Thursday, November 14, 2013

RUSA Retention -- Some Data

Occasionally (meaning not so often that I can use the adjective "periodically"), my friend Bob will mention concerns regarding the retention of new RUSA members.  For example, of the 34 North Carolinians that first joined RUSA in 2010 (which is when Bob and I joined RUSA), only 10 appear to still be active. 

What is the usual retention rate of new RUSA members?
And ... there is a whole series of questions that can open up after that initial question;
However, I won't attempt to list them ... now.
Because the first thing to do is find some data that would address the initial question:
What is the usual retention rate of new RUSA members?

I'm informed that the RUSA database may have the date when an individual first joined RUSA.
However, I don't have access to the database.
Luckily, one doesn't really need to access the database to get some good data on retention, 
Because on the RUSA website, in the RBA resources section, there are Excel compatible files
That include all RUSA members by RUSA number, and
Indicates their last renewal date (which I typically refer to below as "termination date").

A comment on "last renewal date" --
I understand that RUSA does not track intermittent membership dates--
Some stop being members for awhile, return, leave, return, rinse, repeat.
Tracking that would require a lot more effort and resources
Than is needed to answer the question that RBAs and Perm-route-owners need to know:
Namely, "is the person currently a member?"
(Since the intermittent information is not needed, there is no need to retain it.) 

The information in the aforementioned files does NOT include the date when someone first joined RUSA.
However, one's RUSA number is a decent substitute.
At least I assert that it will suffice for looking at longitudinal retention rates. 

Okay, enough with the gibberish.
Here is a chart, organized by 1000-cohorts,
Showing the distribution of termination dates within each cohort.
 



RUSA #s -- Termination date within "1000 number" cohorts













Total
Term Date 1 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Term'd
12/31/1999 211








211 PBP year
12/31/2000 71 13







84
12/31/2001 31 54






85
12/31/2002 35 92 1






128
12/31/2003 89 225 132






446 PBP year
12/31/2004 26 82 135
1



244
12/31/2005 21 36 151 40





248
12/31/2006 27 35 62 143




267
12/31/2007 74 85 102 223 264



748 PBP year
12/31/2008 33 28 42 89 197 48



437
12/31/2009 28 31 36 76 85 218


474
12/31/2010 22 26 26 45 68 171 146

504
12/31/2011 43 46 43 54 62 85 297 41
671 PBP year
12/31/2012 37 44 48 53 50 110 138 407 14 901
12/31/2013 149 115 147 162 182 227 276 401 785 2,444
12/31/2014 49 49 54 67 53 95 98 119 130 103 817
12/31/2015 44 31 17 36 33 40 37 30 64 11 343 PBP year
12/31/2016 3 6 2 7 6 5 8 2 6 7 52
12/31/2017 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
beyond 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2
total 993 998 998 996 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 121 9,106
active 245 201 220 273 274 367 419 552 986 121 3,658

  • Note that the above data was obtained from the RUSA website on Nov-13-2013. 
  • I expect that approx 2/3 of the members currently shown with a termination date of 2013 will renew their memberships (most before the end of the year). 
  • You may notice that there are 15 member numbers missing from the first 4000. I don't know why, but some numbers were either skipped, or perhaps provisionally issued and then reversed.  I have not attempted to learn the specifics.  Those situations have a negligible impact on the data (and any subsequent analysis). 
  • You may notice that one person in the 5000-5999 cohort is shown as having a last terminated date prior to when that RUSA number would have been issued.  That actually gives me some comfort -- any database worth its salt ought to have an error or two embedded in it somewhere. 
 
It is my intention to limit this post to the publication of the data.
Any subsequent "analysis" will come in later posts.

If you have any analysis-type questions that come to your mind when you see the above,
Please leave a comment with said question.

No comments:

Post a Comment