Council Staffing

[1980Scouter]

I would like to start a thread about LC staffing and how excessive it is in most councils. Why do you need 30+ full time employees for a medium sized council? One council I studied, 70% of revenue goes to salaries. We are talking 3+ million dollars a year. 

Most of scouting happens at the troop level and with the exception of summer camp and maybe a few weekend camps the council is not involved at all. 

It seems like the government in that it is overloaded and excessive.  Many camps have fallen into disrepair over the years due to no investment of funds when needed as all funds were needed to cover salaries. 

How many packs/troops interact with LC's on a regular basis other than recharter time and summer camp? 

[Eagledad]

26 minutes ago, 1980Scouter said:

I would like to start a thread about LC staffing and how excessive it is in most councils. Why do you need 30+ full time employees for a medium sized council? One council I studied, 70% of revenue goes to salaries. We are talking 3+ million dollars a year. 

Most of scouting happens at the troop level and with the exception of summer camp and maybe a few weekend camps the council is not involved at all. 

It seems like the government in that it is overloaded and excessive.  Many camps have fallen into disrepair over the years due to no investment of funds when needed as all funds were needed to cover salaries. 

How many packs/troops interact with LC's on a regular basis other than recharter time and summer camp? 

The problem with ideas like this along with Defund The Police is that proposals without details come off as emotional venting. What are the staffing positions? What are their responsibilities? How much do they make? Where is the real fat?

Barry

 

[malraux]

What is the right number of staff then? Looking at my council, its just under 30 employees, but that's counting all the DEs, the camp rangers, etc. Looking at the list, I dunno who I would cut next to improve financials. Plausibly either a DE (eliminate a district), or maybe one of the two program support positions. But of course that would push more of the work to the DEs, Field directors, or camping director and just result in less stuff getting done. Its also the least costly of the positions listed, not saving any real expense.

Looking at your examples of needed work, recharter and summer camp: Recharter needs your DE, the registrar, and maybe accounts payable. Summer camp needs DE, Director of Camping Services, camp rangers, accounts payable, property management, etc. Most of the other positions at LC are either SE, fundraising people, or basic business needs.

You also left out recruiting in your list, which is a lot of work at the DE level and typically involves a lot of pack and council working together.

[MattR]

This thread wasn't in the correct sub forum. I moved it.

Number of staff is not very helpful. Different councils have different needs. Maybe a better measure is how much each position is contributing. I can assure you that the person in our council with the marketing title doesn't cover their expenses. Same for the one in charge of bringing in donations. There are a couple that are in charge of "program" and that's not a lot more than finding volunteers that will create programs. So, all these positions, if they brought in the bacon, might be worth the costs. But they don't. The DEs, on the other hand, are swamped. They are also the lowest paid staff. Thus, there's a huge incentive to get far away from that title, where there's a better salary and less pressure. 

That might be the place to look for reform.

Edited June 27, 2021 by MattR
Moved thread message

[SSScout]

Oh, I can relate.   

I retired from county government service.  Our Transit Service was a local creation, the original idea being that the local folks could do a better job "locally" than the bigger multi juridictional agency.  I started out as a part time driver. . I got promoted thru the years.  One of the people I learned from, I'll call him Dave, had been in it from the beginning.  He knew it all, had the responsibility to get things approved and done.  I loved working with Dave because he was not afraid to assign jobs (to me, for instance) and express appreciation for one's initiative. 

When he retired, they LITERALLY had to create three new positions, with three new sections/departments to take up his responsibilities.  All of a sudden,  no one seemed to have the responsibility to assign, or approve or take the blame.....   Our service seemed stagnated for a long time.  But, we survived . The busses rolled., anyway....

But I remembered the idea that it took at least three new people to take Dave's place...

 

[ALongWalk]

I don’t know the answer on how to get there but somehow the focus of field staff has to get away from fundraising to program. DE’s and FD’s should be intently focused on program but they are more focused on finance….again, I don’t know how to get there but I really believe that is the ultimate answer.

[Jameson76]

Interesting questions and one we have asked many times in our council.  It is a rather LARGE list of characters.  Honestly do not know what they all do.   With the advances in technology most of the mundane items should be automatic.

For our Council 56 professional / hired staff

Several Development and Marketing. Only about 25% are actual unit facing staff (Sr DE, DE or the apparent title District Director).  I keep hearing recruitment but honestly, the local DE does not even know who the unit leaders are as we try to coordinate with the packs.  Guy has two districts, maybe 30 units TOTAL and we've never really seen him.

