IMRA Logo
● Coach Survey Analytics

Weekly Coach Meeting Exit Tickets

Coach satisfaction, skill application, and qualitative feedback analysis across all coach roles — IMRA Cycle 2026.

Total Responses
1,550
Apr 1 – Jul 30, 2026
Overall Avg Score
9.33
Across all 3 metrics (0–10)
High Satisfaction
89.6%
All 3 scores ≥ 8
With Comments
416
27% response rate
Weeks of Data
17
Mar 30 – Jul 27, 2026
Resolved Flags
3
Cadence, overload, writing

Key Insights

✅
Feedback Loop Closed: Role Clarity Implemented
The clearest program responsiveness signal of the cycle. In 07/20, a Review Coach flagged that it wasn’t clear which role each task was for. In 07/27, two coaches independently praised the fix: “Thank you for updating the slideshow and including for which coach the information/task applies to” and “Thank you for making it clear what is specific to Reporting coaches vs. review!” Coach feedback was heard and acted on within one week.
📈
07/27 Recovery: 9.39 After Outage Dip
Quality coaches rebounded to 9.39 in 07/27 (Review 9.44, Reporting 9.31) — a meaningful recovery from the 07/13 outage-driven low of 9.14. The trend line shows the program’s resilience: every external disruption has been followed by a recovery. No Suitability session this week, so the four-week 10.0 streak holds as the final Suitability data point.
🙌
Gratitude Tone Sustained Through Final Weeks
07/27 comments are overwhelmingly warm: “Thank you for always answering our questions and offering help. I appreciate each of you!” and multiple unprompted thank-yous. The community signal (140 total mentions) has remained the most consistent positive throughout 17 weeks. This tone through the end of cycle is a meaningful program outcome.
⚖️
Standards Alignment: Active but Moving
SA confusion persists (8 total mentions, 5 in last 3 weeks), but 07/27 shows coaches taking action: “Our team is meeting tonight to vote on standards alignment to knock it out.” The confusion is real but coaches are now executing, not just asking. The guide requests are being partially addressed through facilitation and direct support.
📱
Dropdown UX: Small Fix, Big Impact for Mobile Users
07/27: “Can we PLEASE put our IDs in numerical order in the dropdown? When you are not on a laptop, you cannot search for your name or number by typing. You have to scroll until you find yourself.” A low-effort platform fix that would improve the experience for every mobile user submitting exit tickets. Worth flagging to the platform team.
🔁
Repeated Information Explicitly Valued
Two coaches in back-to-back weeks have specifically praised the practice of repeating key information: “Thank you for repeating information more than once. It truly is helpful” (07/20) and “Again, thank you for the repeats” (07/27). This is validation that the deliberate repetition strategy is working, especially for complex SA appeals content where coaches need multiple exposures.

Score Summary by Metric

MetricMeanMedian% Scoring ≥ 8Distribution
Objectives Met9.331091.9%
Apply Skills9.361091.9%
Met Needs9.291091.0%
Note: 4 straggler submissions from 06/29 (no formal session) excluded from all analysis.

Performance by Coach Role

Role Comparison

RolenObjectives MetApply SkillsMet NeedsOverall AvgRelative

What Coaches Are Saying By Role

🔍
Review Coaches
07/27 reflects a cohort moving toward closure with warmth. Coaches praised the role-clarity facilitation update, the SA voting process ("our team is meeting tonight to knock it out"), and continued appreciation for the SAFAL team. One coach noted their email, suggesting they may be expecting follow-up. The recovery to 9.44 (higher than Reporting this week) suggests Review Coaches are finding more clarity in the appeals-phase content as facilitation has improved.
📝
Reporting Coaches
07/27 Reporting Coach feedback is positive and practical: praised the role clarity update ("this meeting outlines coach role very well so there is no confusion on who does what"), appreciated the repeated information, and noted "different modalities of answering questions" as a valued support approach. The SA roles boundary concern from 07/20 remains an open flag. Reporting scores (9.31) are slightly below Review this week, which is atypical for the late-cycle pattern.
📋
Suitability Coaches
No session in 07/27. The four consecutive 10.0 weeks (06/15, 07/06, 07/13, 07/20) stand as the final Suitability statement of the program. The arc from uncertainty and overwhelm in April to perfect scores and heartfelt farewells in late July is the most complete coach development story in this dataset — and worth highlighting in end-of-cycle reporting.
📅
1099 Specialists
One 1099 Specialist in 07/27 (10.0). Consistent high satisfaction (9.80 avg) throughout the cycle. This group has been the most reliably positive cohort at every data point, with minimal qualitative concerns and consistent appreciation for content improvements.

