Cburkhardt

Numbers and Firing People. The principal scandal about inflated numbers occurred in the 1960's and 1970's as a result of the then-national "Boy Power" program. Professionals everywhere were given numerical growth targets -- both units and members. It was really a typical sales program, but some professionals could not keep up with the metrics and registered entire troops that were fictional. In most cases, the practice was to add phantom members to existing units. Scoutmasters would find names of people during charter renewal that they had never met. This was relatively easy to do when the cost of membership was extremely low. Units did not even pay a fee. With salaries being increased for top "performers", ethically challenged professionals could make money by paying for the phantom membership. The whole thing came crashing down when the Chicago Tribune broke the story. A big part of the scandal was that some councils were receiving federal "model cities" grants tied to the number of members, so there was some direct fraud that some professional leaders of the day knew about. Nothing quite like that has happened since then. Now days, with member fees being so steep, only a foolish unit leader would register phantom members. There is just no reason to do so and it would cost the unit dearly. Finally, the new system will make misrepresentation of membership enrollment a thing of the past.

Realistic National Leaders Willing to Take Action. Those who served as principal national BSA leaders in the last two decades have addressed simultaneous diminishing membership, financial decline, an angry cultural left, and angry cultural right, hostile litigation over membership standards and child sexual abuse, a worst-case relationship with the press, angry volunteers with every imaginable complaint, disappointed councils, departure of national chartered organization membership, diminished brand equity, hostile youth service competitors and reorganization bankruptcy. With perfect hindsight we point out decisions that could or should have been made differently. Yet, I complement these leaders for recognizing existential circumstances and having the gravitas to take action. This is another reason why the BSA is still around.

Outdoors and Camps. Our movement teaches our young people how to master the outdoors. The thought of heading outdoors for the weekend is very positive and that helped us get through the difficulties. Some of our camps approach matching the beauty of our national parks. This is what comes to mind for many when they think of Scouting.

We are Inexpensive. The annual expense of involvement in our Troop is about $1,000 per year. That includes annual national dues, our council program fee, summer camp and fees for troop participation (campouts, etc.). That is under $100/month, which in my experience as a parent is indeed quite inexpensive. You cannot name another youth organization that provides anywhere near that deal for a quality year-around experience. My Sea Scout Ship is a bit more (around $1,200/year). So yes, we are inexpensive. Our unit always supported the Friends of Scouting effort, so our families continue to contribute the same amount to support the Council (now as a program fee instead of a Friends of Scouting contribution).

I think the fundamental activity of the BSA, which is working with and helping to form the character of young people, is an underlying reason why we continue to move forward. As long as we are believed to be doing a good job on this, we continue to have support. We cannot take that support for granted though. Local volunteers are the face of the BSA. People and parents know and like our local volunteers. They generally have good reason to trust them Another key attribute of the BSA which has led to survival is that it is a local organization. Local chartered organizations with local chartered organization executives who support us, local volunteer supervisory structures and visible local activities. When difficult things happen to organizations that are distant, lines of support are easily cut. Not so when your next-door neighbors are involved. The BSA has been comparatively inexpensive as a youth activity. It is easier to justify continued involvement with an organization that is a good bargain. Generations of family tradition of involvement and engagement have helped the BSA to survive its most difficult times.

What is it about the BSA that has allowed it to survive? The BSA as a whole (from the unit through national levels) has processed significant challenges during the past thirty years. For purposes of this posting I include the discrimination lawsuits (Dale v. BSA, etc.), changes to membership standards, institution of YPT, youth abuse lawsuits, inclusion of girls in Cubs and Scouts, COVID, bankruptcy, establishment of the Summit and rebranding. It would seem impossible for a not-for-profit organization to survive such a combination – yet the BSA moves forward. What attributes of the BSA have allowed it to withstand thirty years of existential challenges? Let’s focus on organization attributes and avoid discussing what might have been done differently (that is covered in many other postings).

