Eagle94-A1

7 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

Where is it public?  I am not doubting, I just need to source it when I let the Committee know.

Here is an image of the PPT slide at the National meeting.

5 minutes ago, skeptic said:

So, again we will see comments that ignore other youth activity costs.  That is the standard, and has been such for a while now.  BSA kept cost per member low for decades in comparison to most other groups, and they still are on averge less. 

Probably because most folks in my neck of the woods cannot afford other youth activities. Any increase in price is significant, despite what the cost compared to other activities .

@Fred8033,

I'm with you. After this year, only one of my sons will be eligible to be a Scout. But he is burnt out. He has been doing Scouting in some shape or form since being a toddler, and hanging with his brothers in Cub Scouts. He achieved his goal, Eagle, and may quit once December comes. He may have stayed around if his brothers and a few 18+ friends stuck around, but none of them are willing to give up their friendships per YP rules to remain in Scouting.

40 minutes ago, Cleveland Rocks said:

• $25 for Merit Badge Counselors (New Fee applies only for Merit Badge Counselors not already registered as leaders) 

One positive out of the MBC fee, now MBCs can camp with troops, ships, and crews  since they are in a PAID position.

The split should occur in 4th grade, not 5th. The entire reason why Webelos became an 18-24 month program in the 1990s instead of the 9-12 month program in previous years was the research showed that it takes about 2 years to get the Scouts, and in my experience the parents as well, up to speed with the differences between Cub Scouts and Scouts.

Whomever made this decision did not do their due diligence, and I fear this will continue to hurt troops' retention of new Scouts.

1 hour ago, Armymutt said:

I wonder how often this happens compared to the old days.  Seems that the increasing competition for social media attention and college applications makes parents slough off integrity in an effort to get their kid rank.  I have seen some questionable stuff in Cub Scouts, like people earning 70% of their rank in a weekend.  Even had one claim that a kid earned AOL despite having attended one meeting and a day (not night) of camping.  

This incident was 20+ years ago before all the hype.  More recently I know of one case where mom threatened a lawsuit against BSA if an extension was not given to her son to do a new project after turning 18. Long story short, The kid did NOT follow the directions given to him by the benefitting organization (BO) prior to approval, and did NOT listen to the recommendations of his SM and ASMs, one of whom was a professional contractor. He ended up getting kicked off the BO's property, turning over all unused funds to repair the damage he causes, got Scouts banned from ever doing another service project there, and nearly caused the BO to be shut down and fined until repaires were made. 

54 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

I ran into the former Scout one time not knowing who he was.  I was surprised he was awarded an Eagle, until I was informed of the situation.

There... fixed that for you 😜 

Sadly he was still registered and active in the troop when I met him. This was about 6 months after National approval, and he was 15 or 16.

On 5/20/2023 at 9:47 AM, PACAN said:

..  Never seen ,, although I guess it has happened,  the scout turned down because it is always the fault of the adults even it there is clear evidence that the scout did not actually do the requirements.

I can testify to this. We had a young man denied Eagle because it was discovered troop's leadership, which consisted of Grandpa SM, Dad ASM, and Mom CC pencil whipped a bunch of his MBs so he could get Eagle at 13 or so. EBOR did what they were suppose to do and gave him a plan to actually earn Eagle. The family appealed to the council and was denied. Family appealed to  national, and he was awarded Eagle with the statement in rationale "We do not penalize the Scout for the mistakes of the adults" or words to that effect. The entire District Advancement Committee resigned in protest over this stating "National can conduct these EBORs"

I ran into the Scout one time not knowing who he was. I was surprised he was an Eagle, until I was informed of the situation.

53 minutes ago, Double Eagle said:

Don't overlook your commissioners help with this.  Commissioners have access to training records that say what course(s) each person is missing.  Recently I reviewed a district's training with only 44% position-specific trained.  That means 56% of unit/MB leaders are going with only their experience with programs, and most of them are Pack Leaders.

When all else fails, a council nasty-gram to the chartered organization rep may help to energize those leaders.  Although some may be repetitive and boring, the on-line training is easy.  Hard to tell Scouts there are requirements when the adults don't follow their requirements.  