Amazing all the overhead.

The old question holds true in our council - Do you raise money to have Scouting OR do you have Scouting to be able to raise money.  We are definitely in the latter part of that with the council holding actual leaders that do actual Scouting in low regard.  We are polite and reciprocate that feeling, basically ignoring them.

COUNCIL STAFF - Seems to be 56.  Professional staff and hourly non-professional.  There are 5 rangers but the councils does have 3 large properties.

Scout Executive/CEO    1
Deputy Scout Executive    1
Director of Safe Scouting & Support    1
Safe Scouting & Operations Director    1
Director of Camping and Customer Service    1
Director of Development & Marketing    1
Senior Development Director    1
Development Director    3
Development Team Coordinator    1
Marketing and Communications Director    1
Director of Field Service    1
Senior Field Director    1
Assistant Director of Field Service and Scoutreach Director    1
Program Director    1
Field Director    2
Senior District Executive    1
District Director    3
District Executive    11
Field Service Administration Support    1
Program Specialist    4
Program Specialist and Brand Ambassador    1
Program Center Manager/ Registrar    1
Accounting Manager    1
Accounts Receivable & Fundraising Specialist    1
Assistant Accounting Manager    1
Camping and Program Assistant    1
Customer Service Specialist    2
Building & Print Shop Manager    1
Camp Ranger    5
Executive Assistant    1
Executive Assistant Field Service    1
Executive Assistant to Scout Executive/CEO    1
Maintenance    1
 

[mrjohns2]

I took a stab at really merging hierarchies. Our rangers do a great job of supporting units at camp, but I guess they are staff vs. line. I see the program director out at enough council events to include him in line. I don't get what all of the office admin people do since we only have 1 registrar who sometimes gets help from 1 other admin. 

1 SE

Line 11
9 DE/Field Directors
1 Director of Field Service
1 Program Director
 

Staff 14
3 Rangers
1 Marketing Specialist
2 Development Director
5 Office Admin
1 Director of Support Services
2 Accounting

 

 

[1980Scouter]

This was my point exactly.  Councils could do with 50% less staff or more. Especially if they all end FOS and do a higher registration fee. No need to fund raise as much. 

I remember growing up in scouting my council had very few employees and nice camps. This was in the 80's.  The registration fee was minimal then too. I believe there was greater United Way support then though. People donated then because they knew it would benefit camps and not salaries.

[MattR]

5 hours ago, 1980Scouter said:

I believe there was greater United Way support then though.

I think there has always been a lot more donations. So much that nobody worried about money. Councils with big cities are still like that. Want a pool? Throw a party and ask for money. It's not hard to collect a few hundred grand. I've seen it. But, for the rural councils, tough luck. My council says it costs $600/scout/year but fos only covers a third of that. So they're bringing in $400/scout/year in donations. I have no idea how much of that actually goes to the youth, or really anything about it.

Many non profits will advertise their overhead percentage, so how much of each dollar donated goes into costs other than the intended charity. I'd really like to see that for my council. I never have. Maybe that's the real question here.

[mrjohns2]

33 minutes ago, MattR said:

But, for the rural councils, tough luck.

I wonder if it is rural, or just the number of Scouts in the council. 

[elitts]

On 6/27/2021 at 5:43 PM, Jameson76 said:

Interesting questions and one we have asked many times in our council.  It is a rather LARGE list of characters.  Honestly do not know what they all do.   With the advances in technology most of the mundane items should be automatic.

For our Council 56 professional / hired staff

Several Development and Marketing. Only about 25% are actual unit facing staff (Sr DE, DE or the apparent title District Director).  I keep hearing recruitment but honestly, the local DE does not even know who the unit leaders are as we try to coordinate with the packs.  Guy has two districts, maybe 30 units TOTAL and we've never really seen him.

Amazing all the overhead.

The old question holds true in our council - Do you raise money to have Scouting OR do you have Scouting to be able to raise money.  We are definitely in the latter part of that with the council holding actual leaders that do actual Scouting in low regard.  We are polite and reciprocate that feeling, basically ignoring them.

COUNCIL STAFF - Seems to be 56.  Professional staff and hourly non-professional.  There are 5 rangers but the councils does have 3 large properties.

