Concerns for BSA's Future

[Eagle94-A1]

I got concerns for BSA's future after all the recent new rules and NAM announcements. It appears to me that folks at national are clueless as to what is happening in the field.

Take the new One Night Cub Scout camping rule. That is going to hurt a lot of pack who have been doing 2 night camp outs for the past 20 years+. We are already hearing of  malicious compliance, and I see it happening even more in the future. Heard some packs will start offering 2 camp outs when they do their own: one Friday-Saturday and  one Saturday-Sunday.

Year-round dues collection direct from families will be a nightmare for a variety of reasons. One  will be those families that are members through insurance plans, unit scholarships, sponsorships, council scholarships, etc. Half my unit has their membership paid via insurance, and 1 has a unit scholarship. Add in keeping tack of who is and who isn't registered. And what happens when a Scout is dropped, but is still active?

And whose idea was it to segregate coed dens at 5th grade in preparation for Scouts BSA?  There was research done showing that the transition from Cubs to Scouts need to be 18-24 months. I was part of the old 9-12 month Webelos program in the 1980s, and can vouch for the need. Today I see too many Webelos and AOL dens being run like Tiger-Bear dens, and it is not only hurting the Scouts, but retention. Heck I know of one den that didn't begin the Scouting Adventure requirements until a month before they Crossed Over. None of those Scouts joined a troop, despite "crossing over" and getting troop regalia. Other Dens start trasnsition in August/September of 5th grade, and their Cubs, and parents, are not much better prepared either.

Speaking of transition, having the Webelos/AOLs  follow Cub Scout camping rules, specifically one nite only, when they do their troop camping visit is stupid. Even back in the 1980s, the Webelos Overnighters with troop was one to two nights. I know they did this in order to allow parents to camp, still.

And I have mixed emotions on no longer allowing a parent to camp with troops.  I understand that it is a condition of the bankruptcy. But when a troop does not have a Cub Scout pack, it is very hard when you have Webelos visit, and cannot camp. Do not get me started on visitors who have never been in Scouts at all.

And what about MB counselors? I guess they can camp now since they are paying a fee as the rules that came out a few weeks ago are no longer valid since MBCs will start paying a fee. You would think folks within the organization would communicate with each other.

And the price increases. 6.6% increase on youth and 33.3% on adults.   Do they not realize they are pricing families out of the program? I am so glad my older two have, or will, age out. Youngest met his goal, he got Eagle, and if he decides not to renew, I cannot blame him.

 

[qwazse]

If it’s any consolation, I was talking to a mom whose kids are in sports and their fees are climbing as well.

A sinking tide grounds all boats.

[Jameson76]

17 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

I got concerns for BSA's future after all the recent new rules and NAM announcements. It appears to me that folks at national are clueless as to what is happening in the field.

 

That sums it up.  One would think the goal would be to make it easier to add and retain members, not the opposite

Many of the volunteer leaders that are at the national level have no idea what it takes to run a unit in the current environment.  Many have been actual unit leaders, but it has been a while.  I have a friend that does work on various national committees, last time he was on an actual campout with actual scouts in the actual woods was maybe 15+ years ago.

Many decisions appear to be made in a vacuum.  Once you lose touch with your core customer, the battle is lost.  In our unit we have some good group of seasoned leaders, but, we are concerned as none of us have Scouts in the troop.  We do have leaders with active Scouts, but many of us do not have that connection to the middle school parent mindset, what drives them.  Even though we are active, go on outings etc, there is a knowledge gap.

BSA has lost that connectivity.  The National volunteers, being so far removed from the field, do not fully grasp the current on the ground unit conditions.  The professional Scouts are fully focused on FOS, popcorn, camp cards, and whatever else raises money, that is used to fund the overhead (professional scouters), and then you add more professionals to raise money to have professionals.  Rinse, lather, repeat.

[fred8033]

IMHO ... It's not at all that national is clueless or making decisions in a vacuum.  This is 100% about legal liability for a great youth program run loosely by outside volunteers and BSA being held liable for societal ills.  

This is why "I think" BSA should NOT be a membership organization.  It should be a certifying body.  BSA should certify that the outside youth in an outside organization (Troop ###) completed rank requirements.  They should not be certifying safety or membership or liable for each and every camp out.  BSA will never wield enough control to be able to legally protect themselves and their members.  

Edited June 5, 2023 by fred8033

[RememberSchiff]

@Eagle94-A1 @Jameson76   in support of your points.

Note around 14:00 or so "...There is a plan in place...very cool to hear...I think we are in good hands...On the unit level,... just keep doing what you are doing..." 

 

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

So continue with the malicious compliance on two-night cub scout camping then? We're on it 😂

[HashTagScouts]

3 hours ago, fred8033 said:

IMHO ... It's not at all that national is clueless or making decisions in a vacuum.  This is 100% about legal liability for a great youth program run loosely by outside volunteers and BSA being held liable for societal ills.  

This is why "I think" BSA should NOT be a membership organization.  It should be a certifying body.  BSA should certify that the outside youth in an outside organization (Troop ###) completed rank requirements.  They should not be certifying safety or membership or liable for each and every camp out.  BSA will never wield enough control to be able to legally protect themselves and their members.  

Aside from how they can practically get out of the mortgage liability of Philmont, retiree payouts, debt on Summit, debt on National Supply, etc. that would be necessary to change the organization to nothing more than a certifying body, there is a real problem to this:

They should not be certifying safety or membership or liable for each and every camp out.

Who, then, has the liability? This is exactly why COs have run for the hills.

 

[fred8033]

43 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

Who, then, has the liability? This is exactly why COs have run for the hills.

