Significant Cultural Changes are Coming Soon

[elitts 464]

18 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Agreed, but not on the backs of adult volunteers who are paying for their own training.  Program events (camporees, summer camp, etc.), I get it... training events, especially required ones (like IOLS and BALOO) should actually be given for free.  If BSA requires me to have some sort of training, then they should figure out how to offer mandatory courses for free.  This would really show volunteers that you value their time and service.

Well... maybe not "free".  The problem with "free" is that people tend to automatically infer that if something is free it is of little value.  So you get lots of "maybe" signups because you aren't out anything if you just don't show up and people who show up, but only to check a box while they surf on their phone the whole time.  A very minimal $5-$10 fee (that can be waived upon written request) does a lot to eliminate those sorts of issues.

IMO, almost nothing should ever actually be totally free outside of emergency services.

[elitts 464]

14 hours ago, scoutldr said:

My Council has started charging a facility fee for camps...1.50 per person/per day.  Many of us veteran Scouts and Scouters spent countless hours and our own funds on maintaining those camps over the years.  One of our old-timers and Executive Board member (now residing with the Great Master of all Scouts) once told me he never donated cash.  He would ask the Ranger what he needed for the camp, and he would procure it and take it up there.  That way the SE couldn't "divert" the funds to other purposes.

LOL!  That's a man after my own heart.  When my Cub Pack got the "Cough with a hand out" over our wreath fundraiser (we didn't sell popcorn) I proposed talking to our local council camp director and asking for a wish list we could dump $1500 on rather than giving it to council.  I pretty much had my committee convinced too, except then I couldn't get the Camp director to actually respond to me (I tried for a couple months too) so the check got sent to council instead.

[David CO 1783]

7 minutes ago, elitts said:

The problem with "free" is that people tend to automatically infer that if something is free it is of little value. 

I totally agree.  Scouters donate their time for free.  The execs get paid.  There is a tendency to infer that the volunteer's time and labor is of little value compared to that of the paid staff.  This drives me crazy, especially when the inference is more than an inference, and it comes from the execs.

[carebear3895 218]

16 hours ago, David CO said:

Charging scouts a $50 council fee has zero value to those scouts whose units don't attend council events.  For the boys in my unit, there would have been no return on that fee.  It's just another tax.

 

Quick question, does your PLC decide that? or You? 

[David CO 1783]

2 minutes ago, carebear3895 said:

Quick question, does your PLC decide that? or You? 

The Chartered Organization decides that.  As the owner of the unit, the CO is entitled to place restrictions on where the unit may or may not camp.

 

[PACAN 220]

Comments on a few items scattered in a couple of topics:  We need to see what comes of the bankruptcy for reorganization changes before much will happen.

DEs - The job is not what most believe it is when they get into it.  It's not an "Executive".  It's really a behind the scenes working the administrivia (my new word) of the council and doing projects at the whim of their SE.    They are given unrealistic goals to meet by their SE that not even the SE could meet and then axed.  That's why they leave and/or are expendable labor.  All DEs will vanish before any SE will get rid of their registrar.   I do not believe they get any training (carebear 3895 can correct me) in how to manage and leverage a volunteer workforce and deal with individuals who have much more experience not only in scouting but in other pieces of business like budget execution.   Thumping the desk gets them nowhere.

 

Charter Partner:   Not sure what the game is here but any unit that says they want a council to be their CO is nuts.  If your council can't provide services now, what chance does an individual unit have.  Will those that are not under the charter agreement of the council get less service.    I think the franchise (territorial) model the BSA uses has failed as well.    Units have no real ability to find the best value for their unit even if their unit borders a council that in their opinion provides better service and requires less travel to district or council meetings.

 

FOS vs Activity fee:   It always seems "we have to add" (like Congress)  vs an honest analysis of the expense side.  With the overall membership of every council down at least 25%, the income needed to support those youth should also be reduced appropriately.  The activity fee is a tax.   FOS is a voluntary donation where people see value to donate just like other non profits.  The activity fee might be palatable if the activities were of quality.  We have had many activities cancelled (pre-Covid) for lack of planning or just a crappy theme the units decided to do their own thing.  The BSA blew it big time with the new scout $25 joining fee.  Lions down I hear 70%.   What risk analysis is done on potential losses when you tack any fee on a scout's parent?    Don't go down the "we are a great value compared to x/y/z".  and  69.00 must pay goes to national so don't blame us at the council.   Those arguments are dated and no one buys it.  The new regular Charter agreement requires participation in FOS and product sales.  A user fee (camp sites, university of scouting, camporees, special events) seems more fair than a straight tax.

 

All the above is just MHO. 

[CynicalScouter 1434]

41 minutes ago, PACAN said:

Charter Partner:   Not sure what the game is here but any unit that says they want a council to be their CO is nuts.  If your council can't provide services now, what chance does an individual unit have.  Will those that are not under the charter agreement of the council get less service.    I think the franchise (territorial) model the BSA uses has failed as well.    Units have no real ability to find the best value for their unit even if their unit borders a council that in their opinion provides better service and requires less travel to district or council meetings.

