For VP Enrollment Management

Forecast, retain, and benchmark in plain English

VPs and Vice Provosts for Enrollment Management use Clema to forecast enrollment, model retention, benchmark peers against IPEDS, and pull Pell, CDR, and PSEO data in one conversation.

How Clema helps

The enrollment questions you own, answered in minutes.

Forecast in plain English

Ask for a term-ahead enrollment forecast or a program-level yield prediction. Clema runs the model and shows the drivers, so you can stress-test scenarios without a data-science team.

Model retention and graduation

Get at-risk student lists with the factors behind each score. Target interventions where attendance, GPA, or course combinations are dragging completion.

Benchmark against IPEDS peers

Build peer groups and compare enrollment, retention, graduation, finance, and faculty. Every figure shows the federal source and year, board-ready.

A day in your peak season

The Tuesday before cabinet

Without Clema

You walk into cabinet with numbers that are already five days stale.

It's the Tuesday before the enrollment management cabinet meeting, and you need an updated fall census-versus-SEM-plan variance by college and by residency status. IR is three days behind because the president's office asked for a reformatted version of last week's pull first.

It's not that IR is slow:

  • Typical ad-hoc fulfillment runs 3 to 14 days, per the whitepaper study.
  • IR capacity climbs to 75-90% utilization in September, January, and May, exactly your census, packaging, and yield-reporting months.
  • You're competing for the same three or four people every other VP is emailing that week.

With Clema

Same Tuesday, same cabinet meeting. You open Clema and ask for the census-versus-SEM-plan variance by college and residency status yourself. The answer comes back sourced to your live SIS data, with the method shown, before you've finished your coffee.

IR isn't cut out of the loop; they still own the definitions and the data model. What changes is that a question you can ask in plain English no longer has to wait in a queue behind everyone else's September request.

The old way vs. the Clema way

Same enrollment questions, a very different wait.

Enrollment forecast for cabinet

Old way

Email IR, wait 3 to 14 days, get a static spreadsheet built around last cycle's assumptions.

Clema way

Ask in plain English, get the forecast with drivers shown, adjust the assumption yourself in the same conversation.

IPEDS peer benchmarking

Old way

Track down who built the last peer list, hope the methodology notes still exist, wait for a refreshed pull.

Clema way

Ask for the comparison directly. IPEDS source and year are shown on every figure, no hunting for the original methodology.

Pell utilization vs. discount rate

Old way

File a one-off request that queues behind everything else IR is already fielding during packaging season.

Clema way

Ask financial aid and Pell questions directly against live data, before the next award letter batch goes out.

Clarifying a follow-up question

Old way

Send a second email, wait again. The whitepaper found 73.5% of ad-hoc requests need 2 to 5 rounds of back-and-forth before they're answered.

Clema way

Ask the follow-up in the same thread and get an answer in the same conversation, no new request, no new queue.

Ask Clema

An enrollment leader's conversation

The enrollment management cabinet needs the fall census variance and Pell retention read locked before Tuesday.

Enrollment Management Cabinet
What's our Pell recipient share among first-time, full-time undergraduates over the last three fall cohorts, and how does that compare to our IPEDS comparison group?
For your three most recent fall cohorts, your Pell recipient share among first-time, full-time undergraduates (IPEDS Student Financial Aid component) is trending upward, while your six-institution IPEDS comparison group's median has stayed roughly flat over the same period. Every figure is pulled directly from IPEDS Student Financial Aid and your SIS financial aid extract, with source and year tagged. Want me to break this out by Pell versus non-Pell retention rate for the same cohorts, or by college/program?
+4 ptsabove peer median, fall 2023

Example figures for this walkthrough · Pell recipient share, first-time full-time

CohortYour shareIPEDS peer median
Fall 202131%32%
Fall 202233%32%
Fall 202336%32%
Break it out by college. Which programs are seeing the steepest decline in Pell student retention?
Across your colleges, the term-to-term retention gap between Pell and non-Pell students is widest in two program areas; both show retention roughly 8 to 10 points below their non-Pell peers in the most recent cohort, versus a narrower 3 to 4 point gap institution-wide. This is descriptive, not causal, so I'd flag it for your success team to investigate with advising and financial-aid-disbursement-timing data before drawing conclusions. Want the at-risk student list behind this cut, or the same breakout for 150%-time graduation instead of term-to-term retention?
10 ptswidest Pell retention gap

Example figures for this walkthrough · Most recent cohort, term-to-term

Program areaPell retentionNon-Pell retentionGap
Program area A71%80%9 pts
Program area B69%79%10 pts
Institution-wide78%81%3 pts
Show me projected fall census versus our SEM plan target, and flag if we're on track.
Based on your current applicant funnel and this cohort's historical yield rate by stage (applied, admitted, deposited), the projected fall headcount is tracking below your SEM plan target, with the gap concentrated in one entry population rather than spread evenly. The model uses the same term-to-term structure documented in our retention methodology (evaluated on 276,519 held-out student-term records at roughly 86.6% accuracy), applied here to yield instead of retention. Want to see which recruitment funnel stage is driving the shortfall, or compare this year's yield curve to the same point last cycle?

The enrollment picture is getting harder to read, not easier

Six independent reports point to the same conclusion.

3.9M → 3.4M

Projected US high school graduates, 2025 to 2041, about a 13% decline. Only ten states are projected to grow over that window, and the South is the only region with a net increase. That's the applicant pool most SEM plans were built against.

