Memorandum: The NAEYC and Affiliate Membership Business Model

Transcription

1 May 2011 Memorandum: The NAEYC and Affiliate Membership Business Model Prepared by Affiliate and Member Relations Purpose: To fully understand the current business models governing NAEYC and Affiliates, NAEYC and SECA (Southern Early Childhood Association), and NAEYC s business model in providing member benefits and services at the national level. Recent History: What Members Told Us NAEYC conducted a national membership survey in 2008 in response to the realization that membership had been trending downward for the previous 6 years resulting in a net loss of 12% in member numbers. Results from this survey indicated a strong desire among members and non members alike to have access to an electronic membership, a group membership option, and more teaching materials and curricula available online. NAEYC has been unable to deliver either membership option primarily due to technology challenges. We have significantly enhanced our online offerings through TYC, NEXT, online training, Voices for Practitioners, and the recent Author Q&A opportunities. While it is critically important for NAEYC to survey our own membership to better understand their needs, desires, and lifestyles, it is equally important for NAEYC to pay attention to association industry membership trends. According to ASAE s 2008, The Decision to Join, the individual decision to join does not hinge on a cost-benefit calculation, which conventional wisdom argues. Rather, the choice of affiliating or not reflects an appreciation that goes beyond self-oriented assessment to include an assessment of value generated for a community of interests. Individuals get value and for no additional cost generate value for those who share a common bond. In effect, this realization expands the spectrum of benefits, and everyone offering the decision to join must understand this balance of personal and good of the order benefits that fundamentally influence affiliation and participation. Other key elements from this report; Academics are among the strongest association supporters; they are the least apt to drop their membership, the most apt to volunteer, and far more likely to be promoters of the association. Plus, they re in a unique position to influence entrylevel people. Employer support of dues or lack thereof, has enormous implications. First, contrary to conventional wisdom, individuals whose dues are paid by their employers value their membership as much as those people who pay their own way. The extent to which ad hoc volunteers are recognized by associations as a distinct segment or cultivated to become more involved warrants serious attention. Enthusiasm takes off with ad hoc involvement in activities such as writing, presenting, and reviewing content when compared to the perception of value by the uninvolved. Viewing needs through the lens of career development is more useful than are generational stereotypes. Consistent with the conclusion of other researchers, the Based on an original NAEYC Board Discussion Item May 2011 Page 1

2 idea that the unique attributes of younger generations spell doom for the future of associations is called into question, with one caveat: The young are dissatisfied with associations effectiveness in meeting their most important needs. Associations will need to strengthen the services they offer this segment if they intend to offset alternative means of networking and accessing information sources. A modestly successful campaign to reclaim members was conducted during the summer of 2010 employing the incentive of an extra 3 months of membership for free plus a publication of choice. 977 former members returned to NAEYC. A new concept My NAEYC is taking hold in an effort to personalize our shared member s experience at NAEYC, and to better understand their lifestyle and professional career track. The outreach and engagement portion of membership was placed in the Affiliate and Member Relations department as of January 2011, along with funding to hire a membership specialist. These events combined with the hiring of a new Director of Marketing will spur new work for a Membership Development Plan, outlining a series of marketing campaigns to reclaim lapsed, retain current and recruit new members in partnership with our Affiliate Network. The National Dialogue is designed to explore the relationship between NAEYC and its Affiliates. One aspect of the relationship is the membership business model that currently exists between NAEYC and Affiliates. What follows is an overview of the legal and fiscal policies that govern this model, the cost of membership at the national level, other factors that influence membership, and key questions to frame the discussion during your May meeting. Overview and Background NAEYC currently offers three membership categories; Regular, Student, and Comprehensive, with an International membership category available to those who live or work abroad in Europe. Members who live or work aboard outside of Europe are categorized as Independent members The Lifetime membership category is no longer an option, but NAEYC continues to support those who joined at this level in the past. NAEYC Affiliates offer the same membership categories. Members may join for a three year period to receive a 15% discount in any member category. The NAEYC Governing Board determines membership dues at the national level in accordance with their Policy Manual. Each level of the association local, state, regional and national has the ability to set individual dues rates for each member category annually. Thus our shared member is the recipient of a bundled dues model that theoretically provides member benefits, services, and leadership opportunities at each level of the association. There are no ground rules for a coordinated approach to membership dues. NAEYC s Board Policy Manual lists the following policies that govern this complex relationship. Section 4.7. Dues. Membership dues shall be determined by the Board Affiliate Group Membership Dues Based on an original NAEYC Board Discussion Item May 2011 Page 2

