Why this exists
Clubs don't lose members in arguments. They lose them quietly.
Sodalitas is Latin for fellowship — a company of people who choose each other. It is built for one problem, and it is worth being plain about which one.
North American Rotary membership has fallen by roughly a third in two decades. That number gets quoted at district conferences, usually followed by a recruitment initiative. Recruitment is not the problem. Clubs bring in new members most years. They just lose slightly more than they bring in, and the losses are invisible until the annual count.
A member misses a meeting for an ordinary reason. They miss the next one because the first made it easier. Nobody calls, because everybody assumes somebody else did. Six weeks later coming back feels awkward, and awkwardness is a more powerful force than any of us like to admit. The resignation email, when it eventually arrives, is a formality — the membership ended months earlier.
Meanwhile the club's software recorded all of it faithfully and told nobody. It knew the attendance. It knew they were on no committee. It knew nobody had spoken to them since March. It had every fact required to say call Margaret this week, and it was never asked, because association software is built to record a club rather than to notice one.
Software that only records who is a member is software that records the decline.
So this product has one job it will not compromise on: watch what the club already writes down, and every week say something specific and actionable about a named person, with the evidence attached. Everything else here — the roster, the meetings, the dues, the public page — exists partly for its own sake and partly because it produces the facts that job runs on.
The scoring is deliberately not AI. It is a fixed set of rules over facts your club recorded, published in full, producing the same score from the same inputs every time. You can read exactly why somebody was flagged, and disagree, and the disagreement is kept. A model that produced a number nobody could interrogate would be easier to build and worth much less — a club that can't argue with its software stops trusting it, and then stops entering data, and then the whole thing is a more expensive spreadsheet.
Some things we've decided
Never tell a club it is failing. Volunteers run these clubs in the evenings after their actual jobs. A dashboard that scolds them is one they stop opening, and it will have been technically correct the whole time.
A club's roster belongs to that club. Districts see rollups. Assistant governors see the clubs they're assigned to. Cross-club sharing strips identifying detail before it leaves, and refuses entirely in groups too small to anonymise.
Say what we don't do. Every feature page names its limits in the same size type as its claims, and the comparison page says where ClubRunner and DACdb each do more than we do.
We never hold your money. Clubs connect their own Stripe account. Dues and donations land in the club's bank, and we take no percentage of them.
Access expires on its own. Rotary offices turn over every July. Roles carry end dates, so last year's treasurer stops having the keys without anybody having to remember.
This is new, and that's a real cost
ClubRunner and DACdb have been serving Rotary for decades and have earned the trust that comes with it. We haven't. If your club needs a deep website builder or direct Rotary International synchronisation, they are the better answer today and we say so on the comparison page. What we do better is the one thing this was built for.