Segments
Your sector median is the only benchmark worth using.
Retention and engagement work differently at a community college, a regional public, a private four-year, and a distance-heavy program. This cluster covers each on its own terms: federal benchmarks, the constraints that actually bind, and where a National Society of Leadership and Success (NSLS) chapter fits.
Where you stand
Median full-time retention by sector
These are medians across institutions, computed from federal IPEDS data, the fall 2022 cohort returning in fall 2023. They are the comparison worth making, because the spread between sectors is wider than almost any difference a single program will produce.
| Sector (IPEDS control × level) | Institutions | Median retention |
|---|---|---|
| Private nonprofit, 4-year | 1,240 | 77.0% |
| Public, 4-year | 646 | 75.0% |
| All degree-granting | 3,296 | 71.0% |
| Private for-profit, 4-year | 182 | 64.0% |
| Public, 2-year | 793 | 63.0% |
Source: IPEDS EF2023D, full-time retention, fall 2022 cohort returning fall 2023. Federal data, cited as IPEDS, not an NSLS figure.
Pick your segment
Five institutional contexts
The first three follow the IPEDS control-and-level vocabulary. The last two cut across it, because a distance-heavy program and a commuter campus face constraints that sector alone does not predict.
Public, 2-year
Community colleges
A 63% median retention rate, a mostly part-time and commuting student body, and transfer-out students who count against the number you report.
Public, 4-year
Four-year publics
A 75% median, scale that makes engagement uneven rather than absent, and a retention number tied directly to enrollment and state funding.
Private nonprofit, 4-year
Private colleges
The highest sector median at 77%, which is exactly what makes further gains hard, and why every retained student is a net tuition line.
Any control · high exclusively-distance or age-25+ share
Online and adult learners
The population federal retention reporting barely covers, and the one where belonging has to be built without a campus.
Any control or level · low residential share
Commuter campuses
Students who are on site only for class, evening programming that nobody attends, and no residence life to carry engagement.
The framing problem
Averages invite the wrong argument
Benchmark conversations stall in a predictable way. Present a national average and the room splits between the people who feel unfairly judged and the people who feel falsely reassured. Neither group leaves with a decision.
Concrete peers work better. "793 public two-year institutions report on this same measure, and the middle of that group sits at 63 percent" is a claim someone can check, argue with, and act on. It names the comparison group instead of implying a ranking.
The same logic applies to program evidence. An 81 percent retention figure from a community college tells a private four-year almost nothing, and a private four-year's 95 percent tells an open-access institution less than nothing. It invites the entirely reasonable response that those are different students. Which is why the case studies below are labeled by segment rather than presented as a single body of proof.
Proof by segment
Published outcomes, labeled by institution type
Each rests on a single published sentence from the NSLS, and each case study sets out what its figure measures and how to present it on your own campus.
Delgado Community College
Public, 2-year
semester-to-semester retention among inducted students
St. Petersburg College
Public, 4-year
above the college-wide retention rate, for 24 members of a one-campus pilot
Merrimack College
Private nonprofit, 4-year
retention among students who joined the NSLS
William Paterson University
Public, 4-year
new members inducted in spring 2022 after a chapter turnaround
Talk through your campus goals
Explore the program, responsibilities, and next steps with our partnerships team.
Questions about institution type
Why does institution type change how retention should be read?
Because the sector medians are far apart. Median full-time retention is 77.0% at private nonprofit four-year institutions, 75.0% at public four-year institutions and 63.0% at public two-year institutions, against 71.0% across all degree-granting institutions (IPEDS, Fall 2023, the fall 2022 cohort returning in fall 2023). A 68% rate is a serious problem at a selective private college and a strong result at an open-access community college, so comparing any institution to a national average produces misleading conclusions in both directions.
What is the retention gap between community colleges and private four-year colleges?
Fourteen percentage points. The median full-time retention rate is 63.0% across 793 public two-year institutions and 77.0% across 1,240 private nonprofit four-year institutions, based on the fall 2022 cohort returning in fall 2023 (IPEDS EF2023D). The gap reflects structural differences in enrollment intensity, work hours, and transfer behavior rather than differences in student ambition.
How does the NSLS segment institutions?
By the same variables an institutional researcher already uses: control, level, and size, as defined in the federal IPEDS data. Control means public, private nonprofit, or private for-profit. Level means two-year or four-year. Size is total enrollment. Two further IPEDS variables matter for programming decisions: the share of students enrolled exclusively at a distance, and the share aged 25 or older.
Does the NSLS program work the same way at every institution type?
The program itself is the same: students are nominated by their campus, then complete orientation, a two-hour Leadership Training Day, three Speaker Broadcasts, three Success Networking Team meetings, and induction, which usually takes place in a ceremony. What differs is delivery and timing. The program is available in person, virtually, and fully asynchronously, which is what lets a residential campus run evening sessions while a commuter or distance population completes the same sequence around work schedules.
Which institution types have published NSLS retention outcomes?
Public two-year institutions, private nonprofit four-year institutions, and public four-year institutions each have at least one published outcome. Delgado Community College reported 81 percent semester-to-semester retention among students who earned induction. Merrimack reported retaining students who joined at 95 percent. At St. Petersburg College, 24 students invited to a one-campus pilot chapter were retained at a rate 37 percent above the college-wide rate. William Paterson University reported a chapter turnaround rather than a retention figure. The three retention figures measure different things: Delgado’s and St. Petersburg’s compare members with the institution’s overall rate (St. Petersburg’s for a small pilot group), and Merrimack’s has no comparison attached. Students chose to join in every case, so selection effects are part of each result.
What determines whether a chapter is viable on a given campus?
Cohort size each term, rather than headline enrollment. The NSLS FAQ states that students are nominated by their campus and that nomination typically reaches less than five percent of the student population, so the practical question is whether that share produces enough members each term to sustain Success Networking Teams and a student executive board. There are more than 800 chapters across the US, and the NSLS also operates a National Online Chapter that serves students at institutions without a chapter of their own.
Sources. Sector retention medians and institution counts: IPEDS EF2023D, full-time retention, fall 2022 cohort returning fall 2023, federal data attributed to IPEDS and not to the NSLS. Program structure, delivery formats, and the five-step member journey: nsls.org/faq and info.nsls.org/our-program. Named institutional outcomes: info.nsls.org/our-program. Each case study sets out what its figure covers.