're looking at. So, instead of looking at just percentage, who gives which we used to call alumni participation, this is an outmoded metric paste has been very strong and advocating for moving to something more robust and accurate, and this it's a good step in that direction. Either denominator are the number of legally contactable alumni, and at the top how many of those participated in at least one of the 4 metrics that were shown on the other page, so that could be a gift could be volunteering communicating or engage in the experience and then you get your alumni engagement rate. The this metric also declines. Every time you have more legally contactable alumni. So it's not perfect. They are the better job you do. Contacting people. The lower your percentage will be, but at least it's got all of the modes. And we use this as foundational, because one of the things we wanted to do today, I know that there are many of you that the survey is relatively new, but one of the things we're hearing is many many more institutions are a place where even if you're not taking part. Yet you're aware of the survey. You're aware of the buckets, and some of the foundational pieces. So we felt like, let's use our time today to really focus on what have we learned? And having this data for the past few years. And so Nick's gonna talk to you about what we have learned in terms of applying staffing both in terms of the expenditures and ftes are full-time equivalencies. We'll talk about the return of in-person events, and where that did, or maybe did not move the needle overall. We will also digging a little deeper to that notion that Anne just mentioned. So now that we've got this alumni engagement rate that looks at one of the 4 buckets, what does that really mean? As we start to measure alumni offending, and the final 2 pieces, I'll take you through in terms of thinking about applying this data. So a little bit more on using this as a depth measure. So not just percentaging gauge or percentage engaged by mode. But we're could we go next? And then sharing with you some of the things we're hearing as institutions are setting goals, and how those goals are evolving as institutions are setting goals, and how those goals are evolving as this data becomes a little less nascent so hopefully that's sounds like a fun ride for all of you. Nick, you're up first to talk about staffing. Thanks, Jenny. So one thing that's definitely coming out from this year survey as well as a trend, we're seeing over time. Is that investment in staffing matters and if we look at this, a couple of different ways, we kind of see different emerging trends. So, Jenny, if you're going to the next slide, please. Thanks, so first, I want to just show you the relationship here between alumni relations, staff Ftes and the percentage of alumni who are engaged. Any mode, and taking a brief look at this graph from a high level, we can see that for all of respondents, these, like gray dot, dot the relationship between these 2 factors is kind of spread all over the place, if you look at this average line this average relationship we can see that there while it's not a strong relationship. There's definitely a positive, a positive direction in the relationship between these 2 variables. But with distinct distinct regional differences between what we're seeing in the Survey. So, for instance, if we look@thisorange.canada, thank you. We can see that on for the median of that of that region. The the Alumni relations, staff fts are higher compared to the other regions, for the number of alumni who are engaged versus. If we look@thegreen.on the bottom, right for the United States, we can see that more alumni are being engaged for her staff. Fte, and part of the story is coming out that we start that the relationships are really being driven by how much institutions are collecting this data. And as institutions start moving to collect this data, especially in a non Western regions, we may see this relationship become stronger for Ftes. But right now I just wanna point out that you we can also explore this in the strategic benchmark and report. I'll show later today if you want to explore this for your institutions. More specifically, however, when we go from the ftes and start to look more at expenditures, we see that the relationship of this correlation, this r squared for alumni relations, staff Fdes on the right is point 2 3. So again, positive, but not overly strong, but. Yeah, well, you know one of the things that it does hint at is that retention of staff is very important. So you could have someone leave and then replace the person your ftes won't change, but the person who's been there longer to retain them they have to be paid adequately, and to hire someone experienced. They have to be paid adequately. Most of the expenditures are salaries and benefits, but this also includes other resources. Exactly so if we, as we move towards the right and look at the expenditures, and again, as an iterated that this is not just the staffing expenditures, but all personnel, we see this r squared becomes stronger, more towards that 50% relationship. And so this to us is hinting more at, as Anne described the retention of staff and the higher salaries, the more expenses that are going to training those staff to really create meaningful engagement. And if you go to the next slide, please, Jennie. So