Tron

I see what is going on here now. This is being redone based on the demographics of the people surveyed in the first study in 2023. Check out the demographics of the people surveyed in the Scouting Edge study; there are 3 chart slides squeezed on to 1 and a half pages of the study in the appendex. The 2023 study was basically a random subset of the whole national population; they probably wanted that to be a marketing survey to see how to capture new or emerging markets (especially when you notice that the non-white male population was under represented in that study based on who historically and currently dominates the membership ranks of Scouting America). This new study is about Alumni and current membership. So in the R3 cycle of membership they did the Recruit emphasized on emerging markets, this is probably the Re-engage or Retain stage of the R3 cycle.

Dude, a lot of what you have been posting just cumulatively sounds like the troop wants to do things a certain way to throttle back higher achieving scouts.

So sounds like Scouting America is trying to determine if their core/base membership has changed. I wonder if this is going to be aggregated to council level or something else. I would love to see this data and compare it to my geographic area.

The big change happened in 2020/2021 ish with the charter language being updated due to CO's liquidating units to take the resources for themselves. My opinion is increasingly becoming that council boards and district executives prefer it this way and are avoiding engaging the CORs. In my council I find this to be the case but it is the OA's fault as they have an inner circle of <insert non-scout language here> that block everything from happening that they can't take credit for or can't control that has anything to do with the council growing or modernizing.

This is so crazy. The last BOR I sat on was literally done like this "Little Billy needs a BOR, he doesn't care that he's going to miss part of the troop meeting; Mr. Tron are you available to sit on his BOR?" me "Absolutely. I'll be right there."

What sort of questions are they asking in this survey?

Seems pretty standard in some of the councils.

This was sort of known after the other vote failed. There is another council in NY merging in as well.

They're all still doing that from what I can tell, they are just not publishing them to the websites. My council will give you their plan if you ask for it but otherwise it's off the radar.

Why is this being driven by the committee chair? At the troop level the advancement coordinator is responsible for arranging boards of review. Additionally, though not the best option, a board of review can be staffed by parents, people from the community, basically anyone with some knowledge of the process that is not a member of the scoutmaster corps.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the wrongful death lawsuits from that range incident a couple years ago?

I would expand on this and have them discuss how their already good LNT habits have limited waste.

The module is just horrible. It fails constantly, leaders hate taking it because of stupid stuff like the soda can, and now that it's mandatory there's no way to know if your compliance is expiring without writing down when your renewal date is.

I don't think this matters. If seascouts can use nights slept on water why can't other scouts? Why would there be a double standard?

Saw your other post. At a district level event it would be the same as a council event, NCAP variances apply.

Does the troop have written expectations of positions of responsibility? Are there APL's that can step in for the sick and uninterested?

I would advise you to chase this as a program improvement point and not a punitive point. Raising it such as "I am concerned that without proper messaging and clarity the camping variance from the council event that our CC utilized might be viewed as allowed outside an NCAP environment. We don't want to normalize the view that we can just camp with who we want when we want. I want to make sure that in order to follow Safeguarding and the GTSS we understand that unit level camping outside of an NCAP regulated event doesn't allow this." versus "CC did this and I don't think we should allow it. What are we going to do to prevent this from happening again?"

Normally no. If this were a joint unit event outside of an NCAP environment she would need at least 2 leaders and 2 scouts from the Scouts BSA program level (preferably all from the same unit). But under a council event that is NCAP regulated there are all kinds of variances.

I see this, even with my own kids; I am constantly telling them no voice-to-text is allowed which forces them to have to spell at least. We're seeing some gap issues at the troop level still but we've undone the damage done at the pack level (Just instituting correction in the program from an adult standpoint). We're one and a half years out from the last covidish era patrol aging out, I suspect if we keep focusing on instituting the program properly on these successive crossover patrols we'll eliminate all of the problems as well. For skits one of the things I have noticed is that if we give scouts advanced notice and remind them to have something in the pocket for a fireside program they come prepared, if we ask them on the campout to have something they go right to the struggle bus.

I just looked at how Scouting America describes the sailing adventure options on the Seabase website and I would say that it does count towards 9a and 9b.

The ScouterDude has a good handle on the normal rules and practices in his post. The only thing I can add that would allow your CC to camp with that other pack is that there are different rules for council level events as those are under NCAP guidelines which allow provisional camping exceptions. As long as your CC spoke with the camp (probably program director) ahead of time she was probably within the rules. The real issue is why wasn't she camping with the pack doing her duty as CC?

God help him if he gets someone like my district advancement chair or the past previous. A board of review depends on the rank. For Scout - 1st Class my goal is 15min or less and focused on the scout experience and keying up on the best and worst experience of the scout on those rank journeys; I generally want myself and fellow board members to ask no more than 3 questions each. Star and Life I start asking multiple questions on the same topics, the boards start getting longer, 30-45min. I've sat on many EBORS over the year, they go long, too long, 2 hours or so, always a 6 person panel. National will not just give it to him. In my time we have only failed one person and national had no mercy for them or the troop. This is not the point of the BOR, especially not at the earlier ranks. These earlier ranks are gauging the scout experience, the health of the unit, blindspots to take back to the scoutmaster corps. Correct.

I think we're on a similar page from two different books. What I am getting at is that WOSM isn't set up to just have 1 NSO; it is the preferred method but not the only method. If the other national level organizations wanted to become the NSO then WOSM has a method of petitioning which forces a federated status as the NSO. So it's not like WOSM locks out other orgs/forces a first to the table situation; there is a way for younger better organizations to take the reigns (to some degree). As you point out two of the other organizations I listed (as examples, there are like 12 nationwide scouting organizations, maybe more here in the states) do not follow WOSM policies and their petitions would be declined. The others could file though. I think the reason why Scouting America is the NSO is that no other group wants to play exactly by the WOSM rules.

What they're really doing is setting this scout up for failure at his EBOR. Are your EBORS handled inhouse with a district rep or out of house with 1 troop rep?

This isn't quite accurate though. While there is 1 NSO (and that NSO is Scouting America here in the states), if GSUSA, Campfire, Rainbow Scouts or Trail Life wanted to become a WOSM member they can apply to WOSM and force a federation; however, those other large(ish) national level organizations don't want to federate for their own various reasons are thus locked out of WOSM.