UGA Quota Just Raised!!

[dgdramadawg]

Originally Posted by DoctorD

Depending on what report I'm reading, 180 or 200 was the old number.

Doesn't answer the question though, does it

I heard from an active member of another chapter at UGA that total was raised from 180 to 200 last year. Then I was told after recruitment this year that total was 219. And now apparently it's being raised from whichever one of those it is?

I have come to the conclusion that total is apparently as secret at UGA as bid lists.

[SoCalGirl]

Originally Posted by Mevara

Average chapter size is the best alternative to Max or Median chapter size.

Originally Posted by Mevara

If you can get which one to pass, Average?

At our campus we currently change total to median chapter size right after formal. The problem with that is that we always have a few ladies drop in every chapter. Last year every chapter was COBing except 1.

Technically median is one type of average, just like mode and mean.
I took five quarters of three different types of statistics and that's pretty much the sum of my stats knowledge.

There in no way should be a change in total that results in most chapters doing COB.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by SoCalGirl

Technically median is one type of average, just like mode and mean.
I took five quarters of three different types of statistics and that's pretty much the sum of my stats knowledge.

There in no way should be a change in total that results in most chapters doing COB.

There are two ways of looking at this. If total is set artificially low and some chapters are much larger than total, making it impossible for the smaller groups to EVER catch up because they are capped by total, then you have to raise total to give them a chance to make up that difference. Each FR cycle it just gets worse.

Raising total too high that makes it prohibitive for chapters to ever reach and all they do is COB all the time is not the goal. But...a chapter should not argue that they don't want to have to COB to keep from raising Total if it helps the smaller chapters that need to be able to grow. It becomes very noticeable over time that XYZ is half as big as ABC even though XYZ is at total.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Raising total too high that makes it prohibitive for chapters to ever reach and all they do is COB all the time is not the goal. But...a chapter should not argue that they don't want to have to COB to keep from raising Total if it helps the smaller chapters that need to be able to grow. It becomes very noticeable over time that XYZ is half as big as ABC even though XYZ is at total.

I don't think UGA (or any of the SEC schools for that matter) have to worry about raising total too high. We're talking that probably right now total is 200, raised to 219, and there are many chapters that have 210-215. When you have 215 members getting 4 more is a piece of cake and no reason to whine.

However, when you have 30 members and are trying to get to the too-high total of 50, getting 4 more is a huge undertaking (unless you know a set of conjoined quadruplets).

This all being said...it would be good if there was a way to say to PNMs "just because total has been raised, doesn't mean that you have a snowball's chance to get into Awesome ABC that dropped you after the first round."

[HQWest]

Originally Posted by 33girl

I don't think UGA (or any of the SEC schools for that matter) have to worry about raising total too high. We're talking that probably right now total is 200, raised to 219, and there are many chapters that have 210-215. When you have 215 members getting 4 more is a piece of cake and no reason to whine.

However, when you have 30 members and are trying to get to the too-high total of 50, getting 4 more is a huge undertaking (unless you know a set of conjoined quadruplets).

This all being said...it would be good if there was a way to say to PNMs "just because total has been raised, doesn't mean that you have a snowball's chance to get into Awesome ABC that dropped you after the first round."

I do think there is a potential problem at SEC schools raising total every year. We have seen for the past couple of years that records are being broken with the number of women signing up for recruitment. For example, if you look at the Alabama numbers, the number of women signing up has almost doubled in 6 years. That is not sustainable growth.

At some point, the number of women interested and able to participate in recruitment, and that have the funds to pay dues will be reached and this surge in popularity is bound to swing back the other way. Right when it first happens, it may not be a problem and they may be able to adjust total down four or five at a time, but there is no motivation for the bigger groups to agree to do that.

This is self-correcting to a point with RFM, but if it continues and total is not adjusted down, there will still be a gap as the most popular groups will also have the best retention rates. It doesn't matter if quota is 60 and total is 180 if your graduation numbers are less than 50%. The smaller groups might try to reduce dues to keep up, but that also means changing their goals and activities.

[gatordeltapgh]

I too wonder about if and when the bubble will burst.

I can also say that there will be support for evaluating total down if and when it becomes unnecessary even in these big communities. The NPC College Panhellenic committee has been beating the drum on proper evaluation of total for several years. If one group tries to not vote in what is best for the community there will be pressure via the NPC Delegates to do the right thing for the community. With that said, as was mentioned previous COBing a few to move everyone to average should not be a big deal. Even the smaller groups deserve the opportunity to get closer to the average chapter size and their HQ will want them to have that opportunity.

We have all lived through the days of what can happen when you don't evaluate total each year. I can say that on the NPC CPH committee and NPC Delegate side, there is a commitment to doing what is right...even if that means an adjustment downward.

[33girl]

Yes, but what is that point? 5, 10, 20, 50 years?

I agree with you that retention is key, more than the focus on total and quota. I would disagree that the most popular groups (if by that you are referring to the ones most desired in rush) always have the highest retention rates.