It’s 7 p.m. the night before your committee meeting, and the dean just asked for yield broken out by source. Someone on your team is about to spend the evening building admissions reports from scratch, one spreadsheet tab at a time.
If a report takes a week to build, you’re not reporting, you’re excavating. Below are ten reports your office should be able to pull easily and quickly.
“One click” isn’t about laziness. It’s about trust and timing. A number you can pull in a minute gets checked, questioned, and acted on. A number that takes three days arrives after the decision it was supposed to inform.
Here’s the list, grouped by the question each report answers.
These tell you where applicants are, and where you’re losing them.
Every stage, every drop-off, in one view. You should be able to see where interest turns into applications, and where applications turn into enrolled students. If the biggest leak is between “started” and “submitted,” that’s a very different problem than a leak at the offer stage.
Who’s complete, who’s waiting on a transcript, who’s waiting on you? This is the report your team checks daily during peak season. It should never require a manual export.
For schools who use our Prospect Module, it’s easy to determine which feeder schools, pathway programs, and recruitment events produce applicants who actually enroll. Not just applicants. Enrolled students. That distinction decides where next year’s travel budget goes.
These keep the middle of your cycle from turning into a scheduling puzzle.
How many slots do you have, how many are filled, and how many invited candidates haven’t responded? You want to see this before you’re short on interview days, not after.
Who has reviewed how many files, and how do their scores compare? A reviewer who scores every file a full point lower than their colleagues isn’t wrong, necessarily. But you’ll want to know. This report protects both your process and your reviewers.
This is where the numbers get personal, because the class is the product.
Offers out, acceptances in, deposits received, waitlist movement. Your yield rate shifts daily in the spring, and your decisions should shift with it.
Where is the incoming class compared to the profile you set? That might mean academic metrics, geography, or the mix of backgrounds and experiences you’re building toward. Seeing the gap early gives you room to act on it.
Who’s applying, who’s advancing, and where does the pool narrow? You can’t fix a drop-off you can’t see.
The least glamorous reports, and the ones people regret not having.
If your office supports advising, you should see who’s working with how many students, and which students haven’t been contacted in a while. The quiet ones are usually the ones who need a nudge.
Accreditation reviews and leadership reporting shouldn’t mean scrambling for data. Whether you’re preparing for LCME, COCA, ARC-PA, CODA, or another accrediting body, you should be able to export clean, consistent records that document your processes, support reporting requirements, and simplify internal reviews.
Run this check on each of the ten reports above:
Any “no” means you’ve found a report that’s costing you more than it looks like.
Pick the three reports from this list that hurt most to build right now. Time them next cycle, including the “can you just fix this one thing” detours. That number is your case for finding a new tool with better reporting capabilities.
And if you’d like to see what these admissions reports look like when they really are one click away, schedule a one-on-one demo with our team!