Almost half the membership gone

[Bluelakes 13]

I hardly go to EServices anymore.  Only involved with a couple wing/region activities throughout the year, that's about it. I get my renewal email, renew, carry on.  Today I had to change my password and was dumped to the EServices homepage.

WOW - I didnt realize we lost almost half the membership in the past few years. 

Sad times indeed.

[Eclipse]

CAP lost 4+ years of membership gain in the span of less then a year, and
finally showed the level of "churn" vs. "retention" required to maintain its
numbers (as well as the inexplicable uptick it saw between 2017 and 2020).

As soon as the churn was cutoff, the numbers dropped like a roller coaster,
and now things are flat again as the churn motor ramps back up, but no real
recruiting initiatives or organizational initiatives which would attract new members
(or keep the current ones for that matter).

My wing hasn't seen numbers this bad since mid 2015, or before that mid 06 when the
demo actually flip-flopped and there were more adults then cadets (which is how it's
stayed for the last 16 years, ebbing and flowing with the same general curve, but
never going back).

I see the next wave of exits on the horizon - there are still a number of "anchor activities" -
NCSAs, encampments, academies, etc., which have not returned, and probably never
will, and a number of wings are struggling with the loss of pilots and other key members
who were smack in the Covid demo, and / or had unusual life changes in the past two years
that took them off the CAP roster.

Worse, mid-point of leadership is all but non-existent. There's no one to replace the
current wave - insiders who "know" see how hard it is find "people" let alone competent people,
the result of which will be more exits.

No mentors, no experienced leaders who have BTDT, and members who were marginalized due to
buffoonery are creeping back into the corners.

There are a non-trivial number of members who were waiting to see how things shook out, and
now that they can see what is the general steady state of CAP, will opt out, either
literally, or simply writer the check for a while and not answer the phone.

[Larry Mangum]

I hardly go to EServices anymore.  Only involved with a couple wing/region activities throughout the year, that's about it. I get my renewal email, renew, carry on.  Today I had to change my password and was dumped to the EServices homepage.

WOW - I didnt realize we lost almost half the membership in the past few years. 

Sad times indeed.

Just a little hyperbole there do you think? I have been in since 1996 and the max membership I can recall seeing was a little after 9/11 when it reached in the mid to upper sixties due to the patriotism that swept the country. We currently stand at a little over fifty-eight thousand members nationwide.  Would it have been nice to stay at that level? Sure, but our ES mission has changed, and there are many more opportunities for the young adults and teenagers of today to be involved in. Yet we continue to recruit new members, so as often talked about, our issue is not with recruitment, but rather one of retention. Perhaps we need to be more selective in who we recruit, as well as a little more honest about what they will be able to do and participate in as a member. Instead, I think we often tell them about all of the things they can do, without saying however in our unit, we only do this.

[dwb]

We lost half the membership in the last few years? Just looking at the count of people who pay dues, that is provably false.

What we did see is a nontrivial pandemic churn. It'll probably take five years for the effects of that to shake out, and anyone (like Eclipse) who claims to see the future is just guessin'.

Remember that even in pre-pandemic times, we had a sort of baseline level of turnover. CAP is not for everyone, and not everyone will be a lifer. Joining, participating for a few years, then moving on to another thing is not an uncommon arc, and that doesn't mean that CAP is failing somehow.

I do agree that re-engaging post-pandemic has been a challenge. And we have had skill atrophy that we need to take seriously (and we are, at least in my corner of CAP). But to declare this The Death of CAP­ is more than a little premature.

[sardak]

National membership for past five years.

[dwb]

Yeah, and to be clear, looking just at total membership numbers is going to leave you susceptible to Simpson's paradox. Trends in key subgroups of membership that we care about (pilots, ICs, cadet officers, whatever) could be masked when we are only looking at total number of members.

[Eclipse]

Yeah, and to be clear, looking just at total membership numbers is going to leave you susceptible to Simpson's paradox. Trends in key subgroups of membership that we care about (pilots, ICs, cadet officers, whatever) could be masked when we are only looking at total number of members.

Unfortunately NHQ doesn't track membership in a way that is actually useful for
evaluating the health of the organization.

It has no idea who its "real" members actually are, since attendance and participation
are not a factor in whether they show up on that graph, only that the check doesn't bounce.

As an example, 6% of my wing's seniors are in 000.

Looking at Region, it's 05% of the total membership, and if you include the Legislative Sqds,
it jumps to 13%!

That's arguably 3-5% (or more, because some wings have cadets in 000) of members who
are 100% off the boards.

The annual churn has been 40-50%, and anecdotal evidence indicates "real" membership
(those who show up and do things) is likely 50% or under.

Factor in that the bump in membership from 2017-2020 appeared to include a significant number
of AEMs (like several thousand), and you start to see the state CAP is in.

CAP continues to tout its Total Force partnership in marketing, despite the fact that
the number of members who actually fall under that umbrella is statistically insignificant,
but taking that example, imagine the uproar that would occur if it was found that
the Air Force was over-reporting readiness to Congress by 30-50%.

[RiverAux]

I've never quite understood some people's focus on trying to track "active" members.  The only area where knowing whether or not someone is "active" is ES and pilots, and those are easily tracked by the number of people that are current in some qualification of interest. 

Knowing the number of folks that actively show up to be leaders in cadet squadrons or doing AE work and don't have some sort of ES/aviation qual does not really matter in any way that I've been able to figure out. 

[etodd]

Knowing the number of folks that actively show up to be leaders in cadet squadrons or doing AE work and don't have some sort of ES/aviation qual does not really matter in any way that I've been able to figure out. 

