Scouting Forward: A Plan to Lead Announced

[mrjohns2 577]

Like many said, this isn’t much of a vision or plan. 
 

Getting distracted by Rovers is pretty dumb. They seem to be cutting out some distractions, but to think a distraction like Rovers will help the core program, they are mistaken. 
 

Get rid of the garbage and the focus of national on a small set of out of touch volunteers is a big part of the problem. Doubling down on excellent execution of the current program is the answer. Any org structure or flanking program that distracts from Cubs and Scouts BSA is a mistake. 

[Sentinel947 1205]

45 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

Like many said, this isn’t much of a vision or plan. 
 

Getting distracted by Rovers is pretty dumb. They seem to be cutting out some distractions, but to think a distraction like Rovers will help the core program, they are mistaken. 
 

Get rid of the garbage and the focus of national on a small set of out of touch volunteers is a big part of the problem. Doubling down on excellent execution of the current program is the answer. Any org structure or flanking program that distracts from Cubs and Scouts BSA is a mistake. 

I don't see any indication in the screenshot that they are implementing a Rovers program. 

[scoutldr 726]

On 7/10/2020 at 9:39 AM, walk in the woods said:

Man, I filled out at least 3 buzzword bingo score cards on that one!

• Nimble and Flexible (uh, look at that process flow on the left!)
• Data-based decision making
• Value-based delivery
• Collaboration and teamwork
• World-class
• Shared accountability
• Areas of Focus
• Facilitate!
• Action Steps!

Biggest red flag to me is this one:

Hire a youth adolescence expert at the national level to guide program development.  I have a sneaking suspicion it won't be Lenore Skenazy!

 

THey are missing "stakeholders" and "mission, vision and guiding principles"...

[CynicalScouter 1434]

52 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said:

I don't see any indication in the screenshot that they are implementing a Rovers program. 

The "volunteer corps for young adults 18-29" could, might, maybe be a modified Rovers program.

[Sentinel947 1205]

1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said:

The "volunteer corps for young adults 18-29" could, might, maybe be a modified Rovers program.

Given most council's lack of interest in supporting Venturing, I can only imagine a Rovers program is dead on arrival. Councils might have an interest in using a volunteer corps if it can help supplement the decline of free OA labor in supporting council properties. I think that's a tremendous waste of potential. It'd also overlap with Alpha Phi Omega, which is redundant. 

Personally I'd love to see the Volunteer corps become more unit facing than just Council facing. A young adult volunteer corps is going to have a range of availability, experience and skill sets. A unit might need help with planning an event, conducting a training of youth/adult leaders, providing specific outdoors skills training or may be short on adults for an outing. They can contact the volunteer corps and get somebody from that group to help meet that need. I know that overlaps with the Commissioner corps, but there aren't enough Commissioners as it is, and frankly to steal @Stosh's term, many of the Commissioner corps are "Parlor Scouters" they are past the point of active outdoor unit participation, either by desire or physical limitation. On a council level, the volunteer corp can help provide support/leadership for camporees, Jambo contingent leadership, additional volunteer support for Summer camps. In a sense you are taking some of the finest young adult Scouting talent in a council, and making them available to units throughout the council on a project by project basis. This makes even more sense as councils may be looking to streamline their district professionals and volunteers in the coming years. 

As somebody in that 18-29 age group, I'd be totally interested in participating and helping lead something like that. Having a purposeful opportunity to volunteer with some friends and assist units in putting together great programs sounds like a lot of fun. Even better if I don't have to make a long term commitment to a unit in order to do so. But every program requires a staff advisor, and I doubt there will be much of an appetite in most councils to oversee such a program as professional resources become more scarce and job responsibilities expand. 

[mashmaster 783]

From the National Commodore today:

Hi everyone - by now you may have seen the attached document which was sent out late yesterday. It is unsigned and I'm not sure exactly who in BSA actually wrote and sent it, and it seems inconsistent with what I understand of the process of dealing with the Churchill recommendations - the flowchart showed to BSA staff this week (you can see that chart at https://www.reddit.com/…/the_bsa_plan_announced_on_ceo_tow…/ if you haven't already) indicates that the Churchill recommendations will be accepted by the National Executive Committee and turned over to BSA management for further evaluation, and indeed, I've been asked to serve on two committees to study these two recommendations, so as best I can tell, that's the actual situation, but this document implies some sort of short cutting of that process.

The 18 year old cutoff has been discussed before; the move to Exploring is a bit of a surprise. Exploring, as you probably know, is a separate division focused on career based activities. There is no Scout oath, Scout law, advancement, etc. so a move there would certainly cause dramatic changes to Sea Scouts and would take away many of the Scouting tools that help us build character for young people in Sea Scouts. If you think that is not a good idea, right now would be a good time for you to reach out to anyone you know on a Council, Area, Regional or especially the National Board and express your views and desires for the future of Sea Scouts.