I would be wary of the accuracy of training reports of Scouters who have been around of while. At least three in the past 19 years, training records and PORs have disappeared. I could understand my out of council records disappearing, but ALL (emphasis) of my training, as well as every single Scouter's training records in the council disappeared. I spent about 18 months getting my district's training records fixed, and was so glad I kept a hard copy and digital copy of all that work because about 2 years later, the records disappeared again. I was able to resubmit the bulk of the records, and only the new folks/ training courses needed time to be reinputted.

ADDED:

I know at one time, National would only consider you "Trained" if you had the CURRENT (major emphasis) training courses completed. Thankfully they changed that policy, But I have noted that while I am "trained" in the records, it still wants me to take the current classes. Which is one reason why when I teach a class, I add my name to the student list as well. Last reliable DE told me to do that so I do not get flagged if national ever goes back to only current classes count.

Current troop neckerchief has the CO incorporated into the logo. I do not know how old the necker design is, but it predates me coming into the area.

There is WAY to much focus on advancement in general, and specifically Eagle. EAGLE IS NOT THE GOALS! (major emphasis). Sadly I am seeing more and more "Eagle Scouts" who cannot do basic skills, sometimes stuff that Scouts have a reputation for doing. Best example I can give is the Eagle Scout who at a first aid competition could not do basic Tenderfoot thru First Class First Aid skills. when I asked if he had First Aid Merit badge, he stated he " I took that my first year at summer camp."

I'd rather have the Life for Life, who knew his stuff and was able to recognize I had hypothermia and treat me when I was hours away from a hospital.

Yes with all the changes going on, I would not put CO on anything. In fact I would not put any district names or council names in any  unit logo. Districts merge, and councils will be shortly.

What I have seen done once was a unit celebrated their 25th anniversary by adding a wreath around their unit logo, and the years underneath the logo. That special logo was used just for the 25th anniversary year, and they went back to the normal logo after the anniversary.

20 minutes ago, yknot said:

 It does have to be balanced with also effectively running the day to day operations of the Council and serving its scouts. 

I agree, and have seen outside groups using camps multiple times in multiple locations. but at least in my area, it is NOT being balanced.

7 minutes ago, sierracharliescouter said:

If I thought these additional programs took anything away from how our Council delivers services, I'd be vocal about it, but I've never seen nor heard a complaint about a unit being disadvantaged because of the existence of these programs.

This is indeed happening in my area. Council is focused on additional programs, and the units are not being serviced. I asked the SE why they cannot help the existing units, and was ignored. Like @InquisitiveScouter, Scouting is struggling in my area. I see 3 more units folding in my old district alone within the next 2-3 years.

What really hurts is that I went thru 2 years of hell as a professional building this area up, only to see it slowly fall apart from professional arrogance, apathy, and neglect.

7 minutes ago, sierracharliescouter said:

I can't believe someone is complaining about a Council doing something good for their community while at the same time helping to maintain a stable budget. If you think your council's SE isn't worth what their paying, or the council should be doing more with the resources they have, become the squeaky wheel. Venting here isn't going to change anything.

Sadly I have seen professionals focus more on making money from community sources,  than serving the Scouts. Rather than supporting an event in their territory, they are at an event that services a community several hours away. And folks wonder why FOS is down.

As for squeaky wheel, in the best case you are ignored. In the worst case, they revoke your membership. One long time volunteer in my area discovered some financial monkey business. When he started bringing it up and became the squeaky wheel, the SE revoked his membership. 

2 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

  Giving it to any public entity could result in a loss of access no matter the contractual agreements.  We are seeing land and buildings given to public entities where names and uses are changed because people today are offended.   Scouting could be forced out of public spaces.  Not saying that I will occur or that it is likely but that it is possible and therefore a risk. 

Seeing it done now. Camp got sold, but in the agreement Scouts can use it 5 times a year for the next 3 years. HOWEVER since the new owners are not maintaining the property, Scouters would have 1 Saturday prior to an event to come in and get everything ready. The last time an event was held there with no ranger onsite, it took volunteers about 2 months going into and out of the camp at our own times to get it ready to meet NCAP standards. One event was already cancelled this year, and the fall events may be cancelled if the conditions are stil in place.

