Leaderboard

I think we need to be careful about overlaying our adult opinions on things. Part of the challenge with scouting is figuring out why so many kids drop out. I am/was a completely gung ho scouting parent, although my focus was more on outdoors and service. I had kind of a shocking moment with both my kids recently, now 20 and 15, when they both told me they loved cubs but mostly hated troop. It just stopped being fun. So you might think kids aren't getting anything out of cub scouting, but our target audience -- kids -- might have a different opinion.

I think there is so much discussion and hand wringing on this site but it is focused on the wrong things. We're all talking about organizational structures and what we think kids need, but what scouting needs is to focus on is why kids don't join in the first place or drop out if they do. If kids loved our program, it would survive bankruptcy and abuse scandals, but the reality is that it's hard to recruit kids.

I totally agree. Scouters donate their time for free. The execs get paid. There is a tendency to infer that the volunteer's time and labor is of little value compared to that of the paid staff. This drives me crazy, especially when the inference is more than an inference, and it comes from the execs.

Well... maybe not "free". The problem with "free" is that people tend to automatically infer that if something is free it is of little value. So you get lots of "maybe" signups because you aren't out anything if you just don't show up and people who show up, but only to check a box while they surf on their phone the whole time. A very minimal $5-$10 fee (that can be waived upon written request) does a lot to eliminate those sorts of issues. IMO, almost nothing should ever actually be totally free outside of emergency services.

Irrational hostility to councils and "professionals" is, as I have said many times, a problem, not a solution. Kill off the volunteers is likely not a useful solution. My council has tried that and the dictatorship of the council employees has been a disaster in terms of membership, volunteer participations outside untis, and fund-raising. It is easy to criticize decisions made by others, but sharing leadership might mititate against that behavior. Better communication? Mutual respect? Honoring the election of key volunteers in accordance with the BSA Bylaws rather t

What concerns me is that this places the largest denominational sponsor of Scouting units and many of the local churches in a potentially adversarial relationship with the BSA. There will be hesitancy to continue to sponsor units at the present time in this type of environment. Many of the United Methodist Churches have sponsored Scouting for decades. A whole new group of church leaders are now working with the packs and troops today and have had no understanding of their role and accountability as an "Owner" of a Scouting unit(s). Unfortunately, most of our COR's have not been trained, do

LOL, right! Most of my posts on the issue of why scouts join and quit are based on polling and data acquired while I was active. But, many folks don't want to consider it because the data doesn't fit their opinion. Focusing on wrong things is in the eye of the poster. And forum thrive on it. But, my post that seems to have started this misdirection wasn't about changing the program, I was thinking more at how to re-market the Cub program in the short term as an opportunity of getting the kids back to some normalcy. Barry

My experience is parents DECIDE to drop out of cub scouts and kids DECIDE to drop out of Boy Scouts. But, your comments are correct.

We've noticed in Cub recruiting that a certain segment of the population - when they become aware of Scouting, it likely to check it out. I suspect that we'll see a robust membership year next year because those kids that were predisposed to it this year will simply wait it out and try next year. I would not worry too much about the doom and gloom right now. Of course kids are not participating and joining when the units are not able to do traditional Scouting

We have always had to deal with nature of the program drop outs. I've never been able to add up specific numbers because National doesn't give them that accurately, but my gross number guess is that around 70% of Tigers drop out before reaching the troop age. If the main cause of dropping is the pandemic, then that is theoretically temporary. If on the other hand the problem is all the other changes in the last few years, then National has to re-image the cub program. This could be an opportunity to market Cubs as a great program to get kids back in the mix, or as you said, rebuildi

Nature of the program. Boy Scout families have dived in and need to keep swimming. Cub Scout families are still testing the water to see if scouting is right for their kid. High commitment versus little commitment. Age of the scouts. Older scouts take their friendship relationships much more seriously. And want those to keep going. Amount of work. Cub Scouts is A LOT OF WORK for the parents. Boy Scouts is much less work and more enjoyable. Boy Scouts is a journey with a goal many scouts want to achieve. Cub Scouts has arrow of light that can be earned even if

It's probably worth noting that program fees are a proportionally smaller part of council budgets. If, for example, you have a council with 10,000 scouts and each is charged $50. That nets a council about $500,000. A council of 10,000 scouts is probably carrying a budget in the 3-4 million dollar range. When you start looking at council spending, you see things like: direct event expenses staff administrative staff (SE, treasurer, registrar, office staff) marketing staff fundraising staff field support staff (DEs) camp

We are looking at a 20% loss of units in the district. Mostly Cub Packs, not rechartering. Zero membership growth across the board. We usually turn over about 30% of members every year anyway, mostly due to moving, but between last year and this we had the outgoing numbers without the influx to balance. 2020 has had a much more significant impact than the loss of LDS units or controversy over adding girls.

I do not envy the position that many councils currently are in or will soon be in. I have worked not-for-profit management at the C-level most of my career. A very challenging set of circumstances are coming together than will challenge the continued operation of many councils. (1) Based on what I am seeing, it is possible that we are looking at a 50% plus decline in membership during 2021. The combination of the pandemic, the loss of chartered organizations, the loss of the LDS church at the beginning of 2020 and difficulty of recruiting will create a firestorm to manage. In our counci

People DO NOT WANT Council as CO. The problem is that their COs are dropping them and they have a choice: fight to find a new CO (with little to no time) or fold. I can see a situation where MOST of these Council-chartered units are there only temporarily (1 year) until they can get a new CO.

