Individual Scout Accounts Part Trois

[RememberSchiff]

The idea that scouts will participate or be motivated solely by personal gain is the antithesis of Scouting. If they aren't doing their best, as service to others with pure motives absent of personal gain then they aren't being true scouts, and we are failing them by not providing the opportunity for a program to instill that virtue.

I agree but that scout virtue "do your best as service to others" often is not shared by controlling parents who feel "do your share and in fairness, others should too".

[DuctTape]

The idea that scouts will participate or be motivated solely by personal gain is the antithesis of Scouting. If they aren't doing their best, as service to others with pure motives absent of personal gain then they aren't being true scouts, and we are failing them by not providing the opportunity for a program to instill that virtue.

And I agree with you.

 

I wonder if in the troops where this issue is the greatest, the fundraisers are designed, implemented and run by adults or are they part of the boy-led program? Perhaps this is a symptom of something greater. I know in my troop, the fundraisers are all adult -run. This is something I have been slowly working on. Difficult to change when "this is how we have always done it". Since many/most of the boys aren't invested in this part of the program due to them not having any real part of the process, the issue comes up often for me. I am slowly training the adults to learn what boy-led means.

[Scouter99]

Example: When the Troop goes to Philmont' date=' it is not the individual Scouts that pay, it is the Troop that pays for the trip. All the Scouts pay to the Troop. They pay either by working extra at the fundraising (?Scout account?), or with daddy's check book. When a Scout goes to Jamboree, it is not the Troop paying for that, that must be the Scout paying individually , that cannot come from the Scout account, which stays with the Troop.[/quote']

Awesome, so they get the worst of both worlds. My troop operates with ISAs (thought I don't like it) and I can tell you if the idea is that Johnny busts his own butt selling so he gets his own money in his own ISA for his own scouting, but then the troop pulled a "just kidding actually its our money that you're holding until you give it to us for troop things" there would be serious problems.

[qwazse]

Even with ISA's, well managed general fund, etc ... Scouters in our troop have had to dig deep to float some special expense or underwrite some scout who fell on hard times.

 

Making sure none of your buddies miss out on some super activity by reducing the fees/collecting enough gear for everyone is its own reward.

 

It's just like putting a dollar in the toll for someone who came up short on the bus. It's not about them being deserving or not, it's about making the driver's day a little bit easier so he can concentrate on the road and serve us all better. Betcha BD's griping mom was the beneficiary of a few "bus bucks."

[boomerscout]

So the choices are: 1) Scouts (and parents?) do something so unit raises money (sells widgets, washes cars, spreads mulch, whatever). Money goes in unit treasury, and Committee decides how to spend it (charter expenses, room rental, new tents, travel expenses for trips, sign out front, badges and books and neckers, etc.). or 2) Scouts (and parents?) do something so unit raises money. Committee decides how money is spent AND who to spend it on (camperships? Backpack for deserving Scout? ) and the kicker is that some Scouts work better/harder and earn/sell more stuff than others, so why should that Scout get more goodies than my Scout?

 

I know a Cub that sold $25,000. gross popcorn two years ago. His Council propered, his Pack prospered (they bought a new PWD track among other things), and he went to summer camp essentially free. I know of no one who claimed they were less benefitted by his efforts (the kid did easily 90% of the selling hisself, contacted many companies and sold internet, long story. ) . The Packs' "scout accounts are held in trust to pay for the Scout's dues, summercamp fees, and do not go to "private" use (ipods, boots, uniforms or other use) and it is well understood that the left overs do not go with the Scout when he leaves the Pack. I know one Scout who saved up his "Scout account" and bought the troop a new trailer with it. The unit benefits, the Scout who did the work benefits (because of his work for the unit). The Scout that did not do as much to help the fundraising must make up for that lack by paying his dues directly. If the Comittee judges that that Scout needs help, then they are within their rights (I think) to spend the general funds to help that Scout. Many I have spoken with agree that this is superior to awarding trinkets for "high numbers".

