Chapter Eight - 2010 Statistics

Today's chapter focuses on membership losses that were reported in the 2010 statistics. I sliced them several different ways to see if anything interesting emerged. While I suspected that removal by charge conference might vary some between churches that reported gains in membership and those that reported losses, I was surprised at how great the difference was. Churches that showed a gain in membership reported that 13% of their membership losses were due to charge conference action while churches that showed a decrease in membership reported that 38% of their membership losses were due to charge conference action. When we look at churches that gained in worship attendance and declined in worship attendance, there are no significant differences in the percentages of how members were lost. 

I think these statistics support those who believe change in worship attendance is a more important indicator than change in membership numbers. By just eyeballing the numbers, it appears that an increase in membership may be more likely to signal that the congregation is lax in keeping rolls clean rather than it being a sign of vitality. 

I also took a look at the reported losses from 2007 to 2010. During that four year period  there didn't appear to be dramatic changes in the percentages. It is interesting to note that the percentage of losses due to death has increased slightly over each of the four yeears. However, in terms of raw numbers we lost more people to death (104,145) in 2007 than we did in 2010 (99,594). 

The percentage of people transferring to another denomination has stayed the same at 9% over the four year period. While I am sure that many of the "other denominations" don't bother to ask for any sort of transfer, these numbers would still indicate that our declining membership is not due to people leaving in droves for other denominations. (We report receiving about twice as many people from other denominations as we report transferring out to other denominations.)

I hope these numbers give you something to ponder. If you would like to see how your annual conference compares with the general church numbers, just drop me a note and I will pull them out for you. 

The various percentages are listed below.

Of all reported membership losses in 2007:

28% were a result of death

33% were removed by charge conference action

15% withdrew 

16% transferred to another United Methodist congregation

9% transferred to another denomination

Total Number: 375,535

Of all reported membership losses in 2008:

31% were a result of death

35% were removed by charge conference action

16% withdrew 

9% transferred to another United Methodist congregation

9% transferred to another denomination

Total Number: 338,673

Of all reported membership losses in 2009:

31% were a result of death

30% were removed by charge conference action

15% withdrew 

15% transferred to another United Methodist congregation

9% transferred to another denomination

Total Number: 323,850

Of all reported membership losses in 2010:

32% were a result of death

31% were removed by charge conference action

14% withdrew 

15% transferred to another United Methodist congregation

9% transferred to another denomination

Total Number: 308,445

Of all reported membership losses in churches that reported an increase in membership:

43% were a result of death

13% were removed by charge conference action

11% withdrew

22% transferred to another United Methodist congregation

11% transferred to another denomination

Of all reported membership losses in churches that reported a decrease in membership:

28% were a result of death

38% were removed by charge conference action

15% withdrew

12% transferred to another United Methodist congregation

8% transferred to another denomination

Of all reported membership losses in churches that reported an increase in worship:

31% were a result of death

32% were removed by charge conference action

15% withdrew

15% transferred to another United Methodist congregation

8%  transferred to another denomination

Of all reported membership losses in churches that reported a decrease in worship:

32% were a result of death

30% were removed by charge conference action

14% withdrew

15% transferred to another United Methodist congregation

9% transferred to another denomination

(Note: Some may not add up to 100% due to rounding. All statistics are based on congregations of at least five members.)

The statistical data included herein were provided at no charge by the General Council on Finance and Administration of The United Methodist Church (GCFA) and may be obtained directly from GCFA, PO Box 340020, Nashville, TN 37203-0029. This data is proprietary and is owned by GCFA and may not be used in any commercial or exploitative way, to make a financial profit, or in a manner that defames the United Methodist denomination or its agencies or organizations. GCFA does not endorse any particular use of the data or accept responsibility for its interpretation or analysis by another.

Chapter Seven - 2010 Statistics

Today's data relates to the relationship of membership growth and worship attendance. 

Of all churches with at least 5 members  in 2010:

• 34% reported an increase in membership. Of these churches, 40% reported a decrease in worship attendance, 14% reported no change in worship attendance, and 46% reported an increase in worship attendance.

