Twocubdad

Memorize and practice saying this: "Can you show me a written copy of that policy?" It will come in very handy when dealing with other Scouters. Besides that, as it relates to an Eagle Project, neither the council, district or unit has anything to say about it. Any money raised by the Scout for his Eagle project belongs to the beneficiary organization and how it is spent is between the Scout and his beneficiary. Since a detailed budget is part of the "Final Plan" section of the workbook, it is entirely up the Scout whether or not he even wants to share that information with the council, unit or district. So what do you do now? You should respond to me with, "Can you show me a written copy of that policy?" Be glad to. It's in the new "Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook", page five about half way down the page in the section titled "The Final Plan (Pages 11-16)". It reads, in part, "This is a tool for you to use -- no one approves it.... you are strongly encouraged to share the final plan with a project coach." Please note that the emphasis in in the original document and that "strongly encouraged" does not equal "required." And honestly now, requiring parents to pay? Hey, Basementdweller, you want to discuss your Scouts' parents' ability to buy 25 pizzas? That's absolutely a legitimate expense, if that's what the Scout and the beneficiary want to do.

It's a tough ticket to get in on. Assuming you are an ASM in your home troop, you're eligible for only one spot on the jamboree troop leadership. Of the four troop leaders, the Scoutmaster and First Assistant SM must be regularly-registered Scoutmasters (not ASMs). The Third ASM is between 18 and 21 y.o. So that leaves only the Second ASM slot available. And of course for every Scoutmaster registered, there are several ASMs, so the competition gets tough. So apply for staff. Do some research and find out what job will put you in close proximity to your son. What I'm hearing is that staff positions are still rather open.

I hate to hear it. Not that I don't care, rather just don't have know enough to comment. Did you read this in the newspaper or did someone slip you an envelope in a parking garage? What is the council's explainaton? Or are they dealing with it at all?

I can't imagine it ever being a my way/highway deal. If you have a Wolf in Pack 123 and they have a poor program, you can always move to Pack 456. Same is true as a Webelos or as a Tenderfoot.

Don't want to argue hypotheticals, but if Scout B takes, let along publishes a photo "showing Scout C's" we've crossed the line from an issue of regulating social media to a fairly serious youth protection violation.

Haven't heard anything, but would welcome it if true. I've often heard the statistic quoted that we loose 50% of Scouts between Webelos II and the first year of Boy Scouts. So what if it is just an effort to bump numbers? Isn't that what the pros were hired to do? Our troop and pack work closely together. We try to supply den chiefs to as many dens as possible and work closely with the Webelos II dens on transition. Right now one of my older scouts is working with the pack committee to coordinate Scouting for Food between the troop and pack. We work together on Scout Sunday with the CO. I attend pack leader meetings several times a year and all the unit leaders are cross registered on emails. We try to get our Webelos to see Boy Scouting as just another step in the same program. Our CO offers a Scouting program, ages 7 to 18, and hope our boys will stick through it all the way. If a family feels they are better served moving to another program, we'll be as supportive as we can. But I see no reason why winter/spring of the fifth grade needs to be some watershed point of changing units. I've maintained for several years the biggest problem with the loss of boys between Webelos and Boys Scouts is the big deal we make of crossover. Ten-year-old boys are just coming to the age of deciding for themselves what they do and don't like and wish to participate. So right at the wrong time we hold up this big EXIT sign. Too many families see crossover as "graduation." The are no longer part of the pack and take crossover as a good time to quit with no on-going obligations. More that just a PR "emphasis" I think we should make program modifications to blur the line between pack and troop. Webelos IIs should start the year as Cub Scout and one morning wake up to discover they're in a tent at Boy Scout camp. You guys know the saw about how you boil a frog? We're taking the frog out of the pot, drying him off cooling him down, then asking if he wants to get back in. Stop making such an big deal over "completing" Cub Scouts. Drop the line about Arrow of Light being the "Highest Honor in Cub Scouting". It's the highest honor in Webelos just like Bear is the highest honor for third-year Cubs. Why require a new application when moving from the pack to troop? I understand under the current setup it's necessary, but change the setup. And it's a two-way street. If the Cub leaders or parents have an issue with the Boy Scout program we're offering, they are welcome to become involved and help make the program better. I understand the "free market" argument. But families are free to choose a different unit at any time, not just between Webelos II and Boy Scouts. If the leadership is taking the big view of the program, hopefully they are working together to improve both the troop and pack programs. I know this would leave those in stand-alone units out in the cold, especially for units like Fred, registered to an elementary school PTO and not really in a position to start a troop. But if it keeps boys in the program, wouldn't it encourage your to join forces with a brother troop or pack or perhaps even start one?

