When and How do you count attendance in sacrament?

I have been a clerk for many years off and on for multiple bishops. I have always counted sacrament during the intermediate hymn. This way I do not interrupt someone who is speaking and possibly fluster them.

I have not found any written guidance in the HBOI. So I am curious what the common practice is among the other saints in Zion.

We count right after the Sacrament.

Our ward also counts after the Sacrament, but not "right after." When I was clerk, I instructed the assistant clerks (and followed the same practice myself) to try to start the count between speakers to minimize the disruption. The actual timing was left up to who was counting that week. We did not do this during any hymns, at the request of our Stake Presidency.

We do it completely wrong probably. When I was called as bishop, I told our ward clerk to do a count of both the sacrament cups used and physically and compare them for a couple of months. He then came up with a number he needs to add to the sacrament cup count. My Teachers Quorum president now gives him a sacrament cup count each week, and he adds his number.

He does a spot check a couple of times a year to see if the number needs adjusting.

I figure it is within the margin of error for a physical count...

TinMan wrote:We do it completely wrong probably.

I figure it is within the margin of error for a physical count...

Well, that process is certainly not disruptive. And if you get an accurate attendance count . . .

Not that I would condone doing it that way, but I am curious as to how much variation there was in the "add factor" when you physically counted. I suppose if the variation was only one or two or three, I might be okay with it. But if it was plus or minus 10 or something, I am not so sure I would want to do it that way.

(I am not speaking of the actual number you add, but of the variation in that number as you sampled the actual attendance.)

I think the current number is 14, but we know we have 8 babies...
And I know a couple on sacrament restrictions.

I figure if we are within 4 or 5 in 290 average, we are close enough.

In fact, I can almost guess from the stand now.

When I was called as bishop (a number of years ago in another state) my Stake President instructed me on his idea of the Sacrament Cup method (count the sacrement cups used and then add 10%) to be used if it was not possible to do the count on a particular Sunday.

We never had to resort to that, though.

I've counted sacrament cups, but only so I can calculate when I need to order more.

Whenever you count, it's going to be a bit disruptive. We always wait until after the sacrament is over. I've found I can count most heads standing in the back by the doors, but I'm fairly tall...

Almost seems like you could keep a ward list, tick off any member of the family in attendance and just count the rest....

JohnShaw wrote:Almost seems like you could keep a ward list, tick off any member of the family in attendance and just count the rest....

In our ward, we can't make the assumption that if one family member is present, all the rest of the family members are present. (yes, I saw the smiley, but just to clarify...)

I think each ward needs to come up with a system that works for them and keeps disruption to a minimum. Since the numbers are averaged, a small error will usually not affect the average enough to be significant.

Other than March, June, September and December, how accurate do you need to be?

That depends on what the ward and stake leadership want.

Really? You are saying some bishops and Stake Presidents look at sacrament meeting attendance numbers every month?

I wish I had that kind of time.

TinMan wrote:Really? You are saying some bishops and Stake Presidents look at sacrament meeting attendance numbers every month?

I wish I had that kind of time.

It would take approximately one minute of the bishop's time to tell the ward clerk: "Please count sacrament meeting attendance each week. If you see any unusual changes, let me know." The rest is up to the ward clerk -- the bishop should never have to worry about it again, unless his trusty ward clerk finds something unusual.

Or if the bishop wants to see the actual numbers, the clerk can present those numbers to him once a month (or whenever the bishop wants), which could consume another minute or so of the bishop's time each month. Bishops are busy with their ministry, but if a bishop thinks this is an important metric to stay on top of, he can afford a couple of minutes a month to review it.

Perhaps aebrown.

For me, it is just easier to review the "key indicators" graphs in the leadership section at the end of every quarter. I can see like 10 "trends" all at the same time. Takes about 2 minutes once a quarter.

Isn't it why those key indicators are there?

TinMan wrote:For me, it is just easier to review the "key indicators" graphs in the leadership section at the end of every quarter. I can see like 10 "trends" all at the same time. Takes about 2 minutes once a quarter.