• 19% reported no change in members.  Of these churches, 38% reported a decrease in worship attendance, 37% reported no change in worship attendance, and 25% reported an increase in worship attendance.  

* 47% reported a decrease in members. Of these churches, 60% reported a decrease in worship attendance, 15% reported no change in worship attendance, and 25% reported an increase in worship attendance.

 Of those churches that reported no change in membership or worship attendance,  84%  had suspicious numbers  in that they reported  zeros in all categories of growth and loss, as opposed to the other 16% that reported gains and losses that when  added together equalled zero. If the suspicious numbers are removed, the following changes occur:

• 36% reported an increase in membership. Of these churches, 40% reported a decrease in worship attendance, 14% reported no change in worship attendance, and 46% reported an increase in worship attendance.

• 14% reported no change in members.  Of these churches, 56% reported a decrease in worship attendance, 7% reported no change in worship attendance, and 36% reported an increase in worship attendance. 

• 50% reported a decrease in members. Of these churches, 60% reported a decrease in worship attendance, 15% reported no change in worship attendance, and 25% reported an increase in worship attendance.

I was surprised to see that less than half of the churches that had an increase in membership also had an increase in worship attendance. I was also surprised that 40% of those that lost membership either held steady or increased in worship attendance.  

The U.S. Congregational Life Survey indicated that the younger the United Methodist worshipper the less frequent was his or her attendance. So, if a goal for the denomination is more young people, I wonder if we should expect that a church that is growing in the number of young adults as a percentage of their total adult membership, should also expect to see a decrease in average worship attendance as the number of people more likely to attend two out of four Sundays becomes a greater percentage as compared to those who attend four out of four Sundays? Or another way of saying this — is increasing membership and decreasing worship attendance a marker of a growing congregation that is getting younger or of a congregation that is never cleaning its membership rolls?

The statistical data included herein were provided at no charge by the General Council on Finance and Administration of The United Methodist Church (GCFA) and may be obtained directly from GCFA, PO Box 340020, Nashville, TN 37203-0029. This data is proprietary and is owned by GCFA and may not be used in any commercial or exploitative way, to make a financial profit, or in a manner that defames the United Methodist denomination or its agencies or organizations. GCFA does not endorse any particular use of the data or accept responsibility for its interpretation or analysis by another.

Chapter Six - 2010 Statistics

Today's chapter deals with a statistic that I call the participation ratio. This is the ratio of people in worship to membership. For example, a church that reports a membership of 200 and an average worship attendance of 100 would have a participation ratio of 100 to 200 or .5. Reported as a percentage this would be 50%. In the aggregate there are at least three ways to look at the participation ratio. One is the total participation ratio, which looks at the total number of worshippers divided by the total membership. The other is the average participation ratio, which takes participation ratio of all churches and averages them. So for example if one church has 100 members and 75 people in worship and another church has 400 members and 75 members in worship, the total participation ratio would be 30%, (75+75)/(100+ 400), and the average participation ratio would be 48%, (.75+.19)/2. The third way is the median, which indicates that half the churches were above the stated participation ratio and half were below. 

The statistics below are for churches of at least 5  members. 

In 2007 the total participation ratio was 41.26% and the median participation ratio was 45.66%

   For churches with a membership of 100 or less, the total participation ratio was 55.41%

   For churches with a membership of 101 to 500, the total participation ratio was 42.61%

   For churches with a membership of 501 to 1000, the total participation ratio was 39.41%

   For churches with a membership of over 1000, the total participation ratio was 35.29%

In 2008 the total participation ratio was 40.94% and the median participation ratio was 45.1%

  For churches with a membership of 100 or less, the total participation ratio was 54.67%

  For churches with a membership of 101 to 500, the total participation ratio was 42.2%

  For churches with a membership of 501 to 1000, the total participation ratio was 39.09%

  For churches with a membership of over 1000, the total participation ratio was 35.32%

