DuctTape

I was glad I took an Art History class while in college (back in the last century). I do not recall a lot, but I remember symbolism was the language used by artists. Nudity was expressive of "purity" or "vulnerability". It is unfortunate that our society has lost this understanding and now views nudity in art as something else. 😥

8 hours ago, 5thGenTexan said:

I have on numerous occasions talked about a duty roster.  They dont know what that is, seriously.  SM and ASM wont even back me on getting a duty roster completed.  I know for a fact on the last Camporee they did not even plan a menu.  I talked to the adult that asked my kid what he wanted to eat and that adult was buying groceries to take to camp for the weekend.

Sadly it does not appear, from what you have described, that this is a real scout troop.  They might have a charter and a unit, but the adults are completely missing the point. 

If the adults do not see this as an issue, and are not willing to listen, learn and change then the only other option is to find a "real" scout troop. 

3 hours ago, 5thGenTexan said:

Our youth leadership doesn't do that nor do the adults.  I'm looking at a way to help the Scouts who are overlooked.

I hear you. And the adults not modeling it makes it even more difficult.  The solution is to get the scout leaders (and adults) to speak with individual scouts separate from the group as the means to not overlook them. When everything is done "as a group" this only facilitates participation by those whose personality thrives in that type of situation. Encourage (and model) more individualized communication protocols.

I would begin with the  4-step process outlined above with the ADULTS and move towards the following:

For the adults, the SM needs to speak individually with the SPL (not with the entire PLC). Second. ASMs need to reorganized to mentor POR like QM, Librarian, Scribe, etc... and not interfere with Patrols.

Then with the scouts...

Step one, I would start with eliminating "troop announcements". The SPL should go to speak with the PLs individually, then circle back to them to see if they have any questions, concenrs or needs.

Step two, the PLs eliminate "Patrol Based Decisions" and each Patrol Leader assign specific patrol positions to the members (GrubMaster, Cheermaster, APL, QM, etc...) These positions need to have specific duties and responsibilities clearly identified. 

This is just me thinking out loud with what I interpret to be your situation. YMMV.

One of the most challenging aspects of leadership (in Scouts and elsewhere) is for leaders to involve all of their members in processes not just the loud-out-in-front ones. Asking a Scout Leader (PL, SPL etc...) the question of how to ensure all members are "heard" and have the opportunity to truly participate regardless of the member's personality is an ongoing discussion I have my with Leaders.

For any issue the discussion wioth my PLs uses this:

1. Identify the concern.

2. Evaluate current practice(s).

3. Brainstorm alternative/modifications to practice(s).

4. Implement and re-evaluate.

Meal planning was mentioned, IME this is typically where the discussion begins b/c it is the most common area where "quiet" scouts are not heard. Many of my leaders when it comes to meal planning realize the "group discussion" is not very effective nor efficient and land on a process something like:

PL: Assigns a grub master for the patrol.

GM: Selects an assistant. (all GM duties are assisted by AGM and the PL/APL as a resource.)

GM: speaks with all patrol mates individually to "know" what they like, dislike, allergies, favorites etc... They keep this info in some sort of binder, whether it is paper or digital.

GM: Makes meal plan based on the individual needs/desires of those attending the event (also taking into consideration the type of event).

GM: Brings plan to PL to review.

PL & GM: Present plan to Patrol for final approval

GM: Keeps plan in "binder" for future use..

note: GM also needs to know what cooking equipment is needed so the the Patrol QM can be sure it is brought (this begins the process  of planning ahead and not bringing the entire trailer.)

One reason many land on this is it also part of the larger discussion with the PLs about training the "next level". And yes, it does take a LONG time to get here and is easily dismantled (mostly by adults).

And note about the wet pants fabric holding air, this is best if the fabric is mostly cotton, as cotton swells when wet. Performance fabrics will work as they are generally a tighter weave but may not work as well due to the threads not absorbing water and swelling. 

What MattR said!

I would encourage the SPL to do two things:

1. A quick morning check-in (5-10 minutes max)with the rest of the PLC to help. set the stage for the rest pf the day. This also ensures they are up, dressed and ready first.

2. Evening check-in (5-10 minutes max) after all is done and other  scouts are readying for bed. This is to reflect on the day and put it all to rest.

Note: The SPL and PLC dictate the topics based on their needs.  These check-ins should be adult free. The SPL can conference with the SM before or after.

23 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

I have my ID# from when I was a Youth.  Only because I found an old ID card.  It was before online record keeping, and since the Council Office couldnt find it, I am guessing all the paper records associated with my number were just purged.  You know... they round filed it all.

That gives me pause and wonders if my adult ID# matches my youth #. I should go look through my box and see if I have an old membership card.

Organizatiinal chart is not a hierarchy chart of levels. It is a communication chart. 

If it were me, I would defer the decision to the PLC to make the determination as to who should be the SPL at camp. IMO when it comes to hierarchy, the PL is the highest and the SPL and all other troop positions exist to serve the patrols thus the PLC should make the decision.

It also appears the unit number might have a 3rd digit? As it would likely have been centered under the council patch, and the 4 appears to be in the middle.

Our troop does monthly dues collected by the patrol. It is $1/month,  (basically 25cents per weekly meeting.) It is purposely low, but has a greater purpose than the $. The majority of finances for the troop is through our larger fundraisers.

36 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

I was a twin of Ogilvie, second from the right.

