The Great Genealogy Merger: Five Years Later, Where’s the Beef?

The Great Genealogy Merger: An investigation into what happened after the National Genealogical Society absorbed the Federation of Genealogical Societies and why local societies are still drowning

Here’s the thing nobody wants to say out loud at conference cocktail hours: Genealogy societies are dying. They’re folding faster than a census taker in a blizzard, and the organization that was supposed to swoop in and save them has been moving at a glacial pace.

In August 2019, the Federation of Genealogical Societies (FGS) and the National Genealogical Society (NGS) announced they were merging to create what was breathlessly described as a “new NGS” that would revolutionize support for local societies. Five years later, it’s time to ask the uncomfortable question: Did the promises match the performance?

A Tale of Two Organizations

The National Genealogical Society was founded in 1903 in Washington, D.C., by a group that wanted to bring some academic rigor to the wild west of family research. For over a century, NGS has been the prestige player in American genealogy, publishing the scholarly National Genealogical Society Quarterly (NGSQ) since 1912 and positioning itself as the organization for serious genealogists who wanted certification standards and peer-reviewed methodology.

The Federation of Genealogical Societies was born in 1976 with a completely different mission: serve the societies themselves. FGS primarily focused on societies rather than individual researchers. It was about helping the people who run the county genealogical societies, the state historical associations, and the family surname organizations. FGS published Forum magazine, packed with articles about society management. They created the Society Strategy Papers series. They reviewed bylaws. They critiqued newsletters. They ran a full day of “Focus on Societies” programming at their annual conference.

FGS understood something fundamental that many in the genealogy world seemed to forget: without local societies, there’s nobody to transcribe those cemetery records, index those county deed books, or maintain the collections that commercial databases haven’t touched.

Two organizations. Two missions. One focused on individual genealogists and scholarly standards. One focused on keeping societies alive.

Guess which one absorbed the other?

The Merger: What Was Promised

On August 21, 2019, at the FGS Family History Conference in Washington, D.C., the two organizations announced they had signed a Memorandum of Understanding to merge. The combined entity would keep the NGS name and operate under a modified structure.

The press release was filled with the kind of optimism usually reserved for DNA matches with first cousins:

• FGS President Faye Stallings declared it would “allow for improved and expanded services to help support societies.“

• NGS President Ben Spratling promised to continue “the strong legacy of FGS as a ‘gathering point’ for family historians and societies all across the nation.“

The merger agreement included specific structural commitments that read like a genealogist’s prenup:

• A new Vice President of Society & Organization Management would be added to the NGS Executive Committee and Board.

• A Delegate Council (essentially the old FGS “House of Delegates”) would provide advice to the NGS Board on society-related matters.

• NGS would create a new staff position or assign existing staff to manage society services and activities.

• Future NGS conferences would include educational sessions on society management topics.

• A new bylaws objective was added: “To strengthen and grow genealogy societies, family history groups, family associations, and other genealogical organizations.”

The merger officially took effect on October 1, 2020.

What Actually Happened

Let’s look at the scoreboard.

• Forum Magazine: Discontinued. The quarterly publication that was the lifeblood of society management content for nearly 30 years was ended after the merger. NGS made archives available online to organization members, but no new dedicated publication took its place. Society management content would instead appear as “a section” in NGS Magazine, according to statements made during the merger discussions. Anyone who’s ever tried to manage a genealogy society knows the difference between a dedicated publication and “a section.”

• The Society Strategy Papers: Frozen in Time. FGS had developed an extensive series of white papers covering everything from strategies for presidents to strategies for program chairs. While these remain accessible, the pipeline for new strategy papers appears to have dried up.

• Conference Programming for Societies: Restructured. To be fair, NGS did create FOCUS, a pre-conference event for genealogy organizations held the day before the main conference. They also run the SLAM! Idea Showcase, where societies can share innovative projects. But, in my opinion, these are scaled-down versions of what FGS once offered.