In 2009 the total participation ratio was 40.66%, the average participation ratio was 50.73%, and the median participation ratio was 45%

   For churches with a membership of 100 or less, the total participation ratio was 54.36%, and the average participation ratio was 60.43%

   For churches with a membership of 101 to 500, the total participation ratio was 42.02%, and the average participation ratio was 43%

   For churches with a membership of 501 to 1000, the total participation ratio was 38.99%, and the average participation ratio was 39.11%

   For churches with a membership of over 1000, the total participation ratio was 34.76%, and the average participation ratio was 36.06%

In 2010 the total participation ratio was 40.3%, the average participation ratio was 50.47%, and the median participation ratio was 44.66%

   For churches with a membership of 100 or less, the total participation ratio was 53.9%, and the average participation ratio was 60.08%

   For churches with a membership of 101 to 500, the total participation ratio was 41.70%, and the average participation ratio was 42.74%

   For churches with a membership of 501 to 1000, the total participation ratio was 38.55%, and the average participation ratio was 38.61%

   For churches with a membership of over 1000, the total participation ratio was 34.42%, and the average participation ratio was 35.66%

  

From a regional perspective in 2010

   Churches in the South Central Jurisdiction had a total participation ratio of 35.91% and an average participation ratio of 47.68%

   Churches in the Northeastern Jurisdiction had a total participation ratio of 37.18% and an average participation ratio of 46.1%  

   Churches in the Southeastern Jurisdiction had a total participation ratio of 39.74% and an average participation ratio of 50.25%

   Churches in the North Central Jurisdiction had a total participation ratio of 47.2% and an average participation ratio of 55.26%

   Churches in the Western Jurisdiction had a total participation ratio of 51.71% and an average participation ratio of 59.5%

I think that it is interesting to note significantly higher participation ratio of small churches as opposed to large churches and the significantly higher participation ratio of churches in the Western and North Central jurisdictions to the other regions. 

While I don't think these statistics provide any  answers, they do raise a number of questions for me, including:

    - What role does weather play in the participation ratio? (You would think that having more severe winters in the North Central jurisdiction might lead to lower participation ratios, but that does not appear to be true.)

    - How does the average age of congregational members relate to overall participation ratio? (The U.S. Congregational Life Survey indicates that younger United Methodist worshippers attend worship less frequently than  older worshippers. So, is a low participation rate a sign of less commitment or of younger members?)

   - Does the fact that the Western jurisdiction has the highest participation rate have something to do with less cultural pressure in the West to belong to a church, so that those who do join are more likely to participate?

  - What accounts for the inverse relationship between church size and worship participation? (Do people in large churches think they are less needed? Do small churches keep their membership roles cleaner?)

The statistical data included herein were provided at no charge by the General Council on Finance and Administration of The United Methodist Church (GCFA) and may be obtained directly from GCFA, PO Box 340020, Nashville, TN 37203-0029. This data is proprietary and is owned by GCFA and may not be used in any commercial or exploitative way, to make a financial profit, or in a manner that defames the United Methodist denomination or its agencies or organizations. GCFA does not endorse any particular use of the data or accept responsibility for its interpretation or analysis by another.

Chapter Five - 2010 Statistics

In Chapter Three we looked at congregations that reported multiple markers of vitality. There were 793 congregations that reported  an increase in worship attendance; at least  one profession of faith; children, youth, young adults, and other adults in Christian formation; at least five people in covenant groups; at least ten VBS participants; at least one community outreach ministry; sent at least one person on a mission team; and paid 100% or more of apportionments.

In this chapter, I thought we would take a look at congregations on the other end of the continuum. I queried all congregations of at least five members and with at least one person in worship that had a decrease in worship attendance; no professions of faith; nobody in Christian formation, VBS, or covenant groups; had no community outreach ministries; sent no one on a mission team; and paid less than 100% of apportionments.