this slide here just kind of summarizes what we're seeing in that more alumni relation staff is those yield strong engagement. However, when we start to look at who those staff are, how long they've been there, and the resources that they're supplied with, at least in the United States, the more experienced alumni reallyation staff with those resources we can expect to have fields even stronger engaging. So we want to throw up a poll for you guys. And we wanna ask you to select the option that best applies to you. So the 3 options we have pose right now as you could read on the page are, do you find that you're having more alumni relation staff at this time compared to last year the same number compared to last year? Or the same number of alumni Relation staff compared to last year. I think these 2 options are the same. Option? 3. Should I be fewer? So if if you see if you're seeing, this, one is more to a same, 3 is fewer. Okay, Gotcha. Thank you. And Leah, hopefully, you're seeing this coming in, as it looks like we're getting a good number of respondents. We'll let you go ahead and post that. Of course, the our plight is always having to look back in time as we're doing this data. It's always helpful to relate that back to what we're seeing right now as well. Okay. So we're saying that a lot of a lot of you are having the same number of alumni staff this year. Compared to last year, which is good with only a few having fewer interesting. Thank you. That's great. Certainly Staffing has been a as we've come off a number of conferences, something that we've heard of that so, and I see a note from Jessica about the big drop was the year before. So obviously, you got to take that into account as well. If you had a real big drop and then you stayed the same. You're still, perhaps not netting where you are and's gonna take us through our in person. Events. Yeah. So I'm sure no one's surprised to hear that in person events are back. They're not as proportion. Here, let me can go to the next slide. Okay? So as a proportion of the total, the average percentage in that, we're virtual is declining. We see it not quite so much in Canada. Although this is a percentage of the events right? So it could be that they've stuck with doing a lot of virtual or hybrid events because they found they worked. But if you were to look at the previous year report, you would see these flipped where the you know, during during the height of Covid, the virtual and hybrid events were much more common, there was a little celebr of in person at the top so this is returning more to, you know. Different, I guess I like to say normal. But what's normal today, you know, if you download the report that's on the case website now, you'll see the same table by institution type. So whether it's an independent school or a 2 year college a 4 year, college, professional college, and that's kind of interesting, too. I think so. It's another way to slice the same data, and it is in the report. You can go to the next one. Okay, when we look at the change in percentage engaged. And even if you look at experiential, which is where events go, it's kind of all over the place it's a little bit of a mixed bag we saw, and in some cases where the data look pretty strong, such as in Latin America. We have an end. So one thing we need to get some really robust information is more and more participants. It really evens out the fluctuations that can occur with, you know, answered or below 2530, the the United States is pretty even to forget. It's a large country, with lots and lots of institutions. So the percentage of us institutions that participate might be the same as in some other countries. There's just so many more of them to hit. We have 1 77 respondents, but there are like 3,500 higher education institutions that still doesn't include the independent schools. This table is also in the report by type of institution, and whether the institution is public or private. And and I'm just gonna answer a question that came in because it was relevant. Okay. As we're looking at these numbers, there's a question about just a breakout from Uk irregular to the rest of Europe, and I'll just note that the vast majority were in Uk Ireland, which is why we groups those to get. Yeah. But let me put a little pitch for you, getting a data portal account. You can go in and benchmark and just pull out. By country, or you know there are many other indicators that you could use. That may be we aren't even using in the report. You'll just get in touch with me after this, and we will set you up, and we'll make sure you can run that. So this is a percentage increase in total engaged in any of the 4 modes in the last cycle. So first of all, we're not seeing anything negative where there's been at least a small increase in every region, and I believe the same thing shows up for type of institutions. The when we say, engaged in any of the form, modes. What we mean is a person can be engaged philanthropically by making a gift. They can be engaged by volunteering, by aing events, and so on. So experientially, communication terrible. That's what everyone leaves out. And that's awful. So if the person is involved in all 4 ways, they get counted here. But if they all they did was click through on an email data set. So it's good that it's going up, and I hope this continues to be a trend. So now we have