do we really need COs anymore?

[BadenP]

As a former DE myself one of my many required duties was to meet with the IH of each CO in my districts at least once a year to make sure they understood what their obligations were to the units they chartered before the charter was signed. If they were indeed just a paper CO it was my obligation to help the units find a new more stable CO. My current DE told me this is still a requirement for their annual evaluation. So if you have a bunch of CO's uninvolved then that means your DE and council are not doing their jobs.

 

One of the problems with the organization today is that any rag tag group can call themselves a CO. These groups are not a church or any type of formal organization and usually fall apart within a year or two. If your CO is not living up to the charter agreement tell your DE and have them help you find a new one, it's part of their job.

[Lisabob]

OK BadenP, let me ask you to elaborate on that. My experience is that seasoned DEs do not want to touch this one with a 10 foot pole unless or until there is some crisis that might cause a unit to try to separate from their CO, or cause the CO to dump them. And inexperienced DEs may take on this task with enthusiasm but, because they don't necessarily realize just how very inactive the CO may be, or what the potential implications of waking the giant might be, they may do more harm than good. So they quickly learn, after being burnt a time or two, that quiescent and oblivious COs are better than angry and aware COs.

 

Is this not your observation, based on your experience as a former DE? Am I being too jaded? Are things really just messier where I am? Have I mostly only met DEs who aren't doing their jobs and who are a minority in that way?

 

 

[Lisabob]

So far I think the best answer for why we continue to need COs has to be the insurance answer. I suppose that the BSA could take on the insurance liability if they chose to, but why would they if they didn't have to, right?

 

And yes I agree that there is a certain percentage of COs that are active and would be (rightly) offended to have their involvement terminated. As I've said elsewhere though, they appear to be in the minority in a lot of places. So maybe what we need is an option: the BSA will charter units right along side other more active COs who may continue to charter their own units if they so choose. BSA-chartered units could be "owned" by the local council, with some revisions of the charter agreement so that the council couldn't simply absorb a unit's gear and money any time they felt like it. (On the other hand, this could really exacerbate the bureaucracy growth at the council level!)

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

Lisabob, one thing that may be interesting to note and the ex-professional scouters may have a thought here, but most of the recent "new" DE's I have seen do not have any experience in the BSA Program. Fom what I am told, since they oversee the administrative elements of the programs, they don't have to know how the programs work. Much as the current Ford Chairman may not know how to bolt on a bumper on every vehicle Ford makes, he still runs the company.

 

Once the BSA starts to "own" BSA programs, now we need professionals who know the program, working with the volunteers to deliver the program not to a District, Council or Region, but specifically to the Flaming Arrow patrol. And that is huge

[Lisabob]

Well I have seen several new DEs just in my area, who have no experience with scouting. No offense intended to any of them because some are working hard, but until they can at least keep straight the basic difference between "pack" and "troop" they will probably have very little credibility with leaders of any type. So I'm not sure I buy the idea that they can do their job without knowing how the program operates (though that hasn't stopped councils from hiring them - hey, they're cheap).

 

Still, I'm not sure that a DE would need to know how to deliver the program to the Flaming Arrow patrol, any more than most current COs have the vaguest clue about that (and I submit most COs have less than the vaguest clue). That's what you find good unit-level volunteers to do.

[OldGreyEagle]

But if there isnt going to be a difference between how CO's run things now and how the BSA would run them, why change?

[GernBlansten]

Just think how long our DE would be in his position if he went to our CO and told the IH they needed to step up to the plate and take active ownership of the unit or he was going to help the scouts find another unit. After I got the call from the DE that he was going to help me find another unit, I guess I would have an overwhelming feeling that someone stole our unit from us and I was talking to the perp on the phone.

[BadenP]

Lisabob

 

To answer your question, my DE is a newbie to scouting but she does meet with every IH in her district reminding them of their responsibilities at least once a year. Only a few of the CO's are marginal and these she does monitor closely. OGE, a DE does not have to be a seasoned veteran to go over the annual contract with each IH which they sign along with their charters each year. This contract, of which the CO gets a copy outlines in concise, easy to understand language what their obligations are to the unit and both the COR and IH sign it. Remember the two main duties of a CO are to provide a meeting place, as well as approving all unit leadership. Our council also does a good job offering COR/IH training which the DE signs them up during the signing of these contracts.

