Stats on Cru’s Top 25 Sending Campuses

March 17, 2015 — 3 Comments

Average Stats on Cru’s Top 25 Sending Campuses:

  • Average Sent into Full Time Ministry per year – 16 (ranging from 10-40)
  • Average Team Size – 15
  • Average Movement Size – 556
  • Students Involved/Staff – 38
  • Sending into Full Time Ministry/Student Involved – 3%
  • Sending/Staff – 1/1
  • 398 of the 918 full time laborers sent into Full Time Ministry with Cru in 2014 came from 25 campuses.
  • There are 546 total campus strategy Cru Movements (most movements focus on multiple campuses).
  • So 4% of the movements send 43% of the laborers.
    • The top 50 sending movements (9% of all Cru movements) send 64% of all laborers (these movements send 6 or more/year into full time ministry)
    • The top 100 sending movements (18%) send 77% of all laborers (these movements send 3 or more/year into full time ministry)
  • Additionally – these 25 campuses (just 4% of movements) sent 54% of Cru’s STINTers. That’s astounding.
    • There’s a less dramatic % for other types of sending from these 25 schools:
      • Interns – 36% of all interns raised up come from these 25 schools
      • Staff – 34%
      • Summer Missions – 28%

The-Top-Sending-Campuses

This is part of a series on Learning from the Top Sending Campuses in Cru.

See the intro for a full list of all the campuses profiled (and links to each). 

What can we take away from this?

The Top Sending Schools Need to Send More Than They Keep

  • This has been my big takeaway from seeing all this. On our campus, we need to send more and keep less.
  • I don’t speak for Cru or for any of these campuses except for my own (U of Arkansas), but I think the Top 25 Sending Campuses have an incredible stewardship. For whatever reason, God is using them to send almost half of the laborers for the entire Cru ministry. We should be sending generously. As Brian White at Texas A&M so powerfully said:
    • “We need to send first. In Cru, our mission is Win-Build-Send. But for most campuses it becomes Gather-Build-Keep. You will rarely have ‘enough’.”
  • Based on the need, I would say the priority should be sending overseas. But a secondary focus should be sending to the areas of the country where it is difficult to raise up laborers and where there is a very low % of evangelical Christians. Specifically the Northwest and Northeast.

 

What else can we take away?

  • These are large movements. I think we can confidently say that big sending comes from big campuses. That’s not to say that smaller movements can’t send a lot of laborers. Or that large movements will necessarily send a lot of laborers. There are large movements that are nothing more than a consumeristic weekly meeting. And there are smaller movements that are very intentional and fruitful in sending. But just looking at it logically, it’s a lot easier to send 10 seniors into full time ministry when you have 40 seniors involved.
  • These are large staff teams. One of my initial theories (before I started researching) was that perhaps big staff teams produce more laborers. I’m not sure if that is true. But, as Texas’s Director said is often true: “students join staff because of a relationship with a staff person – they’ve been really deeply, personally invested in.”
    • In light of this, the Students Involved/Staff stat is an interesting one to keep track of.
    • I know for our region, the average ratio is 30/1. I think back in the old days in Cru, the aim used to be 50/1. That you’d have 50 students involved for every staff.
    • This stat is especially encouraging if you have a smaller team and you’re trusting God for big things!
  • This would be a great goal to have as a team – “We want to send a 1 to 1 ratio for our staff team”. Do you have 10 staff on your team? Make it your goal to send 10 students into full time ministry every year. That’s the average on these Top Sending Campuses.
    • “The one who does the work is only surpassed in value by the one who multiplies the doers.” John R. Mott
  • There’s something about sending overseas on STINT that really benefits from momentum of students going together. 25 movements (just 4% of movements) sent 54% of the STINTers. It seems that staff and intern sending doesn’t see as much of a bump from having a large movement with a lot of sending momentum. My guess: the close, familial relationship with their staff that prompts students to intern or join staff can sometimes happen better in a smaller movement.


What else? Anything else jump out at you?

timcasteel

Posts Twitter

P.S. - I'd love to connect with you on Twitter: here
  • Pingback: Stats on Sending from Cru’s 10 Regions | Leading in Ministry()

  • ArchieK

    Do you have stats on the sending/staff ratio on smaller or more catalytic teams?

    • timcasteel

      I don’t, but I could pretty easily look up schools if you had some in mind. There are a couple catalytic teams that I know of that send a lot – Boston Metro & St. Louis Metro.