3 Affiliate Groups may assess membership dues in addition to NAEYC dues. NAEYC exerts no control over the amount of such assessment, but does require that the state affiliate adopt a single dues structure for the state by September Dues, Program Decisions NAEYC does not dictate the dues structure, membership services, or programs and activities of Affiliate Groups. NAEYC encourages local groups to work with their state group to establish a streamlined dues structure across the state. Nine of our southern affiliated states hold dual affiliation with SECA (Southern Early Childhood Association); Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. Each of these dual affiliated states assesses an additional $20 for SECA dues for each member category. SECA is considered a Regional Alliance within our membership system. SECA also has state affiliates in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina and South Carolina. They are not affiliated with NAEYC state Affiliates. NAEYC serves as the central dues processing agent sending monthly dues payments to local and state Affiliates and Regional Alliances (SECA and Midwest AEYC) for their portion of dues. There is no fee charged for this service. Additionally, in accordance with the Charter Agreement (signed by NAEYC and Affiliates in 2004), NAEYC provides the option for Affiliates to receive an annual capitalization grant (dues advance) equal to half of their dues, based on their membership at the close of the NAEYC fiscal year. What Membership Costs NAEYC receives $25 for each regular and student member, and $60 for each comprehensive member. Recent analysis outlining the total cost of providing member benefits (the cost of journal production for Regular and Student members, and the cost of journal production plus book publication for Comprehensive members) revealed NAEYC s net revenue of -$2.53 per Regular member, -$2.98 per Student member, and $6.98 per Comprehensive member. In sum total, NAEYC gains $1.47 on each member. In summary, the current business model for pricing NAEYC membership at the national level results in a nearly break even formula. Attachment A provides an overview of the current total dues (local, state, regional and national) assessed throughout the Affiliate Network. Based on an original NAEYC Board Discussion Item May 2011 Page 3

4 Does Changing Dues Impact Net Revenue or Membership Numbers? NAEYC has not increased or decreased dues since of our state Affiliates have not changed their dues for the past 5 years. 18 state Affiliates have changed their dues since Analysis of these 18 states produced mixed evidence as to the impact changing dues had on either net revenue and/or membership numbers. The following five states; California, Idaho, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, and Maine are examples of the mixed evidence found. California our largest member state increased Comprehensive and Student dues by $15 and Regular dues by $5 and experienced an increase in net revenue of 3.5%, but an overall loss of 821 members. Idaho increased their Comprehensive dues by $30 and Regular by $10 and experienced a 28% decline in net revenue. Pennsylvania increased Comprehensive and Regular dues by $15 and experienced a 32% increase in net revenue and gained 449 members. Oklahoma decreased their Student dues by $30 and experienced a 20% increase in net revenue and gained 100 members to this same category. Maine increased Comprehensive dues by $14 and experienced little or no change in membership numbers over a 2 year period. Further analysis of the remaining 14 states yielded little or no impact upon their net revenue or membership numbers. Our conclusion is that there is no direct correlation between changing dues and net revenue and/or membership numbers. Based on an original NAEYC Board Discussion Item May 2011 Page 4

5 Other Influences and Factors It is important to note that many factors can influence membership numbers and net revenue; economic and political environments, the range of member benefits and services that state and local Affiliates provide, the perceived value of membership by individuals, and whether there is an ongoing recruitment and retention campaign in place. Each of the states cited in the chart all have a back story that reflect board decisions in response to their local community. Another significant factor is the significant bump and eventual loss in membership that a host state experiences when NAEYC convenes its Annual Conference in their backyard. The following graph shows the noted gain and loss of membership by the host state. A retention campaign developed in partnership with the host state Affiliate will be implemented beginning with Florida post November 2011 Annual Conference. Consideration should also be given to include those surrounding states that may experience a similar pattern with their membership. *Maryland, DC and VA all were the result of the annual conference held in Washington, DC Potential Questions to Consider within the National Dialogue Frame 1. What are the benefits and/or unintended consequences of our current bundled dues structure? 2. Should we have a more coordinated dues structure? What would it look like? 3. Should we consider a business model that does not include Affiliates? 4. What impact would a change in dues now have on the Affiliate Network and SECA in light of the National Dialogue? Based on an original NAEYC Board Discussion Item May 2011 Page 5

6 5. How can NAEYC and Affiliates ensure consistent delivery of equitable member benefits and services to our shared members across the country? 6. Based on the analysis cited, a change in dues does not necessarily impact net revenue or membership numbers. What other factors influence changes in membership? 7. Should membership be free or nearly free such as the AARP model? Based on an original NAEYC Board Discussion Item May 2011 Page 6