<h2>How to Use This Audit</h2>
<p>Work through each dimension before your summer planning meetings begin. Score every indicator honestly: a score of 1 means this is not in place; 2 means it exists but inconsistently; 3 means it is designed, documented, and delivered reliably. Add your scores at the end of each dimension to find your total. Use the scoring guide at the bottom to identify your priority areas for this planning cycle.</p>
<p>This audit is designed to be completed by the orientation director, ideally with input from one or two staff members who were on the ground during last year's programme. Budget 45 to 60 minutes.</p>
<h2>Dimension 1: Orientation Participation and Follow-Through</h2>
<p>Registration numbers are not the same as participation. This dimension asks whether your programme design actually converts enrolled students into active, present, follow-through participants across the full orientation experience, not just day one.</p>
<h3>Score each indicator 1, 2, or 3</h3>
<ul>
<li>We have a clear definition of what "full participation" means in our orientation programme, and it is communicated to students before they arrive. (1 = not defined / 2 = defined but not communicated / 3 = defined, communicated, and tracked)</li>
<li>Our programme includes structured follow-through mechanisms, such as required sessions, check-in points, or peer accountability, that extend beyond the first day. (1 = day one only / 2 = some structure beyond day one / 3 = structured follow-through across the full programme)</li>
<li>We have a process for identifying students who register but do not attend, or who attend day one but do not return, and a protocol for reaching out to them. (1 = no process / 2 = ad hoc / 3 = systematic and documented)</li>
<li>Our orientation schedule is designed so that mandatory and high-value sessions are distributed across the programme, not front-loaded into the first morning. (1 = heavily front-loaded / 2 = partially distributed / 3 = intentionally distributed with rationale)</li>
<li>We use attendance or engagement data from previous years to redesign sessions that historically saw drop-off. (1 = no data used / 2 = data exists but not used in design / 3 = data actively informs session design each cycle)</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Dimension 1 score: ___ / 15</strong></p>
<h2>Dimension 2: Belonging and Connection in the First Six Weeks</h2>
<p>Belonging does not happen automatically because students arrive on campus. It happens because programmes are designed to create it. This dimension asks whether your orientation and Welcome Week programme actively builds the conditions for belonging, or whether it assumes belonging will follow from information delivery alone.</p>
<h3>Score each indicator 1, 2, or 3</h3>
<ul>
<li>Our orientation programme includes structured peer-to-peer connection opportunities that go beyond large-group icebreakers. Small group meals, residential life meet-ups, interest-based breakout sessions, or similar. (1 = large group only / 2 = some small-group moments / 3 = multiple designed connection touchpoints)</li>
<li>Students are introduced to at least two named, accessible staff or faculty members during orientation who they can contact directly in the first six weeks. Not a general "office hours" prompt, but a named person with a clear entry point. (1 = no named person / 2 = introduced but not made accessible / 3 = named, introduced, and contact clearly provided)</li>
<li>Our programme explicitly addresses what to do if a student feels lost, overwhelmed, or disconnected in the first weeks. This is not buried in a handbook; it is said out loud in at least one session. (1 = not addressed / 2 = in materials only / 3 = spoken explicitly in at least one session)</li>
<li>We have a structured touchpoint with first-year students in weeks two through six, beyond the orientation programme itself. A survey, a check-in event, a peer mentor contact, or similar. (1 = none / 2 = one touchpoint, not systematic / 3 = systematic, scheduled, and owned by a specific staff member)</li>
<li>Our Welcome Week programming is designed to serve students from a range of backgrounds, including first-generation students, commuter students, and students who do not fit the "typical" residential first-year profile. (1 = designed for residential traditional students only / 2 = some accommodation / 3 = intentionally inclusive design with specific programme elements)</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Dimension 2 score: ___ / 15</strong></p>
<h2>Dimension 3: Event Reach and Programme Awareness</h2>
<p>Running a well-designed event that students don't know about or can't navigate to is a planning failure, not a student failure. This dimension assesses whether your communication and event infrastructure reliably gets information into students' hands in a form they can act on.</p>
<h3>Score each indicator 1, 2, or 3</h3>
<ul>
<li>Students receive their complete orientation schedule in a format they can access on their phone, not just as an email attachment or a PDF link on a portal. (1 = PDF or portal only / 2 = mobile-accessible but not optimised / 3 = mobile-native, easy to navigate, and updated in real time)</li>
<li>When session times, locations, or details change during orientation, we have a way to reach all students immediately without relying on them to check email or a website. (1 = email only / 2 = email plus one other channel / 3 = real-time push notification or equivalent)</li>
<li>Our event promotion for the first six weeks of the semester reaches students through at least two channels beyond email, and at least one of those channels is where students actually spend time rather than where we wish they did. (1 = email only / 2 = two channels including one student-native / 3 = three or more channels, student-native primary)</li>
<li>Students can find a complete, accurate, and up-to-date calendar of first-year engagement events in one place, without needing to cross-reference multiple sources. (1 = no central calendar / 2 = central calendar exists but not reliably maintained / 3 = one source, accurate, accessible, and maintained)</li>
<li>We measure event awareness, not just attendance. We have at least a rough picture of how many students knew an event was happening but chose not to attend, versus how many simply did not know about it. (1 = attendance data only / 2 = informal awareness tracking / 3 = structured awareness data collected and used)</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Dimension 3 score: ___ / 15</strong></p>
