mrjohns2

NCAP does not cover day events. Day Camp? Yes. Day activities? No. Hasn't in the last 8 years I have been involved. It covers: day camps (2 days or longer using council retained leadership), long term camp (4 nights or more with council retained leadership), and short term camp (1-3 nights with council retained leadership / program). It does not cover a day event. It hasn't. No change in 8 years.

Camping event, not day event. I may have missed the first comment, but I wanted to point that out.

This is question can be looked at as where you can improve on using the word stronger (as in, stronger than today). Not areas that you provide strong areas of leadership in. He can provide stronger leadership in Church, if they became more involved. He could provide stronger leadership at YMCA camp. He could provide stronger leadership at School. He could provide stronger leadership at home by leading family activities instead of parents doing it (planning a trip for example or growing vegetables). You and the Scout can put yourself in a box you can't get out of. Or you could choose to encourage the scout to think more expansively.

January numbers will fluctuate all month, drop at the start, grow a bit with renewals/new people. Is your Jan 25 number from 1/1/25? Your numbers are still interesting to compare end of 24 vs end of 25. So... Dec 24 986,520 Dec 25 907,949 Loss of 81,571 or (8.3%) for the year. So, using Krone's loss number, we really lost 341,571 and gained 260,000 to get to the net loss of 81,571. From a strategy standpoint, an EVP of membership and council unit growth executives could/may/potentially help by having people focus on things like renewals and membership vs. an afterthought. I do agree, though, having some additional employees in and of itself doesn't do much. How about a gosh darn renewal system that doesn't break in the last month or the year, or one that works robustly each and every day! That would be a start.

This is a good approach. Also, if/when you sit on BORs, and the Scout clearly doesn't have a clue, go back to the SM and find out why. This is the feedback loop that the BOR should drive.

Scouting's success is inversely proportional to how much scouting is like school.

Ugh. That is not good.

It is hard work since I did it as a scout and a SM, but like @Tron says: meet every week, campout (2 days, no 1 day wimp-outs) every month except for summer camp. If you do a high adventure, maybe you could skip that, but usually that is a pretty small subset of the unit.

Now that CORs aren't automatically given a vote? I wonder if that translates down to the district? So, it would be the same potentially minus CORs. It is just funny that the same group would potentially vote themselves in.

Why the second 90% reduction? I understand the first, but I don't see where the second one is coming from.

To the CORs and other voting members, we send it out via paper and email. This report works just fine.

I was just thinking about the annual district meeting and what not. Who are voting members? Past members-at-large?

Yes. Based on what BoR are supposed to be, I hate hate hate retests. It is solidly against the G2A. If you really really wanted to put the scout on the spot, and split hairs, have him tie a bowline. Pass him when he isn't able to but talk to the SM about the issue. That is close to the intent of the BOR. How did the scout do, how close is the unit to true north. A review.

That is automatically available in my.scouting. They were given an invite and agenda. I don't know if those 3 will show up again; they were polite, said why they came, but didn't seem enthralled or ask a lot of questions. Back to the original point of the post. I see this not only as removing a barrier to mergers, but also as the first step in changing the policy away from chartered organizations. Maybe not, but this does lay the groundwork for that to be simpler.

We sent out an invite to all 60. The 3 showed up because they were interested. It really was as simple as that.

Well, not no CORs for us. We had 3 out of about 60 show up at our district meeting. So, 5%. We welcomed them and they were a great addition. Not an impactful number overall.

Can you give some examples of what wasn’t up to snuff?

Huh. I work for a fortune 50 company. They share the corporate, corporate subsection, and facility results each year. Then, when shared, they share a plan to improve the results.

Seems like re-testing to me. What if they can't do it? What do you say?

To register as an adult, though, we all have agreed that we must "Subscribe to the precepts of the Declaration of Religious Principle." I'm not saying I like it, I am just saying all adult leaders have agreed to "The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members."

The declaration of religious principals, god is male and pretty much defined as monotheistic "The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members."

I think one link can simply sum up a lot of issues with National: National Staff Cufflinks | Boy Scouts of America. I like local councils for running summer camp, though.

I thought that was acceptable at the time? Either the Green Explorer uniform or the tan shirt with green loops?

Another hard job is the Pack CC. It is very hard being a DL, but having 2 or 3 dens without DLs? Not harder, just impossible? Finding, registering, and getting those DLs up to speed, so they can DO the hardest job, is a hard task.

Correct. One has to either use Scoutbook or import from a 3rd party tool to get advancement in AND they have to enter if they went to camp. To get the data on camp, for the test years, he used our council camp data and then, with the help of commissioners, contacted units that camped outside of council (or didn't at all). The ideas was that we have rarely had enough unit commissioners. So, focus them on the "at risk" units. Units scoring 4 or 5 don't need as much help.