I think we're arguing semantics. Using my home security analogy, if my dog, flood light or security system causes a burgler go to down the street and break into your house, have I prevented a break-in? No, not in net terms. Can you cynically say I've just saved my own butt? Yes. But I did prevent A break-in, just not all of them. But who knows, without my precautions the burgler may have broken into both our houses. And I'll be glad to give you one of my pups and the name of my alarm company. Same with pedophiles. Maybe BSA YP rules just cause a perv to sign up to coach a sports team, teach a Sunday School class or form his own non-profit youth organization. Sure, if I could I'd like to put the sonnofa***** in jail (or worse), but if I can prevent him from doing harm to the boys on my watch, I'll take it.

No, the point is internal changes made over the past 103 years in how we fulfill the purpose of our Congressional Charter do not rise to the level of violating the law. You can -- and usually do -- argue in support of the First Class Journey, 300 feet between campsites or even the infield fly rule, but it is deceitful to suggest BSA is in violation of federal law and we are all a bunch of hypocrites for preaching citizenship and obedience while doing so.

If you want to be cynical about it you can make a case. Of course BSA has a fiduciary responsibility to pretect the assets and reputation of the corporation. But you have to be pretty cold to think the individuals within the BSA don't have a further interest in protecting the youth and adults within its program. Fortunately this is an area where the institutional interests have a good deal of overlap with the individuals' interests. YP does a good job of protecting youth from abuse, adults from false accusations and the corporation from liability. No, the BSA YP program isn't perfect, but it's pretty good. It's purpose is to create barriers to abuse, make it difficult for abuse to occur or at least make the perverts go somewhere else. If somehow BSA had a program which could eliminate child abuse from humanity, I feel certain we would share. It's sort of like home security. I can't prevent all home break-ins, but I can secure my home so that at least the burglers go elsewhere.

There are tons and tons of good craft ideas out there. I think the more important thing is how you teach them. There's nothing worse that sitting in class with a bunch of adults watching Elmer's Glue dry. At National Camp School (CSDC) there is a session on crafts (although it's not one I've personally taught), but it's more about planning, resources and how it fit crafts into the day camp program. To give our participants craft ideas, we have a craft table with sample crafts prepared by each staff member. For each craft we'll have a finished product on display and enough kits for every particiant to have a sample of every craft. The kits have all the materials for the kit (the same stuff you would give the kids) and a detailed instruction sheet. This way the participants get great ideas, get to see the finished craft and have all the information and material the need to use the craft with their boys -- all without having to sit and watch glue dry. From your standpoint as an instructor, it puts all the work (and in some cases some expense) into the preparation. If you have a typical 50 minute class time, instead of letting folks pick the crafts up off a table, you may want to fill the class time by showing the finished sample and distributing the kits. If you can contact your students before the class, ask them to bring a sample of a craft they've used. Sharing ideas and group discussions are always better than lectures.