1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

  I have heard anecdotes from Scouters across the country relating instances where councils have sold properties under such restrictions, after waiting a few decades until people forget or donors have passed away, but I have never seen such restrictions in writing on a deed in order to verify those claims. 

I know one council in TX was using a camp that was owned by a trust. The SE was able to convince the trust to transfer the deed to the council outright, which they did. Within 6 months, the camp was sold. 

In another council, the PTB waited until certain donors passed away before securing permission from the sole survivor to sell the camp.

1 hour ago, SNEScouter said:

I disagree.  Every council is different, and I'm sure all councils can do better.  However, council employees are necessary to train leaders, implement programs,  and supervise and support units.  They do not work for free.  Personally I'd rather pay a fee than deal with Friends of Scouting presentations.

If your pros are doing some of this still, you are lucky.

Last time I saw a pro involved with training was 12 years ago, and he was assisting me because I needed a 2nd trainer for a break out session.

Last time I saw a pro at a district program event, besides roundtable, was 8 years ago. Usually when they get involved, they screw things up. I had camporee dumped into my lap with 3 months notice because of DE interference causing the person to quit..  I quit running events because the DE screwed up the supply order so badly, I ad to get supplies locally and more expensive, going over budget because of them. Since most pros have little to no experience, they really do not know what they are doing.

Now I saw a DE attempt to implement a program, they created the event after the Cub Scout packs stopped meeting for the summer and with 3 weeks notice. In the middle of summer with troops going to summer camp, she  tried to recruit volunteers. When no one signed up, they blamed the volunteers. That was last summer. 

As for supervising and supporting units, they do not in my area. 

Much different now than when I was a DE. I do not see value for my pros.

1 hour ago, TWP said:

Yeah I don't want to put myself in a role where the initial reaction everyone has is that it's sketchy. I have done nothing to deserve that and I am not ok with being seen that way. If that's how people feel and I have to work to convince every single person I meet that I'm normal then I'm out

Sometimes you will have to ignore it. Unit I grew up in and stuck around with while in college did have some new parents question my involvement since I hade aged out. Scouters and existing Scouts in the troop knew me, and had no problems. But new folks would sometimes have concerns. Once you have kids, you will understand.

Two units checked all my references in the councils I had been in, and my work history to verify I worked for BSA. One did their own background check on me.

The Hardest time getting trust was not a unit, but becoming a DE.  The district i was assigned to had a high turnover rate, and previous pros had little to no experience with the BSA. Plus lots of problems on the professional side in the council. Long story short, it took 6-8 months of doing attending just about everything: pinewood derby, OA events, camporee, training events, and summer camp before I gained the trust of my volunteers.

AND IT WAS WORTH!

I made lots of friends, some  of who me I am friends with today. Because folks knew I would do whatever to took to help Scouts, and the Scouters out, they helped me when I had challenges. I left the profession and the area, only to come back to the area as a volunteer. So do not get discouraged if you have to gain folks' trust. After all they have the same goal as you: protecting the Scouts and providing a great program to them

Good luck.

Having been in your shoes here are some ideas.

1. Find out if your church, civic group, etc has a unit you can be part of. did that in 2 councils i moved to and knew no one.

2. Serve on a district level. I was an OA associate chapter advisor in two councils as well. Aslo served on training staff.

3. Show up to a unit. I did that once. Yes people were skeptical, but after talking scouting and giving references, it worked out.

4. do not give up

good luck

EDITED yes where ya at. I need help too.

43 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

  I'd be tempted to create a nice thin, small troop level pamphlet where scouts could keep their advancement signatures.   

National printed one of those a few editions back. Biggest challenge is that National keeps changing requirements, like some folks change clothes.  5 changes to Second Class requirements since 2016? That is a change ever 18 months or so

46 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

 In fact, let a well structured group of volunteers manage all the scout literature.  If it works for Linux, it can definitely work for scout literature.  Then, partner with Kinkos or FedEx to print copies for individuals that really want paper.

If national doesn't have control, they will not do it. Look at the template for council websites. You had some really great volunteer web designers doing local council and OA lodge webpages. And national quashed them. One web designer I know worked for a Fortune 500 company's webpage, and that council and lodge's webpages were excellent. Not anymore since National mandated specific templates.