There were a total of 405 congregations in this group comprising 1.2% of congregations and .28% of membership  (note the decimal point, this is considerably less than 1%).  These churches ranged in average worship attendance from 445 to 2. The median average worship attendance was 15 (half the churches had an average worship attendance of greater than 15 and half less). The mean for worship attendance was 21. (Total worship attendance divided by number of churches.) These churches combined for a 5.8% decrease in members and a 20.8%  decrease in worship attendance. 

Geographically these churches represented

9 Churches from the Western Jurisdiction (.52% of congregations)

172 Churches from the Southeastern Jurisdiction (1.5% of congregations)

100 Churches from the North Central Jurisdiction (1.4% of congregations)

91  Churches from the Northeastern Jurisdiction (1.3% of congregations)

33 Churches from the South Central Jurisdiction (.58% of congregations)

Had these churches paid 100% of their apportionments, it would have added $1,071,736 to apportionment giving.

The combined market value of all church-owned land, buildings, equipment, and other assets of these congregations is $234,233,159. This comes to an average of $10,920 in assets per member and represents .39% of the total value of local UMC assets in the U.S. (The 793 churches from Chapter Three have an average of $6,646 in assets per member and represent 8.4% of the total value of local church assets in the U.S.)

I think it is interesting to note that relatively few United Methodists worship in congregations that are reporting negative numbers on all the markers of vitality. I wonder if we aren't sometimes guilty of taking one marker and trying to give it more meaning than is really valid? On the other hand, when we look at these 405 congregations, I also wonder what sort of witness might be made if the nearly quarter of a billion dollars in assets held by these congregations was directed in a different manner?

The statistical data included herein were provided at no charge by the General Council on Finance and Administration of The United Methodist Church (GCFA) and may be obtained directly from GCFA, PO Box 340020, Nashville, TN 37203-0029. This data is proprietary and is owned by GCFA and may not be used in any commercial or exploitative way, to make a financial profit, or in a manner that defames the United Methodist denomination or its agencies or organizations. GCFA does not endorse any particular use of the data or accept responsibility for its interpretation or analysis by another.

Chapter Four - 2010 Statistics

In chapters one and two I listed the percentages of the various racial/ethnic groups for the entire church and for the jurisdictions. This chapter looks at the percentages of United Methodists that attend a congregation that is predominantly of the same ethnicity as they are . Note that for these results “predominantly” is defined as 50% or more.  Please remember that this is all based upon what congregations reported. Since most congregations don’t ask about a person’s ethnic identity, in many cases the reported figures may be an estimate made by the person filling in the statistics sheet.  So while reality is probably somewhat different, these figures should give us a pretty good ball-park figure. 

Among all U.S. Congregations

86% of African American United Methodists attended predominantly African American congregations

65.9% of Asian American United Methodists attended predominantly Asian American congregations

35.2% of Hispanic American United Methodists attended predominantly Hispanic American congregations

47% of Native American United Methodists attended predominantly Native American congregations

39.6% of Pacific Islander United Methodists attended predominantly Pacific Islander congregations

99.7% of Euro American United Methodists attend predominantly Euro American congregations

In the Northeastern Jurisdiction

84.7% of African American United Methodists attended predominantly African American congregations

72.7% of Asian American United Methodists attended predominantly Asian American congregations

43.3% of Hispanic American United Methodists attended predominantly Hispanic American congregations

35.6% of Native American United Methodists attended predominantly Native American congregations

0% of Pacific Islander United Methodists attended predominantly Pacific Islander congregations

99.5% of Euro American United Methodists attend predominantly Euro American congregations

In the Southeastern Jurisdiction

90.1% of African American United Methodists attended predominantly African American congregations

50.7% of Asian American United Methodists attended predominantly Asian American congregations

18.5% of Hispanic American United Methodists attended predominantly Hispanic American congregations

68% of Native American United Methodists attended predominantly Native American congregations

0% of Pacific Islander United Methodists attended predominantly Pacific Islander congregations

99.9% of Euro American United Methodists attend predominantly Euro American congregations