Isn't it why those key indicators are there?

Those key indicators are based on the quarterly report, and as such contain statistics from only the last month of the quarter. I was responding to a discussion of why and how a bishop might request statistics for the other two months of the quarter.

But if a bishop wants a nice visual representation of the trends for the information on the quarterly report, then I agree with you 100% -- the Key Indicators section of Leader Resources is an excellent choice for that.

Besides. Monthly sacrament meeting attendance fluctuates so much because of farewells/homecomings, baby blessings, vacations, Christmas programs, Primary programs, and so on, I would think checking every month would be rather useless.

but that is just me.

Go ahead and pour over the numbers every month if you wish.

I agree with AEBrown's point. If a Stake President wants the information reported monthly, it is within his authority to instruct his wards to do so. Our past Stake President did just that while I served on the High Council - each ward reported the same information as on the quarterly report on an Open Office Spreadsheet to the Stake Clerk who compiled the stake numbers. The Stake President reviewed the information with the High Council and asked for specific actions when an unexplained trend began to surface.

Later as serving as Ward Clerk, I found that a monthly process was easier to keep going than a quarterly process with the Ward Organizations.

Our current Stake President abandoned that practice. Not to say the first Stake President was wrong - just that he had a different focus.

I don't disagree. The Stake President can ask for anything he wants. I just don't see a one month drop or rise in Sacrament meeting attendance as "a trend." That's all.

TinMan wrote:I don't disagree. The Stake President can ask for anything he wants. I just don't see a one month drop or rise in Sacrament meeting attendance as "a trend." That's all.

1 point does not a trend make. However, by the time a quarterly report identifies a trend, over half a year has gone by which can make a difference at the ward level. One does need to be careful to not overreact to single points above or below the norm without understanding why.

Putting the data in a spreadsheet allows one to do a quick trend analysis to avoid overreacting to individual points of data.

davesudweeks wrote:

TinMan wrote: However, by the time a quarterly report identifies a trend, over half a year has gone by which can make a difference at the ward level.

Possibly. But I would like to see a real life example of a ward that spotted a trend in sacrament meeting attendance in this manner that they couldn't spot by quarterly figures.

Why does the church only plot it quarterly on their key indicator chart when they gather data every month?

TinMan wrote:I would like to see a real life example of a ward that spotted a trend in sacrament meeting attendance in this manner that they couldn't spot by quarterly figures.

Most or our good bishops will look out over the congregation each Sunday and see which way the trend is going. They will have taken action long before the report comes out, and the report will merely confirm their understanding of what they have been seeing from week to week.

TinMan wrote:But I would like to see a real life example of a ward that spotted a trend in sacrament meeting attendance in this manner that they couldn't spot by quarterly figures.

One of the ward clerks in my ward did some analysis and found that June (summer vacations) and December (vacations, visitors, C&E members, etc.) actually tended to be outliers (you can also find multiple threads on this forum that would concur). So looking at each month in the year made it easier to spot trends that were otherwise obscured by the limited quarterly data. And of course, that allows the trends to be seen much sooner.

TinMan wrote:Why does the church only plot it quarterly on their key indicator chart when they gather data every month?

The church (meaning Church headquarters) doesn't gather data every month -- they only gather data quarterly. So that's the only data available for the key indicator chart.

aebrown wrote:

TinMan wrote: The church (meaning Church headquarters) doesn't gather data every month -- they only gather data quarterly. So that's the only data available for the key indicator chart.

my mistake.

I thought my clerk and quorum/rs secretaries were inputting data every month. I will double check.

thanks

TinMan wrote:I thought my clerk and quorum/rs secretaries were inputting data every month. I will double check.

It's possible that they are gathering it each month. As pointed out, it far easier to make it a monthly habit then to try and start it up every third month.

But instead of just gathering it, I thought they were inputting it into the same place they did for quarterly reports, which is where CHQ gathers the data.

The things I have always assumed...

sigh.

