Leaderboard

We have to change it to the nickel now... pennies are no longer being minted as of last Wednesday 😜 https://apnews.com/article/us-mint-treasury-department-penny-end-production-86139df5644ef0885a9baf98e9677380

After months of "piloting", an important policy change, i.e. "Coed Scouting" "family troop option" is announced and in common National fashion, the implementation details and other supporting documents are not available. There are rumors of a 5-page Best Practices PDF? Contact your Council for information! IMHO, a scout program with leadership development, outdoor adventures, and reduced membership costs grow membership. Dragnet recruiting not so much. My $0.02 or is it a nickel now?

On the hoped for increased membership related to girls join. First on girls joining troops and cubs, not my cup of tea, but if folks want to pursue it fine, but let's be honest about the background. BSA (at the time) had Coed options; Explorers and Ventures, neither of which was overly successful and honestly BSA had no idea what to really do with the programs. The REAL challenge to the BSA was continuing decline in membership in 2016 - 2018. If you actually list to Surbaugh's town hall interview (as the announcement on adding girls was made) he basically says that adding girls to packs and troops was the only idea they had left. The brain trust had no other real ideas or had done no real examination of how to grow, so hey, let's add girls. This was not really to provide diverse opportunities, not to serve an underserved group, not to right some perhaps wrong, no, BSA basically (to quote Animal House) needed the dues. Now as this has evolved, many reasons have been developed and applied on why BSA (now SA) did this, but the base reason is this is the only way they felt they could stem the drop in membership. And that is the real deep issue, they (BSA professionals, National Board, regional teams, et al) have never really fully defined the WHY in the drop in membership, they have never truly delved deep and gotten into the reason. Basically an echo chamber of potential ideas that may work have been bandied about (Scout Me In??). This has been ongoing from Improved Scouting Program in the 70's (it wasn't) to the current expansion of classroom focused activities. What did set BSA (now SA) apart is the camping and outdoors, getting youth out of their comfort zones, and really becoming unique in the crowded market place of youth activities. Sadly SA is not that group and the activities they want to focus on or move towards (safer and less of the messy outdoor stuff) are just like so many other groups provide and a lot of those have waaay less overhead. Adding girls to the rosters will likely not stem the decline as National and the high level volunteer groups NEVER defined the WHY for the decline. If one cannot define the problem, they can never solved the problem.

Family Troop. That's a real selling point for the 11 - 17 years olds

I too hate the term.

I cringed when I read the term "Family Troop". My initial reaction was, "there's the final nail in the coffin of the Patrol Method".

I like your attempt at not swallowing the doublespeak. I would encourage everyone to be more direct and use the term “mixed sex troop.” The last thing the youth who participated in the mixed sex troop pilot need is for their efforts to imply that parents and siblings and extended family will all be part of the troop. No! These girls and boys weren’t testing the hypothesis that every scout’s family members would facilitate successful implementation of the program. The issue at hand was a neighborhood of boys and girls (not biological brothers and sisters) working the program together with beneficial outcomes that outweigh proposed detriments.

At least a buck. Then it can stop there.

I can tell you all the following based on my knowledge of my district and council. Our linked troop plan was ok, but not optimal to bring females into the program due to the 5 girl minimum that has been enforced (my DE will not allow 3 female 3x3 units). My pack has crossed female scouts into the void for 7 years now. The females that did cross in my area were forced to cross to units that were not convenient to get to (long drives, bad meeting nights, etc ...) it seemed that all of the not so great units got linked troops first and then the district and council protected their first to the table status. Membership is going to tick up due to female retention, and to some degree brother of sister scout retention, simple rational logic; we're going from a system where female scouts had no path or a poor path to the troop level program to a literal buffet of troop choices. We're going to have better female retention and better female recruitment. My primary unit has become the strongest troop in the district and they were basically barred from having a female linked troop. We have run the numbers, we've talked with the families, and now that the unit charter won't get yanked the second someone ages out or moves we'll recharter in December as a Family Troop starting with 5 female scouts. In March we're picking up at least 2 crossovers. The 3 linked troops in my district have about half of their female membership commuting in from my town, we expect to get half of those scouts transferring in to our new Family Troop in 2026. The critical mass that this will create is already spreading through our local scouting community and we think before the end of 2027 we'll have somewhere between 12 and 20 female scouts in our troop. The downside is that we'll experience a considerable amount of cannibalization in 2026 as female associated scout families reset into their home communities. We are going to see some troops collapse and not recharter in 2027. Some troops that thought they had a good program because they were pulling in female scout families will have to face the fact that their program sucks but they were the only option for people. I spoke with a family this last week, they were ALL going to drop from the program due to their female scout struggling in the only option unit. They are going to stick it out for the Family Troop option. That's 4 registration that we were going to lose on Jan 1st that we're going to retain at least for 1 more year.

IMHO, the membership was inflated for a long time. When I was a DE in the 1990s, I can tell you phantom units and Scouts existed. Anyone remember Ronnie Holmes and the Greater Alabama Council? https://www.heraldnet.com/news/ghost-unit-scams-haunt-boy-scout-operations/. And don't think it was just Alabama. It was all over. If you tried to clean up the mess, your performance reviews were poor because you took a loss in membership and units. Also LDS units registered all eligible youth, regardless if they wanted to be a Scout or not. Heck one LDS pack was completely in name only, and the Scouts were meeting only to play basketball. Those two factors are why I think we are seeing a "rightsizing" of Scouting America today.