In the South Central Jurisdiction

87.2%  of African American United Methodists attended predominantly African American congregations

48.7% of Asian American United Methodists attended predominantly Asian American congregations

43.8% of Hispanic American United Methodists attended predominantly Hispanic American congregations

45% of Native American United Methodists attended predominantly Native American congregations

14% of Pacific Islander United Methodists attended predominantly Pacific Islander congregations

99.8% of Euro American United Methodists attend predominantly Euro American congregations

In the Western Jurisdiction

56.4% of African American United Methodists attended predominantly African American congregations

74.2% of Asian American United Methodists attended predominantly Asian American congregations

19.9% of Hispanic American United Methodists attended predominantly Hispanic American congregations

25.9% of Native American United Methodists attended predominantly Native American congregations

58% of Pacific Islander United Methodists attended predominantly Pacific Islander congregations

97.9% of Euro American United Methodists attend predominantly Euro American congregations

In the North Central Jurisdiction

76.1% of African American United Methodists attended predominantly African American congregations

61.3% of Asian American United Methodists attended predominantly Asian American congregations

34% of Hispanic American United Methodists attended predominantly Hispanic American congregations

35.6% of Native American United Methodists attended predominantly Native American congregations

0% of Pacific Islander United Methodists attended predominantly Pacific Islander congregations

99.9% of Euro American United Methodists attend predominantly Euro American congregations

The statistical data included herein were provided at no charge by the General Council on Finance and Administration of The United Methodist Church (GCFA) and may be obtained directly from GCFA, PO Box 340020, Nashville, TN 37203-0029. This data is proprietary and is owned by GCFA and may not be used in any commercial or exploitative way, to make a financial profit, or in a manner that defames the United Methodist denomination or its agencies or organizations. GCFA does not endorse any particular use of the data or accept responsibility for its interpretation or analysis by another.

Chapter Three - 2010 Statistics

In this chapter I thought we would take a look at congregations that reported multiple markers of vitality. I queried all churches of at least five members that had an increase in worship attendance; at least  one profession of faith; children, youth, young adults, and other adults in Christian formation; at least five people in covenant groups; at least ten VBS participants; at least one community outreach ministry; sent at least one person on a mission team; and paid 100% or more of apportionments. There were 793 congregations that fell into this category, comprising 2.4% of congregations and 10% of membership.

These 793 churches ranged in average worship attendance from 27 to 4400

The median average worship attendance was 257. (Half the churches had an average attendance less than 257 and half greater)

The mean for worship attendance was 386. (Total worship attendance divided by number of churches.)

These churches combined for an increase in membership of .88% and an increase in worship attendance of 5.91%

Combined, these churches accounted for 

13% of the total number of people in confirmation classes

12% of the total number of professions of faith

20% of the total number of people in covenant groups

11% of the total number of people in Vacation Bible School

8.5% of all Sunday School Classes

7.6% of all short-term classes

10% of all those served by outreach ministries

13.75% of all those in Christian Formation

Geographically these churches represented

36 Churches in the Western Jurisdiction (2.1% of churches in the jurisdiction)

315 Churches in the Southeastern Jurisdiction (2.8% of churches in the jurisdiction)

133 Churches in the North Central Jurisdiction (1.9% of churches in the jurisdiction)

104 Churches in the Northeastern Jurisdiction (1.5% of churches in the jurisdiction)

205 Churches in the South Central Jurisdiction (3.6 of churches in the jurisdiction)

In guessing by name, about 17% of the congregations were served by a lead pastor who was a woman.

(Note: I wondered in VBS was perhaps a regional thing, so I ran a new search eliminating VBS as a factor. This added 58 more churches to the total group that were pretty well distributed throughout the country, leading me to believe that including VBS as a factor was not having a negative effect on particular regions.)

