Ending Summer Melt: A Data-Driven Playbook for Enrollment Leaders

They were admitted. They celebrated with their families. They even picked out residence hall bedding. But somehow, between decision day and move-in, thousands of students never showed up. Summer melt, the phenomenon when admitted students fail to actually enroll, is a silent crisis in higher education and one of the most difficult to predict. Its impacts fall hardest on those we most aspire to support: first-generation and underserved students.

What is summer melt? It’s more than an administrative hiccup. It’s a critical moment of disconnection. And for many institutions, it’s the difference between meeting enrollment goals and falling short. In my work across campuses, I’ve seen how the final stretch of the admissions funnel—so often overlooked—is where a great deal of equity work begins or ends.

Summer melt remains frustratingly persistent. Pandemic disruptions, FAFSA processing delays, and policy shifts have all added volatility in recent years. But melt predates these events. Research from the American Educational Research Association (AERA) suggests that more than 1 in 10 students nationally experience summer melt, with much higher rates among graduates of large, low-income, urban school districts (Miller et al., 2024).

Even when the broader context is stable, many institutions simply lack the tools or the time to proactively track admitted students once they’ve deposited. That final yield stage, when students drift off and disappear, is often treated reactively rather than as an essential component of modern enrollment marketing strategies.

From an equity lens, that’s especially concerning. Students who lack college-educated parents or institutional trust are more likely to stall out during the summer months. They may be juggling work, caring for siblings, navigating unclear financial aid steps, or simply not feeling “seen” by the institution that accepted them. In fact, 28% of first-generation students reported not feeling mentally prepared for college in 2024, underscoring just how much emotional readiness can influence the path to enrollment (Rhyneer, 2024).

Each student who doesn’t make it to campus represents a future reimagined—an educational path paused before it could begin, and potential left unrealized.

Too often, institutions analyze melt data only after students fail to matriculate. This retrospective approach, at best, yields surface-level insights. The more effective path starts earlier, by identifying patterns and behaviors that flag melt risk in real time.

Certain data signals are especially telling. These include delayed housing deposits, missed orientation steps, changes in communication patterns, and lack of engagement with next-step messaging. When tracked across multiple cycles and mapped to outcomes, these signals create powerful predictive models that are unique to each campus.

More advanced institutions are now layering in prescriptive analytics to move beyond identification to intervention. If a student is flagged as high-risk based on specific behavior, the system can recommend messaging or outreach that’s most likely to influence enrollment. This is not about automation for automation’s sake; it’s about precision and timely action by reaching the right student, at the right time, with the right message.

Personalized communication plays an essential role in reducing summer melt, as mass messaging has been shown to be less effective, especially deep into the recruitment cycle. Today’s students are hyper-aware of generic outreach. They expect messages that reflect their interests, timelines, and intent, especially once they’ve been admitted.

A growing body of research supports this targeted approach. For example, the AERA study found that low-income and first-generation students who received personalized text message reminders about college deadlines were more likely to enroll that fall. This type of timely, relevant messaging plays a critical role in keeping students on track.

I often use a fishing metaphor: If admissions is the net that pulls students toward your institution, summer melt is the space between catching them and getting them into the boat. It’s not enough to bring them close; you need to guide them aboard.

Yield-focused micro-campaigns are one of the most effective tools for driving student conversion in that critical post-admit phase. These might include personalized text nudges, advisor outreach, program-specific emails, or targeted social media content. The key is relevance—reminding students why they applied, showing them what awaits, and reinforcing that they belong.

Reducing melt can’t be only the role of the Admissions office. As students move from admit to enrolled, multiple campus offices come into play: financial aid, housing, academic advising, student success. Without coordination, the result is often a flood of disconnected, task-driven emails that overwhelm students and don’t inspire follow-through.

To build continuity, institutions need cross-functional strategies that reflect a shared goal: guiding students all the way to day one. That means aligning messaging, sharing data, and co-owning the transition. It also means treating students as whole people, not as handoffs from one office to the next.

The most effective strategies I’ve seen take a lifecycle approach, where the student journey is mapped from interest to enrollment and supported at every step by coordinated, student-centered communication. Advanced systems even tailor outreach based on behavioral insights, ensuring that each message is both timely and personally relevant.

Behind all the metrics and tactics lies a fundamental truth: Students need to feel like they matter. Trust isn’t a luxury; it’s a conversion strategy. Particularly for students from marginalized backgrounds, summer melt is often less about logistics and more about uncertainty and second guessing. It’s about affordability, readiness, and whether they’ll truly be welcomed and find belonging on campus.

Institutions that effectively prevent melt build trust in deliberate ways, prioritizing authentic student engagement rather than relying solely on transactional outreach. They use their data not to generalize, but to personalize. They recognize that one-size-fits-all messaging rarely fits anyone ever, especially in the final stages, as the handoffs from admissions to other offices become necessary. And they commit to making every student feel like the institution is better with them there.

This kind of belonging doesn’t happen by accident. It requires insight into student behavior and barriers. It demands collaboration across offices. And it calls for sustained investment in technologies that support personalized outreach.

Summer melt isn’t merely an end-stage issue. The groundwork for prevention is laid much earlier in the recruitment cycle. Institutions that adopt a full-cycle approach to strategic enrollment management, supported by predictive and prescriptive analytics, can spot melt risk months in advance and act accordingly.

By combining real-time data with flexible outreach strategies, campuses can transform melt mitigation from a year-end scramble into a managed, trackable process that often stops the problem before it even starts. They can support students not only to the point of admission, but through the often-overlooked months that follow.

Summer melt prevention isn’t just about enrollment metrics; it reflects how deeply an institution understands and supports its students. With early insight, coordinated action, and trust-driven communication, colleges can ensure that admission isn’t the end of the journey—it’s just the beginning.

1. Track Early Signals. Monitor student behavior for risk flags like delayed deposits, missed orientation steps, or communication drop-off.
2. Personalize Outreach. Send timely, relevant nudges—texts, social posts, advisor check-ins—tailored to individual student intent and needs.
3. Align Campus Support. Coordinate messaging across admissions, financial aid, housing, and advising to give students a seamless experience and reduce confusion.

References:

Miller, C. E., Phillips, M., & Ahearn, C. E. (2024). Leaks in the college access pipeline: Examining summer melt in a large urban school district. AERA Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584241278314

Rhyneer, M. (2024, February 1). “Move‑in melt” is on the rise: Why it’s happening and 3 strategies to fight it. EAB Enrollment Blog. https://eab.com/resources/blog/enrollment-blog/move-in-melt-is-on-the-rise-why-its-happening-and-3-strategies-to-fight-it/