Texas Registration 2014

[lynca]

I wanted to get all the bright minds together to discuss the Texas Registration Problem.

Current Texas registration is around 90 teams, which is a significant drop from 139 in 2013.

Here's a chart of the Texas Registration Growth since 2003
http://2013.discobots.org/node/84

Any ideas on how to revive these teams ?

[rsisk]

Get your RD or your Senior Mentor to give you a list of contacts for last year's teams and reach out to them.

Find out why they haven't returned and work on those issues. Prioritize by teams most likely to be sustainable.

Keeping teams around takes constant work. Training during the off season, help during the build season, and constantly looking for funds.

[Karthik]

Those numbers are pretty staggering. Of the 227 FRC teams to have existed between 2003 and 2013, only 83 remain today. That's 37% survival rate. Here it is broken down by rookie year. Listed is the number of teams who are registered for 2014 who were rookies in that year, followed by the number of rookies for that given year. The data only goes back to 2003, as that's all that I could pull from the FIRST website, thus the 2003 number is all teams that exist for 2014 who existed in 2003, followed by the total number of Texas teams in 2003.

2003 - 11/19
2004 - 3/12
2005 - 1/2
2006 - 2/8
2007 - 1/5
2008 - 4/9
2009 - 16/50
2010 - 10/23
2011 - 11/43
2012 - 16/33
2013 - 8/23

I'd be curious to see if these attrition rates are on par with what's happening in the rest of North America. There's probably some value in pulling all this data on a state/provincial level once registration closes for the 2014 season. A 37% survival rate sounds very low at first glance, but when you think about it relative to FIRST's typical growth rate and rookie team rate, it does make sense.

[dodar]

Man, what happened between 2005-2009? In those 5 years Texas had half as many rookies as in 2010 alone.

[jessjank.]

The trends you all are referring to certainly appear troubling.

I can't speak for the rest of Texas, but the RD/Assistant RD, Senior Mentor, and Vista staff for Alamo have been busy over the past month contacting all teams who have not yet registered.

In quite a few cases, teams aren't coming back because teachers/lead mentors have been lost. I've been trying to connect teams in those situations, when possible, to other teams to try to help them work through that difficulty. In other cases, teams are just being really slow to actually register although they are still intending to... I've given them quite a bit of prodding.

However, we need to compare these present numbers to last year. I posted some old data below for reference.

[jee7s]

Expanding on Karthik's 2003 numbers, the 11 remaining teams are: 57, 118, 148, 231, 418, 457, 499, 624, 647, 653, and 704. However, none of those were rookies that year.

Per TheBlueAlliance and FIRST's info, here are the rookie year breakdowns for surviving teams who had a rookie season prior to 2009:

2008: 2468, 2583, 2587, 2613
2007: 2158
2006: 1801, 1817
2005: 1642
2004: 1255, 1296, 1477
2003: <none>
2002: <none>
2001: 499, 624, 647, 659, 704
2000: 418, 457
1999: 231
1998: 57
1997: 118
...
1992: 148

The current team numbering scheme didn't go into effect until 1998, as I recall. So, that's why 57 has a lower team number than 118 even though 118 has been around a year longer.

Maybe that was too much detail, but I think it definitely shows the drought was longer than just the 2005-2009 stretch.

The 2009 jump probably has to do with the state grant program. I think it was a Texas Workforce Commission grant program that ran from 2009 to 2011. I was still with FRC 41 back in NJ for the 2009 season, so some locals might have to correct me on that. Anyway, that program started a whole bunch of teams because schools could get registration money quickly and easily. It's sad to see that so few survived.

[BBray_T1296]

Originally Posted by jee7s

I think it was a Texas Workforce Commission grant program that ran from 2009 to 2011. I was still with FRC 41 back in NJ for the 2009 season, so some locals might have to correct me on that. Anyway, that program started a whole bunch of teams because schools could get registration money quickly and easily. It's sad to see that so few survived.