another poll. You're going to select the statement that best supplies for this year compared to last year. So the year we're here that we're working in right now, and in some cases finishing up. So you're gonna indicate whether you were up in engaged alumni flat down, or you can't answer the question. And I appreciate what you all are answering interesting, seeing some of the responses on the chat related to your own attrition. Related to some ticket fees. So love to see that interaction and keep that conversation going. And Cynthia. It's experiential, is the fourth of the 4 modes. So Leah, whenever it looks like we're getting a good group. If you wanna go ahead and publish that. Alright and gosh! I'd say most are in the camp of your up, or you're still unnoticed to answer the question, because data collection are left. Smattering in the middle. Okay. So as I mentioned earlier, I've been studying fundraising outcomes in the United States for couple of decades. Actually more than that. If you count, going back to giving U.S.A. But we relied in the United States on a metric called Alumni Participation, which I've been saying is absolutely for such a long time I finally got to Case and Sue Cunningham pens in a an OP-ed and inside higher end declaring it an absolute metric and now, somehow, people are listening. The alumni engagement is the best available measure of alumni affinity that we have. Maybe there could be another measure, but we haven't designed a way to collect the data. And we're still in the process of learning how to collect the data. With this metric, but go to the next slide. 81% of the engagement we captured on the survey is not the philanthropic. So does that mean you? Just well, then, forget it. No, I mean one type of engagement leads to another, and not just in a person's life, like a I'm a volunteer. I'm more likely to eventually give one of that capacity arises. But also there's a synergy. They're all gears. All alumni are gears in an affiliative activity. So even if you're not a donor, if you come to a and you're someone people look forward to seeing, or you send your children to the school eventually. Those are not philanthropic. Gifts, but they are. They really lift all boats. So I think we need to care about even non philanthropic participation. I took you I took a there's only 59 institutions in this, so take it with a a grain of, for example, if's not proof. But we don't calculate alumni participation anymore in the Us. But if we did, I just went in and ran it it in this group of 59, it would have been 6.5%. That's prop that's feels right to me. It's been declining every year right? Because the number of records which is the denominator just rising astronomically with technology and modes of contact. And then I added in the soft credit, so that's if I made a gift through a foundation foundation, or privately held company or donor advise fund. The organization gets the hard credit. That's the legal donor. But you would soft credit, and steward me as the person who cost the gift to happen. It does increase participation, but it only increased it very slightly. Right, but that is another reason. Participation is going down because the number of donors is the numerator, and if more and more people are giving by a soft credit modes, then they're gonna be missing from the numerator. And then, when I went in and checked percentage engaged using the alumni engagement survey responses from the same group, it's 25.3. Now, that's a number that really shows what you accomplished in engaging graduates. We did look at the percentage of engagement represented by philanthropy, by Instagram. And you know, obviously it varies primarily undergraduate institutions do include a lot of liberal arts colleges where alumni spent 4 years you know, we're in residence. This kind of different from some of the other types you would expect. You know more monetary affiliation there, but you know it's also the end. We have the combined undergraduate and postgraduate is the only category. We have enough institutions, I think, to make a really broad statement. But it's it's still highlights that the percentage of engagement represented by philanthropy is a very nice tip of the iceberg. And if you're doing your math. When Ann started with that 81% that don't actually engage philanthropically, this is the inverse of that. So what you can see here is how that divides up we chose to do this by institution type, because I think it was. A we wanted to show you that. But, as Ann said, it also is globally, and the findings and one just nuance when we're talking about affinity and engagement. What I'd say. We're putting is that rankings, organization, such as us news and World report have historically used a participation. So whether donors give as a stand in for affinity. And so the nuance there being that engagement, we are, and I think the data shows is really a much better measure. And this is to me our least surprising, most important data point when we start to look at the data overall because it really shows how much we've been missing when we only looked at that narrow slice definitely at their. So as we move to our last 2 key findings. So it wanted to share with you. Today, I wanted to switch a little bit from. We've talked really about percentage engaged so far. And what that means. I'd like to talk about depth measures or another