Jameson76

Not sure of current statistics, but, there was a an analysis done on Scout camp usage by Scouting couple of years ago. No I do not have the study or the data, only had a conversation with some camping folks. Basically: A camps weekly capacity multiplied weeks open and then that capacity divided into actual usage For example 350 participants capacitgy x 5 weeks = 1,750 capacity and dividing that into actual, for example 1,250, you yield 71.4% The result was maybe 36% usage or so, all Scouting properties (local / regional / national). And some of those are likely closed now. There was one we went to in Tennessee that was 5 weeks and now is 3. Was not sure how they staffed and made it work with 5, still wonder about 3 weeks and profit and effort for that.

Only caution is the YPT or whatever they call it now. If they are active and still in high school "technically" they would not be able to say give a ride home from school for a friend under 18 who happens to be in the troop or in any troop. That would violate the 1 on 1 deal. Not saying it's logical, but not sure what the solution may be.

Still a lot of youth under 17

IMHO BSA made the classic error of while having good market share, they started worrying / focusing on how to attract even more market share and not considering how changes may affect current customers. However you may feel, there was a core constituency for the BSA. They had ownership in the program, felt a heavy tradition with the program. The organization still has never fully benchmarked why people join, why they stay, what do their customers want. BSA shattered that core group in the 70's with wholesale changes (remember ISP and skill awards for Scouting??), they tried to regroup, and then for the next 30 years (maybe 1982 - 2012) were like a small sailboat in a gale, just trying to follow the winds without a firm direction. The suits and other outside influences tore out the foundations. Not to mention the $1 Billion vanity project in West Virginia. They lost a lot of the tradition, a lot of experience, and many of those that had joined and had stayed active for many years. Scouting is more transactional now, if kids join they get X, as opposed to when kids joined many years ago they joined for fun and adventure. Admittedly all of society is now way more transactional, but BSA or Scouting America is more now about what YOU can get from the program and many time not what your GIVE to the program. Then there are the two main divides in the organization. Group A wants to build a program, go and do things, enrich youth, challenge them outside their comfort zones, these we call volunteers. Group B wants to keep status quo on the organizational structure and administration, the focus is preservation and keeping the paid jobs and kingdoms in place. The only scoreboard is money raised. This group we call professionals. In the end, whether Group A or Group B likes it, the BSA (dba as Scouting America) will become a much smaller organization, less professionals, and lesser societal impact. Maybe other groups will fill the void, maybe portions of Scouting will grow. However this shakes out it will not be what the National BSA's rosy growth projections shown at NAM or other meetings think.

No, it is an attitude issue. Sadly I have seen too many pros over the years who could give a flip about the program and volunteers, they just want FOS dollars and membership increases. Fixed it for you

Well - the notation that Scouts did not change 1970 - 2000 is incorrect. The Improved Scouting Program in 1973 took out a chunk of participants, then the pivot back, then the endless monkeying with the program is the start of the slide. Also the BOY POWER MANPOWER program / effort (early 70's) wherein the plan was to have 33% of boys signed up led to massive membership scandals. While the abuse trials starting in 2000 were a challenge, but the program was already down by half or more at that time

Sooo, maybe good points, lack of specifics. If he had laid out they were reducing councils would have felt better. Glad he didn't start with "your kids are safer with us", that does not need to be the lead in and Go To Market slogan we must make volunteering easier and more rewarding. That means giving volunteers the support, tools and resources they need to succeed. I wonder what the plan actually is, sounds correct, but lacks specifics We need to improve both our internal infrastructure and the technology families interact with directly. Parents and volunteers should be able to use their phones and online tools easily to manage registrations, communication and unit activities. I wonder what the plan actually is, sounds correct, but lacks specifics Another critical area is branding and marketing. During the pandemic and bankruptcy, we did very little marketing. Now we’re reinvesting in campaigns that better communicate the value of Scouting to parents and families. I wonder what the plan actually is, sounds correct, but lacks specifics One challenge we face is that we have significantly fewer district executives and unit-serving professionals than we did several years ago. Those positions are critical because they support units, recruit members and help volunteers succeed. That means some councils may need to rethink how resources are allocated. In some cases, councils may have more property than they currently need, while needing more investment in frontline staff and membership growth. So sell assets to hire even more professionals (DE's) who do little to nothing to serve the units, feed the professional commissioned scouter animal Last fall, Scouting America recruited approximately 260,000 new youth members. The problem is that we are still losing more members than we recruit. Agree, finally that's been said out loud They need opportunities to spend time with other young people, to be part of a patrol and a community, and to experience the outdoors. Scouting teaches youth how to succeed — but also how to fail and recover from failure. That’s one of the most important lessons young people can learn. Agree on that point

See, that is OF COURSE, the real root of membership issues and the decline. Not costs, not program, not movement to a family program, not the literal 1 to 1 adult to youth to be registered to participate; it's timing of renewals. Glad we have that cleared up

Insert a "jump the shark" meme, this has the organization certainly heading in a new direction Originally we only had Scouts, then Cubs came 20 years later, which was for 8-10 years olds. In the 60's when I was in Cubs we did basic things but longed to be Scouts to able to do all the cool stuff. Now it is veering heavily to a Family Program, the original idea to help youth develop and grow into independent individuals equipped to take on the real world and make decisions on their own seems have (or is) being cast aside. SA (sorry I know we're not supposed to abbreviate the name of the organization that lives on abbreviations) is definitely moving heavily to family, moving away from the Scout led program and conceding that the program will be basically (now) 4 year olds to maybe 7th graders

A lot of these issues are caused by councils not planning MB events far enough out in advance using MB classes / events as profit centers Fixed it for you

You don't mean that spending almost $1,000,000,000 (yes BILLION) dollars on a property / facility that really has no purpose, did not meet an unfilled need, and has no road to profitability may have a negative impact on the organization that dumped all that money into it?? I am shocked.

As we are well into April now (quick check of the calendar). Wonder what the numbers are now? My intuition tells me that an organization based and financed by membership and units that does not in fact publicly publish the figures about member and units likely has a growth issue with member and units. Call me crazy

How many recall the feedback a few years back from many of the council leadership and national that what was needed was to edge out the old guard of the BSA and make room for the new leaders, that is what was holding the scouting movement in America back. What the brain trust did not fully take into account was that many of the "old guard" did not really see Scouts as just an activity, but more as a calling and a mission. They were in it for the long haul. Those leaders have in fact moved on and nobody is stepping into the gap. Especially at district and council levels, and obviously the unit level. Getting new leaders is really tough, many families (parents) view Scouting as purely transactional, they pay and the "Unit" provides the program. Not realizing (I feel) that they are in fact the unit. They look around and wonder if they are really getting the bang for their buck. It does not take a detailed accounting to realize if you want to go camping, hiking, build a birdhouse, all of that can be done waay faster and cheaper on your own. Invite kids friends and go to out and do. Scouts needs to fully figure out what value they actually bring

Wonder if there will be secret files and private exclusion lists. What's old is suddenly new again

The current group of professionals and key volunteers know how (in some cases) to raise money. Grow program, not so much. Sad part is they are raising money on the nostalgia of the BSA, not the current BSA No real effort being made to add units or expand the program. Lots of excuses as to why membership decline, just no real honest effort to make updates so people (families) may want to buy what is being sold