[CynicalScouter 1434]

July 10, 2020
Proposed Changes to Older Youth Scouting
The Churchill Project was recently discussed during the recent BSA National Annual Meeting General
Session. The update included proposed recommendations to finances, operational structure and
program streamlining that were guided over the past year by separate teams of volunteers and staff
from the national, regional, area and local levels.
Among these recommendations, two proposals that directly affect adult program participants ages 18 or
older (those involved with Order of the Arrow, Exploring, Sea Scouts, and Venturing) include:
1) To only offer programs for youth under the age of 38. Some of the reasons behind the
proposal are to serve only youth in our “youth programs,” serving programs within similar age
programs (high school), and the legal aspects of serving adults (age 18+} and youth (under age 18) in
the same program.
2) To combine Sea Scouting into Exploring as an aquatic-focused career path.
The Churchill Project recommendations have been reviewed & accepted by the National Executive
Committee. The appropriate teams are now being asked to develop action steps and a proposed
timeline for implementation, which will include the decision making needed to support any impacted
members. in the case of the recommendations pertaining to adult program participants, consideration
will be made for those participants currently working on advancement or holding leadership roles.
While we anticipate that some of the Churchill Project Recommendations may be easily implemented
promptly, while others that are more complicated will take longer and be spread over the appropriate
time period needed.
As we always do, the BSA looks to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their
lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law, and our work is guided by focusing
on what is best for all our members.
More information will be shared in early fall as these and other proposals are submitted for
implementation. Contacting youth officers with questions about these topics is not the appropriate
channel and puts them in an awkward position where they do not have information to share. Please
direct questions and concerns to PR@scouting.org.

[dkurtenbach 348]

On 7/10/2020 at 9:49 AM, RememberSchiff said:

BTW, how old is a "youth adolescence expert" ?

Well, it looks like the youth adolescence expert must not yet have turned 18.  

[David CO 1783]

I might suppose that BSA calls it the Churchill Project because never was so much owed by so many to so few.

[yknot 1338]

Once again, another really media tone deaf choice by BSA. Do they not even watch CNN? Churchill was a great man, but his statues are being toppled because of his racist opinions. What was wrong with Eagle Project? Why are we always shooting ourselves in our media foot? 

 

It's mind boggling. Is this whole organization run by 70 or 80 year old men? 

Edited July 11, 2020 by yknot

[acema606 25]

  

[Jameson76 1481]

On 7/10/2020 at 11:13 AM, carebear3895 said:

"Create a membership category for youth and families with no advancement program"

 

You mean like how was Venturing was supposed to be? High Adventure emphasis with an OPTIONAL advancement program. 

That is a scary one.  So what are you actually paying a "fee" to be able to do?  What is this exactly?  A camping club??

[Jameson76 1481]

Again - WE CANNOT BE A SAFETY ORGANIZATION.  That cannot be our reason for being.  It can and needs to be PART of what BSA is, but it cannot be the WHY of the BSA.  The tail is wagging the dog and the optics on this are not good.  

Many leaders and professionals continue to over think the safe aspect and literally never leave the porch.  They feel very safe doing Scouting as a virtual idea.  Worst idea ever.  Scouting is getting out and trying to do things.  While trying you may in fact fail.  

This document wreaks of those who have NO CLUE how to run an actual unit or programs that youth want to join.  We need to be inspirational and aspirational, not an organization that is scared of it's own shadow.

[yknot 1338]

5 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

Again - WE CANNOT BE A SAFETY ORGANIZATION.  That cannot be our reason for being.  It can and needs to be PART of what BSA is, but it cannot be the WHY of the BSA.  The tail is wagging the dog and the optics on this are not good.  

Many leaders and professionals continue to over think the safe aspect and literally never leave the porch.  They feel very safe doing Scouting as a virtual idea.  Worst idea ever.  Scouting is getting out and trying to do things.  While trying you may in fact fail.  

This document wreaks of those who have NO CLUE how to run an actual unit or programs that youth want to join.  We need to be inspirational and aspirational, not an organization that is scared of it's own shadow.

I hear you but you are simply being a babe in the woods. No organization today can exist without liability insurance. You can't get liability insurance without infinite safety regulations, waivers, etc. Scouts, like many youth organizations, will never be able to operate the way it has been able to do in the past without significant tort reform.  Every youth organization has to be a safety organization today or the doors don't even open. I don't know why people even rail about this. Fight it politically, lobby for tort reform, but you can't fight it individually or you will just get sued. 

[mashmaster 783]

35 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

That is a scary one.  So what are you actually paying a "fee" to be able to do?  What is this exactly?  A camping club??

In my son's crew most don't do advancement because they are tired of that grind. They practice the other methods of scouting and work together to plan and execute trips.

reminder, Advancement is only one method of scouting.