 

 

I fully understand the IRS and BSA wanting to define things such that folks don't make a living by falsely letting others think that a non-profit entity is making the money when it is in reality going in a private pocket. But if the Scout unit defines and limits the Scout account correctly I think the Scouts that work for the Unit will benefit as well as the Scouts that can't or won't. It must go to a Scout activity and benefit the Scout, not the private person. I even have known some Scouts who use their Scout Accounts as a trust savings account to save up for summer camp and HA trips.

 

 

Example: When the Troop goes to Philmont, it is not the individual Scouts that pay, it is the Troop that pays for the trip. All the Scouts pay to the Troop. They pay either by working extra at the fundraising (?Scout account?), or with daddy's check book. When a Scout goes to Jamboree, it is not the Troop paying for that, that must be the Scout paying individually , that cannot come from the Scout account, which stays with the Troop.

While camperships are fine, giving a backpack to a deserving Scout may get you into trouble unless (1) every Scout gets a backpack as part of troop's camping/hiking program, (2) the backpack prize is announced ahead of time for showing most Scout spirit, winning Scoutcraft competition, organizing the orienteering segment at Camporee, etc.(3) the backpack is awarded to best speech on the importance of the Personal Mgmnt mb. Otherwise, since said backpack also has a non-Scouting use, is where you may get into trouble.

It's been my experience that the Scout best at selling widgets is not the same one best at spreading mulch. A variety of fund-raisers helps even things out.

We always inform the parents just before we launch a funder. We explain how much we hope to raise, what specifics the money is to go for (troop expenses is way too general) (if you cite registration - tell them how much to the penny).

I hope this Committee of yours is the PLC

By designing as full a program as possible, we have no problem with batching the top sellers, best mulch spreaders, etc for an extra canoe trip/extra backpacking trip sometime during the year. Everyone understands this ahead of time. We, too, have little use for trinkets.

[boomerscout]

The idea that scouts will participate or be motivated solely by personal gain is the antithesis of Scouting. If they aren't doing their best, as service to others with pure motives absent of personal gain then they aren't being true scouts, and we are failing them by not providing the opportunity for a program to instill that virtue.

The problem is that Scouting has become monetized. You can no longer go camping with kit you find around the house; it now has to be top-rated name brands or you won't have any bragging rights and even risk being laughed at.

I can picture it in my mind's eye even now: Daniel Boone is gliding swiftly along the forest path. His feet, cushioned in merino wool socks, point his Salomon boots straight ahead. His Arcteryx backpack carries enough freeze dried meals to last the journey. As the sun sets, he starts to think about how good his Big Agnes will feel...

[boomerscout]

Example: When the Troop goes to Philmont' date=' it is not the individual Scouts that pay, it is the Troop that pays for the trip. All the Scouts pay to the Troop. They pay either by working extra at the fundraising (?Scout account?), or with daddy's check book. When a Scout goes to Jamboree, it is not the Troop paying for that, that must be the Scout paying individually , that cannot come from the Scout account, which stays with the Troop.[/quote']

Awesome, so they get the worst of both worlds. My troop operates with ISAs (thought I don't like it) and I can tell you if the idea is that Johnny busts his own butt selling so he gets his own money in his own ISA for his own scouting, but then the troop pulled a "just kidding actually its our money that you're holding until you give it to us for troop things" there would be serious problems.

No serious problems; just tell them the law says no ISAs.

However, it all depends how you pitch the plan. You can announce a funder specifically to reduce summer camp fees. You tell everyone how much camp will cost, tack on 15% for contingencies, explain how much each can realistically earn, and that they must make up the difference out of pocket. Most of all, promote the specific camp as a worthy goal rather than just something to do. If all goes well, some will bring in more than they need; their camp fees are fully earned along with some camp options. The kicker, and it's important, is that any extra money they've earned does not go into any ISA; it goes into the troop's general fund.

[boomerscout]

Even with ISA's, well managed general fund, etc ... Scouters in our troop have had to dig deep to float some special expense or underwrite some scout who fell on hard times.

 

Making sure none of your buddies miss out on some super activity by reducing the fees/collecting enough gear for everyone is its own reward.

