Eagle94-A1

23 minutes ago, Tron said:

Your council has it. The question is does your registrar know where it is and does your registrar have the intestinal fortitude to work with you to find it.

Yes she knew what happened to them. Some got lost in moving HQ locations. The bulk thrown away when the storage unit they were in had water damage.  I knew about the lost records as it happened before my time. The water damaged ones happened while I was gone.

My council is now using records laws to keep stuff the legally required time. Then it is destroyed. I am told a lot of councils have been doing this

43 minutes ago, skeptic said:

...We are trying to get a real gathering of COR's who CAN fire the man, but finding the contacts is difficult when the office claims they cannot share that info.  Our current elect president seems to either not understand very well, or he is just a puppet, or it continues to seem....  

One SE told us how to manipulate the nominating process to get the folks who are "friendly" to council on committees and boards. So I wouldn't be suprised.

45 minutes ago, skeptic said:

 On top of it all, we were told they have closed our camp and are looking to find a new option which is aimed at selling by the SE who seems to have gotten himself veto power of some type.  An almost hundred year old camp that has been poorly administgrated for decades, but recently has shown huge success, even to out of area troops.  But with no camp the program becomes even more difficult to run well.   

That happened in my council. Local camp was sold. They said the reason was that it was costing almost $70/ camper to maintain. When volunteers looked at the raw data,  they noticed the data was manipulated to show a loss. They included capital expenses, and forgot to note the camp was closed for 7 months as a result. taking out the capital expense  made it $11/ Camper. But it would have been less because of the 7 months of weekend camp outs, district and council events, etc not taking place. They also conveniently forgot to include the previous 3 years data, which showed the camp was actually a money maker supporting the primary camp. However the amount it raised did not compare to the amount they sold it for. 

Here's the deal, and I am not trying to be a negative Nelly here. As a former pro, I know what the job entails, and appreciate the good DEs. What do I mean by good DEs, I mean, and in  no particular order.

1. They listen to volunteers. 

2. They are more focused on The Movement in general, than FOS. 

3. They appreciate the volunteers.

4. They are courteous towards the volunteers. 

I give every new Pro the benefit of the doubt when they come aboard. I have even talked to them about situations and challenges they will be facing when they work with volunteers. For the past 10+ years, it seems to go in one ear and out the other. Kind of hard to appreciate and respect the pros when they do not appreciate and respect the volunteers.

Back in the day when it was under $30K, buddy of mine calculated how much we averaged an hour, and that is not considering summer camp. It was under $3/hour.

As for vacation, what's that? Seriously for the 16 months, I had 1 day off, besides holidays. And I only got that day off because when I showed up to summer camp, there were too many staffers. So those of us not needed were sent home AFTER we showed up on Sunday. It would have been nice if they told us Friday afternoon, or even Saturday morning before we left. Since I had no plans for Monday, and the girlfriend was off on Mondays, we went to the beach and had a great time.

It wasn't just DEs that were insulting, but also FDs, DFSs, and one SE. And what really ticked me off about the SE was that the only reason the event he did this at was a success was the hard work and dedication of one volunteer, who also contributed his treasure knowing Council would not reimburse him, that he ignored.

While I have seen a few Pros that care, most of them lately seem to be recent college grads and want a job. At least in my neck of the woods.

As for treating volunteers with respect and thanking  them, that is a must. When I was a DE, there were times that the volunteers disagreed with what I was doing. Heck there were times that I agreed with them, but was being forced to do what was being done. But because I treated them with respect, explained why things were happening, and thanked them for the work, like yours, mine  would move mountains to help me.

But more importantly, if you show that you care about the Scouts, and wanting them to have a good experience, the volunteers will respect you. I knew a brand new DE who showed up to his first district event, a Pinewood Derby. Now this DE hated  PWDs, because he had a very negative experience with them as a Cub. There  was a single mom and her Cub who showed up way to late for him to compete. There were issues with the car, so mom left and spent time and money getting them fixed. But by the time they got back, the district was about to do the final race to determine the overall champ. Only thing left after that was the Leaders' Division. Scout was visibly upset he would not be allowed to race, and mom was too. The DE stepped in, said he didn't have a car to race in the Leaders' Division, and could he borrow the Cubs, When the Cub said yes and was handing it to him, the DE said to go ahead and get it inspected for him. Then when the adults started bringing their cars to the track, the DE asked the Cub bring it for him. The DE knew how it felt to be in that Cub's place, and didn't want the Cub to have a bad experience. Word got around that the DE was in it for the Scouts. While there was some disagreements with folks, sometimes even heated one, there was still respect between everyone.

