Open Discussion - Program
Share Scouting Topics here.
Subforums
-
- 816
- posts
-
- 2.8k
- posts
9761 topics in this forum
-
- 2 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 13 replies
- 2k views
-
- 2 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 68 replies
- 11k views
-
- 23 replies
- 3.5k views
-
- 64 replies
- 10.8k views
-
- 36 replies
- 7.7k views
-
- 31 replies
- 6.4k views
-
- 3 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 11 replies
- 2.2k views
-
- 12 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 33 replies
- 7.6k views
-
- 12 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 101 replies
- 15.8k views
-
- 3 replies
- 1.3k views
-
LATEST POSTS
-
I hear you and it would be nice if we could go back to that but it's a nice dream, not reality. I think we've discussed this before. The old model you are talking about hasn't worked for decades. Scouting needs a total corporate restructuring that re-engineers the structure around serving units to deliver the program in the field. It needs more professional support if anything, or at least professional support that is refocused and redeployed. Where will the money come from? I don't know, but that's what a restructuring would start looking at. -
Adding paid professionals isn't an option. For every paid professional you add to a council you have a direct dollar-for-dollar transfer away from program. Nationals model of helping councils is grant based. Grant based headcount is inherently unstable and unreliable due to the come-and-go nature of grants. There are no employees to send to the councils to help either. National has around 700-800 employees total depending on the moment. Most of those employees are high adventure base staff (EG: Todays news reports on the Northern Tier evacuations is that 200 staff are being evacuated along side any remaining scouts on trek). The math is that national basically puts ALL OF ITS MONEY into staffing program a the high adventure bases and the Irving office is basically empty. If districts and councils don't lean hard into recruiting volunteers they will cease to exist, volunteer based councils are the only way forward. -
That won't return, not least of all due to liability issues. Scouting needs to evolve into an organization that is able to offer more paid professional support to unit level volunteers so that they can deliver functional, safe, consistent programs or it won't continue. Maybe you'll still have a few vestigal hubs of nostalgic activity around high adventure locations or some of the larger council camps, but it won't be able to function nationwide without some kind of support.
-
OMG: Cubs absolutely do need to camp. Cubs that camp are almost guaranteed to cross to a troop.
-
By Eagle94-A1 · Posted
I heard one say, "Cubs don't need to camp." This was at a program conference. Thankfully no one else heard him.
-
-
Who's Online (See full list)