• The 2024 Conference: Went Virtual. In 2023, NGS announced that the 2024 Family History Conference would be entirely online. Executive Director Matt Menashes cited challenges in the meetings and events industry following the pandemic. The irony of an organization promising to strengthen societies choosing not to offer an in-person gathering space was apparently lost on the decision-makers. The announcement letter stated, “We must address these issues by reimagining our conference.”

• The Delegate Council: Exists, Technically. There is indeed a Delegate Council with a Steering Committee. There are quarterly Zoom meetings. There is an annual in-person session at the conference. Whether this advisory body has meaningfully influenced NGS policy toward societies is harder to measure. The Council was only formally organized with a workshop in May 2021, and the first permanent steering committee came together afterwards.

Meanwhile, Societies Keep Closing

Here’s where it gets uncomfortable.

One researcher working on a genealogy project across Alabama reported that “most of them tell me they are in decline, some nearly gone. Fewer and fewer people come to meetings. No one volunteers anymore.” These trends predate the merger and are not solely attributable to NGS.

The causes are structural and demographic. The generation that created most genealogy societies in the 1960s through 1980s is aging out. The new genealogist might be forty-five or twenty-five or even seven years old, might live in a completely different state from their ancestors, and might do their research at 11 p.m. in pajamas using Ancestry.com. They’re less likely to show up at a library meeting room on a Tuesday afternoon.

Most genealogy societies in the United States were formed from the mid-1970s to the mid-1980s. This was a result of the growing popularity of genealogy due to the American Bi-Centennial and the television mini-series Roots. The founders were often largely working age adults. So where are all the 20- and 30-somethings at today’s genealogy society meetings?

Local societies are the only organizations with knowledge of and commitment to their localities. They know where the treasures are buried. They’re the ones transcribing the courthouse records that the big databases haven’t touched. They’re the passionate advocates who keep county clerks from destroying vital records.

When these societies fold, that institutional knowledge evaporates.

And how has NGS responded to this crisis? By offering a $50-$175 pre-conference event, quarterly Zoom calls, and access to magazine archives.

The Innovation Gap

Let’s talk about what modern non-profit innovation looks like.

• FamilySearch, the organization run by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has deployed artificial intelligence to index records, created collaborative online family trees, partnered with archives worldwide, and maintained a global network of Family History Centers. They’ve adapted to how modern genealogists actually work.

• Ancestry and MyHeritage have embraced mobile apps, DNA matching, photo colorization, and AI-enhanced search. They iterate constantly.

• Even smaller genealogy organizations have found ways to pivot. Some societies have built substantial YouTube channels. Others have created online databases from their unique local collections. Some have partnered with libraries to offer hybrid programming.

NGS, the 122-year-old organization that absorbed the nation’s primary federation of genealogy societies, went virtual-only for a year and then returned to in-person conferences in Louisville (2025) and Fort Wayne (2026).

The Delegate Council workshop recordings are available on YouTube. There’s a free events calendar. There are webinars. There’s a partnership with BoardSource for governance resources.

These aren’t bad things. But they’re incremental, not transformative.

The Staffing Question

NGS is a small operation. According to their GuideStar profile and strategic plan documents, they’ve focused on three key initiatives: the NGS Genealogy Learning Initiative, the NGS Local Genealogical Societies Initiative, and the NGS Family History Diversity Initiative.

The stated goal of the Local Genealogical Societies Initiative is to “collaborate directly with interested contributors in developing value that helps strengthen local genealogical organizations.”

That’s strategy-speak in my opinion and could mean almost anything. But the question persists: Is the staffing and budget allocated to society support commensurate with the promises made during the merger?

What Societies Actually Need

From my viewpoint, ask a society president what they need, and you’ll hear a remarkably consistent list:

• Help attracting younger members. The median age at most society meetings is 60 years.