So I guess I want Pros who are in it to improve Scouts' lives, and not just collect a paycheck.

4 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

- A focus on unit service.  And everything viewed through that lens...

 

CANNOT. EMPHASIZE. THIS. ENOUGH! (Caps, bold, etc for major emphasis). I t is sad when you ask for help, and the professionals won't help you.

4 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

- Recruit, train, and support COMMISSIONERS to implement the unit service support....

- Low cost, high impact training for unit leaders....

- Transparency on council finances....

- Steer our district and council activities, and our local camp (including Summer Camp) to be more PATROL focused...

Concur, although the last one will be the hardest. Sadly most pros are clueless on programs, and the National literature on Patrol Method has been seriously watered down.

My additions.

-Respect for volunteers. Volunteers are what make the program happen at all levels: units, district, council, section, and national. I have seen DEs ignore, insult, yell at, and curse out volunteers. I've commented on my treatment by pros on other posts. I have had friends resign from district positions, including district chair and commissioner, over their treatment.  One new DE with no prior Scouting experience and only 6 months as a pro, attempted to publicly humiliate one long time Scouter at a district meeting. She got so angry she responded, " I've forgotten more about Scouting than you've ever learned, and I still know more than you!"

-Focus on program, not money. Yes money is important. But need a program that is worth investing in. At least in my council of late, there is no worthy council programs. The local summer camp is being negatively talked about on social media because of issues last year. And to be honest they have had issues for a very long time. Very few people, usually the military folks who are moving into the council from another, are willing to spend the time and treasure to run programs. When I ran district activities, I was put in charge at the last minute, ignored when it came scheduling a third event at the location at the last minute, did not have my supplies ordered or in insufficient quantities (you always over estimate you patches!)

If you build a program, they will come. If you have a good program, people will support it. More later.

4 hours ago, Ojoman said:

In my 30 years as a professional and over 20 as a volunteer I always wanted to know the 'lowest' number of registered youth each year since kids stay on the charter until reregistation time. The low number is generally closer to an accurate count of active youths vs 'total youth served (registered) during the year. Districts always carry 'inactive' youths but it is insane to carry 'paper units and members'. Certainly in councils where the management beats professionals with threats of termination if they don't hit their numbers there is that temptation to keep your job or to try to get a promotion but I always felt that would come back to bite you in the butt. Still, I felt that putting 'fake' membership on the books was and is rare. Check out my post on Charter Reps if you want to know who can alert the board to such an issue. The council board should be well informed about the workings of the council and concerned about any area of service, funding and membership where there is a failure to perform properly. It would be great if everyone in every profession lived up to what we hope the program instills in our young people. 

It was commonplace in a lot of councils. I heard stories from other pros about folks going to graveyards and using phone books to get names. I know one district  had 1/3 of the members and units that were fake. The DE tried his best to clean up the mess, and the SE and DFS were ticked off and forced the DE out of the profession. While I agree it is insane to keep paper units and Scouts, there are some pros who would do anything to get the numbers so they can meet goals and get raises. Same DE was  at a staff conference, and thought his SE was telling folks how to spot fake units to fix the problem. His peers told him to think about it, they were just told how to fake membership without getting caught right.

While theoretically CORs and the executive board have some power, there are ways to limit it. If CORs are not informed of the meetings until the last minute or after the fact, how can they go? Also you do know about the CORs in Chicago a few years back? And the same SE and DFS above told DEs how to manipulate the nominating committee in order to get folks who would be friendly towards the council. They wanted the DE to remove 3/4s of his district committee because they questioned council.

And I can go on.

If your 50+ years were not like my 40+years, I am jealous.

2 hours ago, SiouxRanger said:

I have come to the belief that DE's are not trained in any aspects of program whatsoever, AND, I truly wish you could direct me to the materials that do train DE's on program.  Philmont has loads training programs. Are any directed to DE's and how to put on program?

Once upon a time, DEs were trained in program. Before my time, it was held at Schiff Scout reservation. When I was a DE, we had 3 months to complete Scoutmaster Fundamentals, Exploring Basic Leader Training, and Cub Scout Basic Leader Training in order to go to PDL-1. Also there was a 1 day mock "campout" where we went ot a camp and did some stuff there. Planning events was also part of the process.

But when I talked to a DE about training, it is mostly online now, I have no idea what it covered, but  I know it is inadequate.

