Membership continues to decline?

[Jameson76]

Some membership information (and membership figures are rarely provided) National SA (formerly BSA) youth membership stood at 814,950 at the end of August 2025, down 6.35 percent from 870,177 in August 2024.  This was from a summary of the CST (Council Service Territory) roll-up numbers

 

Has National office actually published any membership information recently?

[InquisitiveScouter]

Haven't seen anything "published" is the usual manner... or in Annual Report to Congress since 2023: https://www.scouting.org/about/annual-report/

Or NAM presentations, 2024: https://nam.scouting.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2024/05/Change-the-Way-We-Work-Together.pdf

Transparency has never been a strength of BSA (my opinion).  Which is often a signal that bad news pervades and must be hidden from view. (again, opinion).

 

 

[Eagle94-A1]

CST 15 posted the following

 In August 2025, there were 51,888 Scouts in CST-15, compared to 53,544 in August 2024, reflecting a decrease of 3.09 percent. National youth membership stood at 814,950 at the end of August 2025, down 6.35 percent from 870,177 in August 2024. Results per CST-15 councils are shown in this table.

Over the past 12 months, the number of units in CST-15 decreased from 2,593 to 2519, a loss of -2.85%. Nationally, units decreased from 39, 511 to 38,582, a loss of -2.35%.

[Tron]

National is not "publicly" releasing membership numbers. It's not hard for volunteers to get those numbers though, just have to ask your district leadership. My understanding is that membership is down nationwide; however, with the new membership method we won't have a really good apples-to-apples look until December 31st. My council just did a hard shift from fundraising to recruiting, and every unit in my district was given a made up recruitment number that was arbitrary. My understanding (if the numbers being shared in my council are correct) is that my council isn't even trying to recruit to keep membership stable. Even if we hit these made up recruitment numbers we're (the council) going to come in something like 5-10% below our previous post covid membership peak for this recruitment push. 

I think the most alarming thing about what is going on is the number of units folding. All of nationals numbers, analysis, etc ... from the CST's and NAM meetings were tied to the fact that packs and troops are roughly the average same size for various reasons and that "super units" are anomalies and we need more units to actually gain more scouts.  

 

[Eagle94-A1]

With national increasing prices, and councils adding their own fees, Scouting is slowing becoming cost prohibitive for most families. And do not tell me to sell Popcorn.  We have only 1 unit in my area selling it, and they are struggling. Only reason they are doing it is to have council waive their per Scout unit charge. And I have a feeling council will backslide on that.

[Tron]

Scouting is becoming more expensive but it isn't super expensive. One of my units recently got a family back from sports. They had pulled all of their kids and pumped them into baseball and after a year of the costs of organized baseball they came right back to scouting. 

I think the expensive part of scouting is hidden by bad units and units that are too reliant on district/council based programming. One of the troops that I help with is getting ready to do its big fall campout and the cost for a weekend is currently at $70 a person. I'm struggling to understand why, with our state parks and how cheap it is to camp in them the cost should be more in line with $20 a person (for a 2 night 3 day campout). 

The council fees are ridiculous. Michigan is $85 a person which is the highest in my neck of the woods. I look across the council line and I have no idea what they are getting for that $85 that we are not getting in my council and we're barely paying a council fee here. 

[DuctTape]

2 hours ago, Tron said:

Scouting is becoming more expensive but it isn't super expensive. One of my units recently got a family back from sports. They had pulled all of their kids and pumped them into baseball and after a year of the costs of organized baseball they came right back to scouting. 

I think the expensive part of scouting is hidden by bad units and units that are too reliant on district/council based programming. One of the troops that I help with is getting ready to do its big fall campout and the cost for a weekend is currently at $70 a person. I'm struggling to understand why, with our state parks and how cheap it is to camp in them the cost should be more in line with $20 a person (for a 2 night 3 day campout). 

The council fees are ridiculous. Michigan is $85 a person which is the highest in my neck of the woods. I look across the council line and I have no idea what they are getting for that $85 that we are not getting in my council and we're barely paying a council fee here. 

I agree. I also would add I have no idea what any of us are getting for the $85 membership fee that goes to National HQ. 

 

Sorry if I sound jaded with HQ as of late; I am.

[Jameson76]

3 hours ago, Tron said:

National is not "publicly" releasing membership numbers. It's not hard for volunteers to get those numbers though, just have to ask your district leadership. My understanding is that membership is down nationwide; however, with the new membership method we won't have a really good apples-to-apples look until December 31st. My council just did a hard shift from fundraising to recruiting, and every unit in my district was given a made up recruitment number that was arbitrary. My understanding (if the numbers being shared in my council are correct) is that my council isn't even trying to recruit to keep membership stable. Even if we hit these made up recruitment numbers we're (the council) going to come in something like 5-10% below our previous post covid membership peak for this recruitment push. 

I think the most alarming thing about what is going on is the number of units folding. All of nationals numbers, analysis, etc ... from the CST's and NAM meetings were tied to the fact that packs and troops are roughly the average same size for various reasons and that "super units" are anomalies and we need more units to actually gain more scouts.  

 

Any time membership drop is discussed there are always qualifiers; well it was this, it was that, it was letting females in, it was not letting females in soon enough,  it was the Mormon Church leaving, it was letting in 5 year old Lions, it was COVID, Scouting cost too much. it's the way too long Cub program, it was the bankruptcy, we need to wait for this date to normalize, the new registration system messed up stuff, etc etc.  All very good assumptions, but an best anecdotal.  There are no facts and no real understanding of why membership continues to drop.  

There are never any facts (from districts / councils / national / executive board) to support and figure a path forward.

What SA (formerly BSA) is NOT doing is root cause analysis; for youth leaving / not joining OR for successful units.  Where are the actual exit interviews, where is the research, who is benchmarking successful units with floundering units.  Yes there is universal leader / volunteer training but what works and what doesn't?

IMHO National and Councils are mainly looking at dollars raised.  I got a survey recently about my perception (attitude??) about Scouting America.  In summary it was mainly about donations and financially supporting Scouting.  In my council there is no emphasis on adding members.  DE's focus on raising funds, so the council can hire staff to raise money.  All events are monetized.  Goal of Scouts is to raise money, that is the bar.

Until the BSA comes to really understand underlying issues, what needs and perceptions are not being met, and what needs to be changed, nothing will change.

Bottom line, 815,000 youth in 230 (or so) councils means 3,500 youth per council.  If a Council Executive (average) pay is $200K (all in) that means just for the local CE there is a burden of $57 per member.  Data suggest 3,100 or so SA employees, so that may indicate (with benefits) just labor overhead burden of +/- $190,000,000 or $233 PER YOUTH member.  That is before any other overhead costs such as IT, liability insurance.  SA (formerly BSA) needs to reduce the costs, focus on growth, and get rid of what doesn't add value.

 

[mrjohns2]

3 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

NOT doing is root cause analysis; for youth leaving / not joining OR for successful units.  Where are the actual exit interviews, where is the research, who is benchmarking successful units with floundering units. 

It wasn’t covered in the roll out of the unit metrics, but those are rooted in research. A Scouter in my district was literally the guy who came up with them. Units that score 4 or 5 have a very high (90%+) likelihood to recharter. Units with 0 or 1 have a very high likelihood to fail and not recharter. Data was gathered, by hand, for about 4 years and in the 4th year he could predict units they wouldn’t recharter very well.    

Edited 5 hours ago by mrjohns2