Retention & Attrition

You're interviewing families who left. But what if they don't want to talk to you? How do you get them on the phone?

​

We work with your Head of School or advancement director to identify families who left in the past 2-3 years. You send them a warm invitation:

"We're doing some listening with families to improve the experience. Would you spend 30 minutes confidentially sharing your experience?"

About 60-70% respond. Families appreciate being asked genuinely—they're rarely asked. We've done this across 15+ schools and built protocols that work.

​

How do you synthesize 50+ interviews into patterns? What's your methodology?

​

We conduct 20-80 interviews (30-45 minutes each), depending on scope. We record and transcribe them. Then we code for themes—not just "why did you leave?" but patterns in how families experienced the school.

For example: Some families say "academics were harder than expected," but we dig deeper. Was it a surprise? Did they see it coming? Did the school prepare them? From there, we identify 3-5 core themes and recommend institutional responses.

We're not counting complaints. We're looking for systemic patterns.

​

I already know why families leave (cost, academics, fit). Will your report just confirm what I already suspect?

​

Maybe. But here's what usually happens:

You think families leave for cost. We find that cost is the stated reason, but the real issue is that families felt unsupported or like an afterthought by March.

Or you think academics is the issue, but it's actually a mismatch between what you promised in admissions and what the experience actually is.

The diagnostic separates stated reasons from actual patterns. That distinction changes what you do next.

​

What actionable changes come out of this? Or is it just research?

​

You get research plus action plan. Here's the structure:

1. "Here's what we're hearing" - findings organized by pattern

2. "Here's why this matters" - pattern analysis

3. "Here's what we recommend" - specific institutional moves

Example: If the pattern is "families surprised by middle school rigor," we recommend:

• Refresh admissions messaging to set clearer academic expectations

• Add parent onboarding in June to prepare families

• Create peer mentor program for new 6th graders

• Midyear check-in with families to address confusion early

We don't just diagnose; we tell you what to do and why.

​

Timeline: How long does this actually take? Two weeks? Three months?

​

About 6-8 weeks from start to final report:

• Weeks 1-2: Conduct interviews

• Weeks 3-4: Synthesize findings and identify patterns

• Weeks 5-6: Write the report and recommendations

• Week 7: You get the report + a debrief call

You can start implementing recommendations immediately.

​

Can I combine this with the Enrollment Sprint, or do I have to choose?

​

You can combine them, but they're different work:

• Enrollment Sprint: "How do we get more families in the door?"

• Retention Diagnostic: "Why are families leaving once they're here?"

Some schools do enrollment first (get volume), then retention next year (keep volume). Others do retention first (if you're losing 20% of families, fix that before you recruit more).

Depends on your situation. We'd recommend starting with whichever addresses your most urgent problem.

​

Who do you interview? Just the families who left, or current families too?

​

Primarily families who've left—they have the clearest perspective on what didn't work. Depending on scope, we may also do brief listening with current families to understand what is working, so we can preserve those strengths while addressing the gaps.

​

What if families who left won't respond to the invitation?

​

That happens. About 60-70% respond, which usually gives us a strong sample. If you have 30 families who left and 18 respond, that's substantial. We can work with that.

We may also supplement with brief surveys for non-respondents, depending on your situation.

​

Do you share individual family feedback with my team?

​

No. We don't share individual stories or names. We code the interviews for themes and report patterns, not complaints. This protects family privacy and keeps the conversation institutional, not personal.

​

What if the patterns you find are things we can't change?

​

We focus on institutional patterns you can address. For example, if cost is the barrier and you can't lower tuition, we look at what cost reveals: Is it perceived value? Is it financial aid clarity? Is it how the school talks about affordability?

There are usually levers you can pull. We help identify which ones matter most.

​

Do you recommend specific staffing changes or budget reallocations?

​

We recommend institutional responses based on what we're hearing. That might include staffing, budget, programming, or communication changes. What you actually do is your call.

We're here to inform your decision-making, not to dictate it.

​

What happens if we disagree with your recommendations?

​

That's fine. The diagnostic is yours to use how you see fit. Some schools implement everything. Some implement selectively. Some use it to confirm what they already knew but didn't have evidence for.

We recommend what we think will move the needle based on what families told us. You decide.

​

Can we do this anonymously, without families knowing BLAC is involved?

​

Families will know someone external is doing the listening. We're transparent about that. But we don't position it as a "sales pitch" or mystery. We're straightforward: "We're doing some institutional listening to improve."

Families appreciate the directness.

​

How do we know if this is the right service for us?

​

You're a good fit if:

1. You're losing 10%+ of families year-over-year

2. You want to understand why, not just accept it

3. You're willing to hear honest feedback

4. You have leadership stable enough to implement changes

If you're unsure, book an Initial Assessment first. We'll recommend whether Retention Diagnostics is your priority.

​

How do I book?