New name is good, but our mission remains most important As a lifetime BSA Scout and Scouter I have done it all in every program as a youth and adult – and at all levels of the movement. Today I’m a unit leader of a Sea Scout Ship, having turned-over the Scoutmaster position of an all-girl Troop I formed in 2019. I’ll be attending our District of Columbia roundtable tonight (yes, the “District” is its own “District”) and will enjoy hearing feedback about the name change from our local folks. I continue to be consistently optimistic about the future of the BSA. This, despite the impacts of changing membership standards, formation of all-girl Troops, quitting of national chartered organizations disappointed with membership standards changes, bankruptcy, COVID and now a name change. Before these I experienced occurrences thought to be existential, such Boypower (60s), admission of females into Exploring (1969), the Improved Scouting Program (70s), the intense council merger period (70s-80s), and “New BSA” (a national organization reorganization effort during the 2000s). Every one of these developments was then regarded as a threat that might end our organization or negatively alter it in a catastrophic manner. While these matters deeply challenged unit, council and national program and operations, they did not have the organization-ending impacts feared by many. The reason we continue and will always exist is that our mission is a sound one. We serve to assist all families in teaching important skills and modeling American-affirming values and positive character for young people. This is an enjoyable but deeply serious business. That so many of you, the media, government leaders, professional Scouters, participating families and outright opponents express strongest opinions on just about everything in Scouting supports this view. Our organization remains large enough to be an expression of our society and its development. As society changes, so inevitably does our movement. Hopefully our movement’s changes are thoughtful and productive versions of these society-wide changes. In some instances, our changes were essentially mandated by fundamental legal, economic or societal shifts. The reality is that our organization is a “following” indicator of American social development. The BSA has always been this way and, if we want to continue to be the leading organization of our type in our nation, Scouting America will continue to evolve in this manner. Those who wish to form or join restrictive organizations that serve particular segments of our society are not bad people and are free to do so. However, I will stay until my end with the Scouting organization that attempts to serve all. The new name reflects where our organization and American society have arrived and will serve us well as we continue to recover organizational health. Compared to the above-listed organizational changes, a name change will be easily digested. It respects and preserves our heritage and moves us forward in an important manner. As a unit leader, I will never again have to delicately maneuver around our organization’s prior name as I recruit a female, urban teenager or member of their families. It better-expresses the practical and aspirational activities of our future. There are times when an organizational change might indicate it is time to depart. After having carefully read all of the postings on this thread, this name change does not present that circumstance. It is the fundamental soundness and beauty of our mission that is important. We serve to assist all families in teaching important skills and modeling American-affirming values and positive character for young people – and with the new name we remain the finest organization of our nature in United States history.

Councils are intended to support Units. A unit exists to work with a Chartered Organization to operate unit programming for young people. A council exists to grow, improve and preserve Scouting at the unit level through its professional and volunteer staff. It also exists to provide program opportunities that a unit cannot conduct by itself (like summer camp and certain activities). Councils exist to protect the overall organization and members (especially youth) by assuring adherence to policies on things like advancement, life safety and YPT. Essentially, councils exist to serve units, but units are responsible to be active partners in that process. Units and their volunteers do not serve or “work for” the councils. The single best thing a council does is to work to support units to operate in a quality manner, and it does this via its district executives and volunteer district committees and commissioners. Putting on events like camporees is really a secondary function of districts and the quality of these activities is always dependent on the quality of the volunteers involved. District camporees are normally cancelled only when the organizers have done such a poor job that the event is destined to be a fiasco for program and financial reasons – and there is no advantage in allowing a fiasco. The factors you raise indicate there are probably programming, scheduling, planning and financial mistakes being made. There needs to be some fresh blood involved to organize the next camporee. Consider volunteering to help to help organize your next district camporee to assure a steady organizing and execution process. Finally, accept that these events are often less-than-perfect.

I was under the impression that these international Scouting organizations (which I know relatively little about) concentrated on assisting the Scouting organization in countries around world and did not engage in political and policy advocacy. I took a three-minute peek at their web site and see mention of political and policy matters on which countries would take varying positions. Does anyone know if the BSA has granted this organization authority to adopt and express policy positions on behalf of the BSA and its members?

My two units (a ship and a troop) are considered an important part of the services offered to the community by our COs. The COs believe that we are internal to their organization and directly relevant to the achievement of CO objectives and missions. Our CORs for both units are respected and active members of the COs and are effective communicators. We perform service projects each year for our COs. We agree with and advance the priorities of our COs. The idea that they would charge our Scouting units a facility use fee would be like charging a 6th grade Sunday school class a fee to use meeting space in a church. Units that do not sufficiently develop this kind of internal relationship are missing out in many important ways. I don't know much about how Girl Scouts works and don't know if they encourage a close relationship with the landlords of their meeting places. Since they do not allow a CO-unit relationship, their units are probably more vulnerable to being treated as "renter/tenants", rather than as program offerings internal to the CO. I know of several COs that appreciate the difference between a meaningful unit-CO relationship and a youth group "renter" relationship. The organizationally distant "renters" pay rent and the BSA units do not. In fact, these organizationally distant youth groups actually seek a rental-style legal arrangement. It is not surprising to me that such organizations ("renters") are eventually asked to pay facility use fees ("rent").

A good District Committee provides a solid interface between Scouting and the local community. Members can be critical in the placement of units with new COs and the successful formation of sustainable units. A good District Committee assures there is a competent commissioner staff to maintain good unit practices and intervene when there are difficulties. A good District Committee helps raise funds from the local business community for the Council. Finally, a good District Committee organizes and operates supportive services like camporees and training conferences. Beginning with a general unwinding of strong District Committees in the 80's, many of these responsibilities began to fall on the shoulders of professionals, who reluctantly began taking on what eventually became an excessive burden. This gave the impression that the professionals were "taking over" the program. The actual circumstance was that they were being forced to substitute for the declining tradition of community leaders and former unit scouters becoming mentors and Scouting promoters on district committees. It did not work well. The trend resulted in the DEs becoming over-worked and always-blamed for nearly everything. If we could restore competent and positive District Committees everywhere, units would be benefitted greatly. I have to say that the District Committee and Commissioner Staff in our District (which happens to comprise the geography of the District of Columbia) is quite good. Its presence and effectiveness is a principal reason why our local Scouting did not decline as much during COVID/bankruptcy and has recovered nicely.

