WARNING: To have a high rate of prediction for the BOM (eg 99%+) it apparently needs to be taught by a teacher - this was found in the study in China.   
(The following is my personal advice: )
I would also advice couples to reflect for a time on whether they would in practice want a highly predictive knowledge or whether this could be a burden in its innecessity.  The method is there to reduce burden for eg people with finanical limitations.  The important thing is I guess that the method is easily accessible for those times when it could be needed, which it seems to be here via this website.  I have not heard anyone that knew the method in detail to complain that it was a burden to know of it however I do think that it could be a good idea to properly consider the implications of knowing this much – I have been told that knowledge is power by someone that knew the method well however hopefully what I am writing here is yet more knowledge through giving people the choice and therefore perhaps resulting in a better timing – or maybe not.  Perhaps it is enough to say as the Church does that it is to be taught in the context of marriage and it is therefore between the couple to decide how soon they think they want to know this method.  My concern (/responsibility as I promote it here) is that this method may give people a power which they may not have chosen had they given it proper consideration, that is if it is not required ie they may choose to be free of awareness of the situation, at least in detail ie the situation day-by-day.

I guess that the reason the Church has said that the BOM be taught in the context of marriage is because we would not want people to know of this method yet be deprived of the message regarding the ‘benefits’ of marriage eg emotional security but with more aspects for consideration besides (I won't elaborate now, also because most readers will I think know already - there is a CTS booklet that I think will do this job - £1.95 available in many churches 'Gift of Life and Love: Love, Marriage and Natural Fertility Regulation'  by John Billings.  It also includes a description of the Billings method.)  Moreover, if the Billings method is taught in detail only in marriage it will then mean that the decision can be the joint one and that the married couple are free to decide that they do not want this day-by-day knowledge at least in the first instance.

I’m sure this method needs to be widely known (really, worldwide) ie that it exists and I think there is no harm to know the basic idea and that this is beneficial to have an understanding of fertility and how it works eg in cycles.  This is also a reassurance I think for all women/people.   It would I think be disputed that there is any harm in knowing in more detail the method eg for a girl/woman to know their particular cycle and the method etc is taught to teenagers with seemingly good affect (ie it was involved in postponing sexual involvement - over 90% of female and male virgins remained uninvolved while 30-65% of previously involved students stopped during the year-long program.)  This is a recognised benefit.

However, maybe more work is required in order for there to be a better and much needed promotion.

More teachers are/will be required (the Creighton model is a variation – based on the Billings yet different - Billings have a pamphlet regarding the differences).