Here, here, Ea. And, Kudu, if our charter defined our purpose as teaching boys "to do things for themselves and others, to train them in baseball, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods that were in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916." the leadership enthusiastist would still be within the charter. It is significant that Scoutcraft (not baseball) is but one of five purposes (six if you count "kindred values") we are charged with promoting. You can argue the finer points, such as what does patriotism really mean or how the God, Gays and Girls debate fits in, but overall I believe we do a good job of fulfilling the charter. Further, I'll add our mission is not a bad recap of the purpose. The mission to teach "ethical decision making" reasonably captures the purpose -- particularly if you include "kindred values" -- albeit in a late-20th century, corporate-babble sort of way. As to Scoutcraft -- if we use the definition Kudu posted from the Handbook for Boys which defines Scoutcraft as "First Aid, Life Saving, Tracking, Signaling, Cycling, Nature Study, Seamanship, Campcraft, Woodcraft, Chivalry, Patriotism, and other subjects" I would say we do a pretty good job of that, too. Okay, maybe not tracking, I'll give you that one. Of course these topics are not all found in the T-2-1 requirements, some are, but all (except tracking) are found in the merit badges. If there is a suggestion that the charter requires BSA to eternally use the precise program from 1916, down to specific badge requirements, please show me the section of the charter which does so. If the charter is that specific, shouldn't we all still be wearing jodphurs, leggings and campaign hats too? We can debate program and philosophy, but if there were a legal case to be made that BSA is in violation of the charter don't you think someone would have made it by now?

Folks doing a little knife sharpening in preparation for Monday night? On it's face, you can read the media guide and get that impression. But I chalk that up to overly ambitious writing. But without your question in mind, I would have read the guidlines and assumed it only referred to media specific to Scouting. BSA is notorious for it's lack of consistency among documents. The danger is cherry-picking the documents and trying to make a point without a clear understanding of the principles and the overall program. But not the context. The media guidelines are a marketing document. They are not included as part of the Guide to Safe Scouting or as a youth protection policy. In fact, you can argue the media guidelines contradict the G2SS in that the MG prohibit private communications like email, where the G2SS describes the conditions under which private conversations, like Scoutmaster conferences, may take place. IMO, the media guidelines are overreaching and distort well established youth protection principles. But we chewed that one awhile back. You may want to search that thread. But more to the point, who would want to go there? Do you really want to police member's internet usage? Shouldn't that be the parents' perogative/responsibility? Are you going to open up all the social media accounts for all the adults? How about the parents who are organizing the witch hunt? The members of your chartered organization ought to open up too, right? Keep in mind "social media" isn't limited to Facebook and Twitter. Do any of the adults belong to "alternative" social media sites we need to know about? Who wants to open those cans of worms. Clearly, a Scout is expected to live by the Scout Oath and Law 24/7, online and off. But as was discussed in your earlier thread, the Oath and Law are ideals, not criminal law. We deal with boys who fail to live up to the ideas with counseling and guidance, not prosecution. Which is why your Scoutmaster is handling the situation well and everyone else needs to butt out.

This isn't making sense. The committee plans a menu and this lady plans another one. So who is buying the food? If it's this woman, and she's buying her menu not the committee's, then simply get someone else -- one of the people doing the complaining -- to do the shopping instead. And if this woman still shows up with a pig in her minivan and expecting everyone else to do the work of preparing it, just say no. While I think you would be getting rid of a great asset, if you don't want this woman running the pack kitchen, just sit her down and tell her so.

