Our churches are very slowly turning in their ACPs. My administrative associate is about to pull her hair out. Is this just paper work to keep the statisticians happy? Is there real value in putting our laity through all these numbers when apparently very few care what those numbers are now or were twelve months ago?
Some thoughts on how I use the numbers as comparisons from year to year:
1. Which churches are trying something new
2. Which churches are losing as many members as they are gaining
3. What is the ratio of baptismal additions versus other additions
4. Which churches are putting an emphasis upon discipleship training including new members classes
5. Which churches are developing mission education
6. Which churches are increasing or decreasing their spending on missions
7. Which churches are using mission activity to reach out into their communities
8. Knowing their demographic situation, which churches could use various kinds of resources and encouragement
9. Which churches can I cluster together for a focused training event
I'm open to other good ideas that are more than just comparing last year's numbers to this year.
Looking at numbers alone is not enough. Too many variables can make an effective disicple-making church look like it is in trouble (a major population shift) and a sleepy inward-focused church look active (a split in a nearby church sends several members to them). An ACP is useless unless you know the DNA of the church and have a good sense of its life dynamics. An ongoing awareness, good communication, of what each church is facing is still a key to being able to use ACPs effectively,