way to say, this is, I like to think of as pipeline, pipeline, pipeline, and that is, then, as I've been talking to many of you a phrase pipeline pipeline and that is ben as I've been talking to many of you a phrase that has just really continued to come up and what I think is interesting about that is, I believe that as a profession, when we're talking about pipeline, that's really had a subtle shift from meeting, we want people to give to give more to thinking about this much broader and so by that I mean, how do we move our alumni or our constituency? Into activities that then would encourage the outlook that are most desirable for our institution, and we believe that this data shows engagement plays an important role in that conversation. So while we are going to talk about outcomes, plural of engagement, let's start with the one that probably most likely comes to mind, and that is looking at the outcome of filling therapy. So this is straight from the findings report. Nick is gonna share with you what we call our summary benchmarking reports. That's where that's something that you all have. We have just loaded them up so more to come on that. But we also do create, as Nick mentioned, what we call our strategic reports, and that's a bit of more of a custom engagement with Case one of the things that those reports include is the data point that you can see here. But you can see it for your institution. And I'd say you can also look at building this out in the data portal as and referenced. And we've got all those resources that links at the end of this presentation today. But as you look at this data, notice that. Yes, it differs, promote, that makes sense. When we think about funding models of education, when we think about age of development office, when we think about age of the Alumni Relations Office and then also just simply the mix of his taking part in the service. But what you can see is it does vary as well by the mode overall. So institutions that are using this are starting to think of things like, well, what happens if we really, strategically are asking for our bar? Are alumni are attending events to. Then give. And what if it's related to the event? Experience itself. We also can use this to see things like the percentage engaged through communication, who give tends to be lower than the other modes. And that's okay. Because that's probably the most passive of our modes. As Ann noted, that would be someone that sip clicking through on emails that you're sending. Or they actually did it at least one time during the year. How could you take that to think about? What's the next thing we want to encourage? Maybe it's not a gift. Maybe that's too far of a stretch, and it's simply getting to them, getting them to an event, getting them interacting. In your online forum. So with other alumni, there's other pieces that may be that next step along the way. So something to consider as you're thinking about moving from simply the big numbers overall to a little bit more of these strategic strategic measures. Yeah, we can also take this idea and flip it on its head and say, well, our alumni who engage, are they also giving? And one of the things we saw it said about just over a third of our engaged alumni. Also give. I tell you this number, but I will also say much like the last data point. It is highly distributed. So the range is really wide. But when we're looking at our engaged alumni, who are also giving excuse me, our engaged donors, who are also engaging our alumni donors, who are also engaging, I should say what you may want to do at your own institution, is, think about. Is there an average gift, size, difference? You know, 4 alumni that are really interacting with the work of our institutions. Are they more invested it they may or may not be. But again, I think that can help your strategies overall, and as we're going through this idea of depth measures, here are some other things that you may want to consider. So graduation, cohort is an example of something, we added, and the survey for fiscal 20. Here's your public service announcement. Now please fill out that data for next year. I think you'll really appreciate having the benchmarks and it's something we can all come and talk about next year. We actually did start to get it we're going to be adding legally contactable. Yeah, it's there. Now. So we can start looking at this by percentage. You'll also see that the survey does have data. By aumni category. And so that's things like, are they undergraduate? Only are they perform degree-only? Do they have multiple degrees. And I'm saying this for higher education, but we also do have definitions for schools so if you have a little middle and upper, you actually could be able to count Lumi and those categories as well. One of the things we've seen, and actually, I'd say the one finding that we've had for 4 years, and maybe our one finding from year one other than we did, it is multiple degree to alumni engage higher in all 4 modes, if that is not the case, at your institution. That's the first thing you want to check out. Nick is gonna show you a new data point that we've started analyzing. And that's understanding a little bit more of this multiple modes of engagement. If you are building pipeline, are you seeing that you are actually engaging alumni in more ways, or are you simply just increasing that count