Comments on a few items scattered in a couple of topics: We need to see what comes of the bankruptcy for reorganization changes before much will happen. DEs - The job is not what most believe it is when they get into it. It's not an "Executive". It's really a behind the scenes working the administrivia (my new word) of the council and doing projects at the whim of their SE. They are given unrealistic goals to meet by their SE that not even the SE could meet and then axed. That's why they leave and/or are expendable labor. All DEs will vanish before any SE will get rid of their reg

IMHO, as long as I've been involved, the charter partner model was BSA finding a way to market scouting, extend the program and create more scouting volunteers. It was never about quality control or vetting leaders.

Charging scouts a $50 council fee has zero value to those scouts whose units don't attend council events. For the boys in my unit, there would have been no return on that fee. It's just another tax.

Yes, all valid points. Development folks need to tailor their messaging to the right audience so that the philanthopic support is not lost in lieu of the program fees. You're correct that each group must see the value in what they are either buying, or supporting. That will boil down to proper stewardship of gifts, and proper engagement opportunities for members as part of their program fee.

I knew John Wayne's cousin. John's real name was Marion; his cousin's name was Maurice. He used to play the piano for us at the Farmer's Grange for our 4-H Christmas parties. Somehow both an artist and a mountain man type. He was famous for his snapping turtle soup, which he caught himself. Interesting family.

The Sexual Abuse Survivor Proof of Claim Form, at Sec. 4, Sub P H requests, in pertinent part, the "name and location of the organization that hosted meetings of your Scouting unit, during the time of the sexual abuse." Although it includes a caveat that the CO's, "are not currently parties to the bankruptcy," the question wouldn't be in the POC if there was anything other than the intention to pursue them in the same manner as the LC's. The LC's liability/involvement in the bankruptcy is similarly caveated. I realize you are aware of this, but I think the need to defend against asserted

My understanding is that this was a point of organizational concern but that National when it was created in 1911 was unable to know who in a community was of good character/good leader but that the COs (originally called "Sponsoring Institution" would. In other words, everyone "knew" that local churches were of good moral character and would therefore do the vetting for Scouting to pick good, moral leaders. Same thing with fraternal organizations, etc. This 1934 Boys Life notes . Of course since then the idea collapsed as COs looked at their role as room/hall rental faciliti

Ah, now that would be a diverse, equitable, and inclusive MB program. My $0.02, well at least here

I've been to a lot of bake sales. They are all a game of chance.

Yes. I don't think Boy Scout units can survive as a Cub Scout program for older boys. If BSA tries to turn it into that, it will die. Boys won't be interested in joining. Boys are aware of this prevalent attitude of girls are good/boys are bad. They get it all the time in school. They don't like it. If BSA keeps pushing this idea in scouting, boys won't be interested in joining. Boys understand the good touch/bad touch thing. They understand the difference between someone giving them a pat on the back and someone fondling their genitals. They're not stupid. If BSA starts say

I think over the decades scouting became such a stalking horse for so many social issues, whether religious or otherwise. Instead, it should have just stood on its own and focused on being relevant to children. A lot of these headaches never would have existed if so. We could have easily staked out the outdoors/conservation ground and never did. It's not necessarily too late to still do so.

In my area the answer is Zoom burn out and an inability to do ANYTHING outdoors plus a critical mass loss. That and "wait and see" . 1) Zoom burn out. Scouts, BSA are willing to do things and focus on zoom for 45-60 minutes. The cubs? No way. Plus if they've already been zooming all day long they can't focus. 2) Inability to do anything. COs are banning them from the building in my area. The cubs won't keep the masks on or stay socially distant. And with the change in daylight savings, night comes very early. A few dens tried shifting to Saturday mornings but that's been of only cert

EagleDad - in response to your question: In our large midwestern council, it appears that we are looking at a potential 70% to 80% Cub membership loss. We are right in the middle of re-chartering and will not know for certain perhaps for another month. Several of our units are late in submitting their renewals. This number seems to be consistent from what reports are coming out of adjacent councils. A lot of our cub packs have been decimated by the pandemic. While virtual meetings seem to work at least somewhat well for the older youth, it has not done nearly as well for Cub age yo

Cynical Scouter - I would agree that the Cubs will take the major hit. I would guess 70% to 80% loss in some councils. Unfortunately, this is our largest program and major losses in this program will adversely impact the troop level programs, perhaps for years to come.

Not necessarily. Offices are a relatively fixed cost. The fact that your membership dropped 25% doesn't mean you remove 25% of your office space the next day. And many councils have had massive layoffs. What do you want, exactly? Everyone works for free?

Quick question, does your PLC decide that? or You?

And what precisely do you think the bankruptcy is going to do? Magically make it so councils operate for free? That staff will never have to be paid anymore? The fact is that so long as councils exist, they will need to pay for people. Unless you are one of those who believe that all of Boy Scouts of America should be entirely volunteer led, that means money.

I don't mind a council charging a facility fee to those who are voluntarily using their camps. They could charge a million dollars a day as far as I'm concerned. We don't use them. Their fees are none of my business. It's when the council charges fees to those scouts who never use their facilities that I have a problem. It's not fair. Hopefully the bankruptcy will end this problem.

The Chartered Organization decides that. As the owner of the unit, the CO is entitled to place restrictions on where the unit may or may not camp.