SayPro Benchmarking Data

Graduation Rates

Institution	Program Focus	Graduation Rate (%)	Key Factors Impacting Graduation Rates
SayPro	Varied (Business, STEM, Education, etc.)	75%	– Needs more personalized student support. – Limited hands-on practical experiences.
Competitor A	Business & Management	85%	– Strong industry internships and leadership development programs. – Extensive career services and mentoring.
Competitor B	STEM (Engineering, CS)	78%	– Strong research opportunities. – Hands-on labs, but challenges with course load.
Competitor C	Healthcare (Nursing, Public Health)	82%	– Clinical rotations improve hands-on training. – Close ties with hospitals for practical experience.
Competitor D	Arts & Humanities	80%	– Strong focus on critical thinking and personalized advising. – Lower graduation due to job market challenges.
Competitor E	Education & Pedagogy	88%	– High job placement rate in education-related fields. – Robust curriculum development and classroom management training.

Analysis:

• SayPro’s graduation rate (75%) is slightly lower compared to competitors, particularly those like Competitor A (85%) and Competitor E (88%). This gap may be addressed by enhancing support systems, such as more internships, hands-on experiences, and academic advising.
• Competitor C (82%) and Competitor E (88%) show higher graduation rates, possibly due to their real-world experience components, like clinical rotations in healthcare and teaching practice in education programs.

---

2. Student Satisfaction

Institution	Program Focus	Student Satisfaction (%)	Key Satisfaction Drivers
SayPro	Varied (Business, STEM, Education, etc.)	78%	– Strong faculty but potential for more active learning opportunities. – Lack of career-prep resources.
Competitor A	Business & Management	85%	– Strong industry ties, internship programs, and career mentoring. – High levels of student engagement in capstone projects.
Competitor B	STEM (Engineering, CS)	82%	– High satisfaction with hands-on labs and industry placements. – Advanced learning tools but occasionally overwhelming workload.
Competitor C	Healthcare (Nursing, Public Health)	84%	– High satisfaction with clinical training. – Extensive faculty support and career services.
Competitor D	Arts & Humanities	80%	– Students appreciate the personalized attention and writing support. – Satisfaction drops due to limited post-graduation career opportunities.
Competitor E	Education & Pedagogy	87%	– High satisfaction with practical teaching assignments. – Effective integration of technology in classrooms.

Analysis:

• SayPro’s satisfaction rate (78%) is lower than Competitor E (87%) and Competitor A (85%). Competitors with high satisfaction scores benefit from extensive internship programs, career mentoring, and hands-on training (e.g., Competitor C in healthcare and Competitor A in business).
• The lack of career-prep services and practical learning opportunities could be contributing factors to SayPro’s lower satisfaction scores. Competitors like Competitor A (Business) and Competitor E (Education) demonstrate high satisfaction by offering practical career-building experiences and industry exposure.

---

3. Employment and Career Success

Institution	Program Focus	Employment Rate (%)	Average Time to Employment	Key Employment Drivers
SayPro	Varied (Business, STEM, Education, etc.)	80%	6-12 months	– Needs stronger industry partnerships and internship programs. – Less emphasis on career preparation services.
Competitor A	Business & Management	90%	4-6 months	– Strong business network and alumni connections. – Early industry immersion through internships.
Competitor B	STEM (Engineering, CS)	85%	6-12 months	– High demand for tech graduates. – Internship experience boosts employability.
Competitor C	Healthcare (Nursing, Public Health)	88%	3-6 months	– Close relationships with healthcare providers for clinical placements. – Strong job readiness programs.
Competitor D	Arts & Humanities	75%	12-18 months	– Employment is often in education or non-profit sectors. – Limited job market leads to longer search time.
Competitor E	Education & Pedagogy	85%	6 months	– Partnerships with K-12 schools and educational institutions for teaching placements. – High demand for qualified educators.

Analysis:

• SayPro’s employment rate (80%) is lower than Competitor A (90%) and Competitor C (88%), suggesting that while students graduate, they may not be as well-prepared or connected to industry networks.
• Competitor A (Business & Management) and Competitor C (Healthcare) demonstrate quick post-graduation employment due to strong industry connections and internship programs.
• SayPro could potentially improve by fostering stronger industry partnerships and career services for more direct entry into the job market.

---

4. Technology Usage and Integration

Institution	Program Focus	Technologies Used	Impact on Learning and Outcomes
SayPro	Varied (Business, STEM, Education, etc.)	– Canvas LMS, Zoom for online learning. – Basic course management tools.	– Limited technology integration could hinder engagement and learning outcomes.
Competitor A	Business & Management	– AI-powered LMS for personalized learning. – VR simulations for business strategy. – Gamified learning platforms.	– High engagement with interactive simulations and personalized learning paths.
Competitor B	STEM (Engineering, CS)	– Cloud-based tools (GitHub, AWS). – Robotics simulation. – Adaptive learning platforms.	– Strong focus on hands-on, real-world applications, enhancing practical learning and employability.
Competitor C	Healthcare (Nursing, Public Health)	– Telemedicine platforms for training. – EHR systems. – VR medical simulations.	– Effective integration of technology into clinical practice, improving training and job readiness.
Competitor D	Arts & Humanities	– Collaborative online tools (Google Docs, Slack). – Digital archives for research.	– Supports global collaboration and access to historical data for research.
Competitor E	Education & Pedagogy	– Google Classroom, EdTech tools (Kahoot, Nearpod). – Interactive whiteboards.	– Engaging classroom environment and effective technology integration for future educators.

Analysis:

• SayPro uses basic tools like Canvas LMS and Zoom, while competitors have advanced technologies such as AI-powered LMS (Competitor A) and VR simulations (Competitor B). These technologies promote greater engagement and personalized learning, which may help students achieve better outcomes.
• SayPro can improve by integrating more advanced learning technologies such as adaptive learning platforms, VR, and AI-driven personalization in order to remain competitive.

---