At the core I believe it is to ensure safety; at least mitigate the greater risks not bubble wrap. In practice this varies greatly based on the group and activity. The rifle range director will be much more hands on and the decion maker regardless of the scouts' maturity and leadership ability. The SMs on a campout with a patrol of experienced scouts will be 100 yards away in case they are needed. And everything in between. This is a judgement call for the SM based on the Scouts ' experience, knowledge, and ability.  Navigating this tightrope is fundamental to the program, else it fails as either unsafe-lord of the flies, or the other end as adult-programmed day care.

Yep. Advancement is a method, it is not the goal. 

22 minutes ago, BisonBison said:

The Patrol method breaks down if those signing off ranks don't have the skills themselves. Post-COVID (or for whatever reason), I've inherited a Troop that has a significant attenuation of skills - knots included. I know what the handbook says, but I chose to use the SM conference to assess knowledge. If a Scout isn't adequate, he gets some on the spot tutoring. If the deficit is too great, he gets sent away to review and refresh. He can come back the next day or whenever he is ready. I don't look for perfection, but if rank is to mean anything and Scout knowledge has any value, there has to be some part of the system that creates accountability. Nobody's Scouting career has been derailed by having to spend an extra bit of time learning the square lashing. 

The SM has the authority to decide who may sign-off. If the PL does not have the skill themselves, then they should not be granted authority to sign-off.

The continual re-testing of a skill CAN be done if it is to be used as a requisite for being able to sign-off on another scout's requirement.

For example, Scout Timmy is a new patrol leader, he wants to be able to sign off on his patrol's knot requirements. The SM says sure, let's see if you can do them first. This is not a retest for advancement, but to be granted additional authority. 

I think it is a good idea to have property used as an additional revenue stream. However, I question (ever so slightly) the use of council staff to provide programming even for a fee as this takes the staff away from their primary job of supporting scouting units. If the council staff is not needed to support the units, then perhaps staffing reduction needs to be considered. If the fees charged to these other organizations are minimal, then there is a significant issue IMO. Councils should not be subsidizing the cost of other organizations by providing staff programming at a discount. If this were ther case, then it would be the scouting units themselves which are subsidizing these other groups through council unit fees, fundraising etc...  Now if volunteers provided the programming at a cost to these other groups at the market rate as a revenue stream for the council, then this is an awesome way to subsidize the scouting units to keep costs to the units lower..

14 minutes ago, sierracharliescouter said:

The SE is responsible for all of the facilities run by the council, whether they are being used for scouts or other groups. In the case of our council, they have worked with the schools to develop and run STEM programs for the schools. The school group is still responsible for supervising their group, but the program is provided (at a fee) by council staff.

Interesting. That must be quite the money-maker for the council.

Why would the SE oversee programs not involving scouts? Even if a non-scout group was to rent a council facility, that group's leadership is still responsible for their own group's program, not the SE.

At one time the scout camp lands were just that, land. Scouts would go and camp in the woods and paddle the lakes just like if they were on national or state forest lands. There was little to no infrastructure to maintain. With the creation of dining halls, trading posts, cabins, etc... the cost for maintainance skyrocketed.

Ironically to help pay for these costs, many councils sold public easements to states so that during non-camp times the general public could use the lands for hunting, fishing and camping outside the "main camp", ie the woods and forests. So the general public now uses the unimproved forests for the same experiences the scouts used to use them for generations ago  to help pay for the scouts to have more indoor facilities. 

Is their a "dollar" breakdown for budgets from National and Councils?

Like, "from each fee dollar, here is where it goes...

45cents to....

15cents to...

15 cents to...

10cents to...

10cents to...

5 cents to...

"

😢

We would hand out patches at the conclusion of the election.

If there is an issue with them not being sewed on in a timely manner, perhaps have that as part of the process:

1. Election.

2. Announcement of results.

3. Hand out (new) patches.

4. Sew on new patches.

If scouts cannot sew, then look at this as a fantastic learning opportunity. 

5. Some type of ceremony acknowledging new roles.

mB counselors sign off on completion of the requirements whilst providing their expertise, experience and the most important, adult association. They might not be able to be the person whom the scout recieves the direct instruction.

In this case, if the mB counselor is not a certified instructor in CPR/AED then the mB counselor can sign off on the requirement when the scout recieves the instruction from a certified instructor who does not have to be a mB counselor.

The scout may have recieved the instruction during health class at school, or as part of a sports team, or many other venues including the mB counselor hosting a certified instructor.

As a mB counselor for other badges, I often sign off on requirements which were completed this way. I often ask the scouts about these experiences, what the learned the most, whether they recommend these venues , etc...

These discussions are not additional requirements only a discussion between the counselor and scout. If a scout does not want to discuss it, I of course provide the signature for completing the requirement as written.

I also have the similar discussion with them when I was the person who provided the instruction. I am certain to let them know upfront that the purpose of the discussion is for ME to improve as a mB counselor and I am seeking to learn from them. 

I view the number one job of the mB counselor is to fulfill the adult association method, and for me the main lesson I want my scouts to see in me is that of personal growth, lifelong learning and always seeking to improve.

I do not see a discrepancy. Although both are worded slightly differently, they require the person to be a trained instructor. Which is NOT synonymous with a person trained in CPR who is instructing. 

Fun is determined by the Patrol; both in their analysis of the activities and the choice of them. If a patrol says they aren't having fun, then they need the encouragement, assistance and authority to choose more fun activities. 

Troop, District, Council and National all need to support the Patrol in words and deeds. 

Regarding cost, the problem most have is that little/none of the $ to national or to council is viewed as benefitting the individual scouts and patrols. They do not see the value of that sunk cost, or the value is not commensurate with said cost.