As our ES missions dwindle over time ... those Cadet squadrons will be CAP's future. CAP will be somewhere in-between scouting and jrrotc.

[Eclipse]

I've never quite understood some people's focus on trying to track "active" members.  The only area where knowing whether or not someone is "active" is ES and pilots, and those are easily tracked by the number of people that are current in some qualification of interest.

How about pure attendance? Active members are what keeps the doors open.

In an org that allows people to show up once a year, or once every three and re-qual via
having lunch with an SET, using the numbers from OPS Quals is also useless, since you
can, and do have members who have long since checked out but are still counted, or just hang around
to re-punch because they like to tell their friends at parties about their affiliation.

Knowing the number of folks that actively show up to be leaders in cadet squadrons or doing AE work and don't have some sort of ES/aviation qual does not really matter in any way that I've been able to figure out. 

They certainly matter, and increasingly as the org shrinks.

This is why you have units all over with plenty on the roster and no one to
take command, and (*poof*) no unit - and somehow this is almost always a "surprise" to higher hq.

[Eclipse]

As our ES missions dwindle over time ... those Cadet squadrons will be CAP's future. CAP will be somewhere in-between scouting and jrrotc.

No ES = no planes.

No ES = lots less adults and cadets.

No ES = No CAP.

The organization is not capable of sustaining itself purely as a paramilitary STEM trainer.

Most non-parent adult members I know joined for ES and then are happy enough in the down times to
help on the cadet side, but that is not their prime motivator.

And FSM love our valued pilots, but just about every Senior Squadron exists because there was no interest in
"babysitting" as I too often here - they just want to fly and be left out of both the admin
of the org, and dealing with cadets.

No ES and every Senior Squadron is gone.

[CAP_truth]

CAP lost 4+ years of membership gain in the span of less then a year, and
finally showed the level of "churn" vs. "retention" required to maintain its
numbers (as well as the inexplicable uptick it saw between 2017 and 2020).

As soon as the churn was cutoff, the numbers dropped like a roller coaster,
and now things are flat again as the churn motor ramps back up, but no real
recruiting initiatives or organizational initiatives which would attract new members
(or keep the current ones for that matter).

My wing hasn't seen numbers this bad since mid 2015, or before that mid 06 when the
demo actually flip-flopped and there were more adults then cadets (which is how it's
stayed for the last 16 years, ebbing and flowing with the same general curve, but
never going back).

I see the next wave of exits on the horizon - there are still a number of "anchor activities" -
NCSAs, encampments, academies, etc., which have not returned, and probably never
will, and a number of wings are struggling with the loss of pilots and other key members
who were smack in the Covid demo, and / or had unusual life changes in the past two years
that took them off the CAP roster.

Worse, mid-point of leadership is all but non-existent. There's no one to replace the
current wave - insiders who "know" see how hard it is find "people" let alone competent people,
the result of which will be more exits.

No mentors, no experienced leaders who have BTDT, and members who were marginalized due to
buffoonery are creeping back into the corners.

There are a non-trivial number of members who were waiting to see how things shook out, and
now that they can see what is the general steady state of CAP, will opt out, either
literally, or simply writer the check for a while and not answer the phone.

How do you think we can fix the problem?

[Eclipse]

Not my flat tire.

[ES-ER]

I think this may be my first post here despite reading posts for the last 4 years.  But this conversation struck a cord with me because I am one of the members who is reconsidering my membership due to lack of ES missions.  I am an MP and IC. 

The loss of ES missions is very discouraging, and CAP needs to find meaningful and regular missions or it will fall into irrelevance for many members.  I have tried to develop new missions locally through interfacing with local emergency response agencies, but I received little CAP management support, and frankly, the local agencies didn't seem to view CAP as a meaningful partner.

I do hope that CAP national can come up with a solution or I will find an option where my efforts are more meaningful.    We keep hearing about new things coming down the pike (UAS missions that evaporated and still no regulations after years of drafting, funding for commercial and CFI ratings that never come, etc.)  GIS seems to be an exception, and kudos to the GIS team for their efforts -- but that alone is likely not enough.

[Eclipse]

I have tried to develop new missions locally through interfacing with local emergency response agencies, but I received little CAP management support, and frankly, the local agencies didn't seem to view CAP as a meaningful partner.

Sadly this is a broken record for the totality of my 23 years...

[PHall]

I have tried to develop new missions locally through interfacing with local emergency response agencies, but I received little CAP management support, and frankly, the local agencies didn't seem to view CAP as a meaningful partner.

Sadly this is a broken record for the totality of my 23 years...

So why are you still here then? You pay dues every year to be unhappy. Or that's the way it appears from your posts.

[RiverAux]

This is why you have units all over with plenty on the roster and no one to
take command, and (*poof*) no unit - and somehow this is almost always a "surprise" to higher hq.

There is no immediate relevance to NHQ about how many people show up at Podunk Cadet Squadron's meetings.  Any higher level officer that doesn't recognize what units are struggling isn't paying attention. 

While book membership may not be active membership, it is a pretty good proxy.  Everyone knows that a unit with 15 members is almost always going to be on deaths door.  Do we want to burden that unit with submitting reports on their attendance to even further drive people away with useless admin tasks?  Reporting their plight isn't going to help them.  Only they can help them. 

[Майор Хаткевич]

Don't the total numbers also count Patrons?

[Dustoff17]

How do you think we can fix the problem?
[/quote]

Treat your SMs better! Use the strengths each SM brings and wwatch the Squadron run!

[etodd]

How do you think we can fix the problem?

Treat your SMs better! Use the strengths each SM brings and wwatch the Squadron run!
[/quote]

You replied to a thread thats a year old. The stats may not be the same anymore?