Regarding why districts are failing, in some cases you got longtime volunteers who have been ignored and abused by pros, and they are fed up with it. They are told they will be treated differently by the new pros, but it is the same old, same old.

On 11/29/2023 at 4:12 PM, DannyG said:

Correct. The Cubs program has not been run this way in a decade or more. Those scouts are long gone.

While the Cubs may be gone, You have a few, and I stress a FEW, who still treat the Webelos/AOL program like it was originally intended to be: a transition program from Cubs to Scouts. Usually those Cub Scout Leaders are long time Cub Scout leader who were Cub Scout basic Leader trained, or newer leaders who have either trained under, or been mentored by, older Leaders who have been around a while.

IMHO, the training for WDLs is the problem as I got rid of that information.

Sadly I know several councils where numbers were fudged. Heck one SE and DFS had a reputation for doing this, and using the DEs as scapegoats to get out of trouble. It was so well known that I was warned to watch my back with them by a SE I knew.    As @Ojomanstated, if you want to kill your career in Scouting, be a whistleblower. I have met pros, really good ones IMHO, that found some shady stuff, reported, and were penalized.

3 hours ago, DannyG said:

In reality, neither Webelos nor AOL is prep for Scouts. But they are learning skills throughout Cubs that will help them as they progress. Webelos and AOL is the culmination of that. It's the closest to scouts but it's still a Cubs program. Really there is no prep until they join a troop and become part of a patrol. 

If you look at how the pre-2015 structure was created, as well as the older pre- CS Position Specific Training syllabus circa 2007 and older, Webelos was created and expanded to an 18-24 month program with the purpose of preparing them for Scouts.  Parents no longer signed off on advancement, guest experts in different Activity Badges were recommended to come in a teach a few meetings to simulate MBCs, utilizing the Patrol Method with a Denner with duties, wearing the Patrol medallion instead of den number etc.

 When they went from CS Basic Leader training, a day long class covering all positions, to each position having their own training, I thought it was a mistake becasue people think they are "Trained" in one POR, think they know what to do in another. WDL is a completely different creature than a CSDL. And online training has made it worse IMHO.

And we are Seeing new Scouts who are confused and uncomfortable with the differences between CS Scouts. Worse off are the parents.

50 minutes ago, Tron said:

Your council will have a paper archive of all those old documents that pre-date the electronic filing of recharter, etc ... You will need to contact your council registrar and ask for access to review old documents. 

That is IF, and I stress IF, they kept the records and/or the records have not been lost or damaged. For my troop's 100th anniversary, we wanted names of all SMs.  We had most of them, but not all of them. My council did not have the records.

4 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

Do not see the numbers of years past coming back.

Me neither. Our area is as rural one, with a high poverty rate. Median income is barely over poverty levels. If I had to pay for all three hoodlums, and myself, I could not afford the program, and I drank the council Flavor-aid when they were Cubs. Over $500 on national and council fees alone, then add $180 for pack fees. And I am not including uniforms.

The new fees will definitely shrink the program.

1 hour ago, qwazse said:

What money? A handful of spiral bound books and some green/blue shirts? It’s not like there are stacks of older-youth equivalents of pinewood derby kits and other nick-knacks piling up. The remaining Venturers and Sea Scouts drop dimes on HA bases and Jamborees (or their region level equivalents), so National will be very slow to dispense with those niche markets.

I am not big into Sea Scouts as I used to be, but up until a few years back, national only supplied patches, not uniform shirts and pants. Why someone said Sea Scouts wore "Piratical Costumes." Most ships purchased from SHIPS STORES in CA instead of National because A. National only kept a limited number of items, and B. Better quality. In fact the last time I purchased items form National, and they were on sale at the time, all of the labels had "Sea Explorer' (item name)" on it, and this was over  10-15 years after Sea Explorers became Sea Scouts again.

We have not had a feeder pack in about 12 years. Our Scouts recruited by word of mouth, and until recently most Scouts transferred from other troops in the area. We went from48+ back then, to 7 currently on the charter, and one of those ages out this year.  We will not be folding this year, but it may happen next year.

Because we have not been able to recruit in the schools, we are down to 2 packs in my county. 26 years ago when I first moved here, 10 active packs in the county. We had 11 active troops in the county, with 24-48 scouts each. we are down to 7 troops, with 6-24 scouts each. There were over 750 Cub Scouts, Scouts, and Explorers/Venturers in the county back in the day. Today there are under 400 Cub Scouts, Scouts, Explorers, and Venturers in the 7 counties that comprise my current district.

