← Risk register SOC 21-2021 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Directors, Religious Activities and Education

22,160 US workers · median $52,100/yr · Social Service

EXPOSED

The paperwork half of this job — lesson plans, newsletters, curriculum outlines, event calendars, volunteer sign-up tracking, grant and budget write-ups — is already the kind of drafting AI does at usable quality. What does not transfer is standing in a room with teenagers, sitting with a grieving family, recruiting and holding volunteers who are not paid, and being the person a congregation trusts with its children's formation. There is no state license here, so the protection is relational and institutional rather than legal, and headcount tracks congregational budgets more than technology.

10-year outlook: The administrative half of the role thins out and gets absorbed by fewer staff with AI assistance, while the in-person formation, youth, and pastoral-care duties remain and increasingly define the job.

US employment, 2019–2025+1.6%
21,82022,160 workers

Roughly flat across the period, with year-to-year wobble.

Median pay $43,860 → $52,100 -5.0% in real terms (nominal +18.8%, less ~25% US inflation over the period)

The job count is not the verdict

This line is counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics — the one figure on this page that isn't a judgement of ours. Headcount moves on demand, offshoring, demographics and the business cycle, and automation is one term among several, often not the loudest.

So a falling line is not evidence that AI did it, and a rising one is not evidence that it won't. Both happen in this register: some occupations resist automation and shrink anyway, others are highly automatable and keep growing. The marked year is 2020.

BLS projection, 2024–2034

+2.1%

Percentage only. The projection counts a different population from the 22,160 above — it includes self-employed workers, which for this occupation is most of them, so the two headcounts are not comparable.

Growing, and only partly exposed

The BLS expects +2.1% more of these jobs by 2034, and at 53/100 the work is only partly exposed — some tasks are automatable, the core of the job is not. Nothing here is in tension.

Different clocks. The score is what current AI could do to this work today. The projection is how many of these jobs will exist in 2034. Everything between the two — how fast employers actually adopt, whether demand grows in the meantime — is why they can point opposite ways without either being wrong.

~13,800 openings a year on average, including replacing people who leave.

One email if this score changes. Watch as many occupations as you like from the same address — no account, and nothing is sent on a schedule, only when a verdict actually moves.

Also known as — 24 job titles this covers

Titles reported by people doing this work, from the US Department of Labor's O*NET survey. If your job title is here, this page is about your work even though the name doesn't match.

RectorYouth PastorYouth DirectorProgram DirectorWorship DirectorYouth InstructorChurch SupervisorYouth CoordinatorChildren's DirectorLeadership DirectorMinistries DirectorMinistries CoordinatorSenior Adults DirectorYouth Ministry DirectorCampus Ministry DirectorAdult Ministries DirectorMen's Ministries DirectorMusic Ministries DirectorYouth and Family DirectorYouth Ministries DirectorYouth Program CoordinatorCampus Ministries DirectorFamily Ministries DirectorYouth Development Director

Score — 53/100 resistance

Holding it up: trust premium (17/20). Weakest point: liability shield (2/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 12 + 10 + 2 + 17 + 12 = 53. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 12/20

Mixed — a routine tier and a judgment tier The 12 reflects a genuine split: curriculum sequencing, VBS scheduling, teacher-training handouts and the weekly bulletin insert are draftable now, but running a confirmation retreat, catching the kid who stopped showing up, and negotiating with three Sunday school teachers who all want the same room are not tasks that reduce to text output.

Embodiment 10/20

Some physical or field component At 10 rather than 4 because the job is physically located — setting up classrooms, chaperoning lock-ins and mission trips, driving vans, hauling supplies — but it is a church building and a fellowship hall, not a roof or a construction site, which keeps it out of the 13+ band.

Liability shield 2/20

No licence, no signature requirement A 2 because ordination or denominational credentialing is an internal matter, not a state license — no board can revoke your right to direct a education program, and when something goes wrong the exposure runs to the congregation, the senior clergy, and the insurer, not to a personal license you hold.

Trust premium 17/20

The human relationship is the product At 17 because parents are handing over their children's religious formation specifically to a person they know by name, and the youth who will actually talk to you at 11pm on a retreat is talking to you and not to the position — this relationship is most of what the job produces.

Judgment & accountability 12/20

Meaningful discretion A 12, not higher, because the hardest calls — a disclosure of abuse, a family in crisis, a doctrinal dispute over what gets taught — are real and yours to spot, but they escalate quickly to the pastor, the board, the denomination's safe-church policy, or mandated reporting, so you rarely own the final resolution alone.

Confidence: medium · reviewed 2026-08-11 · how scoring works

What this job involves — and which parts are yours

The verdict above describes this occupation as a whole. Almost nobody does the typical version of a job — tick what's actually in your week and see how your own mix sits.