overall again? It may go back to your goals. Another interesting piece is that we've started working with institutions to start thinking about using this data. To set some targets, an example would be, how many alumni that you have to engage to actually get a donor and understanding those measures overall, you could even mix that with your philanthropy results to see what that average gift size is to set some forecasting to and then finally. we're hearing, we're starting to hear some examples of institutions that are taking that case, framework and overlaying it with specific social identity. Groups. So groups that you've identified are important for affinity with your institutions. And that's probably a good segue into the fifth of the 5 takeaways. As we think about this idea of evolving goals and outcomes. So I'm going to come back to that. So I'm going to come back to that social identity. But first we're going to ask you once more. Really curious. We've opened this up so you can pick multiple things here. Want to hear at your institution. What are ways that you are using your alumni engagement metrics? So how are you using data as you're thinking about being strategic with this work? And we tried to put some examples of things that we've been hearing from you all. I will tell you right now, if you pick other, please put that in the chat as well, because love to hear what some things might be that don't always raise to the surface as well. Yeah, folks, just a couple more seconds, and then we'll have Leah go ahead and paste that. And thanks, Jason. I see an example there of your engagement scoring. Yes, I'm glad to hear that's internal, only you probably don't want to be with an alumnus and tell them that they are a 52 or whatever that number may be. Excellent. So we're seeing those results come in. So it looks like we have a mix of view that are sharing dashboards are are developing them. That was definitely something that is, institutions have gotten to a place where they're collecting more. We're hearing more and more of. I love to hear the idea that your engagement metrics are being included as part of leadership meetings. That's, I think, really invaluable to have that seat at the table. As we look at this data and sort of all over the board. And again, I'm very appreciative of those of you that, said other, for those of you that are in the early stages. Again. I think that's hopeful to see. It's still about half because that's sort of overlays again, some of our thoughts as we're taking interpreting this data overall. So I wanted to speak a moment to data confidence. And one of the things that for those of you familiar with a survey will be aware of. But if you're not, we started several years ago, including a question, and I think Andy Shanlon is on the calls. I will shout him out as the Brainchild really behind this question, and setting some parameters about you know what counting gifts is very different than measuring engagement, and let's just be open with it. And so with that, we started saying, Okay, measuring means reducing a certainty. And let's learn a little bit more about that uncertainty. And so the question around Covid is not. Do you trust your data as accurate? More? Do you trust your data as representative? And what might that look like? And so what I'm just sharing with you is when we looked at 2 years of results, so 2020 to 2022, you can see that needle, is starting to move upwards. You can also see that we're still at about 30% that don't feel somewhat confident or confident when we look at that communications data as a reminder. In the short version of the Survey communications is, in fact, optional, so I'm not saying that you have to have as a requirement to take part. And here you can see when we look at the inverse of that, the percentage of institutions that are taking part in saying, Hey, we're doing this. We know there's a lot of ways to grow right now. We're not very confident. We still see we absolutely have that for each of the modes. But again that's gone down in particularly. We've seen that nice decrease in communication overall. So I told you I would come back to social identity, and our friends within the Opportunity inclusion center a case case actually has a fantastic new product which is the advancement inclusion, index and the advancement inclusion index is all about understanding your institutions. Or excuse me, your advancement office within your school, or institutions, maturity level across the spectrum of advancement, office within your school or institutions, maturity level across the spectrum of advancement, inclusion, or inclusion, and there's a number of measures that are included in that index we've chosen one to share with you that we feel like really bridges the gap as we think of the future, of surveys like this. The question is simply around the percentage of institutions that are currently tracking social identity data. The access, as you can see here, only goes up to 60%. And so we see a little over 60% of our reporting institutions. So far, that have gender, and then it goes down from there. No notice how low that bar is when we look at things like indigenous communities. Lgbtq. Z. With disabilities. So I plant this seed to say, we absolutely believe that these types of metrics become really powerful when you can start to look at the framework overall and then