• Technology training. Many societies struggle with basic digital skills, from Zoom hosting to website maintenance to social media strategy.

• Succession planning. The same twelve volunteers have been running things since 1987, and nobody wants to talk about what happens when they can’t anymore.

• Guidance on digital preservation. What happens to all those transcribed records when the society folds?

• Partnership frameworks. How do small societies collaborate with libraries, archives, historical societies, and DNA testing companies?

• Financial sustainability models. Dues don’t cover what they used to, and bake sales aren’t exactly scalable.

• Template documents. Updated bylaws, operating procedures, grant applications, partnership agreements.

FGS once provided much of this. The Society Strategy Papers addressed these issues directly. Forum magazine featured articles from practitioners sharing what worked.

What does NGS offer now? Archives of Forum. A few webinars. A pre-conference day. Access to BoardSource.

The Uncomfortable Truth

Here’s what nobody in the genealogy establishment wants to admit: the FGS-NGS merger may have saved FGS from financial collapse while simultaneously diluting its mission into an organization that has never prioritized society support as its core function.

NGS was founded to serve individual genealogists and promote scholarly standards. That’s what it knows how to do. That’s where its institutional expertise lies. That’s what its staff understands.

Society management is a different skill set entirely. It requires expertise in non-profit operations, volunteer management, local community building, and organizational turnaround. It requires dedicated resources, not leftovers.

When the merger was announced, Amy Johnson Crow, a respected genealogy educator, wrote presciently: “Just having one extra day of society management topics at the conference and a few articles in the NGS magazine won’t cut it in terms of what societies need.”

Five years later, her words read like prophecy.

Where We Go From Here

NGS isn’t evil. They’re not villains twirling mustaches while genealogy societies burn. They’re a small non-profit trying to serve multiple constituencies with limited resources.

But genealogy society leaders deserve an honest accounting.

• Did the merger deliver on its promises? Only partially. The structural elements were implemented: Vice President position, Delegate Council, bylaws amendment, conference programming. Check, check, check, check.

• Did the merger transform NGS into an organization that prioritizes society support? The evidence suggests otherwise. The DNA of NGS remains what it always was: education, scholarly publishing, and individual genealogist development. Society support is an add-on, not the main event.

What should happen now?

• NGS should publish transparent metrics on society membership, engagement, and satisfaction. How many societies were FGS members in 2020? How many are NGS members now? What’s the retention rate?

• NGS should create a dedicated society support publication. Not a section in a magazine. A resource specifically for people running organizations.

• NGS should build a crisis response capability. When a major state society is about to fold, there should be a playbook. An emergency intervention team. Something.

• NGS should partner with technology providers to offer subsidized tools for small societies. Website hosting. Email marketing. Video conferencing. Database platforms.

• NGS should advocate loudly for local societies at the policy level. When state vital records offices consider restricting access, NGS should be there. When county courthouses think about destroying old records, NGS should mobilize.

The Bottom Line

Genealogy societies are the infrastructure of American family history. They’re the local experts. They’re the record preservers. They’re the communities where new genealogists learn the craft.

Five years after the merger that was supposed to strengthen them, societies are still fighting for survival with a support system that feels like it was designed by committee and implemented by interns.

Local society leaders: you deserved better.

You still do.

GenSocSoup serves genealogy society leaders, genealogists, and family historians with news, analysis, and resources. If you’re a society leader with a story to share, reach out.

* * *

Author’s Note: I want to be transparent that this content – The Great Genealogy Merger: Five Years Later, Where’s the Beef? – was created in part with the help of artificial intelligence (AI) language models – Claude Opus 4.5 and Gemini Pro 3. The AI assisted in generating an early draft of the content, but every paragraph was subsequently reviewed, edited, and refined by me. The final content is the result of extensive human curation and creativity. I am proud to present this work and assure readers that while AI was a tool in the process, the story, style, and substance have been carefully shaped by the author.