AI already does these at usable quality

These still need a person

Active moats on the surviving side: trust, physical-presence, judgment

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: Coursera — negotiation, influence and persuasion courses free to audit · Coursera — work planning and personal productivity free to audit · Coursera — negotiation courses, audit free free to audit · Toastmasters — public speaking practice at local clubs worldwide low · Khan Academy — physics, chemistry and biology from the ground up free · edX — performance measurement and evaluation free to audit · Purdue OWL — the standard reference for professional writing free · Coursera — engineering and procurement courses, auditable without paying free to audit

All 35 skills ranked by how many jobs they open →

Where this experience transfers — occupations you could move toward

Computed from U.S. Dept. of Labor O*NET skill and knowledge profiles: high overlap with what you already do, a materially higher resistance score, no large jump in required training, and no licence you would have to start a new pipeline to get. Targets that pay meaningfully less, that are themselves COOKED, or whose own headcount is falling are excluded — a move into a shrinking trade is not an escape.

Clergy SAFE · 69/100 · you already have ~85% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Persuasion, Time Management, Negotiation, Speaking

Mental Health and Substance Abuse Social Workers SAFE · 70/100 · you already have ~79% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Science, Monitoring, Persuasion, Writing

Therapists, All Other SAFE · 72/100 · you already have ~77% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Equipment Selection, Monitoring, Science

What would move this back up — beyond any one person

The moves above are yours to make. This is the other half: what would have to change in the world for the occupation itself to score higher. None of it is in any one person's gift, but it is where the floor actually comes from. Scores here are not a one-way ratchet. Only two of the five dimensions — task resistance and embodiment — track what machines can do. The other three track law, what buyers will pay for, and who is answerable, and those move in both directions, often in response to the same pressure AI creates. If every lever below landed, this occupation would score around 64/100, still EXPOSED.

4 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening judgment accountability +3

    Child-protection regimes that name the education director as the accountable person for screening, training, and reporting decisions — mandatory-reporter designation plus insurer-required safeguarding sign-off. Church liability insurers (e.g. Church Mutual, GuideOne) already condition abuse coverage on named-role safeguarding compliance; tightening that to a designated director role makes the ambiguous call — whether to remove a volunteer, whether to report — formally owned.

  • already happening task resistance +3

    Genuine two-tier structure: if AI absorbs newsletters, calendars, curriculum drafting, and grant write-ups, what remains is the in-room work — teaching adolescents, pastoral presence with families, volunteer recruitment and retention. Task_resistance rises as a share of a smaller remaining job, without any new law.

  • plausible liability shield +3

    State-level youth-serving-organization statutes requiring a designated, background-checked, certified child protection officer per congregation, with personal duty attached (extensions of existing mandatory-reporter clergy laws in states like Texas and New York). This is the only realistic route to a legal shield here, and even then it is a named-role duty, not a practice license.

  • plausible trust premium +2

    Denominational bodies adopting explicit policy that formation and catechetical content must be authored or vetted by a credentialed human — e.g. a USCCB or synod-level statement that AI-generated catechesis is not acceptable for sacramental preparation, or a Jewish movement's education commission requiring human-authored curriculum. Precedent: multiple denominations already issued statements on AI-written sermons (Southern Baptist ERLC, several Lutheran synods).

The limit. The binding constraint is not capability but congregational budgets and attendance decline; no lever here offsets shrinking membership, and headcount can fall while every dimension score rises.

These are conditions, not forecasts — what would have to happen, not what will. Specific rules, cases and bills are named so you can go and check whether they exist and where they stand; verify before relying on any of them. Nothing here is legal or financial advice.

Where this work is, and what it pays there

BLS metro figures for 85 areas. The verdict above does not change by city — the rubric judges what the work involves, not where it happens — but pay and headcount do, and the national median hides a very wide range.

Most of these jobs

New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 2,940 $59,170 +14%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 1,270 $62,390 +20%
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA 1,100 $46,110 -11%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 490 $51,540 -1%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 480 $59,320 +14%
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 480 $60,650 +16%
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI 420 $51,070 -2%
Indianapolis-Carmel-Greenwood, IN 410 $58,490 +12%

Best paid

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 200 $93,120 +79%
San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX 40 $84,650 +62%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 70 $83,480 +60%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $52,100. Counts are jobs in that metro, not vacancies. Metros where the BLS suppressed the cell are absent rather than shown as zero.

Who is actually doing this — nobody, on the record

We have no reported case of a named organisation automating this occupation. Not one deployment, not one announcement.

That is worth saying out loud next to a score of 53. The verdict above is about what the work exposes — what current AI could do to these tasks. It is not a claim that anyone has done it. For this occupation those two things have come apart completely: the capability argument is on this page, and the evidence column is empty.

Read that as a gap in the reporting we can see, not proof of absence — the dispatch runs on English-language feeds and misses plenty. If you know of a case, tell us, or add a field report from inside the job.

Quick take — do you do this job?

Has AI actually changed your work? One tap, anonymous, and the running tally is public. Nothing else is asked of you.

Self-reported and unverified — a sentiment signal, not a survey. One response per person per occupation; you can change your answer.

Field reports — what people say has changed

No field reports yet. A written account takes a paragraph rather than a tap, goes to an editor before it appears, and is the one thing on this page the rubric cannot produce on its own.

File a field report

Concrete beats general: a tool that arrived, a task that moved, a headcount decision you watched happen. Don't include anything that identifies you or your employer if that would put you at risk.

Watch this verdict
Kept current

Rather than check back: get the digest and we'll tell you what changed — or watch a single occupation from its own page.