<h2>Dimension 4: Communication Consistency Before Arrival</h2>
<p>The summer before orientation is when students make up their minds about whether they belong before they've ever set foot on campus. Consistent, well-timed communication during this window reduces melt and increases students' readiness to engage when they arrive.</p>
<h3>Score each indicator 1, 2, or 3</h3>
<ul>
<li>We have a documented summer communication calendar with defined send dates, responsible staff members, and approved content for each touchpoint between deposit and move-in. (1 = ad hoc / 2 = partially documented / 3 = fully documented, owned, and scheduled)</li>
<li>Our summer communication includes at least one message that is specifically designed to build excitement or anticipation for orientation, not just deliver logistical information. (1 = logistics only / 2 = one excitement-oriented message / 3 = multiple messages with clear tone variation across the timeline)</li>
<li>Students who have not completed required pre-orientation tasks, such as online modules, health forms, or housing assignments, receive targeted follow-up rather than the same general email the whole cohort receives. (1 = general emails only / 2 = some segmentation / 3 = targeted follow-up based on completion status)</li>
<li>Our summer communications are tested on mobile before sending. We know what our emails and messages look like on a phone screen, because that is where most students open them. (1 = not tested / 2 = occasionally tested / 3 = routinely tested and mobile-optimised)</li>
<li>We have a clear, simple, single point of contact students can reach during the summer if they have a question or concern, and that contact information appears in every message we send. (1 = no consistent contact provided / 2 = contact provided but inconsistent / 3 = same contact in every message, monitored and responsive)</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Dimension 4 score: ___ / 15</strong></p>
<h2>Dimension 5: Staff and Peer Leader Readiness</h2>
<p>The orientation director sets the strategy, but the people delivering the programme determine whether students feel welcomed or processed. This dimension assesses whether your staff and peer leaders are prepared to create genuine connection, not just execute a schedule.</p>
<h3>Score each indicator 1, 2, or 3</h3>
<ul>
<li>Peer leaders and orientation staff complete training that explicitly covers how to recognise a student who may be struggling to connect, and what to do when they see it. Not just emergency procedures, but early belonging signals. (1 = no belonging-specific training / 2 = covered briefly / 3 = dedicated session with clear protocols)</li>
<li>Staff and peer leaders know the three to five most common reasons first-year students disengage in the first six weeks at our institution specifically, based on data or structured feedback from previous years. (1 = not discussed / 2 = general awareness / 3 = institution-specific, data-informed awareness)</li>
<li>We have a clear protocol for what a peer leader or staff member should do if a student expresses homesickness, overwhelm, or disconnection during orientation or Welcome Week. The protocol is written down and practiced before the programme begins. (1 = no protocol / 2 = verbal guidance only / 3 = written, practiced, and available during the programme)</li>
<li>The ratio of peer leaders or staff to first-year students in small-group settings during orientation allows for genuine conversation, not just crowd management. (1 = ratio too high for meaningful interaction / 2 = manageable but stretched / 3 = intentionally designed for relationship-building)</li>
<li>After the programme ends, we collect structured feedback from staff and peer leaders about what worked, what did not, and what they observed about student engagement. This feedback is documented and reviewed before planning begins for the following year. (1 = no debrief process / 2 = informal debrief / 3 = structured, documented, and used in future planning)</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Dimension 5 score: ___ / 15</strong></p>
<h2>Scoring Guide</h2>
<p>Add your five dimension scores together for your total out of 75.</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>60 to 75: Strong foundation.</strong> Your engagement plan is well-designed across most dimensions. Focus on the specific indicators where you scored 1 or 2 and build from there. Your priority this summer is refinement, not rebuilding.</li>
<li><strong>45 to 59: Solid in places, gaps worth addressing.</strong> You have real strengths to build on. Identify the two lowest-scoring dimensions and prioritise those in your summer planning. At least one of them likely has a direct line to your first-year retention data.</li>
<li><strong>30 to 44: Meaningful gaps present.</strong> Several dimensions need attention before this year's cohort arrives. Use your lowest scores to identify where to focus first. Consider which gaps are design issues you can address this cycle and which require longer-term resource investment.</li>
<li><strong>Below 30: Significant redesign needed.</strong> Your programme has structural gaps that are likely showing up in your engagement and retention data. This audit gives you a clear picture of where to start. Prioritise dimensions 2 and 3 first; belonging and reach are the fastest levers to pull in the short term.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Your Next Step: Turn Scores Into Actions</h2>
<p>For each dimension where you scored below 10, write down one specific thing you could change before this year's orientation begins. Not a goal. A change. A specific session redesigned, a protocol written, a communication calendar built. Small, concrete actions taken before students arrive compound into measurably better first-year experiences.</p>
<p>Bring this audit into your summer planning meeting. Walk your team through the scores dimension by dimension. The conversation it starts is at least as valuable as the document itself.</p>
<h2>Run It All From One Place</h2>
<p>If your audit surfaced gaps in event reach, communication consistency, or participation follow-through, those are exactly the problems a well-designed orientation app addresses. Guidebook gives orientation teams a mobile-native platform that puts schedules, maps, push notifications, and engagement tracking in one place, without involving IT or waiting on a developer.</p>
<p><a href="https://guidebook.com/edu">See how Guidebook works →</a></p>
.svg)
