Rumors of an initiative to align same COR units

[fred8033]

Has anyone heard of a national or other initiative to get units from the same COR to align together? I heard something at a district meeting about it. But I was not sure if it was just the idea of an individual, district, council or national?

 

The idea being that a packs, troops and crews chartered by the same COR should work together. It read to me like the old "feeder pack" concept being resurrected.

 

Just curious if anyone can point to any news article or other publication.

[fred8033]

I should mention that my city has six troops and seven packs. One troop has never successfully recruited a cub from the aligned pack. Two troops don't have a pack as the ones with their COR closed down. Our pack doesn't "officially" have a troop as we're chartered by an elementary school PTO and it's a relatively new elementary school.

 

We all want each other to succeed, but it doesn't always feel that way. Recruitment time can be like a feeding frenzy.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

[qwazse]

I know there are parents who are bitter when the pack doesn't automatically feed its members into our troop. So much wasted hot air.

 

There are parents who are bitter when the crew and troop do work together. ("You're ruining the patrol method!" "Little Johnny is isn't ready for girls yet!") And there are those who are upset that I don't "automatically" multiple any eligible boys to the crew.

 

Meanwhile our charter organization is simply thrilled that all these youth are coming through the building! The youth are happy. They're happy. I doubt the COR is going to sweat the details.

[Eagle92]

Ideally that is how it is suppose to work. That's why you have the same COR for all units chartered by the same CO (at least you are suppose to, I knew 1 CO that had 3 CORs, but that is a different and VERY long story, and also pre-SCOUTNET which would catch it today.)

 

Does it happen, not always. But that is the ideal.

[pchadbo]

My first reaction to this was why wouldn't you want to establish a relationship with a pack or troop that was chartered by the same organization? Then I read further and realized that you were one of the "have nots". I would suggest in your position of more packs than troops you would be more able to help your boys find the best troop for them. As for the troops that have been unable to recruit from their brother pack, I would say that is more a statement about the troop than any guideline from national or even your local council.

As a new Pack CC one of my focuses has been making sure our Troop and Pack have a good relationship including recruiting den Chiefs for the first time in years. I think the directive may have something to do with trying to prop up struggling troops rather than and actual national directive.

[pchadbo]

My first reaction to this was why wouldn't you want to establish a relationship with a pack or troop that was chartered by the same organization? Then I read further and realized that you were one of the "have nots". I would suggest in your position of more packs than troops you would be more able to help your boys find the best troop for them. As for the troops that have been unable to recruit from their brother pack, I would say that is more a statement about the troop than any guideline from national or even your local council.

As a new Pack CC one of my focuses has been making sure our Troop and Pack have a good relationship including recruiting den Chiefs for the first time in years. I think the directive may have something to do with trying to prop up struggling troops rather than and actual national directive.

[fred8033]

I understand the debate.

 

I'm just wondering if someone has heard of something coming out of national within the last year emphasizing the alignment between same COR units.

[moosetracker]

Didn't hear anything new, but I think it was always the idea to do so.

 

Personally I like the idea of visiting two or three troops, but not the idea of the whole den jumping to the same troop as a unit. If they are going to jump together as a whole unit they might as well just go with their CO's pack (or most of them should.)..

 

That's because few of those scouts are making any decision as to what is the best pack for them accept just exceptting either the Den Leaders decision as to which one is the best.. Or following the lead scout who did make a decision like sheep.

 

Troops should attract different scouts based on what they seem to focus on and what the scouts interest is. I guess there could be a poorly run troop.. But alot of times it is not that, it is just follow the leader. We have heard a couple of times of incidents where if that leader is an adult, they are not choosing what is best, but rather continueing some sort of grudge, war, or just already have kids in the other troop and so have made up their minds before even searching..

 

When my son crossed over there were two troops that our Pack usually look at and half went one way while half went the other.. Then we moved again, but not back to the other troop.. Finding a "right" fit between scout and troop is really an individual & personal decision, and makes all the difference in if the scout stays or leaves the troop after a few years.