It is depressing. 

1 hour ago, mrjohns2 said:

The presentation said that ONLY the AOL is intended to be prep for Scouts (6 months for AOL) vs. previously all of Webelos (18 months Webelos and AOL) being prep. 

Going back to the 1980s and earlier.

On a different note, from everything I am hearing, packs are already doing this essentially. Watch retention at the Scout level continue to drop.

9 hours ago, Tron said:

The 6 month time frame has always been an issue; I have had many discussions with other den leaders and asked them how they fit the current AOL program into 6 months and no one can quite explain it. Based on personal experience most AOL den leaders are straight pencil whipping the program plan as it is designed right now.

In the pre-2015 program, as soon as a Webelos den completed the Webelos Rank, they began work on the AOL. The entire reason why BSA went from a 9-12 month Webelos program in the 1980s and earlier to the 18-24 month program was because studies showed it took the Webelos, and their parents, that look understand the differences between Cubs Scouts and Boy Scouts.

I am friends with one of the 411 committee members that came up with the current program design. I asked can we still start working on AOL as soon as they completed Webelos, and was told yes, they shorted the number of required activity badges for the few that joined in 5th grade. But the goal was to cross over no later than March, so that they would be prepared for summer camp.

When I did training on the 2015 program, I told the pack in attendance just that. Those packs that do start the transition from Cubs to Scouts in 4th Grade have better prepared new Scouts who remain in Scouting longer. Best example I can give is the Webelos 2/AOL Den that began the transition in 4th grade, and in December of 5th grade, just before Cross Over on January 2nd, did their last activity badge, CASTAWAY. The den had their individual shelters built and started cooking lunch before the Scouts completed their shelters. Heck one Cub had his shelter completed, and lunch cooked before the DL had his shelter completed.

So if done like above, it should be no problem to complete AOL in 6 months of 5th grade.

BUT,  I know that people have said the new program was never intended to work like above, and that the person who told me it could, one of the committee that created the program. was wrong. And sadly7 whomever wrote the current WDL/AOLDL training did not know why Webelos went from 9-12 months to 18-24 months. With the new program, I see a lot of folks pencil whipping Cub Scout advancement, and a lot of new Scouts, and their parents, getting culture shock when the Cross Over.

42 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

It's just an award and really not that special of an award.  Any kid that stays in and is mostly active earns AOL.  Also, parents do most of the work.  Any cooperative kid generally earns AOL.

If you read the older literature, I would say pre-2008 but I do not remember exactly when it went from Cub Scout Basic Leader  Training to Cub Scout Specific Training, parents are not "do most of the work anyway." Rather they are suppose to start backing off, starting in 4th grade, and let the Cubs do more and more. It was recommended that Parents do not even sign off on advancement.

Sadly I am seeing this more and more. Only packs with  WDLs with the older training are doing it they way I was trained. Forgot to add, they have better retention in Scouts.

12 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

My cub experience was vastly different from what I have been hearing the last few decades. Cubs.  for me was NOT a family affair, nor a Pack-centric unit.

We had a den which met weekly after school at the den leaders house for an hour or so, then walked home or our parents picked us up. There were a couple pack meetings throughout the year, maybe 2 or 3. Pinewood derby and B&G are the only ones I remember. There were also a couple pack campouts, but we mostly stayed with our den. I do not recall ever really interacting with another den.

Each den meeting we would do an activity, sometimes a continuation from the previous week. No "requirements" were ever signed off by parents. AOL was an extra award one could earn as a Webelos, and there was only one year of it. There were only 4 years of cubs, iirc, Bobcat, Wolf, Bear, and Webelos.

I had a similar experience to the one you described in the early 1980s. Only difference was Cub Scouts was 3 eyars as Tigers did nto come out until 1982.

4 hours ago, CubHerder said:

For Cub Scout standards, yes. Unless the organization, i.e., the BSA, provides provides resources to execute the plan, such as people or money, they are quite literally just providing words on a page.   

Unless things have changed in 4 years since I was involved with Cubs, BSA offered all kinds of resources for Den Leaders. In addition to training, there was a "Program Helps" which contained den lesson plans for each meeting. They were great for new leaders as they provided information for everything you needed. As you got more comfortable as a leader, you could use it for a basis for the meeting, then expand up on the literature. Those books were so popular that I had folks from other youth organizations buying them to get ideas for their meetings.

