Eagle1993

They include the following questions. Looking through the CDC guidelines, I do have to agree our vetting is pretty poor. What type of supervisory situation do you prefer? If applicants are very independent, they may not fit in an organization whose policies and procedures require close supervision. What age/sex of youth do you want to work with? How would you feel about working with a different age/sex? If an applicant seems fixated on one age/sex, be wary. However, it may be that the applicant has experience or is gifted with working with certain age groups. Asking follow-up questions about why an applicant has a strong preference can help you determine if there is cause for concern. Is there anyone who might suggest that you should not work with youth? Why or why not? Why do you want the job? What would you do in a particular situation? Set up scenarios that involve potential concerns, boundary issues, or youth protection policies and interactions to gauge the applicant’s response. Be concerned if applicants disregard the organization’s policies and procedures or handle a situation poorly. • What makes you a good candidate for working with youth? What would your friends or colleagues say about how you interact with youth? What other hobbies or activities do you enjoy? Determine if applicants have mature, adult relationships—not just relationships with youth.

MJ referenced this document: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/preventingchildsexualabuse-a.pdf Screening and Selecting Employees and Volunteers Who should be screened? Screen all applicants, both adults and adolescents, for all positions that will have contact with youth. • Consider more in-depth written applications and personal interviews for adolescents, for whom work history and criminal background checks may be unavailable. • Rigorously screen applicants who will have more autonomy as employees or volunteers. • Do not make exceptions for people you know or have worked with in the past Written application The written application provides the information you need to assess the background and interests of applicants. Questions should help you determine whether applicants have mature, adult relationships as well as clear boundaries and ethical standards for their conduct with youth. The sidebar on page 6 may help you develop appropriate questions. • Ask about previous work and volunteer experiences. • Ask questions pertinent to child sexual abuse screening. • Provide a permission form for contacting personal references and performing a criminal background check. The permission statement should include an indemnification clause developed by an attorney to protect your organization from false allegations or other legal issues. • Ask open-ended questions that encourage broad answers. These will provide material for follow-up in the personal interview and throughout the screening and selection process. • Use disclosure statements to ask applicants about previous criminal histories of sexual offenses, violence against youth, and other criminal offenses. The applicant may not disclose past offenses, but the inquiry will demonstrate your organization’s seriousness about protecting youth and potentially discourage applicants at risk for perpetrating child sexual abuse. • Clarify that you are interested in learning about an applicant’s past perpetration of child sexual abuse rather than a history of victimization. Personal interview The personal interview provides an opportunity to meet applicants, determine if they are a good fit for your organization, and ask additional questions to screen for child sexual abuse risk factors. The sidebar on page 6 may help you develop interview questions. • Ask open-ended questions that encourage discussion. • Clarify and expand upon the applicant’s answers to questions from the written application.

That is how our GSUSA Troops do it. There is 0% chance I can be near the kids without registering.

I'm not sure there is a smoking gun, but he does bring up valid concerns. Overall, the only "inside baseball" that could turn out bad for the BSA: - 72 hour rule .. if BSA didn't follow their Youth Protection expert, why? It would be good to see their internal discussions. My guess is upsetting volunteers which probably won't look good. - Known offenders having access to kids ... really bad if true. Really, really bad. - 50% of abuse is from other youth ... that has started to be an increased focus, but I don't know if BSA ever made this public. Also, some scouting orgs do not have 11 year olds in the same program as 17 year olds. We have discussed this and I wonder if BSA had internal meetings. Overall, he raises some legitimate concerns, many of which have been discussed here. I'm not convinced this shows a lack of institutional control. I think it does show BSA struggling to adjust their program to the expectations of safety today.