People DO NOT WANT Council as CO. The problem is that their COs are dropping them and they have a choice: fight to find a new CO (with little to no time) or fold.

I can see a situation where MOST of these Council-chartered units are there only temporarily (1 year) until they can get a new CO.

Edited December 16, 2020 by CynicalScouter

[CynicalScouter 1434]

32 minutes ago, PACAN said:

With the overall membership of every council down at least 25%, the income needed to support those youth should also be reduced appropriately.

Not necessarily. Offices are a relatively fixed cost. The fact that your membership dropped 25% doesn't mean you remove 25% of your office space the next day.
And many councils have had massive layoffs. What do you want, exactly? Everyone works for free?

Edited December 16, 2020 by CynicalScouter

[gpurlee 247]

I do not envy the position that many councils currently are in or will soon be in. I have worked not-for-profit management at the C-level most of my career. A very challenging set of circumstances are coming together than will challenge the continued operation of many councils.  

(1) Based on what I am seeing, it is possible that we are looking at a 50% plus decline in membership during 2021. The combination of the pandemic, the loss of chartered organizations, the loss of the LDS church at the beginning of 2020 and difficulty of recruiting will create a firestorm to manage. In our council, fall recruitment this year was less than 10 percent of one year ago!  I fear that this loss of members and sponsors will be difficult to overcome, especially with the organization being focused on the bankruptcy and survival, not membership growth.

(2) This membership decline will very significantly affect FOS campaigns, product sales, summer camp and activity fees, merchandise sales and more. As mentioned by another poster, councils face a number of fixed costs such as insurance, utilities, maintenance that make budget management a challenge today.

(3) We do not know yet how major donors will react to the adverse publicity and bankruptcy threat. Even if you are a strong supporter of Scouting, you have to begin question if the program will be here long-term.  Many corporations and foundations will be hesitant to donate until they see how this bankruptcy will play out.

(4) Councils are facing the very real possibility of having to tap reserve funds or sell properties in response to the bankruptcy. The financial safety net may disappear or be diminished.

(5) United Ways and other community funding groups continue to defund Boy Scouting programs in many communities.

(6) And the reality is that a significant number of our councils were not in the best of financial shape before 2020. 

I truly appreciate the work that many of our volunteer boards and professionals are doing to attempt to maintain our program at this time.  I have never witnessed an environment this challenging and overwhelming in my professional lifetime. I wish them much success.  

 

 

 

 

 

[CynicalScouter 1434]

10 minutes ago, gpurlee said:

(1) Based on what I am seeing, it is possible that we are looking at a 50% plus decline in membership during 2021.

Based on my experience I suspect this will not fall evenly among the programs. I think Scouts, BSA and similar (Venture, Sea Scouts) will take minor hits. Cubs are going to get hit hard.

[gpurlee 247]

Cynical Scouter - I would agree that the Cubs will take the major hit. I would guess 70% to 80% loss in some councils. Unfortunately, this is our largest program and major losses in this program will adversely impact the troop level programs, perhaps for years to come. 

[Eagledad 2777]

11 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Based on my experience I suspect this will not fall evenly among the programs. I think Scouts, BSA and similar (Venture, Sea Scouts) will take minor hits. Cubs are going to get hit hard.

There is probably some confusion between the trends of increased drop outs and the trends of lower new scout recruiting. 

However, even if troops keep their drop out rate to zero, their membership comes from the Cubs. Whatever happens now at the cub level is the future of troops within five years. Venture is in the same situation. 

Barry. 

 

[Eagledad 2777]

28 minutes ago, gpurlee said:

Cynical Scouter - I would agree that the Cubs will take the major hit. I would guess 70% to 80% loss in some councils. 

Why do you say this? 

Barry

[yknot 1338]

44 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Based on my experience I suspect this will not fall evenly among the programs. I think Scouts, BSA and similar (Venture, Sea Scouts) will take minor hits. Cubs are going to get hit hard.

That's today, or at least this December, but next year or the year after might be different.

Cubs have no commitment to a larger scouting goal that would motivate them to stay involved.  Few Tiger scouts or their parents are thinking I have to keep my kid active in Cubs so that he can make AOL. The higher retention at Troop levels is like due to scouts and their families who are a couple of years in and are focused on making Eagle. That same motivation won't exist a year or two as these scouts Eagle out. My point is that the lower attrition rate isn't a function of the Troop program -- it's likely attributable to Eagle. We have a number of scouts who have moved up their Eagle timetables to be finished as soon as possible. So while Troop numbers have a minimal decline this year, next year won't be the same story.  
 

[PACAN 220]

Cynic....not suggesting organizations don't have fixed costs or staff should work for free.   

Companies need to review their fixed costs as well especially when they lose 35% of their customers.   Downsize their footprint of office space for example.  A solid business case analysis is certainly  appropriate which should include all the resources properties, reserve requirements etc.    you are not going back to the funding levels of even three years ago and if you try and spend your way out, there will be for sale or auction signs at your camps.