As for people, that is what Roundtable is for.Experienced volunteers provide information and resources to conduct programs. I have not served as a RT commissioner in several years, but I still have folks contacting me for advice.

Now One thing I will grant you is the lack of classroom training. While online training provides info, it lacks what a Trainer who has "been there, does that, have the t-shirt" can bring to training. When I was training chair and running courses, I was able to bring in knowledgeable folks who could relate to the new volunteers, give them ideas and help them during training, and give them a resource outside of RTs.

Regarding Pack Fees and Webelos 2s/AOLS, The pack I was did it two ways.  The older two were not charged anything except national fee, which transfered over to the troop,  Since they were leaving in December and January respectively. Youngest was charged a pack fee, but that was the cost of their AOL plaques in February. They got really, really nice ones.

14 hours ago, CubHerder said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend anyone who had a part in the developing the current program.

No offense taken. Just wanted folks to know that volunteers were involved who actually talked to folks in the field. I was NOT (emphasis) part of the committee, but a friend was, and he got a lot, and I do mean A LOT (emphasis) of input. He was an involved Cub Scout leader for a while, but moved up to Scouts before being on the Cub Scout Committee. So he had knowledge, skills, and experience. He also knew enough that just because one council did it a certain way, doesn't mean that is the only way to do things.

14 hours ago, CubHerder said:

Our scouts love the Castaway Adventure! Thanks for that!  They would love to do boating as well, but our Council basically told us that the safety rules around swimming and boating are so complex and impractical to enforce at the Cub Scout level that they basically don't allow it. Part of me believes they want to reserve those activities as selling points for the Council's Cub Scout Day Camp.

Glad to hear it about CASTAWAY.  That was the highlight of my middle son's den in 5th grade. Preparing for, and doing that was what kept them motivated before crossing over in January.

More than likely your council is using the process to make it a selling point.  While it is complicated, troops do it all the time. 

14 hours ago, CubHerder said:

It sounds like the pre-2015 model made a little more sense. In the current program, calling Arrow of Light The Highest Rank in Cub Scouting isn't consistent with the requirements to earn it.

Yeah, there was a lot of questions about it when the material started coming out in January 2015. A lot of folks thought AOL lost its meaning. Myself included. BUT I can count on no fingers how many 5th graders joined Cub Scouts.

14 hours ago, CubHerder said:

Yes, that is what the handbook says. But those are just words on a page, the rubber meets the road when Den Leaders and parents to donate the time to deliver the program. We are grateful to our leaders who step up even if they can't execute the program to ideal standards, and to our parents even if they can't supervise a month's worth of Cub Scout homework. 

The challenge is that this is setting the Scouts  up for major challenges when they become Scouts. Further it gives the parents false expectations regarding advancement, The biggest complaint I have heard from crossed over parents is about advancement, they still expected it to be handed to their Scout.

Trust me I understand being a DL. I did it for 6 years with my hoodlums, and I was exhausted  at the end of the 6th year. And this was from someone who has been a Scouter for over 30 years at the time.

From the Guide for Officers and Advisers.

Adult membership qualifications. All members of, or candidates for membership in, the Orderof the Arrow who are 21 years of age or older and who are registered members of the Boy Scouts of America shall be considered adult members or candidates for adult membership. Individuals shall be selected as candidates
based on the following:

1. Adult leaders in units: Each year, upon holding a unit election for youth candidates that results in at least one youth candidate being elected, the unit committee may nominate registered unit adults, 21 years of age or older, for membership in the OA to the lodge adult selection committee, composed of the lodge adviser, the chair of the council committee on which the lodge adviser serves, and the lodge staff adviser.

The number of adults nominated can be no  more than two-thirds of the number of youth candidates elected, rounded up where the number of youth candidates is not a multiple of three. In addition to the two-thirds limit, the unit committee may nominate the currently serving unit leader  (but not assistant leaders), as long as he or she has served as unit leader for at least the previous 12 months. Recommendations of the adult selection committee, with the  approval of the Scout executive, will be candidates for induction, provided these conditions are fulfilled:
               • Selection of the adult is based on the ability to perform the necessary functions to help the OA fulfill its purpose, and not for recognition of service,
                 including current or prior achievement and positions.
                • The individual will be an asset to the OA because of demonstrated abilities that fulfill the purpose of the Order.
                • The camping requirements set forth for youth members are fulfilled.                                                                                                                                                                                     • The adult leader’s membership will provide a positive example for the growth and development of the youth members of the lodge.