So you committee wants to dumb down the menu and this lady doesn't want to play? Good for her. 'Round here, what she's serving IS camp food. You give my boys hot dogs and Spagetti-O's while the adults are eating good eastern NC barbecue, you better duck -- a hot dog is going to be flying toward your head. I don't buy the argument that "we're here for the boys" so we should serve the junk they want. That's just a justification. If the boys wanted Gummie Bears and PopTarts would you serve that? What's wrong with expanding their horizons? Committee wants to be in charge of the menu? Then step up and take over the shopping and cooking. We have an ASM like this lady who does all the shopping, cooking and a lot of the cleaning for the troop adults. Know what we eat? Any dang thing he wants. She's putting a high-quality meal in front of them and your boys want gummie bears and PopTarts? Who's giving them the junk food? There's your problem. Count your blessings, dude. Many, many units would give anything to have someone with this level of dedication and willingness to put in a lot of time and effort. And think big picture. Down the road I want boys in troop who think big. I want the boys who have learned by example that they ought to eat well on campouts. I don't want the guys who are accustomed to settling for hot dogs and PopTarts. "Hey guys, remember when Mrs. Smith used to make that great barbecue for us on campouts with the pack? I bet we could do that!" What a great example she's setting for the boys.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

That's correct. And I do have the form here so let me help you out. Others are short-term camping nights, number of times the PLC meets, number of Courts of Honor and a troop budget. But none of those are necessary to "gauge how the bigger organization is doing" or to evaluate the DE's performance.

So as not to highjack the thread, I won't go into details, but "rescuing a failing pack" would be a lousey ticket item for a Webelos Den Leader. If you want to get into those weeds, we can spin another thread. Of course, nothing -- Wood Badge or not -- precludes the WDL, Moose and MIB from taking on the task,

Biggest thing would be for council advancement committees doing their dang jobs in certifying the course. (And I see summer camps as the prime example that they don't.) If, as a Scoutmaster, I could have faith that the CAC's stamp of approval really meant that the classes are being conducted properly, I'd be more likely to allow my Scouts to attend. Class size is the big thing, and I'm thinking no more than 6 kids for required MB or those which are particularly complicated or difficult (and if they're not, why are the being offered?) Most of these classes run about 6 hours. If you spend three hours on instruction, that only leaves 30 minutes each to sit down with the boys and sign off on the requirements the way you're supposed to. In lieu of small classes, have multiple counselors available to help with the sign-offs. So you have Steven Spielberg teaching Cinematography or Jim Lovell for Space Exploration and 100 kids want to take it. Great, but you then need another 15 or 16 counselors available to complete the work 1-on-1. Or only use blue cards signed in advance by the Scoutmaster. All others get a certificate listing the requirements they completed (even if they completed all of them) which they could then take to a regular MBC who could accept the requirements as complete, work with the Scout enough to know how he did and/or make him re-do the requirements. Registration materials need to make clear to Scouts and parents that the Merit Badge process includes the prior approval of your SM. Without it, your unit is under no obligation to accept the Merit Badge.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

What data do unit JTE reports provide to which the council doesn't already have access? Retention, membership growth and Webelos transition numbers are on or can be derrived from the charter. Advancement reports are already submitted. Ditto training, NYLT and summer camp attendance (out of council long-term camping could be easily reported between camps). None of the rest has anything to do with a DE's performance. A DE's job is money and membership. The few program elements for which the DE is responsible should be part of an evaluation of the district committee -- offer a day camp? What percentage of Cubs attend? Same for Boy Scout camporees. Does the district off a full slate of training courses? Active OA chapter? Functioning Commissioner Corps? Some of this is on the district JTE, but not all. But the point is, that data can come from the district, not the units. And to KC9's point, the data available to the council is without reporting bias. No units juicing the numbers just to get a patch, no DEs "helping" units with their numbers, no holes in the data from units with curmudgeonly leaders.

I doubt many folks really object to DE's receiving bonuses. Most are sophistocated enough to understand bonuses aren't windfall, but a performance-based part of their salary. That's a good thing. Sure, people get snarky on internet fourms, but that's just the nature of things. My objection is to DE's bonuses being tied to us spending our time and effort on a process which has very little benefit to our units. Keep in mind this whole JTE discussion began with Basementdewller's DE declaring JTE participation to be "mandatory." This sets up a situation which is ripe for such abuse. If you want to create performance metrics for the professional staff, knock yourselves out. But why are you bothering me?

