The report examines the SIS choices higher education institutions made in 2012 and in previous years to illustrate emerging technology selection patterns. With this report, higher education institutions considering acquiring a new SIS are able to know the SIS preferences of their peer institutions as well as the key issues involved in their acquisition decision processes.

1. 2013
Student Information Systems
U.S. Higher Education Market
Share,Trends and Leaders
Report Date: April 2013
By Vicki Tambellini and Mary Beth Cahill
The Tambellini Group, LLC
Copy Licensed to Higher Education Employee Only. Unauthorized Distribution Prohibited.

2. Copyright 2013 The Tambellini Group, LLC All rights reserved.
Contents
Acknowledgements......................................................................................................................................................................1
Executive Summary.....................................................................................................................................................................2
TTG Higher Education Market Definition...............................................................................................................................4
U.S. Higher Education Market Overview.................................................................................................................................5
Market Trends for SIS 2012 Purchases......................................................................................................................................6
Making a Vendor Selection.......................................................................................................................................................10
U.S. Higher Education 2012 Vendor Market Share...............................................................................................................11
SIS Vendor Market Share...........................................................................................................................................................11
SIS Selection by Institution Size...............................................................................................................................................14
SIS Selection by Institution Type..............................................................................................................................................18
SIS Total Market Share by Institution Type............................................................................................................................21
SIS Vendor Trends and Roadmaps...........................................................................................................................................24.
Campus Management Corporation...................................................................................................................................25
Ellucian...................................................................................................................................................................................27
Jenzabar..................................................................................................................................................................................29
Oracle.....................................................................................................................................................................................31
RJM SONISWEB...................................................................................................................................................................32
Three Rivers Systems............................................................................................................................................................34
Companies to Watch in 2013 and Beyond..............................................................................................................................36
Amperea ampEducator........................................................................................................................................................36
FAME......................................................................................................................................................................................37
Unit4 Agresso Education.....................................................................................................................................................38
Workday.................................................................................................................................................................................39
U.S. Higher Education Technology: 2013 and Beyond.........................................................................................................40
Cloud Computing......................................................................................................................................................................41
Mobile Computing.....................................................................................................................................................................44
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)..............................................................................................................................45
Appendix.....................................................................................................................................................................................46
Methodology...........................................................................................................................................................................46
About the Authors..................................................................................................................................................................47
About The Tambellini Group, LLC.......................................................................................................................................47
Pricing Information................................................................................................................................................................48
Copyright and Terms of Use.................................................................................................................................................50
List of References....................................................................................................................................................................50
2013 Student Information Systems U.S. Higher Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders

3. Copyright 2013 The Tambellini Group, LLC All rights reserved.
2013 Student Information Systems U.S. Higher Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders
1
The authors gratefully acknowledge the editorial
contributions of Katelyn Tambellini, who reviewed and
edited the report in the context of her vast knowledge of
the Education Information Technology Profile Database™,
technical writing, publishing and education technology. Her
edits and insights are appreciated.
The authors would also like to thank each of the vendors
covered in the 2013 report. Every vendor provided detailed
information and responsive answers to our questions.
Additionally, the vendors provided feedback for their
summary sections to ensure an accurate portrayal of their
solution.
This report would not be possible without the support
of our market research team, data analysts and staff. The
cover design and creative layout is by Lisa Mott. Every
effort is made to provide accurate and timely information.
The authors acknowledge that institutions make it possible
for us to report our findings by answering our surveys
and providing interviews. We thank everyone who has
participated in making this major report available.
Acknowledgements

