ParkMan

It strikes me that what you are building is more of a wikihow kind of site than a search engine like google. A Scout wants to work on a badge, you'll have all the resources there and put together to enable the Scout to go through the process. I see this as essentially just a modern interpretation of the Scout handbook and merit badge guides. If someone in their 20's or 30's sat down from scratch to build Scouting, it is unlikely that they would write a 100+ merit badge guides. Instead, they'd put them all online and have videos and more interactive content. It just happened to be that

Let me clarify what I meant. The the BSA is technically a charitable organization (a charity). If one looks at the programs of the BSA, there are indeed attempts to provide Scouting to kids from families with limited incomes. I know that in our council (which does charge fees), there are indeed programs to waive the fees for those that cannot afford them. There are lots of charities out there that are targeted primarily at helping people with limited means. Habitat for Humanity for example builds homes for people who cannot afford to buy one. Scouting is just focused on working w

NCAC: Compensation of Leaders (FYE 12/2018) Compensation % of Expenses Paid to Title $690,326 6.16% Les Baron CEO

As mentioned in another post - people who are not on the Executive Board tend to have that perception. But, in reality, I've seen that many Executive Board members are there through dedication to the organization. In that time, they build networks within the council board that eventually leads to senior council board positions. Some do this through the ability to generate donations for the council, others through being able to deliver results and have impact within the council. I like to remember that whatever the group you're in, the people there need to like each other and be able to

Respectfully, but that's not true at all in our council. There's a bunch of folks on our board who do donor stuff. They tend to be wealthy business types - but that largely is because they are the ones comfortable and capable of developing big donations. There are a bunch of folks on our board who do program stuff. They tend to be volunteers who worked their way up. The VP of program types or prior District Chairs. Most of these folks are accomplished enough, but they are not wealthy. The didn't get these roles because of money, but because they could go into a room of Scouters

Can a council really declare bankruptcy so that they can pay into the settlement? I'm trying to imagine how that works. If a council doesn't have enough lawsuits to make them declare bankruptcy today can they voluntarily enter into a settlement that they cannot afford and then simply go bankrupt? I'm guessing that they'd be more likely to dissolve the corporation and sell of assets and then allow another council to either purchase their assets or a new council to form.

I would have to imagine an appeals court would overrule it anyways if they did. I'm no legal scholar, but I cannot fathom a legal argument that bankruptcy reorganization could force the dissolution of the BSA if it is specifically codified as perpeptual. You might liquidate all the BSA assets that are not otherwise protected by law, but somehow I think the BSA would still then own all the IP.

Let me rephrase my point, competently run councils should learn. Dwindling family FoS contributions are too easy to blame on a variety of factors - the DE didn't try hard enough, the district doesn't have enough volunteers, the unit leader isn't supporting the effort, etc. Not contributing is something of a passive response. Families and units revolting to fees is another. If a family says - no, I will not pay, then that is harder to ignore. A family saying, we are leaving because you are charging too much is harder to ignore. I've no idea if councils will really listen- but

Despite what many here will tell you, volunteers do have tremendous sway that the council level. Many of these issues that we talk about here often result from people in council positions that simply just don't have the awareness to make the best choices. I'm a bit of an optimist, but I generally find that people are trying to make the right decisions. The challenge is that there are relatively few Scouters who progress from unit leader to the council level. Because of that, boards are often a mixture of friends of board members (folks who travel in the board circuit) and a few long t

I can't completely blame the executives. Even in our troop it's more fun to go on high adventure trips and have lots of great gear. Keeping the program economical is a choice - but there are certainly costs of that choice. I've watched how units (and council) have scrimped to save a few dollars on fees. Then I'll get done, hop in the car, and grab lunch with my son for $20. It takes a choice by people to know the potential of what could be, yet to continually work to do it in the most economical fashion. I can see that there are many who say - "why do we work so hard to save money?"