We're talking soft drink and maybe a bag of chips or about two or three bucks. For our guys, that's affordability isn't in issue. But not remembering to bring money is. Our guys are pretty Friendly and Helpful and often times generous. I frequently see guys in the checkout line loaning their buddy a couple bucks, or even with an arm load of snacks buying stuff for their friend. More stops than not I'll spot a Scout or two a couple bucks. The more I think about it, the more I understand this really isn't about the junk food. It's like the guys getting together for a cold one after a long day at the office. Instead, we cap a full weekend of camping with a Coke and a pack of crackers. And it's about tradition. The troop has been stopping at the same store for years -- long since before we joined. Every year on the Webelos campout the boys make sure we have time to stop at "The Store" so the can introduce the Webelos to the tradition. So if it's such a great thing why threaten the boys with not stopping? Because we ARE trying to develop character. If you want to have fun, get the work done first. Can't think of a better character lesson than that. I can think of only a couple times when we've not stopped. (And one time it was the ADULTS which held us up. We still stopped, but only the patrol leaders went in and got a drink for everyone in their patrol -- all on the adults. The kids loved it. I don't think they would have been happier if we had bought steak dinners for everyone. And that was a great lesson as well: the adults can mess things up, too. But when we do we make it up to the other guys. You guys need to get off the interstate more often. There is great value in an old country store.

I'm not a fan of scout accounts and don't have much experience with them. Consequently, I can't really put my finger on why, but it just doesn't feel right to me. Seems like this crosses a line somewhere.

Oh for Pete's sake. Who is the meeting with?

John-in-KC is getting down to the brass tacks. You need to do some due diligence. Is there really a pack here to save? I agree with John the first step is to talk with the DE and get the back story. He has a vested interest in keeping the unit going which means he could give you all the support and help you need but that he may also blow sunshine up your shorts. Beware. Next visit would be with the IH and COR to see if there is any real support for the pack. Do they want a pack? Are they willing to support it or are they another "name only" CO? Where are their hearts? Enthusiastic or over it? Are they willing to front seed money if necessary? If things check out, I think you approach this like you're starting a new pack -- see JKC's list. Make a clean break. Pick a new meeting night and get away from the bad habits of the old regime. Start by building the Tiger and Cub program (you know you can put the Wolves and Bears into one den, right?). Let the W1 den continuine doing their thing. Plan a nice send off for the W2s, but don't Otherwise, I think you help the Wolf and Bear Scouts find a new pack and come up with an action plan to help the Webelos I's through their last year. Then wiz on the fire and call in the dogs.

I've made the same pitch. My point was to give donors, particularly Scout parents, a point of reference as to the cost of administering the program. The obvious implication is to suggest a level of contribution which covers the cost of their Scout being in the program. But is that what's going on here? I got the impression this was more of an assigned goal for the unit, rather than a suggested level. If it's just a suggested contribution, why the difference between Cubs and Boy Scouts? AK, can you clarify for me?

Perhaps I overstated my case. I don't think the junk food is the big draw, I think the guys just like the idea of stopping at the store. It's kind of a guy thing -- sitting on a bag of deer corn in front of the store eating jerky. Many only get a drink. It's mostly a fun troop tradition. The incentive is if we don't break camp efficiently and leave on time, there's no time to stop. And this is not in lieu of breakfast. Sunday breakfast is included in the patrol planning and needs to include at least one cooked item. In fact, a few years back we had one patrol which figured they could skip Sunday breakfast -- no cooking, no dishes to clean -- and eat when we got to the store. They screwed up by bragging to the other patrols about how oh-so-very clever they were. Guess who got to sit with the Scoutmaster while the other guys went to through the store? As far as the parents go, the only complaint we've had are from drivers who don't want to take the extra time to stop (it's a big 15 minutes). I've never had a parent complain about the boys eating the junk food. But if any did I'd suggest they talk with their son about what he is and isn't allowed to purchase and eat when he is away from home.