2. Adult leaders in council and district positions: The lodge adviser, district chairs, council president or board chair, or members of the professional staff may nominate adults to the lodge adult selection committee. All requirements set forth for adult leaders in units must be fulfilled, with the exception of the camping requirements, which may be waived at the discretion of the lodge adviser and Scout executive. Recommendations of the adult selection committee, with the approval of the Scout executive, serving as Supreme Chief of the Fire, will become candidates for induction. 

Adults may be nominated for membership only one time per year as either unit Scouters or district/council Scouters, but not both. How they are nominated depends on where they maintain their primary registration.

Because the Order of the Arrow is principally a youth organization, unit, district, and council Scouters are not selected for membership as a recognition. Selection should take place only when the adult’s position in Scouting will make OA membership more meaningful in the lives of the youth membership.

There is a third category for professionals, but since this is not the case, I won't post it.

Thank You  @RememberSchiff. It is sad when I get information faster her and other social media than through my council.

11 hours ago, CubHerder said:

I really like this new organization. It looks like someone has actually thought about and designed a six-year program, as opposed to the current structure that appears to be made up of one band-aid solution on top of another. I'm also glad to see Arrow of Light as simply one of six rank badges. The idea that Arrow of Light was some great culmination of Cub Scouting never made any sense to me. Any kid who joins a Pack in 5th grade and participates for six months can get Arrow of Light. Whoop-De-Do. 

The  original version of the current program had a committee of volunteers working on it  for over 2 year ( I thinkit was closer to 4)and getting input from other volunteers in the field. If you pack likes boating activities, or your Webelos/AOLs like the CASTAWAY ADVENTURE, you're welcome. I was the one that reminded a committee member that Cubs could only do boating activities at council event s at the time. And I talked up how my troop growing up used wilderness survival as a recruiting tool.

As for the hoopla, prior to June 2015, you had to earn the Bobcat and Webelos Ranks in order to earn AOL, and symbolized your readiness for Scouts. They changed that because folks thought it discouraged 5th graders from joining. 

11 hours ago, CubHerder said:

Requiring eight adventures for each rank I think is a good move. Frankly, many of our Den Leaders hold one meeting per adventure regardless of difficulty or whatever. Eight Adventures means at least eight Den Meetings, which at least gets them together once per month for the duration of the school year more or less.

WHOA. Each adventure was designed to take a month, not a single meeting Giving away awards is not cool, especially at the Webelos and AOL levels. Webelos and AOLs are suppose to be transitioning to Scouts, getting prepared to do things, not just their best. 

Eight adventures pushes crossover from December-March time frame to February- May time frame. Research shows that the earlier the Cross Over, the better prepared the Scouts are for Summer Camp, which is crucial for retention.

 One thing that I am worried about, and is still missing is the transition from Cubs to Scouts. Research showed it takes 18-24 months to prepare folks. If you shorten it, which is what it is looking like, retention rates will drop. I know some packs already do not begin transition until 5th grade, and see those new Scouts dropping like flies because neither the Scouts, nor the parents, are ready for the differences between the two programs. The pre-June 2015 program only had 3 or 4 activity badges required for AOL so that as soon as it was earned, they could start work on AOL, which had 5 or 6 activity badges. Again the focus wa on preparing for transition.

30 minutes ago, Armymutt said:

Does anyone have an idea of how this will work for kids already in the pipeline?  It would be pretty crappy for a kid to be looking forward to earning AOL in August 2024 because he only has 2 adventures to do over the summer while waiting for the 6 months since turning 10 to arrive.    

Sadly they will need to meet the new requirements.

This part really concerns me.

Quote

Webelos and Arrow of Light will be separated.  Webelos becomes the 4th-grade program in Cub Scouting.  Arrow of Light becomes a stand-alone badge of rank for 5^th graders and will no longer be associated with.  Arrow of Light will be the program that prepares Cub Scouts to join Scouts BSA.

I see very few packs in my council actually making 4th Grade the beginning of the transition. I blame current training on it because there is no longer an emphasis on beginning the transition in Webelos.  The pack that begins transitioning in 4th grade has a better retention rate on Scouts than the one that waits until 5th grade in my area. The third pack does not begin transition until 5th grade, and does not Cross Over until August of their 6th grade year. While I honestly think that is too late, their troop's retention rate is higher than the one that waits until 5th grade, and Crosses Over in March.  6-8 months is not enough time for transition.