WICHE, Knocking at the College Door (11th ed.)

56.3%

Average first-time, full-time discount rate for 2024-25 (51.4% across all undergraduates). Across 286 participating private nonprofit institutions, grant aid covered 63% of tuition and fees for first-time students; 83.4% of all undergraduates received some grant aid. Every point of discount rate is a decision made with less margin for error.

NACUBO, 2024 Tuition Discounting Study

74%

Chief academic officers seriously worried about federal student aid changes. 65% are also very or extremely concerned about international enrollment amid visa and immigration policy shifts. Leaders described their role as more about fixing problems than planning ahead, citing lack of data and delayed decision cycles.

Inside Higher Ed / Hanover Research, 2025 CAO survey

19.4M

Total US college enrollment for fall 2025, up 1.0% year over year. Enrollment is volatile even as the demographic cliff approaches, exactly why a single static forecast built once a year stops being good enough.

Chronicle of Higher Education, IPEDS-based Almanac

"Outdated systems, disconnected teams, and blind spots in data"

How AACRAO frames the underlying SEM problem: a fragmentation and visibility issue, not a missing tactic or a lack of urgency on any one team's part.

AACRAO, Strategic Enrollment Management research

41%

Top research priority for enrollment leaders is the "last mile" from admit to matriculation. That last-mile work depends on the same cross-functional, high-quality data that's hardest to get fast during peak season.

EAB, 2025 Enroll360 survey

Smaller applicant pools, higher discount rates, and policy uncertainty add up to one thing: enrollment leaders need faster, more granular answers than a quarterly dashboard refresh gives them. That's the gap Clema is built to close.

Peak season

Your busiest months are also IR's busiest months

Enrollment reporting peaks in September, January, and May, exactly when census counts, financial aid packaging, and yield reporting all land at once. Across the 50+ institutions in our whitepaper study, IR utilization climbs to 75-90% in those months, the same window your forecasts and benchmarking requests depend on.

Read the whitepaper
Fix the fragmentation, don't add to it

Where Clema fits with your SEM stack

Clema isn't another dashboard competing with Slate, EAB, or your SIS for attention. It sits on top of the systems you already run as a conversational layer, with a source and method shown on every answer. Your CRM stays the system of record for the funnel; your SIS stays the system of record for enrolled students.

Clema

Ask across the funnel and enrolled students in plain English, sourced.

sits on top of, doesn't replace

Your systems

SISSlate (CRM)EABData warehouse

82.4%

of IR/IE teams cite data fragmentation across multiple systems as their top infrastructure issue. Adding another standalone system only makes that worse.

"The issue is not the absence of tools; it's the absence of integration."

Clema is how you ask a plain-English question across both without waiting for someone to build a new report. Every answer stays governed by your existing role-based access and SOC 2 and FERPA compliance.

What Clema gives your team

Forecasted

Term-ahead enrollment and yield, drivers shown

Modeled

Retention and graduation risk, at-risk lists included

Benchmarked

Against IPEDS peers, source and year shown

Enrollment leader FAQs

Yes. Clema builds enrollment forecasts and yield predictions in plain English on your historical data. You ask for a term-ahead or program-level forecast and get the model output with the drivers shown, not a black box.

Clema runs term-to-term retention and 150%-time graduation models on your student data. You get at-risk student lists with the factors behind each score, so your success teams can intervene where it matters.

Yes. Clema queries IPEDS in plain English, so you can build peer groups and compare enrollment, retention, graduation, finance, and faculty with the federal source and year shown on every figure.

Yes. Clema has built-in federal datasets including Pell Grant, Cohort Default Rate, PSEO, and College Scorecard, so enrollment and aid questions can pull public and private data in one conversation.

No. Clema doesn't replace your SEM plan or your existing forecasting methodology, it runs those models faster and makes the outputs queryable in plain English. If your team already has a validated forecasting approach, Clema can execute it on live data and let you interrogate the drivers; it doesn't impose a black-box model in place of judgment your team already trusts.

Student-level data, including Pell status, financial aid detail, and academic records, stays governed by your institution's existing access controls and FERPA obligations. Clema is built with SOC 2 and FERPA compliance as a baseline, and every query respects the same role-based permissions your team already has in the source systems, so a query never surfaces data a user wasn't already entitled to see.

Clema connects to your SIS, data warehouse, and BI layer, along with public federal datasets like IPEDS, College Scorecard, Pell, EADA, PSEO, and Cohort Default Rate, so answers reflect current data rather than a quarterly extract. The exact refresh cadence depends on how your systems sync to the underlying warehouse, which your IR/IT team controls.

Yes. Every answer Clema gives is sourced: it shows the dataset, the year or term, and the methodology behind the figure, the same audit trail an IR analyst would document by hand. That matters for board reporting and accreditation self-studies, where a number without a traceable source gets challenged.

Onboarding timing depends on your data infrastructure, but institutions typically plan a setup window ahead of one of the three peak reporting months (September, January, May) rather than during one. Talk to your IR/IE team and book a demo to scope a realistic timeline against your next census, aid-packaging, or yield-reporting cycle.

Pricing is published and free to start. The Free plan is $0 forever and includes 20 AI conversations a month for one user; Pro is $99 per month and Max is $299 per month, both available monthly or annually with two months free. Enterprise is custom annual pricing for institution-wide rollouts. Book a demo for a plan scoped to your team's size and data footprint.

Get started

Answer your enrollment questions in minutes

Book a demo with enrollment scenarios, or start free on your data.