 

It's just like putting a dollar in the toll for someone who came up short on the bus. It's not about them being deserving or not, it's about making the driver's day a little bit easier so he can concentrate on the road and serve us all better. Betcha BD's griping mom was the beneficiary of a few "bus bucks."

I certainly appreciate putting in that extra dollar. Selfishly, it's sometimes about me feeling better by getting the show on the road rather than sitting at the station arguing about who should have done what

[boomerscout]

Right now, as I look out the window, Scouts should be making enough money shoveling out driveways to last them the entire year of Scouting

[Scouter99]

Right now, as I look out the window, Scouts should be making enough money shoveling out driveways to last them the entire year of Scouting

I donnoooooo, where do snow shovels fall on the tool use chart? http://www.scouting.org/filestore/healthsafety/pdf/680-028.pdf

[fred johnson]

So the choices are: 1) Scouts (and parents?) do something so unit raises money (sells widgets, washes cars, spreads mulch, whatever). Money goes in unit treasury, and Committee decides how to spend it (charter expenses, room rental, new tents, travel expenses for trips, sign out front, badges and books and neckers, etc.). or 2) Scouts (and parents?) do something so unit raises money. Committee decides how money is spent AND who to spend it on (camperships? Backpack for deserving Scout? ) and the kicker is that some Scouts work better/harder and earn/sell more stuff than others, so why should that Scout get more goodies than my Scout?

 

I know a Cub that sold $25,000. gross popcorn two years ago. His Council propered, his Pack prospered (they bought a new PWD track among other things), and he went to summer camp essentially free. I know of no one who claimed they were less benefitted by his efforts (the kid did easily 90% of the selling hisself, contacted many companies and sold internet, long story. ) . The Packs' "scout accounts are held in trust to pay for the Scout's dues, summercamp fees, and do not go to "private" use (ipods, boots, uniforms or other use) and it is well understood that the left overs do not go with the Scout when he leaves the Pack. I know one Scout who saved up his "Scout account" and bought the troop a new trailer with it. The unit benefits, the Scout who did the work benefits (because of his work for the unit). The Scout that did not do as much to help the fundraising must make up for that lack by paying his dues directly. If the Comittee judges that that Scout needs help, then they are within their rights (I think) to spend the general funds to help that Scout. Many I have spoken with agree that this is superior to awarding trinkets for "high numbers".

 

 

I fully understand the IRS and BSA wanting to define things such that folks don't make a living by falsely letting others think that a non-profit entity is making the money when it is in reality going in a private pocket. But if the Scout unit defines and limits the Scout account correctly I think the Scouts that work for the Unit will benefit as well as the Scouts that can't or won't. It must go to a Scout activity and benefit the Scout, not the private person. I even have known some Scouts who use their Scout Accounts as a trust savings account to save up for summer camp and HA trips.

 

 

Example: When the Troop goes to Philmont, it is not the individual Scouts that pay, it is the Troop that pays for the trip. All the Scouts pay to the Troop. They pay either by working extra at the fundraising (?Scout account?), or with daddy's check book. When a Scout goes to Jamboree, it is not the Troop paying for that, that must be the Scout paying individually , that cannot come from the Scout account, which stays with the Troop.

SSScout ... The trouble is that you may "want" to have it different, but the IRS is interpreting the law. If you want a different interpretation, change the law.

 

I must admit that the IRS is right in my opinion. Ignore the trinkets for now. Even the IRS states that some non-significant amount is okay in that it helps earn more money for the non-profit.

 

The issue is that the money earned under the non-profit name is for the non-profit. Those that lead the non-profit or do the fundraising can't be the targets of the benefits because of their fundraising. That is self serving and using the non-profit good will to benefit those who did the sales. It is no better than telemarketers soliciting donations for policemen and firemen and then keeping 80% of the funds for themselves and giving 20% to the non-profit. At least in that case, those telemarketers submit tax returns and income tax statements.

 

Beyond a token amount, scouts benefiting from non-profit is ethically dishonest. We are used to it, but it is. We all know it. We just want to pretend it's ethically okay. Heck, it's amazing what the human mind can justify. But that doesn't make it right.