The statistical data included herein were provided at no charge by the General Council on Finance and Administration of The United Methodist Church (GCFA) and may be obtained directly from GCFA, PO Box 340020, Nashville, TN 37203-0029. This data is proprietary and is owned by GCFA and may not be used in any commercial or exploitative way, to make a financial profit, or in a manner that defames the United Methodist denomination or its agencies or organizations. GCFA does not endorse any particular use of the data or accept responsibility for its interpretation or analysis by another.

Chapter Two - 2010 Statistics

After Chapter One, I had a question about jurisdictional statistics. Here are a few items broken out by jurisdiction. These are based on churches with at least five members. 

Ethnicity

Western Jurisdiction (1704 Congregations)

4.56% - African American

8.91% - Asian American

2.08% - Hispanic American

.35% - Native American

77.33% - Euro American

2.47% - Pacific Islander

1.32% - Multi- racial

2.98% - No ethnicity reported

South Central (5622 Congregations)

5.49% -African American

.51% - Asian American

2.03% - Hispanic American

.79% - Native American

90.44% - Euro American

.08% - Pacific Islander

.63% - Multi-racial

.72% - No ethnicity reported

North Central (6895 Congregations)

2.43% - African American

.77% - Asian American

.37% - Hispanic American

.11% - Native American

94.23% - Euro American

.06% - Pacific Islander

.69% - Multi-racial

1.34 – No ethnicity reported

Southeastern  (11337  Congregations)

7.15% - African American

.5% - Asian American

.51% - Hispanic American

.14% - Native American

91.06% - Euro American

.05% - Pacific Islander

.38% - Multi-racial

.21% - No ethnicity reported

Northeastern (6951 Congregations)

7.47% - African American

1.66% - Asian American

.62% - Hispanic American

.11% - Native American

87.88% - Euro American

.09% - Pacific Islander

.85% -  Multi-racial

1.32% - No ethnicity reported

The statistical data included herein were provided at no charge by the General Council on Finance and Administration of The United Methodist Church (GCFA) and may be obtained directly from GCFA, PO Box 340020, Nashville, TN 37203-0029. This data is proprietary and is owned by GCFA and may not be used in any commercial or exploitative way, to make a financial profit, or in a manner that defames the United Methodist denomination or its agencies or organizations. GCFA does not endorse any particular use of the data or accept responsibility for its interpretation or analysis by another.

Chapter One - 2010 Statistics

This blog is an extension of occasional e-mail memos that I send out related to congregational statistics reported by United Methodist congregations in 2010.  I hope these provide food for thought and grist for conversation.

Of all reporting congregations of  at least five members:

Combined membership declined by .97% and worship declined by 1.85% (32,893 congregations)

Congregations that had 0 professions of faith  showed a combined membership decrease of  3.3% and a worship decrease of 4.44% (15,742 congregations)

Congregations that had 1 to 5 professions of faith showed a combined membership decrease of  1.6% and a worship decrease of 2.34% (10,676 congregations)

Congregations that had 6 to 10 professions of faith showed a combined membership decrease of .76% and a worship decrease of 1.46% (3,315 congregations

Congregations that had 11 to 20 professions of faith showed a combined membership increase of .13% and a worship decrease of .88% (1,999 congregations)

Congregations that had 21 to 50 professions of faith showed a combined membership increase of  .82% and a worship decrease of .12% (950 congregations)

Congregations that had more than 50 professions of faith showed a combined membership increase of  1.21%  and a worship increase of .53% (211 congregations)

Of all reporting congregations of at least five members:

5.89 % are African American

1.15% are Asian American

.93% are Hispanic American

.29% are Native American

90.23% are Euro American

.18% are Pacific Islander

.61% are Multi-racial


The statistical data included herein were provided at no charge by the General Council on Finance and Administration of The United Methodist Church (GCFA) and may be obtained directly from GCFA, PO Box 340020, Nashville, TN 37203-0029. This data is proprietary and is owned by GCFA and may not be used in any commercial or exploitative way, to make a financial profit, or in a manner that defames the United Methodist denomination or its agencies or organizations. GCFA does not endorse any particular use of the data or accept responsibility for its interpretation or analysis by another.