Pet Peeve: Adults doing jobs in the Troop that Scouts should be doing... - Maintaining Troop website and social media... should be done by Webmaster with adult mentor - Maintaining, inventorying, procuring Troop gear... should be Quartermaster with adult mentor - Communicating with Lodge for arrangements and scheduling Troop's OA election... should be OA Troop Representative with adult mentor (ASM who is Troop OA Advisor) - Maintaining info boards for rank and Troop organization, takes notes at PLCs and writing up minutes, taking attendance at meetings and outings, etc... should be Scribe with adult mentor etc, etc, etc I would rather these tasks not be done, than be done by adults. Sadly, most Scouts in Positions of Responsibility in our unit just wear a patch and don't do much to help the Troop. And yes, they get credit for wearing the patch. Those patches are awfully heavy, you know 😜

A primary purpose of the BOR was to get a chance for Committee Members (who were less integrated in troop activities back then) to get to know the Scouts and have a conversation about their experience....feedback on how the troop program was meeting their needs. Also it was a chance for encouragement and goal setting for the next steps.

Adults wearing Eagle rank patches. Not the square knot, the oval. And I'd personally let it slide for an 18 or 19-year-old, but I'm seeing too many 50-something men wearing an oval Eagle rank patch.

This is so poorly worded and tone deaf. Family Scouting was a smart concept for Cub Scouts. It makes no sense as a marketing tool for Troops. And like Jameson76 mentioned, it's not what 11-17 year olds want. Also pitching this as a solution to inadequate numbers needed to start a single-gender troop is just pure nonsense. This didn't come about to solve that problem and we all know it. I'm 100% in favor of this all happening, it's long overdue, but I don't get this particular marketing pitch to roll it out as "family scouting". It makes no sense.

I'll jump on that OA pet peeve; how about : Everything in the OA being done by adults? I literally just saw a post by councils lodge about a great turnout for an OA event and there was only 1 freaking youth in the picture.

The delusional thinking regarding increased membership stupefies me. We will be fortunate if we see a turnaround in a decade. Prove me wrong. (Seriously, please prove me wrong.) This summer, I did meet a couple that said they would not support our troop if it ever went coed. If five girls approach me to start a unit, I’ll help them. But, I have no inclination to hazard community support if SA continues the corporate doublespeak of “family” scouting. I’d rather say our CO fields a unit for boys, and one for girls, and they sometimes join in the same activities.

As I have aged to old coot or goat status, I find few things surprise or tryly annoy me. Not worth the bile. As long as the YP is in place and the Scouter means well and is focused on the youth growing, what is the big deal?

My experience is that council doesn't do much more than get the final signature and send the package off to national. In my council everything is done at the district level, I am not even sure if we have more than a paper council advancement committee.

LOL ... Yes. "always" is too extreme. ... So ... For the last 20 years or so... and my council definitely ... Your whole experience is why the BOR instructions include "review". If someone has already checked the dates, signatures, etc, then the BOR "review" part is mostly moot. With ScoutBook advancement reports, "review" is even more almost moot.

Sadly the Powers That Be (PTB) in their more public communications do use the term "celebration" as well as saying the EBOR is not a "interview. https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/11/07/an-eagle-scout-board-of-review-isnt-a-job-interview-its-a-celebration/ While they briefly mention, "While part of the board’s responsibility is to ensure that requirements have been met...," they later state " This candidate is by all intents and purposes an Eagle Scout when arriving at the board of review...Therefore, make the Scout’s Eagle board of review a celebration of their achievement." My question is, how can you "ensure that requirements have been met," but consider the person "an Eagle Scout when arriving at the board of review?" Now, I know that by asking questions about their experiences in Scouting, you can see if they really did the work.

"Celebrating" as part of encouraging the scout to continue advancement. No one said confetti, play music and serve pizza. "not up to snuff?" ... that type of statement always scares me. It's a review if all the requirements were completed. It is not a review of whether completed requirements are "up to snuff". It's not show how to tie a square knot or show how to do a square lashing knot. Sending a scout back is a fall back option for when things have fallen apart such as the scout has a really bad attitude or the scout has been arrested by the police and a court date is pending.

YES! If you can find an old 3rd edition SMHB 2 volumes, there is a very good plan to starting a troop with new Scouts. Funny thing is, the best SPL i ever worked with was 12 years old. He was voted in, and beat older Scouts.

If a troop is starting with 11 and 12 year olds, does it even make sense to have an SPL to start?

It's definitely something that confuses me. Why would you sign up with an organization that has ideas you disagree with and then change them? Why not create your own organization?

I just realized a pet peeve....people who disagree with and are obviously unhappy with the organization, yet continue to voluntarily sigh up for it.

These days, it is mostly just a formality. Back in the day, you were tested on a few skills at a BoR. Nowadays, that is a no go. Now, it is more of a job performance review for the SM corps, by proxy through the Scouts' eyes. Helps the Committee see that the program is being delivered rightly to the Scouts. But, if the committee doesn't know the program... well... Even Eagle Boards of Review are mostly a formality, too. In that, I would agree they are primarily "hoops" to jump through.