It seems to be hard enough for some clerks to get the report in every quarter.

TinMan wrote:But instead of just gathering it, I thought they were inputting it into the same place they did for quarterly reports, which is where CHQ gathers the data.

Hopefully they are not putting it in the same place. That data exists only for the quarterly report. So in April, the March figures are put into the Q1 quarterly report.

If in May a clerk then tries to put the April figures somewhere, the only option would be the exact same place the March figures were put -- the Q1 quarterly report. That will have the effect of overwriting the April figures and submitting an adjustment to the Q1 quarterly report, which is not at all the right thing to do. The Q2 entry fields don't even become available until July, so there's nowhere to put April or May figures except for a place that will make a big mess of unit statistics.

Nevermind.

I get up and count right after the sacrament is passed. Several people usually get up and walk out (either to go to the bathroom, or to leave) and I count them. Then I walk up and down the aisles because it's easy to miss children who might be laying down, or kneeling on the floor coloring or something. Then I count anybody sitting in the foyer, or in the hallways that I didn't previously count. Then when I'm done, I take note who arrives late and count them as well.

We don't count cups. I wouldn't think that would be very accurate. What about children, or infants who didn't take it? What about individuals who couldn't take it, or people who came late after it was passed, or left before it was passed. We want to be as accurate as possible.

Our bishop also wants to know what the attendance is each Sunday, so I put it on a spreadsheet so he can take a quick glance. It takes 2 seconds for him to see how many people came last Sunday, or even the previous Sundays. It really takes no time at all for him to do that.

jasonfitt wrote:We don't count cups. I wouldn't think that would be very accurate. What about children, or infants who didn't take it? What about individuals who couldn't take it, or people who came late after it was passed, or left before it was passed. We want to be as accurate as possible.

I have a friend in another stake who was instructed by his Stake Clerk to count cups and add 10% to factor in the exceptions you mentioned. He did the normal walking count for a couple of months along with counting cups. His experience was that it was surprisingly accurate. I would expect that in a ward with lots of toddlers/infants, the method would under-count and in a more mature ward, it might over-count. But he did say that both methods were usually within 3 or 4 members of each other.

We count cups and add 10%.

For a few weeks I was tasked with trying to find the most accurate number. So one week I tried counting heads in sacrament. That method was HARD, you can't see everyone, and I undercounted by about 30. Then I spent some Sundays watching all doors and keeping track of people. Turns out that many people still quietly filter in after sacrament. And adding in babies who don't take the sacrament, adding 10% onto sacrament cups was the most accurate method.

helix400 wrote:For a few weeks I was tasked with trying to find the most accurate number.

You can't get anymore accurate than going row by row and counting heads.

helix400 wrote:So one week I tried counting heads in sacrament. That method was HARD, you can't see everyone, and I undercounted by about 30.

Whats hard about going row by row and counting heads?

helix400 wrote:Then I spent some Sundays watching all doors and keeping track of people. Turns out that many people still quietly filter in after sacrament.

Then count later during the meeting, during the intermediate hymn or right after the hymn.

helix400 wrote:And adding in babies who don't take the sacrament, adding 10% onto sacrament cups was the most accurate method.

10% of a 190 would be 19. I seriously doubt any ward has 19 babies at a time, or even 19 people coming in late.

Gary_Miller wrote:I seriously doubt any ward has 19 babies at a time, or even 19 people coming in late.

That would be quite an underestimation in our ward. We checked both ways for a while and the number to add fluctuated from 17% to 24%. Too unreliable, so we still count bodies.

Sometimes it's nice being in a small branch. As 1st councilor, I can sit on the stand and quietly count everyone. Not only do I count them but I KNOW who everyone is, unless a visitor comes in late.

There are many things difficult about a small branch, but this is one of the many nice things. Even little things can be nice.

Gary_Miller wrote:You can't get anymore accurate than going row by row and counting heads.... Whats hard about going row by row and counting heads?