Michael Johnson is new board member of the zero abuse project. Announced Friday last week. https://www.zeroabuseproject.org/zero-abuse-project-appoints-three-new-board-members/ Michael Johnson (Detective Mike) is an internationally recognized expert on all aspects of child abuse and exploitation and specializes in abuse investigation, detection, and prevention efforts for organizations serving youth. An early pioneer and visionary in the field, Johnson was at the forefront of promoting the multidisciplinary team investigative approach and the Children’s Advocacy Center (CAC) movement in the early 1990s. In 2019, the American Society on the Abuse of Children (APSAC) at the 26th APSAC Colloquium, recognized Detective Michael Johnson as “one of the most influential pioneers in the investigation of suspected child maltreatment.”

Perhaps the report later today will be a nothing burger. Perhaps BSA YP is strong. I'm not ready to buy into the report until I hear it along with the evidence. If MJ is correct, then BSA's response won't matter as I expect the organization will fade away. It is actually more important they act if they believe there are no issues. This will be a PR crisis and risk the settlement that was already at high risk. The BSA board needs to take immediate action. As ThenNow stated, the truth will eventually come out; however, you also need to deal with the immediate damage. This isn't a random lawyer, this is BSA's youth protection director coming out claiming Scouts BSA is not safe .... that demands immediate action by the board.

Just read this again: Disclose details on former detective refusing to sign NDA, non-disparagement agreement - MJ is a former detective, so this must be him providing details on how he did not sign a NDA, non-disparagement agreement. These are typical as part of layoffs and are tied to severance packages. I'm 99.9% sure it will be MJ later today.

I hope BSA’s board is ready to meet today to discuss: - Validity of MJ’s claims and what action to immediately take in terms of BSA leadership - Hiring crisis PR firm … as regardless of the validity they will need to respond today - Hiring an external agency to investigate the claims To me, those are the three immediate actions and it must come from the board not the current leadership.

Obviously we will need to let this play out. I've seen much, much lower level individuals come out with claims after being laid off including calling regulatory agencies. Most of the time that was just false acquisitions (or misleading statements) made by an upset individual. Clearly other times they are completely legitimate. We will have to wait and see. 1) We don't know for sure who this is and the timeframe it is based on. 2) We don't know what evidence the individual has and if it is opinion based or evidence based (or some combo) 3) If it is someone that recently left BSA ... why did they leave? If they were responsible for youth protection and it was failing under their watch, why not come out earlier? I have a ton of questions. No matter what, this isn't good for the BSA. How bad it ends up will really depend on the details that start coming out tomorrow.

Agreed. BSA would have to be pretty stupid to fire their youth protection director in the middle of a CSA bankruptcy without a ton of cause. I’m not saying he was fired, but if they did I would think they have some good reasons.

I wonder how he became former. Was he fired or did he resign. MJ’s LinkedIn profile shows him as the current youth protection director. So, I’m not 100% sure it is him. http://linkedin.com/in/michael-johnson-a1a9a737

Split here:

In terms of bankruptcy, if I’m the future claimant rep I’m calling off support for this plan. The number of younger claimants and the value of their claims could explode with this info.

It sounds like they created the role in 2010… it has created the new full-time position of Youth Protection director.

If it is MJ I will be interested in what he shares as it will be current. If any leadership hid abuse they should be fired and possibly prosecuted. I’m not ready to say it will end the BSA, but if it is current and as bad as it sounds, it definitely could.

Ok, I think that is enough. I believe @HelpfulTracks has answered the question. I understand you are looking for a specific amount and the answer was provided in terms of general beliefs. You are clearly at a point where you will have to agree to disagree.

I also think camps near your higher concentrations of scouts is important. Asking a Troop to drive 3+ hours for summer camp is perfectly reasonable. Asking a pack to drive 3 hours for a weekend overnight is tough. Asking a parent to drive (or bus a kid) 3 hours each way for a day camp is not feasible. I could be convinced that there may be plenty of camps in certain areas (for example, one could argue that in Wisconsin, there are an abundance of camps). However, in many cases these camps are far from population centers to the point where they are only useful as summer camps. BSA needs a combination of properties. Some close to population centers that could be used for cub scout day camp, weekend campouts and camporees ... perhaps these can be smaller & simpler (for example, no need for a shotgun range or advanced waterfront). Then, some larger camps that could be far from population centers (for residendent day camp & summer camps).