Scout Executive/CEO    1
Deputy Scout Executive    1
Director of Safe Scouting & Support    1
Safe Scouting & Operations Director    1
Director of Camping and Customer Service    1
Director of Development & Marketing    1
Senior Development Director    1
Development Director    3
Development Team Coordinator    1
Marketing and Communications Director    1
Director of Field Service    1
Senior Field Director    1
Assistant Director of Field Service and Scoutreach Director    1
Program Director    1
Field Director    2
Senior District Executive    1
District Director    3
District Executive    11
Field Service Administration Support    1
Program Specialist    4
Program Specialist and Brand Ambassador    1
Program Center Manager/ Registrar    1
Accounting Manager    1
Accounts Receivable & Fundraising Specialist    1
Assistant Accounting Manager    1
Camping and Program Assistant    1
Customer Service Specialist    2
Building & Print Shop Manager    1
Camp Ranger    5
Executive Assistant    1
Executive Assistant Field Service    1
Executive Assistant to Scout Executive/CEO    1
Maintenance    1
 

The problem I see with that list isn't so much the number of employees, it's the amount of "senior leadership".  There are 22 people with titles that would indicate "senior leadership" out of a staff of 56, and that excludes the District Executives.  To my eyes, that's WAY to many leadership positions for a staff that size.  Of course without salaries and job descriptsions it's hard to know if they are truly "executive level" staff or if the councils simply suffer from title inflation the way banks do.

But to provide some contrast, I work in a similar sized organization.  It's a local government unit with a full time staff of like 53-54 and our monthly leadership meetings include a whole 9 people, including the Township Manager. (and that includes the part time fire chief)

[MattR]

16 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

I wonder if it is rural, or just the number of Scouts in the council. 

It has less to do with scouts/families and more to do with the number of donors with deep pockets. Years ago my troop went to a neighboring council's summer camp and our service project was to pick up shotgun wads on the nature trail. No way the scouts or scouters would be allowed to shoot there. It was a fundraising activity for the council that included booze carts. They brought in a couple million dollars so they thought it was a good deal. They got money and a bunch of scouts cleaned up the mess. All they had to do was pay for alcohol. Once I figured out the whole story I told my troop we were done. 

I saw something similar in the Northwest. They wanted a new pavilion so they threw a party. They asked for donations. Donors asked how much and wrote checks on the spot. These were people high up in fortune 100 companies. Granted, they weren't shooting skeet on a nature trail, but when the money is that easy, who cares about overhead? Well, the donors are drying up and the model really hasn't changed. So here we are.

 

[Jameson76]

4 hours ago, elitts said:

The problem I see with that list isn't so much the number of employees, it's the amount of "senior leadership".  There are 22 people with titles that would indicate "senior leadership" out of a staff of 56, and that excludes the District Executives.  To my eyes, that's WAY to many leadership positions for a staff that size.  Of course without salaries and job descriptsions it's hard to know if they are truly "executive level" staff or if the councils simply suffer from title inflation the way banks do.

But to provide some contrast, I work in a similar sized organization.  It's a local government unit with a full time staff of like 53-54 and our monthly leadership meetings include a whole 9 people, including the Township Manager. (and that includes the part time fire chief)

On the salaries - From the 2019 - form 990

(CEO/Secretary) Base, Bonus, other compensation $459,042 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $622,731
(Deputy Scout Executive) Base, Bonus, other compensation  $189,411 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $261,6901
(Director of Development/) Base, Bonus, other compensation  $155,602 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $177,294
(Director of Field Service) Base, Bonus, other compensation    $151,268 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $194,938
(Director of Support Service) Base, Bonus, other compensation    $146,684 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $185,891
(Accounting Manager) Base, Bonus, other compensation     $101,634 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $165,897

For 2019 revenue of $14.3 MM and salaries and other compensation $6.5 MM

 

 

Edited June 29, 2021 by Jameson76

[1980Scouter]

2 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

On the salaries - From the 2019 - form 990

(CEO/Secretary) Base, Bonus, other compensation $459,042 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $622,731
(Deputy Scout Executive) Base, Bonus, other compensation  $189,411 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $261,6901
(Director of Development/) Base, Bonus, other compensation  $155,602 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $177,294
(Director of Field Service) Base, Bonus, other compensation    $151,268 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $194,938
(Director of Support Service) Base, Bonus, other compensation    $146,684 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $185,891
(Accounting Manager) Base, Bonus, other compensation     $101,634 - Total compensation (retirement / nontaxable) - $165,897

For 2019 revenue of $14.3 MM and salaries and other compensation $6.5 MM

 

 

Wow that must be a well funded LC. The SE salary is crazy!!!!!