[qwazse]

Sounds like it is someone from your district with a specific agenda. You'll have to find them and ask where they got their idea from.

 

In our council, all of the venturing crews are in their own district, which would make things even more complicated for our COR if he was to stay on top of everything that was going on.

[moosetracker]

How did all the crews get their own district? Districts are broken up by land mass and where your unit meets. Sounds like a way to segragate them more, from mainstream BSA and tell them they are unwanted...

[Eagle92]

Moose,

 

In some councils, you have a pro who specializes in Venturing and is the go to person instead of the local DE. Yes the DE helps the crew, they are part of the CO in his district when asked, but the Venturing DE (or is is Venturing Executive [VE) is the one ultimately responsible for commissioner council level committee and council level program for Venturing.

 

CAVEAT:

 

I was just looking over on SCOUTSTUFF.ORG, and notice that while the Exploring Executive emblem is still being made, there is no Venturing Executive emblem. back in the day some councils with large enough numbers of Explorers would have a pro doing what I mentioned above. The SrEE my old council had was AWESOME and even helped trained me when I needed it.

 

When Venturing came out in August 1998, it was suppose to follow the same format. I know the EE I was working with was still responsible for Exploring units in the council, and was responsible for the newly moved over Venturing units as well. Don't knwo if that format is still the case, EMB can better answer it.

[Eagle92]

Forgot to add, the purpose of having their own district is to get someone focused on their needs. Yep DEs get some training on all aspects of Scouting, except Sea Scouts (yes I have met pros who did not realize they still exist). But Venturing has some really advance, specialized needs that can get overlooked by district folks.

[click23]

It is more than just recruiting the boys, its about building a relationship between the troop and the pack. As a commissioner I tell troops that share a CO with a pack that the boys are free to go wherever they wish, but it is up to the troop to get those boys to want to join their troop. The troop needs to be involved with the pack; den chiefs, regular camp outs with the Webelos dens, helping out with den/pack meeting, joint service projects at the CO, etc. If the troop does this and has a good program it will be a natural choice for the boys coming out of the pack to join their troop.

[Basementdweller]

I am going to bet they are losing a bunch of boys during the webelos cross over and the competition for scouts between the troops is getting the blame. The competition results in stress and confusion with the Webelos and Parents, who wants that.

 

The district really doesn't care if troop A is better than troop B. What district wants is 100% transition from Pack A to Troop A at the same CO. It removes the confusion and conflict.....probably retain more scouts too.

 

[moosetracker]

Basement - Gotta disagree with this statement :

The district really doesn't care if troop A is better than troop B. What district wants is 100% transition from Pack A to Troop A at the same CO. It removes the confusion and conflict.....probably retain more scouts too.

 

Both A & B troop may be good.

 

But if A troop is into hiking, and B troop is into aquatics then those boys who can't swim may be better off going with troop A, while the boy who dislikes hiking but loves canoeing, snorkeling etc.. Is better off going with troop B..

 

If you are running a good boy lead troop, do you really need/want the family who comes in demanding a change for a more organized troop.. Wouldn't they (and you) just be happier if they skipped on down the road to the Adult lead troop in the first place?

 

Forcing boys into troops they know they will not fit in means either the boys don't cross into any troop, or they cross in and drop out before a year is over.

 

Giving boys a choice of troops I feel better serves retaining more boys for a longer time period.

 

P.S. Don't know if we have it now, but I do think at one time we had a DE that was for Venturing only.. Still the crews were thought to be in the district their unit's meeting place was in.

 

I do know though in our district, little is done for our crews on district level.. Training has been more through Council Training events (I have tried but they put this high bar on who can be trainers.. Not just knowledgable in Ventureing but must have taken EDGE & Powderhorn & show their crews are using the advancement method etc..).. They set up their own events & we get little on if they are doing advancement. Still when I get a list of what units are in my district, they are listed as in my district.(This message has been edited by moosetracker)