apply it to your identity groups and really see where there might be opportunities to move the needle, but again, there's a lot of work to be done as we think about those data collection efforts overall. And when we follow up, if this is something you're interested in, you'll have an opportunity to get some additional information as well, and we've got that in our resources. So I thought that sort of the last topic that we leave you with before we have Nick share with you. Your reports is some of the things that we're hearing. So we just put some things. There's some broad categories about what you might be doing, but a little bit more in terms of some of these goals. And again 4 years ago, I think the goal for all of us, for just to figure out, could we even do this? And so, in a very short period of time, I think it's exciting to see how these goals have evolved so examples of things we've heard are goals that are really about brand and affinity with, you know getting alumni to connect with our brand to pay attention to what's happening and build that into engagement, to then build into engagement, to then build into what is the intended outcome for the institution that may or may not be philanthropic, and I'll show you some examples of those outcomes. Most we also are, you know, certainly, seeing institutions that are setting attitudinal outcome goals. So this could be as simple as really intentional surveys. Post event to understand the outcomes that were achieved. So no longer are the days where we say there's a lot of people they seem to like the food. They were happy. It was a success, no, this is much more strategic, as we think about this idea of really a broader pipeline across the spectrum oh, and then, as we think about the goals, and this idea of building confidence in the data we're collecting that really goes hand in hand with the notion of How do we expand the reach? How our campus partners involved from the beginning to, you know, collecting the data to the idea of in outcomes and setting those goals. And again, I think these are opportunities where we zoom, people get really creative and thinking about, you know, does something as small as just show those measures to some of your campus partners, so that it's very easy to say, oh, well, we know our numbers most much higher than this why, are you not including X Y and Z. Well, now we've opened up that conversation, so I haven't had an opportunity to completely keep my eyes on the chat. They talking too much in this chat? But when I was looking a little while back I saw some information about about scoring, and so what I think that we've started to hear, as institutions say, the case framework as a starting point actually may be good enough to start. To then apply to key segments. So I'm not saying there is not a need for scoring but that if you're just getting started, simply this sort of easy binary, did they? Did they not particularly with each of those notes, may be enough for you to say, Okay, here's a starting point. So again, an example of that might be if 98% of your population's not giving, and maybe 20% of your population's engaged instead of focusing on the 98% let's focus on that 20% and think about using that to move the needle and then lastly. one of the there was a great book that actually that Sue Cunningham wrote earlier. This year, with a number of influential candidates. And it's really about conversations around engagement. And one of the the pieces in the chapter around alumni Relations, that I thought was so powerful today is this idea of outside and versus inside out communication, and how we used to always be completely inside out. The institution told the alumni what they needed to know, and so I think part of this is moving to this idea of more outside. And how are we learning from our alumni and adjusting? All of that is, say, as we think about the future. This may not be the case. We that's a actually may be the royal. We we're all coming together and thinking about what are multiple outcomes. Frank. We've already talked about. Some of the areas around giving, but you know, how do you show that? It's helping with your student recruitment. How do you show that engaged alumni are helping, keeping, keeping your students on board, helping with career placement? I've worked with some institutions that have said, being a brand ambassador is actually the number one album that they like from engagement for their Instagram. So given that, how do we then move? Move the needle? There another might be. If you're a public Us. Institution advocacy within your governmental space corporate, corporate partnerships, is something that, again, doesn't necessarily the public Us. Institution advocacy within your governmental space corporate partnerships is something that again, doesn' and I think that last piece is this idea of how do we build that mutual beneficial relationship? How are we through engagement demonstrating the value back to our alumni from the institution? So, hopefully, that's just good food for thought. What I'm going to do is I'm going to pass things over to Nick to show with you a little bit about what we've been doing around the solutions side of things before he frame shows his screen just a frameness, and mentioned the data portal as case members. You all have access again. Happy, happy, happy to follow up and make sure of folks! Get