[John-in-KC]

Personal thoughts:

 

1) Unit autonomy? Watch that go away. I've seen franchise places, I've seen corporate shops. Franchisee has more freedom than internal management.

 

2) Want compliance? You'll get it. BSA will look Commissioner's Service in the eye and make them the enforcers.

 

3) Oh, by the way... what about all those separate corporations called Councils, and their assets and resources? What about assets/resources administered by foundations which BSA can access but doesn't own?

 

Changing the pattern will definitely keep a generation or so of contract lawyers profitably employed.

 

Again, my thoughts only.

[SctDad]

I have been looking over the posts and see that there are a lot of problems that some are having with their CO.

 

On their bright side, our CO is great. They not only jumped at the oppurtunity to take us on when we needed a CO, But they also let us know that there was a room that would be big enough for us to hold our meetings and activities in. It is a nice sized room and there is plenty of wall space for us to put things up as long as we follow some simple rules on putting holes in the walls.

 

The post Commander is also impressed with us in that we make sure the chairs that we use are lined up at the tables when we are done, where as the Legion members sometimes forget.

 

BTW we are chartered through the local American Legion Post. The legion is there for youth organizations. There is a lot that they do. If you have any questions about how we are doing with them, just let me know. Or if you are looking for a new CO, contact your local American Legion Post and ask if they can help.

[GernBlansten]

SctDad,

Your CO sounds more like a gracious host than an active CO.

Does your CO take an active role in leader selection and recruitment?

Does your CO use the program to fulfill an internal need for the CO? Does your CO have any input or care in how you run the program?

 

American Legion Posts and VFW posts sound like great hosts for units, but I don't think they fit the ideal role as BW has indicated.

[BrotherhoodWWW]

My Troop's CO is a Knights of Columbus. They and the local Catholic Church provide meeting space and payment of the recharter fee only. They at one time provided storage space for some gear plus one single bulletin board. We've since moved to a church about a block away for both meeting space and storage as they are a community church that no longer has a paid minister. The second church allows us full access to a 3 Bdrm house and detached garage along with several sizable cash donations over the course of the year.

 

Last year around re-charter time I attempted contacting our COR to set up a face to face meeting with myself (CC) and our Scoutmaster. He turned us down! To give him fair credit he is a US Postman and that is a rather busy time of year for him.

 

Most all of the units I have been personally involved with have been of the type just like our Troop. A detached CO that only provides meeting space and sometimes some storage. That said if CO's are strong and take seriously their responsibilities then the movement would be stronger.

[SctDad]

I find it sad that, when we have so many people that having problems with their CO, when one person states something that might be helpful, and how they have a good relationship with their CO, the first post is an insult saying that the CO is merely a gracious host.

 

I know I am new to scouting as a leader. I do not know the books inside and out as many here point out very fast. I have not recieved all of my training. (I did get my BALOO done BTW) Sorry.

 

But I am trying to get things done. I am reading the books and trying to learn how things should work.

 

Check out this link to info about the CO

 

http://www.scouting.org/CubScouts/AboutCubScouts/ThePack/chorg.aspx

 

Or you can look on page 9-1 and 9-2 in the CUB SCOUT LEADERS BOOK for more information. I know that there may be some things that we still need to work on. Like the FOS campaign (How many of your CO do that) and the united way.

 

But our CO Does provide us with a SAFE place to hold our meetings, and they help the boys learn about God and Country.

 

My main question I guess is, why is it when someone finds something good with their CO, does someone else have to point out something bad, or make it seem like it is not the best.

 

SctDad

[GernBlansten]

For the life of me, I can't figure out how my post was an insult.

I pointed out that your relationship with your unit mirrors what many of us have, but according Bob White, we have hijacked the program from them because they are not intimately involved in owning the unit. My gracious host comment was meant to distinguish that relationship from one where a CO actively recruits and selects leaders, sets parameters for the program, not just provide a safe place to hold meetings.

No insult intended, just commenting on how similar your situation is to most every other I've seen.

[Gold Winger]

IMHO, in a perfect world, if FBOLR (Federated Brotherhood of Large Rodents) Lodge 97 decides to charter a troop, the troop committee and most of the leadership should come from within the lodge.

 

After all, the troop is part of their youth program, why on earth would they want a bunch of outsiders running part of their program. That would be like a Catholic church bringing in a Baptist minister to teach their CCD program.