Counting centres and their members

1 Types of Shambhala Groups and Centres

Using administrative data, there are several ways of assessing how many centres or groups are active in Shambhala. Each may tell a different story or a different facet of the whole story. For example, we can look at activity levels in different ways, such as:

by whether a centre or group is marked as “active” in the SDB (an administrative designation based on leadership communication with SGS),
by whether a group or centre has people affiliated with it (See Section 2 for a year-to-year comparison),
by whether the group or centre offers programs requiring registration, and
by whether people affiliated with a centre or group register for programs offered at any location (e.,g., including online or at other centres). (See Activity level comparison for a year-to-year comparison of these two measures of activity level.)

Table 1

	Status and type	Centres	Members	% of total
Active members and centres 2026 year-end snapshot
	Shambhala Meditation Centre	63	4,223	70%
	Shambhala Meditation Group	48	527	9%
	Shambhala Online and Global	2	922	15%
	Practice Centre	10	308	5%
	Other	10	15	0%
Total	—	133	5,995	100.0%

At the end of 2026, 64 Shambhala Centres and 48 Groups were recorded as active, down from 65 Centres and 49 Groups a year earlier.

Table 2

	Status and type	Centres	Members	% of total
Active members and centres 2025 year-end snapshot
	Shambhala Meditation Centre	65	4,205	69%
	Shambhala Meditation Group	49	631	10%
	Shambhala Online and Global	2	916	15%
	Practice Centre	10	302	5%
	Other	8	1	0%
	Retreat Place	1	0	0%
Total	—	135	6,055	100.0%

Membership affiliated with Shambhala Online and Global rose modestly from 916 in 2025 to 923 in 2026, a much smaller shift than the mass reassignment seen in the prior year’s transition, when centre dissolutions pushed several hundred members into that category at once.

Table 3

	Status and type	Centres	Members	% of total
Active members and centres 2024 year-end snapshot
	Shambhala Meditation Centre	65	4,500	79%
	Shambhala Meditation Group	49	676	12%
	Shambhala Online and Global	2	166	3%
	Practice Centre	10	343	6%
	Other	8	1	0%
	Retreat Place	1	0	0%
Total	—	135	5,686	100.0%

This table provides a context for the qualitative findings in the survey.

The 923 members who are affiliated with Shambhala Global Services (SGS) in 2026 is only slightly higher than the 916 recorded in 2025, a much smaller change than the 2024-to-2025 transition, when several hundred members whose centres dissolved were reassigned to SGS. The survey data indicates that members who do not relate to a center tend to rate their sense of belonging and willingness to recommend Shambhala as low. The Societal Mirror has not included direct questions about how how people could reconnect to a Shambhala community, whether personally or by digital means

2 Counting groups and centres by size of membership

Land centers and an online-only group are excluded from this analysis, as they do not fit into the size categories.

Grouped bar chart comparing the count of active Shambhala centres and groups in four size categories — Small, Medium, Large, and Largest — across three years (2024, 2025, 2026). Centre size categories appear on the x-axis; count of active centres on the y-axis (maximum 80). Three colour-coded bars per category represent each year, with counts labeled above each bar. The number of small centres declined steadily across all three years (51, 50, 48), while medium-sized centres dropped sharply between 2024 and 2025 before edging back up slightly in 2026 (40, 33, 35). Large and Largest centres held roughly steady across the period. — Figure 1

Small centres declined steadily across the three-year period, from 51 in 2024 to 48 in 2026. Medium-sized centres dropped sharply between 2024 and 2025 (40 to 33) before ticking back up to 35 in 2026. The Large and Largest centres have been more stable across the period. Some changes may simply be due to centres changing size due to membership gains or losses.

Grouped bar chart comparing the number of active members affiliated with Shambhala centres in four size categories — Small, Medium, Large, and Largest — across three years (2024, 2025, 2026). Centre size categories appear on the x-axis; member counts on the y-axis (maximum 3,000). Three colour-coded bars per category show each year's totals with counts labeled above each bar. Small centres shed about 15% of their members over the period (528 to 449) and Medium centres shed about 11% (1,434 to 1,280), tracking the loss of centres in those categories. Large centres lost about 3% of members (1,215 to 1,178) despite a roughly stable centre count, while the Largest centres lost about 12% of members (2,135 to 1,888) even though their centre count stayed the same, suggesting a retention problem at the top end of the size spectrum. — Figure 2

Small and medium centres lost roughly 11-15% of their members over the period, tracking the decline in the number of centres in those categories. Large centres lost about 3% of members despite a roughly stable centre count, while the largest centres shed about 12% of their members even as their count remained unchanged, suggesting a retention problem at the upper end of the size spectrum.

As can be seen by comparing Figures 1 and 2, while the number of smaller centres greatly outweighs the number of larger centres, the very great majority of members are affiliated with the larger centres.

3 Global Community Council Regions

The Global Community Council (GCC) regions is a community governance body representing Shambhala center and group members. Representation is clustered in ‘constellations’ reflecting region and/or language. See the map on the Membership page. Membership declines are spread across all the GCC regions.

Stacked horizontal bar chart showing the number of active centres in each GCC constellation, broken down by centre size category. GCC constellation names appear on the y-axis; count of active centres on the x-axis. Four size categories — Small, Medium, Large, and Largest — are colour-coded and stacked within each constellation's bar, with numeric counts labeled inside each segment. The size composition varies considerably across constellations. Combined with the membership-loss figures shown earlier, this chart illustrates that all constellations are experiencing a membership retention problem. — Figure 3

The size composition of centres varies considerably across GCC constellations. When combined with the overall member count trends, the picture shows that no constellation is immune to membership pressure — all are managing losses of members or centres, or both.

Grouped horizontal bar chart showing year-over-year change in the number of active centres within each GCC constellation. Constellation names appear on the y-axis; count of active centres on the x-axis. Two colour-coded bars per constellation compare the prior year (2025) and the current year (2026), with counts labeled beside each bar. Most constellations held steady: no constellation added centres, 3 lost a centre (Canada: Québec and Ontario, US: Southern California and Southwest, and US: Southeast), and the remaining 13 were unchanged. — Figure 4

This shows that no constellation added new centres between 2025 and 2026, 3 constellations lost a centre, and the remaining 13 stayed the same.

The data on Centre Activity expands on the theme of how many centers are active and in what respects.