8 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Wow !!!   I wanted to comment that books and uniforms are profit centers that are not subsidized by national fees.  

Yes, uniforms and books subsidize National, and councils. Since they are a source of revenue, I have included them in the value national gives us. My oldest bought a pair of pants that was worn maybe  6 times to meetings, and they ripped within 2 months of purchasing. I still wear ODL shorts, pants, and shirts from 1994. There is a reason why ODL shirts with all kinds of glue go almost as much as a new shirt today.

8 hours ago, dk516 said:

Our Council has been collecting $60 for some years now. Their reasoning was that they would no longer push FOS since it did not bring in enough $$$s but would ask the programming fee from all active council members. I am sure we'll see more of this and increasing $$$s with the decreasing number of participants.

And more and more folks will not be able to afford Scouting, including those who most need it.

8 hours ago, SNEScouter said:

Councils are moving towards a user-fee model because Friends of Scouting / other fundraising isn't pulling in the dollars that are needed.

In my neck of the woods, arrogant professionals have alienated volunteers and donors. A lot of folks have been burnt by pros. And every time national fees increase, that is less income for FOS.

7 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

Don't tick off the United Way without a plan to replace their funding.

That is an understatement. And all it takes is one arrogant professional to tick off UW folks. My old boss made some rather rude, obnoxious comments about the local UW president that got back to them. Long story short, we lost all UW funding except designations.

6 hours ago, fred8033 said:

 The real question is does the individual scout get value from the $75 national and $100+ council fees which their own units are staffed by volunteers and the camp fees are separate. 

No., families do not get value. I would argue that the quality of service National provides has proportionally decreased as prices increase. Books and uniforms fall apart, training materials are leaving out so much, and concerns from the field are ignored. As for council, The office staff have provided more support to the unit than the pros. Heck I cannot tell you the last time I saw a professional at a district event, besides roundtable, or a council event in my district.

Not trying to be a negative Nellie, but I am at wit's end.

15 minutes ago, JSL3300 said:

Over the last couple of years, Great Trail Council (which is the local body that we answer to) has made a policy that Cub Scouts cannot family camp anywhere except council owned camps.

At least you have a list of approved camps, even if limited to council owned. Some councils do not have any list of approved camps because some high level volunteers feel "Cubs don't need to camp."  So packs are using the OA's Where to Go Camping book as their list of approved camps since it is a council publication.

6 minutes ago, DannyG said:

Actually, the rule for Cub Scouts is council "approved" camps. They don't have to be council owned. My council has approved the state park our unit camps in, and some privately owned (church groups) camps.

Yes, but some councils do restrict their Cubs to only  their own camps. I know of one council that has great Cub programs at the camp, but once they reach Scout age, tend to go elsewhere because they are bored at going to that camp.

2 hours ago, DannyG said:

So the council adds some honey to attract the Cubs into the local camp... Win-win? Unintended consequences? Better than nothing I suppose.

Actually some of us predicted this was the reason for the rule change.

1 hour ago, JSL3300 said:

What I do wonder is about the ban on shooting sports for cubs when not at a council event. Prior to that rule change, our council had rangemaster training and each unit that wanted to do shooting sports would send someone to get trained so they could do shooting sports on council property during unit campouts. They changed the rule to say cubs could only shoot at council events. Maybe now that camp is technically a council event, maybe one of the things they can bring back is letting cubs do shooting sports and camp. Fingers crossed. 

Edit: Emailed camp director. Not going back to old style of range renting. Bummer. But glad we can still camp. 

Actually what your council, and many others I might add, were doing was not allowed by national. However that rule was never enforced. Probably because it made money for the local councils, i.e. pay for the training, pay to rent the range, pay to rent the equipment, buying the ammo and targets, etc.  Now it appears national is coming down like a hammer on councils.

5 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

Well, I guess I won't share what our troop does since we are a girl troop.

Just remember, Venturing has been around 24 years, and folks still call them venture Scouts instead of Venturers, and venture crews instead of Venturing Crews. Girls troops have only been around 4 years.