that access. If this is not known to you. This is where the data lives. This is where the summary benchmarkking report that Nick's going to show is if you took the survey, you have a summary benchmarkking report, and then finally, he will also share with you the strategic report. We're really excited about this, because our hope is, you can, you know, take action on the data by working with us. And the last piece I'll note is super thrilled to say that we are announcing we're going to be building a cohort for institutions that would like to partner with Case to really think about coming together and using this data more to come on that but I will tell you we are hosting this for the first 15 institutions that do sign up, and certainly something I can talk to any of you that are interested. Offline. So, Nick, with that I am going to stop sharing my screen and pass it over to you. Thanks for the sake of time. So hopefully, we have more time for. For questions and comments. I assume everybody can see my screen now. Yes. Yes. Okay, perfect. So here, what I'm showing you is just a sample report. Using non-real data of the summary bench ranking report. So, as Jenny alluded to each institution who participated in the survey in the data portal, you should now be able to access and download your own summary benchmarking report for your institution, and I'll just throw out that if you are having any issues, with that feel free to email us, and we will work through that with you. But they are on there. If you participate in the past, the access to those should be similar. What is different from previous years is mostly aesthetic, and we've really taken this year to phone on, how can we communicate the information from the survey from all of the hard work that each of our participants put in and a useful and easily digestible way? So in the summary benchmarking report, we've added a few new features that I wanna I I wanna point out to you and most of these are interactive. And what you one quick way that you can get an overview of what these kind of interactions are. So you can delve deeper into the data and pull out the data from from this report is, we have this report navigation, which will give you a high level overview. But generally in this report we present 5 key indicators from the survey for your institution. 5 k pers which are determined using an algorithm which you can find more information about the algorithm in this pure algorithm tab as well as your region. And your and all respondents. So, for instance, here, I'll show you the first one that we present is the proportion of alumni who are contact will engage, and this is just a quick way for you to easily compare your institution against those peers. The your region, and all respondents to see how you are essentially stacking up against these different comparison groups. Each chart comes fully interacting, so as you hover over it, you can see the actual numbers and the detail that's going on in to that into each chart. Each chart is also able to be filtered, using the legend, if it has it, where, if you select twice, it'll show it'll isolate what you've selected, or if you select, once it will remove that away in addition, I just want to point out briefly that each of these charts. You can then export zoom in reset to tailor towards your liking, or if you wanna take this information and maybe use it in your own your own slide decks, you can, of course, download the data, all of the data or all the data for the charts in this report it can be exported into Csv. Excel where you can, then take it, and maybe turn it into your institutions. Colorors, or incorporate it with other data. But, as I said, there are 5 key indicators that we cover this here the proportion of alumni are contactable and engaged. We also cover staffing and expenditures in broad detail. So, for instance, here we just have the staffing full-time equivalent, ft. E. And the contactable alumni port. First Staff, Fte. We also provide you with the alumni relations, expenditures in a separate chart. And again, if you hover, you can see the detail or not. Only the dollar cost, which will be depending on which region you are. It'll be in your local currency, but also the percentage of that category. For instance, here salaries and benefits, for towards the overall expenditure, and as I go through, I'll also mention that each of these categories are these referenced groups, the case pairs the region, and the all response bear in mind that these are immediate of everybody who feels into into that group. Secondly, I was also show you engagement by any mode, so we provides you this in 2 ways to provide a little bit more context. But again as trying to keep that high level overview first for the total percentage of alumni, just any mode, and then so you can see how that's changed. And again, if you hover, more detail comes out, whereas here in this chart you can see the change for each mode of engagement, and that same vein I just wanna lastly show you we do break out engagement by mode at a high level here for communication. But then using this dropdown interaction, you can see each of the different 4 modes to filter back down, to which mode you're interested in. And as Jenny alluded to the confidence levels, it are deeply important for understanding this data, especially depending on which mode of engagement