4. Copyright 2013 The Tambellini Group, LLC All rights reserved.
2013 Student Information Systems U.S. Higher Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders
2
The U.S. student information systems (SIS) market continues
to shift in an effort to accommodate the changing needs of
higher education institutions and their constituents. Key
themes driving 2012 SIS procurements were automation,
centralized processing, self-service and managing long-term
costs. Institutions are seeking to automate business processes,
centralize enterprise-wide software solutions and provide the
capability for students, faculty, parents and administrators to
do as much as possible via self-service. Costs associated with
aging systems and systems that have been heavily customized
are being targeted for reduction. This report is a cumulative
report that provides a detailed overview of the higher
education student information systems (SIS) market within
the U.S.
The goal of the Student Information Systems U.S. Higher
Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders report series
is to convey important market research about vendors
providing SIS software solutions and services. We provide
this information to better inform higher education
institutions’ SIS purchasing and implementation decisions.
There is a scarce amount of resources dedicated to presenting
and analyzing specific SIS vendor selections made by
institutions. As a result, institutions must fend for themselves
to discern one SIS vendor from another in an industry
where it can be challenging to make distinctions between
vendors due to similar marketing. With that in mind, The
Tambellini Group (TTG) created this series of reports to
provide institutions with critical overviews of SIS vendors
and selections made by institutions (that are not available
elsewhere in this level of detail). The report analyzes a vast
and complex set of data, making it accessible and easier to
digest. A summary for each SIS vendor focuses on vendor-
specific strengths.
Additionally, the report examines the SIS choices higher
education institutions have made in recent years in order
to illuminate emerging selection patterns. TTG’s extensive
research captures the key aspects of this SIS selection process,
including institution type, institution size, systems replaced
and SIS add-on solutions. Higher education institutions
use this report as a valuable resource to evaluate SIS trends
and vendors before making SIS selections. Institutions
also use this report to better understand the choices that
peer institutions make by institution size and type. The
report answers questions such as, “What SIS solutions are
selected most often in private, not-for-profit institutions
with enrollment between 5,000 and 9,999 students.” Vendors
refer to this report when meeting with higher education
institutions. TTG’s unbiased market research and transparent
presentation of decisions made by institutions, provide
information relating to all vendors institutions are selecting.
Finally, vendors use this report to discover market trends and
to help inform product and marketing decisions.
The focus of this report is the 2012 SIS landscape, market
share and trends, emerging technologies, and a review of SIS
vendors selected most often by institutions in the U.S. The
SIS data points analyzed in this report are derived from the
TTG Education Institution Technology Profile Database™,
which is the world’s most comprehensive catalog of over
51,300 education technology selections made by institutions
worldwide. The Education Institution Technology Profile
Database™ contains validated SIS records for more than
5,400 U.S. higher education institutions, which includes
both accredited and non-accredited schools that span all
institution types: public institutions, private, not-for-profit
institutions, and private, for-profit institutions. The total size
of the Education Institution Technology Profile Database™
exceeds 18,100 global institutions, including categories
such as most recent systems selected for human resources,
financial systems, learning management systems, CRM,
student success, advancement/alumni systems, student/
faculty/staff email, library systems, and more.
Executive Summary
“ Institutions may use this
report to easily determine
the vendor SIS solutions
most often selected by
other, similar institutions.”

