GEM Horizons Webinar Rewind: Graduate Enrollment Management Pulse Check

Every fall, graduate enrollment management leaders ask the same questions: How’s everyone else doing? Are applications up? Are international numbers bouncing back? Are we finally getting some stability in our pipeline, or are we dealing with a new normal?

Liaison recently conducted a survey of graduate enrollment leaders to find out. The signals are strong, and they tell a story about a field that’s adapting, improvising, and maybe even getting a little scrappy again. During Graduate Enrollment Management Pulse Check, the latest installment in the NAGAP-Liaison GEM Horizons webinar series, speakers walked through what that data says—and where it doesn’t line up with the national headlines.

As Liaison Vice President for Graduate Enrollment Strategy Steve Taylor noted, the current environment is characterized by fragmented micro-markets, constrained resources, and persistent volatility. This session, which also featured insights from Liaison Client Success Director Kelly Sugrue and Old Dominion University Director of Graduate Admissions Bill Heffelfinger, explained what that entails for graduate education.

You can watch Graduate Enrollment Management Pulse Check on demand now.

The survey data revealed that 73% of participating programs enroll fewer than 500 students, often leaving small teams responsible for managing complex portfolios. Sugrue noted that in many cases, “one or two” individuals oversee dozens—or even hundreds—of graduate programs while striving to innovate under significant operational pressure. Heffelfinger illustrated this challenge at Old Dominion University, where a central admissions team of four supports approximately 3,000 graduate students across multiple units, including online, health sciences, and international populations.

Two practical approaches emerged:

• Centralization and automation | The Old Dominion team leverages a centralized IT-managed CRM team to implement filters and automation, reducing administrative burden. The guiding principle: Any process that can be automated or centralized should be.
• Strategic relationship-building | New leaders are encouraged to identify campus “connectors”—individuals with broad networks—and cultivate partnerships. Heffelfinger, for example, scheduled informal meetings with faculty to understand enrollment needs and foster collaboration. That, in turn, reinforced the importance of engaging peers across graduate units and participating in professional communities to avoid duplicating efforts.

A significant portion of respondents reported limited or uncertain marketing budgets, with the most common range falling below $50,000 for entire program or college portfolios. Sugrue noted that leadership often prioritizes short-term enrollment gains, making it difficult to invest in long-term brand-building initiatives that yield less immediate ROI. While institutions generally feel confident once applications are submitted, many struggle to generate awareness and inquiries at scale.

Recommended tactics include:

• Data-driven decision-making | Rather than repeating prior-year strategies, teams should analyze which channels and campaigns yield enrolled students—not merely clicks or inquiries.
• Leveraging low-cost resources | Maximize CRM-driven communication plans and personalization. Engage faculty, current students, and alumni in outreach, events, and referral initiatives.
• Innovation funding | Allocate a modest “innovation budget” to pilot new ideas through departmental proposals, funding those most likely to advance enrollment or strategic objectives.

Scholarship funding and tuition discounting emerged as areas of significant concern. Nearly two-thirds of respondents reported discount rates under 25%. On the other hand, some well-resourced private institutions are aggressively discounting, fueling a merit-aid arms race. Sugrue described a new reality: Strong domestic applicants increasingly negotiate awards and compare offers across institutions, behaviors that were once rare.

International markets present additional complexity. Historically robust regions are softening, while growth is concentrated in areas such as West Africa, where students often face financial constraints and visa challenges. Institutions that previously relied on full-pay international students now confront heightened financial and visa risk.

Heffelfinger shared an example from his large public R1 institution: Most master’s students pay full tuition, effectively subsidizing near-total support for Ph.D. students. Experiments with small “micro-scholarships” ($500–$1,000) yielded minimal impact, as many recipients indicated they would have enrolled regardless. One innovative approach under consideration involves allowing undergraduates who graduate early to apply unused institutional scholarship funds toward a graduate year at the same institution, transforming sunk costs into structured pathways.

Key takeaways for scholarship strategy include:

• Segmenting by program and population (domestic vs. international, high-capacity vs. constrained programs).
• Testing assumptions about discount sensitivity.
• Repurposing unused or inflexible funds creatively.

Only 3% of surveyed programs met all enrollment targets, and expectations for future cycles are evenly divided among growth, decline, and uncertainty. For many institutions, volatility is no longer an anomaly—it is the norm. Sugrue observed that traditional forecasting models, reliant on stable admit/yield rates and predictable pipelines, have eroded due to factors such as visa backlogs, policy shifts, affordability concerns, and last-minute enrollment decisions among part-time and online students.

Her recommendations include:

• Staying informed about regional policy and market developments.
• Tracking year-over-year data through a micro-market lens rather than assuming historical yield patterns will persist.
• Continuously educating leadership on pipeline realities versus inflated projections influenced by visa or financial risk.

Heffelfinger’s approach reflects these principles: He dedicates an hour daily to monitoring global news and policy updates, provides weekly briefings to his dean summarizing risks and opportunities, and cautions against premature optimism when application volumes spike. In response to unexpected disruptions—such as visa appointment collapses—he successfully advocated for real-time strategy adjustments, including admitting and funding additional domestic students to offset anticipated international shortfalls.

Across all themes—capacity, marketing, scholarships, and forecasting—a consistent message emerged: Navigating today’s environment requires more than national averages and intuition. Enrollment leaders need:

• Peer-level, program-specific data for accurate benchmarking.
• A collaborative community of practice, supported by tools such as Liaison GradCAS and associations like NAGAP.
• Leadership that recognizes success depends on numerous micro-strategies, each grounded in data and local context

As Taylor aptly noted, graduate enrollment is not merely about filling seats; it is about enrolling individuals who will make transformative contributions in their fields. That mission, even amid volatility, underscores the importance—and the value—of disciplined, data-informed strategy.

You can watch Graduate Enrollment Management Pulse Check on demand now.