Signal Tracker — 17-Week Overview

How to read this tab: Flags extracted from 416 open-text responses across 17 weeks. Ongoing = confirmed multi-week pattern. Emerging = appeared primarily in last 2–3 weeks. Resolved = no mentions in last 3 weeks after prior activity.
✅ Resolved this cycle: Three-Meeting Cadence Confusion (35 mentions in wks 1–9 → 0 for 8 weeks), Information Overload (0 for 9 weeks), Writing Support Needed (0 for 5 weeks). Three significant qualitative improvements sustained through the end of cycle.
Ongoing
Emerging
Positive / Resolved

Requested Future Topics

Top Training Topic Requests
Respondents selected from predefined options across all 17 sessions.

All Qualitative Feedback

Role:
FAQ Intelligence Report — Synthesized from 416 qualitative responses across 17 weeks. Updated through 07/27.
✅ Closed Loop — Feedback Heard and Acted On
Can you clearly indicate at the start of each task which role (Review vs. Reporting) it applies to?
✅ Implemented & PraisedRequested 07/20 → Implemented → Praised 07/27
07/20 request: "Perhaps clearly indicate at the beginning of a task explanation who it is intended for." 07/27 response: "Thank you for updating the slideshow and including for which coach the information/task applies to" and "Thank you for making it clear what is specific to Reporting coaches vs. review!" This is the most complete feedback loop in the 17-week dataset.
🔴 Still Active — Needs Continued Attention
SA appeals: who does what, how do I modify/submit errors, and what is the Phase 2 timing?
🔴 Active — DecreasingReview & Reporting Coach5 of last 6 weeks
Still the most active concern, but showing signs of movement. 07/27: one coach noted their team is meeting to vote and "knock it out" — coaches are now executing. A consolidated SA appeals reference guide (who does what + error submission steps + Phase 2 timeline) remains the highest-value outstanding resource gap, but urgency is decreasing as coaches act.
I am not comfortable performing both Review and Reporting Coach roles for SA appeals when paid for one.
🔴 Sensitive — OpenReporting Coach07/20
Raised once but significant. This is a compensation and scope-of-work concern that requires acknowledgment from program leadership, separate from any guide or training response. Has not reappeared in 07/27 but remains an open item.
Can IDs in the exit ticket dropdown be sorted numerically? Mobile users can't search by typing and have to scroll the full list.
▲ New UX RequestReporting Coach07/27
07/27: "Can we PLEASE put our IDs in numerical order in the dropdown? When you are not on a laptop, you cannot search for your name or number by typing. You have to scroll until you find yourself." A low-effort platform fix that would improve submission experience for all mobile users — worth flagging to the platform team.
🌟 Positive Patterns Worth Naming in End-of-Cycle Reporting
The practice of repeating key content multiple times is genuinely helpful.
🔥 Validated Best PracticeReporting Coach07/20, 07/27
07/20: "Thank you for repeating information more than once. It truly is helpful." 07/27: "Again, thank you for the repeats." Two consecutive weeks of unprompted appreciation for deliberate repetition. For complex SA appeals content, coaches benefit from hearing the same information framed multiple ways. This is a facilitation design principle worth codifying.
Offering support through multiple modalities (in-session, office hours, pre-meeting materials, direct contact) makes coaches feel supported.
🔥 Program Design ConfirmationReview & Reporting CoachMultiple weeks
07/27: "Thank you for different modalities of answering questions!" The combination of in-session Q&A, office hours, pre-meeting materials, and repeated content has created a support ecosystem coaches trust. This multi-channel approach is the most important program design insight of the cycle for future planning.
The small-group working session format with dedicated SAFAL staff is the most effective meeting structure.
🔥 Cycle-Long SignalReview & Reporting CoachWks 9–17
The format that drove the program’s five highest-scoring consecutive weeks (06/01–07/06). Still generating appreciation through the final sessions. The combination of small groups, trusted SAFAL staff, and working time is the most actionable design recommendation for future cycles.
✅ Fully Resolved — No Longer Generating Questions
What exactly happens at each of the three meetings (unpacking, consensus, drafting)?
✅ Resolved35 mentions in wks 1–9 → 0 for 8 weeks
The program’s single most persistent issue — fully resolved. Zero mentions for eight consecutive weeks.
There is too much information per session.
✅ Resolved0 for 9 weeks
Information overload resolved as coaches settled into their roles and the working-session format reduced broadcast-style content density.
How do I coach reviewers to write stronger evidence?
✅ Resolved0 for 5 weeks
Writing support requests resolved as coaches shifted focus to appeals-phase work in the final sessions.

Quality Coaches — Exit Ticket Participation

What this shows: Exit ticket submission by week, not formal attendance. Percentages calculated out of 16 applicable Quality Coach weeks (04/27 and 06/29 excluded). Tiers: ● High = 80%+  ● Mid = 50–79%  ● Low = <50%

Suitability Coaches — Exit Ticket Participation

Suitability Coaches have 11 applicable weeks. No Suitability session in 07/27.