Correct. The Texas Workforce Commission funded the entry fee for all Texas team's first regional registration for a few years. This has not been the case for recent years, and many teams who sprung up and depended on that money to subsidize their programs could not fund themselves anymore.

Proud to be a part of one of the 3 surviving rookies in Texas from 2004!

[Kyler Hagler]

IIRC the Texas Workforce grant is still active, now i don't know about rookie help specifically but i do believe you can still apply for it (I might be wrong). I know they help pay entry fees for teams to be able to go to championships but I don't know if they still pay regional registration fees.

[Steven Donow]

In a similar vein, I'd assume the 2011 and 2012 jump in rookies probably is related to the JCPenney sponsorships(and weren't they a title sponsor for the Dallas Regional?)

[Adrienne E.]

Originally Posted by KylerHagler

IIRC the Texas Workforce grant is still active, now i don't know about rookie help specifically but i do believe you can still apply for it (I might be wrong). I know they help pay entry fees for teams to be able to go to championships but I don't know if they still pay regional registration fees.

Through FIRST In Texas you can still apply for a Texas Workforce Commission Grant and more (http://firstintexas.org/).
"Each organization which provides funding for these grants has their own targets and goals for their funding. By completing this application your team will be reviewed for eligibility for all grants, and considered for all grants the team is eligible for. All of the information collected in this application is relevant to the targets or goals of one or more of our grantors."


It specifically states that you can use any money received for entry fees or equipment somewhere in the application. However the application process is extensive and required a lot of information that was impossible for me to find (or legally report). I filled out the application in August and I'm still waiting for a response. I've called twice and they have given me the same generic answer both times "We review all grants weekly, eventually we will get back to you."

Since 2010 they have paid championship registration for any Texas team that qualified at a Texas regional. They told us last year that this funding is subject to change every year and we didn't find out about the funding until about 6 days before St. Louis.

If it's frustrating to me, I have to assume I'm not the only one. This could be a deterrent for some teams.

[BBray_T1296]

Originally Posted by DevenStonow

In a similar vein, I'd assume the 2011 and 2012 jump in rookies probably is related to the JCPenney sponsorships(and weren't they a title sponsor for the Dallas Regional?)

Yes, as their world HQ is in Dallas. That is where kickoff was for a while, and JCPenney was the reason the Dallas Regional(s) were in the expensive-and-massively-oversized-but-convenient-and-awesome Dallas Convention Center.

Since the company is struggling, they have cut most (if not all) funding for robotics teams. The regional has since (2013-now) moved to the appropriately sized Irving Convention Center (30 minutes away), and many of the teams who relied on their funding are worse off than they were.

I know the Texas Workforce Commission did not pay for our first regional in 2012, and maybe not even in 2011. Honestly I do not know more than that.

[jessjank.]

FIRST in Texas has gone through major changes this season. It is now under entirely new management - Skillpoint Alliance based in Austin, Texas. Skillpoint has been a longtime FLL Affiliate Partner and Central Texas FTC event manager, however, they have limited experience with FRC. The transition to a new FiT manager less experienced with FRC is part of the reason the granting process is going much more slowly this year. Down the road, the process should hopefully go far more efficiently and we'll reap a variety of benefits from this new partnership. For now, I know it's certainly frustrating for teams.

Another issue faced this year with regard to granting money is that the Texas Workforce Commission is being more assertive about prioritizing money going to teams that meet certain characteristics (regardless of whether they are actual indicators of a team's financial need). They are targeting teams whose members:

• are in 9th through 12th grade ONLY
• from economically disadvantaged families
• are enrolled in schools on military bases
• have disabilities
• are home schooled
• are from traditionally underserved populations (females, minorities, and from rural areas)

Once FiT has granted funding to as many teams as possible who match some of those characteristics, they will then be extending grant money to other teams who have applied. This is further slowing things down and contributing to a less than ideal situation for many teams.