you're looking at. So we do provide you with the confidence levels. For instance, here the number of the percentage of institutions who say they are confident in the data for all respondents in terms of communication. So you can get a picture of what you're looking. Finally, as Jenny was referencing, we try to help you put this into context and not just hand you data and hands. You charge and information to give you an overload. Try and help you understand? You know what all this hard work that you put into pools the data, how you can get the most out of it. So, for instance, here we have next steps which include reviewing this report, the findings report as well as if you want to learn on your own using the data portal, or if you want to continue learning with us a strategic benchmarkking report or that cohorts information that jenny was just referencing while we have a few minutes. I also want to show you a high level overview of the strategic benchmarking report which what this does is it provides the same information, but in more detail and with more indicators. So for this strategic benchmarking reports, we went from 5 indicators to 25 indicators. And what these let you do is to pick the peers up to 20 that you want to compare yourself against. We often see institutions picking both aspirational peers and peers, that they know that there's similar to, and kind of molding together a bunch of different reference groups, and each report comes with an about section similar to what you saw before institutional characteristics for the for the peers you selected and executive overview, which will be written handwritten by our team, depending on your goals and strategies that you discuss with us in one of the 2 meetings that this that in order here includes, as well as a high-level overview and the detailed findings where you can see each individual institutions, data, and competition yourself against. So, for instance, if you wanted to look at just the non-egreed, you can see, line by line what each of these have. As I alluded to earlier, from the alumni engagement charts that we that I showed you can explore your institution compared to those peers compared to already respondents quickly and easily with hovering information to get more details and then the chart that Jenny was alluding to one of the great calculated variables we put in this year engagement across multiple modes. You can see how your institution is performing in terms of alumni. Are engaged in one mode alumni, who engage in 2 modes, 3 modes, and so on. Compared to the peers. So this group, I think this provides a great way to see just how that pipeline is working. And, for instance, here, in the sample institution, perhaps there have you have a decrease from 2021 to this to 2022, and those alumni are engaged in one mode, but then we see an in and those who are engaged in multiple modes so there's a lot of information jam packed into these reports, as I said, they come with 2 calls with us, so we can really learn what your strategies are, which I think is helpful for you in terms of understanding. You know how to get the most out of this report. But again helpful for us to make sure we're curating something that's actually useful for you. And with that I'll thank you. And I'm gonna stop sharing my screen. Great thanks so much, Nick, and I hope you all are as excited as we are about these really fantastic reports, and we love hearing your thoughts, good or bad. So please go check yours out and let us know your thoughts. I will simply leave you all with some next steps. One is, the findings are out. Here is the link. We're very proud that our website is a lot easier to navigate now. So you'll see insights is actually top navigation bar. But again easily. Link here and then finally, what I will say is one. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for this great commentary. I will be spending some time reviewing this and looking forward to following up with all of you lots of great questions as well. I think most got answers, but if not again, we'll make sure to follow up with you. Leah is just putting one additional question out, because we wanna make sure that we can get answers to your questions. So if anything you heard about today, you want to learn more. You want clarification. You've got an idea. Please let us know we're going to be following up with some sort of decision. Trees, so we can make sure we get your route in the right direction, as you're doing that I'm just leaving you with sort of a checklist of some things that we think you can do next from here. I will call out, it's never too early to think about submitting for fiscal year 23. I will call out, it's never too early to think about submitting for fiscal year 23. Those surve. So you know. September Yup, but you can go on now and take a look at the survey instrument and to help that there's a lot of popup help and stuff like that. So it's worth getting at the account set up now. So, just. Excellent, and thank you. Thank you. Thank you all. Again we were so thrilled to have such great turnout, and looking forward to continue keeping the conversation going. Thank you for being a part of this project.

case insights

alumni engagement

survey findings

improve strategies

in-person events

non-philanthropic engagement

data analysis

goals and outcomes

social identity data

practical tips