Schools with most inactive NPC chapters

[NutBrnHair]

Originally Posted by violetpretty

However, this is before release figures or before quota was set to allow for optimum matching. Since I have recruitment data from the past 20 years at Maryland, I was looking at 1994.
Total women participating in bid matching=442
Quota=36
Number of sororities filling quota (out of 15)=5 (4 more came close, the other 6 missed it by a lot)
So, in case you don't have a calculator out, 442/15=29.5, so quota SHOULD have been around 29-30. Why on earth was quota set so ungodly high? NO WONDER smaller chapters closed!

Interesting... The NPC Rush Resolutions came out in 1991, but as 33 said -- many campuses chose to still do their own thing. Even without using release fiquers, the simple formula for determining quota has been around for MANY years.

[violetpretty]

Originally Posted by NutBrnHair

Interesting... The NPC Rush Resolutions came out in 1991, but as 33 said -- many campuses chose to still do their own thing. Even without using release fiquers, the simple formula for determining quota has been around for MANY years.

I was thinking maybe that 36 was the optimal number to match as many women as possible. If the big chapters don't make heavy cuts after the first round, the damage is done. The large chapters will have big preference parties and the small chapters will have small preference parties. Then again, this was still back in the days of hand-matching bids, so I doubt the Panhellenic and chapter recruitment advisors would have done a quota range by hand to figure out how to best match the optimal number of women. I just am scratching my head at why they picked 36.

I don't know if many other schools set quota too high, but I am sure that not using the RFM surely didn't help Pi Phi, AGD, AXiD, and Gamma Phi at Maryland.

[ValpoKD]

[QUOTE=violetpretty;1646055]I was thinking maybe that 36 was the optimal number to match as many women as possible. If the big chapters don't make heavy cuts after the first round, the damage is done.

The seemingly high figure could be the result of setting quota too early. In the past, I have seen that some campuses would set quota based on the number of women after the second round, on the night before Preference, etc and not make any adjustments as women withdrew or were dropped from recruitment. Hence an unrealistic quota! It just seems so obvious that the final quota should have been based on a number relating to preference (ex. number of invitations accepted).

I explained this once to a chapter advisor who was complaining that quota was lower. When I looked at the stats for the years she was addressing, there were not enough women attending preference for each chapter to have a decent shot at the quota set 1-2 days earlier.

Would this have solved everything for all chapters? No, but it certainly did not help.