5. Copyright 2013 The Tambellini Group, LLC All rights reserved.
2013 Student Information Systems U.S. Higher Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders
3
The TTG 2012 SIS Market Trends Report identifies and
explores the following major points:
• U.S. higher education SIS selections are trending away from
public institution toward private institutions.
• U.S. Higher education SIS selections are trending toward
institutions that have enrollments of less than 2,500
students.
• In 2012 the fastest growing segments of the higher
education market are private, for-profit, and private,
not-for-profit institutions.
• The SIS market for software systems developed to run in a
client-server or hosted environment has reached a mature
state.
• Vendor preferences are clearly defined by market sectors
and institution enrollment size.
• With the expansive growth of continuing education,
workforce development programs, and distance learning,
the landscape within higher education is shifting away
from a primarily traditional learner environment.
Some of the most critical findings in this report depict major
changes in the 2012 vendor landscape. Campus Management
amassed approximately 36% of the total SIS procurements
and was the leading vendor in 2012 with placements in 13
institutions that span 52 campuses. Forty of the institutions
that selected Campus Management were private, for-profit
institutions. Fifty-two percent of the SIS institutions making
selections in 2012 were private, for-profit institutions. Niche
vendors captured 20% 2012 SIS market share, primarily in
the private, for-profit sector.
Ellucian (23%) was selected more than any other SIS vendor
in 2012 in traditional learning institutions, which include
private, not-for-profit, public- four-year, and public- two-year
institutions. Ellucian was followed by Oracle (21%), Campus
Management (17%) and Jenzabar (16%).
Eighty-two percent of the new SIS procurements in 2012
occurred in institutions with enrollments of less than 2,500
students. Campus Management (42%) took the lead in those
institutions that procured a SIS with enrollments of less than
2,500 students, followed by Ellucian (8%), Jenzabar (7.5%),
Three Rivers Systems (7.5%), and RJM Systems (5%). Niche
vendors garnered 28% of the institutions selecting an SIS
with enrollments of less than 2,500 students in 2012.
Oracle was the leading vendor in 2012 among institutions
with enrollments of 10,000 students and greater. While this
market comprised only 7% of the total 2012 SIS selections,
Oracle was awarded eighty-two percent of the SIS selections
in this size range.
Now in its fifth year, this annual report shows that the top
group of vendors selected by institutions each year is made
up of a core group of providers. Each year the top vendor for
the year is determined more by the number of institutions
that make decisions by size and type of institution than by
changes in vendor product or strategy. For example, in 2012
the majority of the decisions were made by institutions that
had less than 5,000 students, had requirements for term and
non-term based enrollment, required vendor implementation
and preferred a solution developed based on Microsoft
technologies. Many of the institutions were also for-profit.
Campus Management is most often selected by private, for-
profit institutions and easily maintains the position of market
share leader in that category. In 2012 top vendors Datatel
and SunGard Higher Education combined to form Ellucian.
Collectively, Ellucian SIS solutions are implemented at
more U.S. institutions than any other vendor. Banner by
Ellucian is selected more often than any other vendor SIS
solutions. While institutions of various sizes and types select
Oracle’s PeopleSoft SIS, Oracle is most often selected among
institutions with multiple entities and/or large student
enrollments.
The body of the report delves further into this research,
shedding light on the new product offerings, services, and
add-on products that have contributed to higher education
institutions’ SIS selections in 2012. Institutions can use
this report to easily determine the SIS solutions most often
selected by other, similar institutions.
Executive Summary (cont.)

6. Copyright 2013 The Tambellini Group, LLC All rights reserved.
2013 Student Information Systems U.S. Higher Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders
4
TTG’s definition of the U.S. higher education market includes
all accredited and unaccredited postsecondary institutions
and schools that span all institution types: public institutions,
private, not-for-profit institutions, and private, for-profit
institutions. The TTG Education Institution Technology
Profile Database™ is the world’s most comprehensive catalog
of over 18,100 worldwide institutions, including 9,500 U.S.
education institutions. TTG currently has SIS data for more
than 5,300 U.S. higher education institutions. Figure 1 shows
the percentage of U.S. SIS institutions tracked by TTG by
sector of institution.
TTG Higher Education Market Definition
The TTG database includes institutions that are listed in
the Higher Education Publications, Inc. Higher Education
Directory (HED) and the U.S. Department of Education’s
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS),
as well as institutions that are not included by either of
these entities. While HED publishes the list of accredited
institutions, IPEDS gathers information from every college,
university, and technical and vocational institution that
participates in federal student financial aid programs.
The Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, requires
that institutions that participate in federal student aid
programs report data on enrollments, program completions,
graduation rates, faculty and staff, finances, institutional
prices, and student financial aid.
Higher education is in a constant state of transition with
ever-changing student expectations. Schools are starting to
deviate from the traditional learner model typically seen
in liberal arts schools to a more unconventional, career-
oriented approach that accommodates adult, working, and
underserved students. The proliferation of private, for-profit,
and less than two-year schools , coupled with changing
student needs, have had an impact on the U.S. higher
education landscape. Less than two-year schools are typically
non-degree granting schools that provide credit towards a
degree, or offer training and/or vocational programs that
facilitate gainful employment. Profit-driven educational
entities have become the fastest growing segment within
higher education. Generally, private, for-profit institutions
have experienced the most rapid enrollment growth.
According to a 2012 report by the National Conference of
State Legislatures, student enrollment at private, for-profit
institutions has increased 225% over the last two decades,
growing from 200,000 students in the late 1980s to 2.4
million students as of the 2010-2011 academic year.
Today, private, for-profit institutions enroll approximately
12% of the U.S. post-secondary student population. Private,
for-profit institutions are becoming more accepted as credible
and viable learning alternatives. They fulfill niche learning
markets that were not previously addressed by public and
private not-for-profit institutions.
Individuals interested in data from TTG are often reviewing
market opportunity, education trends, technology
adoption in higher education, and overall issues affecting
procurements and investments in technology related to
education of all types. As a result, the TTG Education
Institution Technology Profile Database™ includes all types of
institutions, regardless of size and accreditation status.
In addition to research reports, TTG uses research data
to inform education executives and to deliver individual
institution technology profiles to clients. Executives use
data to compare peer institution records, to educate boards,
trustees, and investors, and to reduce risk. Research is
conducted from the perspective of the institution decision-
maker and is developed to answer questions such as: Which
vendor solutions have my peers recently selected? and How
many other institutions with my basic institution profile have
made the decision that I am considering?
By monitoring the selections made by institutions of all sizes
and types, TTG is able to report on details unavailable from
any other source. For example, in addition to the selection
made by each institution, TTG tracks the vendor that was
replaced by the selection. Over time, reports are available
to indicate which vendor solution is most often selected
when a vendor is replaced. The TTG Education Institution
Technology Profile Database™ is updated on a daily basis, so
report results and comparisons are subject to change as new
information is validated and recorded.
Figure 1: Percentage of TTG SIS Institutions
by Sector of Institution

