yknot

I hear you and it would be nice if we could go back to that but it's a nice dream, not reality. I think we've discussed this before. The old model you are talking about hasn't worked for decades. Scouting needs a total corporate restructuring that re-engineers the structure around serving units to deliver the program in the field. It needs more professional support if anything, or at least professional support that is refocused and redeployed. Where will the money come from? I don't know, but that's what a restructuring would start looking at.

That won't return, not least of all due to liability issues. Scouting needs to evolve into an organization that is able to offer more paid professional support to unit level volunteers so that they can deliver functional, safe, consistent programs or it won't continue. Maybe you'll still have a few vestigal hubs of nostalgic activity around high adventure locations or some of the larger council camps, but it won't be able to function nationwide without some kind of support.

I agree in that the focus is always on recruitment, not retention. I also think part of the reason for that is that the reasons for poor retention are unpalatable and not what leadership wants to hear. It isn't so much that "bad" units are pushing scouts and families away, it is that the entire organization has become so poorly designed and managed and unworkable that it is very difficult for Scouting America to produce a high quality, consistent product at the unit level whether that's across country let alone across town. The organization needs to re-engineer itself around providing a good product at the unit (parent and scout) level, instead of organizing itself around what has become the Scouting institutionalized monolith. There are so many touchpoints that simply don't work for most parents and kids and there seems to be little recognition of it or appetite for changing anything.

All volunteers are in decline, but I think your viewpoint is part of why volunteers are declining so much in scouting. Volunteers are largely viewed and treated as unpaid employees and this is a condition pretty unique to scouting. As far as YPT, there has been a lot of confusion and many complaints down in the weeds about the process this year. I do think younger generations have less patience today for putting up with the kinds of organizational dysfunction and poor leadership that older generations did. They also expect technology to be their friend and for any portal or interface to be functional, user friendly, and seamless.

The problem isn't necessarily salary bloat, it is that the resource has been mis-applied. To survive, scouting is going to have to devote more resources towards unit operations even as unit numbers decrease. That's because the bar is always being raised due to incidents and liability issues. One of the huge issues facing scouting is the degree to which it has always relied upon volunteers. Volunteers and volunteerism, though, are in general decline. Unlike other youth organizations and many nonprofits, scouting has never developed strategies to cope with this reality, largely because it requires re-engineering structure far beyond consolidating councils. Apart from not having the bodies, scouting also lacks reliable expertise. You can't train unpaid volunteers enough to be considered expert in some of these areas. The aforementioned Range and Target sports is one example. In the years ahead, that is an area where scouting is likely going to be forced to either contain those activities to places where it can provide professional level supervision, provide direct paid unit support, or contract with third party providers.

That is a critical issue that affects retention. There is too much spiraling and repetition in program elements, and the revamp to make it easier for adult volunteers to run multi rank meetings only made it worse. The program also repeats some of the K-5 school curriculum.

Councils with failed camps often have such a history. Poor stewardship, poor management, and no strategic, mission related oversight by anyone who should care (but doesn't), like National. Land assets in scouting are generally viewed through a lens that favors larceny over legacy.

There is nothing stopping councils from benchmarking with each other to get ideas and guidance on how to optimize assets. Most of them don't really want to, though, for various reasons. If National had ever been a more competent and well managed organization, it would have been more proactive in regards to camp assets stewardship for the benefit of scouting. It would have developed strategies, like centralized purchasing, to help camps optimize camp operation and functionality.

The poorly run council camps run for 8 weeks. The well run council camps in my state are optimized -- and monetized -- almost the whole year through. I realize that doesn't work or make sense for every single property out there, but it would for many.

One of my fears is that the only concrete idea Leadership has to 'save' scouting is to sell yet more outdoors based land assets to fund salaries. I would bet it's probably one of the few things on this list that might actually be effected.

That is what the Chipmunk rank expansion is for -- to boost the numbers up before the end of 2026. Allowing everyone to recharter in February also means that membership numbers from year end 2026 now through to whatever the new recharter grace period is (May?) will be inflated. That means that in 2027, unless Chipmunk completely fails or numbers really continue to trend down and tank, we will likely be seeing and hearing of claims of membership growth.

The actual presentation graphic says "February Renewal of Charters"

Or: "We are men of action. Lies do not become us."

Scouting is in decline. Other youth activities are not. Most have not only rebounded after Covid but have hit new highs. For example, 4-H is around 6 million up from 4 million prior to the pandemic. More US youth are involved not only in traditional sports but in new and emerging sports like Cricket. More US youth and families are involved in the outdoors than ever before -- they just are not accessing it through scouting. The problem with scouting's decline is scouting.

The only big one in recent memory was Scouts Canada but their decline wasn't due to girls.