Ok, I moved a bunch of comments to the general bankruptcy thread here: https://www.scouter.com/topic/32769-bankruptcy-everything-but-the-legalese/ I also hid a few comments from all sides that just resulted in some generic back and forth arguments. Those didn't really fit in this thread nor the other one. I left in the back and forth that was specific about camps. Camps are a major source of assets for the bankruptcy settlement and also a major aspect of scouting. So, I think it is fair to have a camp specific discussion. I understand all of this ties together, so once this specific topic seems to have drifted again, we can just lock it and move on. Unlocking...

BSA is betting against this. I'm not sure if it is in the current plan, but previously BSA agreed to big penalties if they grow much beyond their current business model (which shows <1M scouts until 2025). BSA had agreed to pay $50 per scout they register above certain thresholds. In addition, they agreed to pay $150 per scout who registers at a high adventure base above certain thresholds. These payments would be made to the trust settlement. Now, they can get out of those payments by immediately paying off the large loan they are giving the trust.

There are many different bankruptcy topics in this forum so we wanted to help map out the various topics below. If you find more to add, send a DM and we can add. Current active discussion regarding the latest on the Chapter 11 case: https://www.scouter.com/topic/32791-chapter-11-announced-part-6-plan-50tcc-plan-tbd/ Active discussion about the bankruptcy and various impacts outside the legal case: https://www.scouter.com/topic/32769-bankruptcy-everything-but-the-legalese/ Discussion about former youth protection director and concerns about BSA: https://www.scouter.com/topic/32828-former-youth-protection-director-on-the-dangers-in-scouts-bsa/page/3/?tab=comments#comment-534495 Message to abuse survivors: https://www.scouter.com/topic/32626-to-the-abuse-survivors/ List of camps/properties lost to bankruptcy: https://www.scouter.com/topic/32538-bankruptcy-losses/ Discussion on council camps as part of the mission of the BSA https://www.scouter.com/topic/32825-council-camps-as-part-of-the-mission-of-bsa/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-534392 Youth Protection changes in the TCC proposal: https://www.scouter.com/topic/32814-ypt-changes-in-tcc-proposal/ Statement by the UMC: https://www.scouter.com/topic/32795-statement-by-the-united-methodist-church/ Bankruptcy rift with religious partners: https://www.scouter.com/topic/32802-boy-scouts-bankruptcy-creates-rift-with-religious-partners/ Prior bankruptcy threads (locked, but can be viewed for background discussions) https://www.scouter.com/topic/32751-chapter-11-announced-part-5-rsa-ruling/ https://www.scouter.com/topic/32676-chapter-11-announced-part-4-revised-plan/ https://www.scouter.com/topic/32608-chapter-11-announced-part-3-bsas-toggle-plan/ https://www.scouter.com/topic/32556-chapter-11-announced-part-2-after-the-big-slow/ https://www.scouter.com/topic/31928-chapter-11-announced/

While I side with the opinion that BSA LCs should provide more funding, to be fair, claimant attorneys that represent 80% of claimants have signed onto this deal. BSA is looking to negotiate an exit and their lawyers are now working with a group of attorneys who believe the current plan is fair. It is now up to claimants to determine if they agree. If they don't, or don't in a large enough number, then it is back to the bargaining table. However, at this time, I don't think we can blame BSA for the offer if the bulk of claimants attorneys agree to it ... if there is any anger against the current plan, the coalition attorneys should bare the brunt of the outrage.

What is Bates White experience in other cases in terms of child sex abuse claims? Claro seems to have a lot of experience in other cases. I wonder if the judge will take that into account.

Let us know when they subpoena scouter.com.

The docket is bursting today with documents. A lot of discovery requests all around. Several now pulling in individual COs (specific churches, etc.).

Subpoena by Zalkin served against a variety of councils and COs including churches, schools, Etc. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/02f5f86d-8578-44db-b1e2-ba2559be6308_6549.pdf