Not so. For a few weeks I tried. The problem is that some kids are surprisingly hard to spot. Another issue is that many families are coming in and out of sacrament, or are in bathrooms, in the car, in a classroom getting ready, in the library, etc. Another is that many families leave after the sacrament. Another is that many families show up well after the sacrament and just hang out outside until sacrament ends. So for that month, I was constantly walking around the entire building, inspecting every classroom, watching every door, remembering every face, and counting heads as accurately as possible. In Bishopric meeting we compared the cups numbers and my detailed count numbers. The bishopric saw that taking sacrament cups, and adding 10%, was surprisingly accurate. So that's my direction to follow.

Gary_Miller wrote:10% of a 190 would be 19. I seriously doubt any ward has 19 babies at a time, or even 19 people coming in late.

I shared your skepticism. I advocated for just taking the amount of cups and adding 5. The Bishopric tasked me with a very accurate count of heads. Turns out I was wrong, adding 5 isn't enough to be accurate.

helix400 wrote:The Bishopric tasked me with a very accurate count of heads. Turns out I was wrong, adding 5 isn't enough to be accurate.

The way you are doing it now is never accurate. I would say that its virtually impossible to be 100% accurate.

We take the count at the same time every week right after the sacrament is passed. We go row by row so we can see everyone who is on the row, then we count those who are in the fower and that's it. The key is consistency taking it the same time and/or same way each and every time.

JohnShaw wrote:Almost seems like you could keep a ward list, tick off any member of the family in attendance and just count the rest....

I've seen this done before, someone or a couple of people on the stand have lists of members and they mark people they see. I think this is a great way to be aware of who's attending and not attending, as long as it can be done inconspicuously.

I always prefer to count during the intermediate hymn. On fast Sundays I try to count as much as I can from my seat, then verify during the closing hymn.

Gary_Miller wrote:The way you are doing it now is never accurate. I would say that its virtually impossible to be 100% accurate.

It's a decision made by our bishopric after consulting the handbook, doing research, and choosing an approach they felt was the closest possible to being accurate.

Overall, no approach is 100% accurate. Our ward has significant movement during the entire sacrament meeting hour. We found that counting heads right after sacrament is less accurate. Cups + 10% is simply more accurate for us.

I was pleasantly surprised to see this topic and read of other wards and stakes that do the same thing we do. We came up with our approach independently of others.

I had never given it a thought. We have always counted immediately after the sacrament. My assumption given that when I was made clerk was the goal for attendance count was those present for the sacrament. If they came in late enough to miss that then it didn't count. So likely our count has been low from the late arrivals by 5 to 10 each week if any attendance counts.

When I was growing up the clerk sat in the stands behind the sacrament table. As the priesthood went back to their families following the priesthood he walked the aisles and counted. After the remodel that wasn't convenient so I walk from the back up and count up one side and back down the other one row of benches at a time.

jirp wrote:My assumption given that when I was made clerk was the goal for attendance count was those present for the sacrament. If they came in late enough to miss that then it didn't count. So likely our count has been low from the late arrivals by 5 to 10 each week if any attendance counts.

I have not read anything that specifies to only count those who are present while the sacrament is being passed. I'm not sure where you get that from, but if you can find anything please post. Under 'Clerk Resourses' in LDS.org it says to, "Include in your count all individuals who attended sacrament meeting, members and nonmembers alike." To me, that means count all who attended anytime during that hour and 10 minutes. So, I count whoever comes in late, or leaves early regardless of whether they were there for the passing of the sacrament.

If you have direction from your Priesthood leader then I would follow that council, however, if not, I would tend to be more liberal in my counting - It is the bulk of money that funds the ward's activities.. it ought to represent the actual activity.

I used to walk around and count head now I seat at the opposite side of the Sacrament table which used to be were the clerks used to sit and take tally, I use the app Tally Counter on my iPad and start when the sacrament song starts most of the time I'm done before sacrament starts. I watch the YM that goes into our foyer if hes quick no one out there if he out for a bit I watch the door and count them as they come in.