Joint Youth Programs between the Ward and Branch shar youth programs

[danieldavis]

Our youth programs are joined together with adult and youth leaders called from both the ward and the branch serving combined youth quorums and classes. As Ward leadership how can we access the branch youth information and communicate with them? Also, how can quorum and class presidencies that have members in both the ward and the branch have access to a full list of members that they serve?

Currently, we have to request this information from the branch that has to export the information, which is only as current as the date it was exported. Communication with branch youth must be done outside the church system as it does not provide a mechanism for ward members to access these youth.

[jdlessley]

This is where out of unit records and out of unit callings are used. See the Help Center article Out-of-Unit Members and Callings. After the out of unit records are created in the other unit then the leaders, both adult and youth, are set up with callings in the other unit. This will grant the access needed in both units. The result will be that adult and youth leaders should have the same calling in both units. However, this cannot be done with the ward bishopric and the branch presidency for the Aaronic Priesthood quorums. To give them the needed access to young men contact information in the other unit, the ward bishopric can be set up as quorum advisors in the branch Aaronic Priesthood quorums and the branch presidency can be set up as quorum advisors in the ward Aaronic Priesthood quorums.

While it sounds simple, it is quite challenging to manage the out of unit member records and out of unit callings since this all must be done manually. The two units will need to communicate frequently to manage the out of unit records and callings. There is potential to have orphaned out of unit records when out of unit members move out of their home unit or when callings change.

[BrianEdwards]

Here's two other Forum threads the Search came back with, that also ask basically the same question, and essentially have the same response as jdlessley shared. As stated, the end result is what you desire, but there needs to be constant oversight to avoid a disconnect between what the ward and branch see, as changes inevitably occur.

The one additional point I'd add, is to make sure the Bishop and Branch President keep track of their individual youth stewardships, and actively share information. I'm sure they would do this regardless, but there's always a possibility with out-of-unit youth records, that the home ward Bishop (or Branch President) might not be aware of things the out-of-unit Bishop (or Branch President) might be seeing, as the out-of-unit youth is participating.

Recording presidencies in combined second hour classes

Two Wards with Combined Primary and Youth

[johnshaw]

I'd almost suggest this be a pinned message or someone combine the threads here. This is something that, over time, will only be more and more important that we have good processes around. The church will likely be decades behind this process as it is in most things that are major changes, but We all see the demographics of wards/branches/stakes/districts changing. Our families are shrinking more and more every year, our Young Me and Young Women groups are, statistically, shrinking. I live in LARGE-GROWTH area, we've split wards from one of 900 members to 2 of 450 members (three in the last 2 years) and a stake split last year.... Our Deacon's Quorum is like 4 people, our teachers are 5, our priests are 2... our young women are a bit bigger, but 10, 20 years ago in large growth areas in Utah those groups would often need to have 2 quorums. We've gone from large families to small families. We have more and more competition with school/sports, etc...

Combining Wards, doing 1 youth program per building is going to be very common and/or become the norm. We need Bishops to get more comfortable with this. We need the church to help us figure out the issues (like the one brought up here about 'stewardship') - we need to understand that the youth are what's important rather than jurisdiction, though jurisdiction is still important, but it can't get in the way of serving the needs of our youth, they are our future, and administrative squabble's that get in the way of their experience will be VERY APPARENT to them.

[johnshaw]

Not sure why I can't edit my above post, but I just wanted to say, now that church has announced smaller stakes and wards, it makes this topic even more important.

[russellhltn]

now that church has announced smaller stakes and wards,

I missed something. Where was that?

[BrianEdwards]

There was a communication today (at the local level, sent to Bishoprics and Branch Presidencies), regarding a worldwide standard for creating new units or changing stake and ward boundaries. There are now standardized minimum participation requirements for a number of listed factors.

Pertinent to the O.P., the standard states a new ward is recommended to have 20 participating youth, where "participating youth" is defined as any one of the following: tithe payer, recommend holder, has a calling, new member in first year, or attending seminary. Obviously even if this initial standard is met, every unit subsequently has substantial ebbs and flows in their youth program, including in total numbers, YM/YW balance, and ages.

My hunch is that with the new standard, the Church likely expects the norm to continue being wards handling their own youth programs, as 20 total participating youth (minimum) seems a reasonable number for local youth activities. For branches, if they are geographically removed from other units then combined activities continue to be a challenge. But if they are co-located with a ward or another branch, then that's always an option.

[russellhltn]

Interesting. Without seeing the other numbers I don't know as this would increase or decrease the size of new wards. 20 active youth sounds like a workable program to me.

Did this announcement suggest that youth programs be combined?

[johnshaw]

There was a communication today (at the local level, sent to Bishoprics and Branch Presidencies), regarding a worldwide standard for creating new units or changing stake and ward boundaries. There are now standardized minimum participation requirements for a number of listed factors.

Pertinent to the O.P., the standard states a new ward is recommended to have 20 participating youth, where "participating youth" is defined as any one of the following: tithe payer, recommend holder, has a calling, new member in first year, or attending seminary. Obviously even if this initial standard is met, every unit subsequently has substantial ebbs and flows in their youth program, including in total numbers, YM/YW balance, and ages.

My hunch is that with the new standard, the Church likely expects the norm to continue being wards handling their own youth programs, as 20 total participating youth (minimum) seems a reasonable number for local youth activities. For branches, if they are geographically removed from other units then combined activities continue to be a challenge. But if they are co-located with a ward or another branch, then that's always an option.

Let's just not gatekeep, I mean the permutations of what 20 youth means... It could as easily mean 1 young man and 19 young women as it is to be 19 young men and 1 young woman, but likely more balanced, but rarely, if ever, evenly balanced, the only way to have more evenly balanced types of activities is to have more included because the averages are easier with larger numbers. I can image amazing combined activities with other wards, and not when they aren't combined. The idea that a youth program could encompass a larger number is extremely valuable in many cases. But the important thing is that we're meeting the needs of the youth, the youth.

[johnshaw]

Interesting. Without seeing the other numbers I don't know as this would increase or decrease the size of new wards. 20 active youth sounds like a workable program to me.

Did this announcement suggest that youth programs be combined?

It's in the Newsroom. It basically takes the definitions of wards and stakes in the US/Canada to what the rest of the world has been using... 2K for a stake, 250 for a ward, etc...