7. Copyright 2013 The Tambellini Group, LLC All rights reserved.
2013 Student Information Systems U.S. Higher Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders
5
U.S. Higher Education Market Overview
According to the U.S. National Center for Education
Statistics (NCES), student enrollment in degree-granting
post-secondary institutions reached a record high of
21.6 million students1
in 2012. This represents a marked
increase in student enrollment of about 6.2 million
students, as compared to the fall of 2000. The increase in
college enrollment can be attributed to both an increase in
the traditional college age student population and rising
enrollment rates1
. Table 1 depicts the estimated 2012 student
enrollment by institution type.
Table 1: Estimated 2012 Student Enrollment by Institution Type
Source: NCES
According to the NCES, student enrollment in degree-
granting post-secondary institutions increased by 37%
between the years 2000 and 2010, from 15.3 million
students to 21.0 million students respectively. A majority
of this growth is attributed to a 45% increase in full-time
student enrollment and a 26% increase in part-time student
enrollment. In addition to degree-granting postsecondary
institutions, about 539,000 students attended non-degree
granting, Title IV eligible, postsecondary institutions in 2009.
Research shows that this number continued to increase in
years 2010 through 2012. Non-degree granting institutions
typically offer career and technical curriculums that are two
years or less in duration2
.
The Student Clearinghouse estimates that between 33%
and 38% of the students enrolled in U.S. higher education
institutions are adult learners, and that this percentage
is expected to increase by an additional 20% by the year
20193
. Adult, non-traditional students are classified as
undergraduate or graduate students who are 25 years of age
or older, attend school on a part-time basis, are financially
independent, and/or are likely to have jobs. The Lumina
Foundation has reported that there are an estimated 37
million Americans who have previously attended a higher
education institution but have not earned a degree. This
equates to about 22% of the work force between the ages of
25 and 64 years.
Private, for-profit institutions are one of the fastest growing
sectors within higher education. TTG research shows that
52% of the SIS selections in 2012 were made by private,
for-profit institutions, with 39% represented by private, non-
degree granting postsecondary schools. Learning programs
that accommodate continuing education and career and
workforce development continued to gain popularity in
2012. Online education represented another growth area in
higher education in 2012. Overall, SIS activity in non-degree
granting postsecondary schools and community colleges
exceeded that of public and private, four-year institutions by
eight percent.
Public 2-Year
7.4 million
Public 2-Year
7.4 million
Public 4-Year
8.1 million
Private 4-Year
5.6 million
“ TTG research shows that
52% of the SIS selections
in 2012 were made
by private, for-profit
institutions, with 39%
represented by private,
non-degree granting
postsecondary schools.”