Fully agree. In a weird way, I believe that council fees will be good for councils. Those fee will force councils to have more accountability to their Scouts and families. You won't be able to lose the MBC applications 3 or 4 times because people won't accept it. However, there are three primary hurdles to this: The challenge for councils though can be summed up in - "that they don't know what they don't know". Most are small organizations of 15-30 professionals. They have people who have lived most of their careers in the BSA system. That registrar who is used piles of paper o

@Cburkhardt - agreed. In fact, I would favor a higher council fee to a higher national fee. For example, I would not begrudge $60 a year to council, $20 a year to national. That strikes me as an appropriate ratio. Further, I have no issues with local units having varying degrees of fees. A troop in a more affluent community certainly charge more and in return provide a different kind of experience than a troop in a lower income community. As has been pointed out, the problem with the various fees is that it is difficult to communicate the value one gets for those fees. We sort of

To me, "this" is issue. The BSA doesn't really know what it is. Is it a frugal activity for low income kids? Is it a high cost activity for well off kids? Is it both, is it neither? I've got no idea and I doubt anyone else does either. But, we all have an opinion on what it should be. If the BSA really wanted to market to lower income families, it easily could. But, we would actually need to try. We'd also need to stop doing things like spending money in ways that results in $66 to national and $48 to council. If the BSA doesn't want to worry about low income families, then

That's my problem nationally too. As far as I can tell, I write a check for $66 per scout so that someone will update the various manuals, so that there is insurance should something bad happen, and some amount of money for a national marketing team. I can't fathom that this is a $66 per scout cost.

We're talking different things here. I started my comments in this thread saying that national needs to reduce fees. I believe that $15-$20 a month for dues is too much - but mostly because there are many people we try to bring into the program who don't have the disposable income that others do. But, I think we have to be careful to not say it simply too expensive because in 2020 in the US, $15-$20 a month is pretty cheap compared to much of what we spend money on. $15 to $20 a month is a bargain to some, to others a fortune. When we decry Scouting as simply too expense, we run t

Fascinating - thank you. It sure looks like the BSA has been taking on a lot of debt for some reason - the Summit I imagine. I'm not on to blame national for stuff - but I do think that national really ought to focus to get fees down and if these are in the way, national needs to restructure. Hopefully coming out of bankruptcy whatever remains will have a significantly reduced need for a large national fee. $66 a year to national, $48 to a council, and $100 to a unit is getting very expensive. $15 or $20 a month for dues isn't a lot of money to some, but it's a lot of money to ask wh

Interesting analysis. What was the cause of the significant increase in liabilities?

Another example of the inefficiency of the BSA structure. $66 to pay for national $30 to pay for council I don't mind that we have to pay, but $66 to national seems like a lot now that we have to pay council fees too. Would be a good time for national to figure out how to get that to $20 a year per scout.

Sorry to hear you are not feeling well from the vaccination and missed the orientation. I am sure that they will be happy to fill you in on what you missed. Very exciting that it is less than 1 month to go.

We had this discussion in our troop too. What we realized is that there are really two primary styles of patrols - mixed age patrols and same age patrols. New Scout patrols are a logical extension of the same age patrol model. Youth are grouped together by age, the start in a troop as a group, and they journey through Scouts together. In many ways, it mirrors life for the youth. This model has a tendency to promote a tighter patrol bond as the youth are together for the long haul. They go through similar stages together, etc. The mixed age patrol model is predicated on the notion th

NIce post @Eagledad. I didn't know that about WB - but I am not surprised. I think most leaders who attend trainings are earnestly trying to do the right things. The paucity of leader training makes it difficult for leaders who do not instinctively know these things or who come from a troop that does not already have a strong patrol method culture. Though folks like to blame WB, I think the real issue is that the BSA doesn't have an intermediate level Scouts BSA sequence of courses that cover these things. I would welcome a sequence of intermediate and advanced courses for unit volunt

Ahh - I see. You're suggesting that the WOSM just sit back for 5 years while the councils realign themselves in that scenario. I have to imagine that in this scenario it will be like the breakup of the Bell System. In 20 years we'd be back to a handful of NFPs that have acquired all the others. I can see how that works. FWIW, I can't imagine the BSA IP simply being given away. Perhaps councils band together to purchase it, but there is just about no chance the bankruptcy court says - hey you 270 NFPs you all get the share this IP that has monetary value. But, to your other comment -

I would be interested to know how technology is faring in the recent rounds of cutbacks. I have to imagine that plans around Scoutbook will be severely curtailed at this point in time.

Scouting isn't what it once was, but it made national news for several days. There are many millions of people with history with the BSA and it does have an emotional connection to many people. An announcement by the WOSM might be lucky to get a mention in a "well that's cute" sort of way.

I understand your point - I think you are defining a new Scouting model - a confederation of councils based on the same program and materials. Maybe 50 or 100 different councils that all use the same program and function independently. I would think that even if such a model were to occur that they would derive representation in the WOSM through a central organization. From the WOSM website: What would be the value to 50 or 100 local councils in the US to all join individually? What would be the value to the WOSM? Does Scouts UK really want to have individual relationships with a