[fred johnson]

With the individual incentive removed, will units set stricter rules for member fundraiser participation, make do with a projected decrease in funds raised, use pay as you go, allow families to "opt-out" of fundraising?

 

Though units will set non-profit fundraiser participation rules, the IRS has already said that's not legit. It's conveying the private benefit of membership based on fundraiser participation where the result of fundraisers is supposed to be the public benefit of the purpose of the non-profit. It's imaginable that the unit instead of raising as much money could just charge the members more. Since there is a financial equivalent, it's private benefit.

[fred johnson]

So the choices are: 1) Scouts (and parents?) do something so unit raises money (sells widgets, washes cars, spreads mulch, whatever). Money goes in unit treasury, and Committee decides how to spend it (charter expenses, room rental, new tents, travel expenses for trips, sign out front, badges and books and neckers, etc.). or 2) Scouts (and parents?) do something so unit raises money. Committee decides how money is spent AND who to spend it on (camperships? Backpack for deserving Scout? ) and the kicker is that some Scouts work better/harder and earn/sell more stuff than others, so why should that Scout get more goodies than my Scout?

 

I know a Cub that sold $25,000. gross popcorn two years ago. His Council propered, his Pack prospered (they bought a new PWD track among other things), and he went to summer camp essentially free. I know of no one who claimed they were less benefitted by his efforts (the kid did easily 90% of the selling hisself, contacted many companies and sold internet, long story. ) . The Packs' "scout accounts are held in trust to pay for the Scout's dues, summercamp fees, and do not go to "private" use (ipods, boots, uniforms or other use) and it is well understood that the left overs do not go with the Scout when he leaves the Pack. I know one Scout who saved up his "Scout account" and bought the troop a new trailer with it. The unit benefits, the Scout who did the work benefits (because of his work for the unit). The Scout that did not do as much to help the fundraising must make up for that lack by paying his dues directly. If the Comittee judges that that Scout needs help, then they are within their rights (I think) to spend the general funds to help that Scout. Many I have spoken with agree that this is superior to awarding trinkets for "high numbers".

 

 

I fully understand the IRS and BSA wanting to define things such that folks don't make a living by falsely letting others think that a non-profit entity is making the money when it is in reality going in a private pocket. But if the Scout unit defines and limits the Scout account correctly I think the Scouts that work for the Unit will benefit as well as the Scouts that can't or won't. It must go to a Scout activity and benefit the Scout, not the private person. I even have known some Scouts who use their Scout Accounts as a trust savings account to save up for summer camp and HA trips.

 

 

Example: When the Troop goes to Philmont, it is not the individual Scouts that pay, it is the Troop that pays for the trip. All the Scouts pay to the Troop. They pay either by working extra at the fundraising (?Scout account?), or with daddy's check book. When a Scout goes to Jamboree, it is not the Troop paying for that, that must be the Scout paying individually , that cannot come from the Scout account, which stays with the Troop.

YOUR EXAMPLE IS BAD. You are misdirecting by "pay" having two connotations. One being where did the money come from. The other being who did the paperwork.

 

Paying with troop funds is not the same as depositing money from parents in the troop checking account and then writing a check to Philmont. The troop only begins to pay for Philmont when the fundraiser earnings are used. If mom/dad write a check that is deposited in the troop account, the troop is not paying

 

I have never seen a troop pay for a "troop" to go to Tomahawk. An individual scout, yes. Part of some expenses, yes. But troops never use general funds to send eveyone to camp. Heck, 10 people is $10,000 cost.

 

You would have to be in a troop that raised a heck of alot of money.

[boomerscout]

Right now, as I look out the window, Scouts should be making enough money shoveling out driveways to last them the entire year of Scouting

Guess it depends if you have to use a step-stool, or not

[Stosh]

One mom who happens to be CM said "I am not fundraising so Johnny scout who didn't sell any popcorn can go to camp or enjoy scouting free".

 

Now there's a lesson in parental support for team development and leadership. Such selfishness has no place in Scouting.

 

Stosh

And if one were to carry this debate any further it would need to move to the Politics/Issues area.

 

Stosh