With our Council's new service fee of $80/year, our Council will no longer do FOS at the unit level. Prior to this, I had my 2 units (a Troop and a Ship) make an annual unit contribution to the Council to offset our not participating in Council-organized fundraising. We will discontinue this annual unit contribution practice as a result of the new fee. It would be difficult for conduct a unit FOS and charge a service fee, because the FOS solicitation was always presented as a way to pay for the things the service fee now handles.

Units should collect “all-in” dues to pay for operations and national/local fees. Everyone participating on this site knows we provide a huge financial bargain for our member families. This becomes very apparent when comparing Scouting fees to other activities for youth. When we started our all-girl troop in DC in 2019, we decided to calculate the all-in cost of our year long-program (with the exception of campouts and summer camp). This included purchase of things to keep our equipment inventory up-to-date, program materials and special activities and our annual dues to council/national. This includes everything from award patches to refreshments at the court of honor. We calculated the annual out-of-pocket cost at $400 for each girl. We therefore collect $200 dues at the start of each academic semester and fully fund our program from that. For monthly campouts and summer camp, we simply collect the break-even costs. We average the weekend campout costs so it is always the same amount – to minimize confusion. As a result, we do not conduct product sales or similar fund raisers – the conduct of which deforms program and chews through leader time and wallets. Once a year we hold a coffee gathering of our families as our only fundraiser to help pay the dues for under-resourced girls. When I posted this arrangement a few years back, a lot of folks thought this was outrageously expensive. However, if we are honest about what all of us spend to make these units function, this is reasonable. After four years, we continue to do the same thing and there are no complaints. We spend our money is an organized manner and are never concerned that the account is getting empty. If participating families and we value the work we are doing, we should not apologize for recovering our full costs in a manner that respects the time investment of the volunteer leaders. There is nothing about Scouting that requires its volunteer leaders to operate units out of their own wallets or in a financially strained manner. That's right -- I'm talking to the many of you who have stacks of popcorn boxes, faded Christmas wreaths and rotten candy in your basements. Let's leave behind the horrible cycle of fundraising, continuous small fee collections and unit leaders effectively paying for many things without full reimbursement. Because council and national fees will continue to rise, there is even more of an incentive to operate this way. My four-year experience is that our families willingly pay, because they fully understand our costs. Don't just sit there and be flustered -- make the change.

Our mega-sized girl troop (that is not paired with a boy troop) does not rely on crossovers. We recruit at least 80% of our new members through simple open houses and similar tactics. I would focus on effectively recruiting girls. Solely relying on "crossovers" does not provide plentiful membership for girl troops. I would spend time figuring out how to recruit bunches of girls who have not been in Cub Scouts instead of figuring out how to operate a micro-sized girl troop. Your heart is in the right place and you will figure this out. Proceed with confidence. You have a wonderful program to offer girls and they will join when you share your story.

When I serve on a council board or district committee, I want the senior responsible executive present to report on activities and be questioned on critical projects. The CEO of a company is always present at board meetings and is normally a member. Attendance of a paid employee is appropriate and not a key issue. It is the ability and willingness of volunteer council board or district committee members to fulfill their roles without allowing themselves to be overly influenced by anyone -- including professional staff. Paid employees are in the position to have more-extensive knowledge of facts and have superior relationships with outside parties, such as national BSA employees. Weak board members can allow themselves to be co-opted by paid professionals or others for any number of reasons. These are not the right people to serve. Certainly, there are professionals who have arranged to overly-dominate their boards or district committees. These are plainly-obvious circumstances that can be corrected by the insertion of strong-willed and objective individuals. I have served on key BSA boards and committees at every level of the organization from the 1980s onward. I can only think of two examples of the kind of individuals you are concerned about who pulled the organizations off-track with their approaches -- and these individuals were laid low by some of the tougher volunteers who asked the right questions and followed up month after month. There is no rule or procedure that can prevent undue influence by professionals or others who might seek to overly-dominate. Only the presence of the right kind of members on the nomination committees and boards can offset such behavior. If the CORs and other informed volunteers in a council are unwilling or ineffective in assuring that the right people are involved, they will have little to complain about. They must be willing to engage in and resolve conflict in favor of the future of our young people. Registering complaints will get you absolutely nowhere -- after 38 years I have never seen that approach work. Councils that are continuously impacted by narrow or rigid thinking by overly-dominant individuals -- because the CORs and others will not step-up -- will ultimately receive a visit from someone like me. You will learn that the days remaining for your declining council are few.