Additionally, there are less Texas Workforce Commission funds to go around this year. Veteran teams may be granted between $2,500 to $3,000. Rookies may be granted between $6,000 and $7,000. There are a little over 50 veteran FRC grants (compared to 80+ last year) and around 18 grants for new FRC teams. Additionally, FiT will likely be granting only half of the registration funds to cover teams Championship registration costs, though that is still being finalized.

For your reference: Attached is an official FIRST in Texas document regarding Texas Workforce Commission Grants that details much of the above information.

[jessjank.]

Originally Posted by lynca

I wanted to get all the bright minds together to discuss the Texas Registration Problem.

Current Texas registration is around 90 teams, which is a significant drop from 139 in 2013.

Here's a chart of the Texas Registration Growth since 2003
http://2013.discobots.org/node/84

Any ideas on how to revive these teams ?

So, I went back to the numbers from around this point in last year, Andy, where you made a very similar observation about Texas bleeding teams. In reality, it appears that this is actually a very typical (although frustrating) trend in Texas. Texas teams have been historically VERY SLOW to get registered. Here's a quote from Mark McLeod on the Registration 2013 thread from 11/06/2012:

Originally Posted by Mark McLeod

This is a snapshot, so for a valid comparison to draw those kinds of conclusions, you have to compare the Texas numbers from comparable dates.

Last year on this date, Texas showed a -32.6% growth over the previous year, so this is actually 11% better than that.
The actual registration numbers for Texas on comparable dates are 2012: 97 teams vs 2013: 117 teams (currently ~20% growth), but remember this higher spurt is just last year's rookie teams registering earlier than they did last year.

Right now, a couple weeks out from the same date last year, we're at a ~33.9 loss. I expect (and hope!) we'll be looking better in Texas a month from now. In the end, we may have either positive (preferable) or negative growth, but as of right now, we're pretty much on track with past Texas registration trends.

[itsjustmrb]

When we take a look at Texas teams and grants, we also have to look at the big picture. If we qualify for a $3000 grant, that money is going to be well spent, but we still have to keep in mind what we describe as a "local regional". Our local Alamo regional tournament is 150 miles away from us, so if we take 24 kids and a few mentors it is very expensive. The local regional with registration, travel, hotel and meals will cost us over $12,000. That does not include robot parts, give aways, team uniforms, ets. If we start analyzing what happened to the Texas teams, we might have to start looking at whether they are urban or rural and the proximity to a "local" regional.

On a side not, we had 78 students register for our team this year...I am affraid to calculate travel costs for that many :-)

Mr. B.

[s1900ahon]

Originally Posted by itsjustmrb

If we start analyzing what happened to the Texas teams, we might have to start looking at whether they are urban or rural and the proximity to a "local" regional.

Great point. I keep forgetting the mere 75 miles we go to Alamo is half that for you guys.

In addition to the geographic location of the ephemeral teams, we should also look at the life time distribution. Single year teams in El Paso (for example) could simply have found that a rookie grant of $6K didn't cover the additional $6K for travel and stuff. Combine that with other possible factors (*) and a picture might emerge.

But I suspect that there will be a high rate of ephemeral teams in heavy urban areas too.

-Scott

(*) Factors including..
- Local sponsors (other than state grant provider or school).
- Access to long-term mentors. I know that 2468 would fold without Coach Norm, but I also know he can't do it himself either.
- Committed school and district administration. Schools must be willing to celebrate successful years and help work through unsuccessful years. If a school administration looks on robotics like they do Texas football, they miss the point of FIRST's mission and values.
- Competition for mind share with Texas traditional activities (Football, Band, Cheer, etc.). As someone who moved to Texas from Ontario, I was really taken by surprise just how focused Texas schools *and communities* are on Friday night activities. I've yet to see a picture of a high-school robot on the walls of a Dairy Queen.