Probably smaller organizations that start up and shut down.  That purchase insurance on their own.  Maybe it would be good that a troop would startup and dissolve over 10 or 20 years.  

BSA has long been a lightning rod for all the society ills for the last 100+ years.  It bankrupted and nearly killed BSA.  Maybe BSA should oversee camps that outside organizations use; if they come with their own insurance, etc.  Or, have the camps as individual on-going non-profit organizations that run themselves.  Or, petition government to own special state and national parks that specialize in hosting youth groups.  

I fear that structurally BSA may not be compatible with the current legal system.  I think BSA needs to re-think how it exists structurally.

Edited June 5, 2023 by fred8033

[HashTagScouts]

1 hour ago, fred8033 said:

Probably smaller organizations that start up and shut down.  That purchase insurance on their own.  Maybe it would be good that a troop would startup and dissolve over 10 or 20 years.  

BSA has long been a lightning rod for all the society ills for the last 100+ years.  It bankrupted and nearly killed BSA.  Maybe BSA should oversee camps that outside organizations use; if they come with their own insurance, etc.  Or, have the camps as individual on-going non-profit organizations that run themselves.  Or, petition government to own special state and national parks that specialize in hosting youth groups.  

I fear that structurally BSA may not be compatible with the current legal system.  I think BSA needs to re-think how it exists structurally.

At the end of the day, BSA is not entirely the whole of "scouting"- scouting does and can exist without the BSA. BSA is just a corporation really. What BSA has had going for it is really the assets they have ownership over. Folks have wanted the Eagle Scout, and the Wood Badge, etc. and the iconic nostalgic "Scouts" that they saw in media of yesteryear that their parents and grandparents were a part of. If that were gone, seems safe to say IMO that numbers would precipitously drop, not rise. In the last ten years I've seen three interest groups form in my neck of the woods for Outdoor Service Guides (then BPSA). None lasted more than a couple years. I don't disagree with your premise that re-envisioning the program is going to be a necessity for BSA to stay around for another 100 years, and I personally believe that is going to mean letting go a lot of the past as well as not getting caught up in thinking that doing so is a sure-fire path to grow numbers. It would involve a fair amount of pain, and fair amount of loss of folks that have been involved for a long period of time that just don't see themselves as fitting that newer model. Where my most significant concerns are right now is that BSA is still somehow thinking they can have their cake and eat it too. 

[MattR]

7 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

@Eagle94-A1 @Jameson76   in support of your points.

Note around 14:00 or so "...There is a plan in place...very cool to hear...I think we are in good hands...On the unit level,... just keep doing what you are doing..." 

 

This video was 2 people talking about the exciting things they saw or heard at NAM:

#1, someone said the scout oath

#2, key 3 speech

#3, she got tickets to Atlanta, and something about not knowing how to take a cab.

#4, a discussion on safety

#5, talk by Atlanta pro sports team strength and conditioning coach (the Americanism speech) about how scouting helped him. and he used the Edge method

#6, a presentation on what social media is.

#7, the audience asked great questions.

#8, a scout sung the national anthem.

#9, Angelique?

#10, James?

#11, Lisa Riley won the silver buffalo

#12, NAM happened

#13, ??

#14, they did things on the fly during the meeting.

In summary, as RS said, they have a plan, (Mosby has a plan to increase membership) don't worry ... but nobody could honestly distill this plan down to a 20 minute presentation much less that it would fit into one of the top 10 things they saw at NAM. And yet, a presentation on what social media is did make the list?

Really? The first step in fixing a really big problem is to admit there's a problem one doesn't understand.

[mrjohns2]

57 minutes ago, MattR said:

In summary, as RS said, they have a plan, (Mosby has a plan to increase membership) don't worry ... but nobody could honestly distill this plan down to a 20 minute presentation

One would have thought they would have been working on the plan when not in court and would have unleashed this at the meeting. Instead, they unleashed the fee increases. 😞

[Eagle1993]

2 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

One would have thought they would have been working on the plan when not in court and would have unleashed this at the meeting. Instead, they unleashed the fee increases. 😞

I expect they do have a plan, but it sounds like they didn't make it public in NAM.  We have seen some snippets during the bankruptcy hearing, and those snippets were from late 2021.  Anyone with any competence would have a detailed plan ready to save BSA.  I was hoping they would release it during NAM but based on what has come out, nothing was really released.

If those were the top 15 items at NAM, I'm happy I didn't attend.

Edited June 6, 2023 by Eagle1993

[Jameson76]

11 hours ago, MattR said:

This video was 2 people talking about the exciting things they saw or heard at NAM:

#6, a presentation on what social media is.

 

This could be part of the issue.  If BSA, with myriad of staff and volunteers on multiple levels still needs to inform key stakeholders (one would assume they are that as they are at NAM) what "Social Media" may be, BSA has missed the boat.

BSA unfortunately uses social media as a billboard and not a reflection of the program.  They should be highlighting participants doing things, not just promoting events.  Social media should be a way to spark interest in (1) Families of young people (2) Actual youth.

But, as BSA does little to no marketing or brand awareness any way, guess missing the social media juggernaut is expected.

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

8 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

If those were the top 15 items at NAM, I'm happy I didn't attend.

From what I've seen, it's definitely not worth standard conference price. I have no idea if this is typical for NAM, but when I plunk down almost $1000 (well, really, my employer does) for a professional conference I leave with new research information, new connections, and a sense of where the field is heading and who's currently pushing the limits. I'd expect the same for NAM, then, but if taking an airport train counts as a highlight that was absolutely not worth $750. The normalization of most cub dens could have been an email.

Have to wonder about the ROI of NAM, and even the opportunity cost even if the attendee fees pay for it. Scouting isn't a research field and it's not something to sell at a giant expo. Why is a professional conference-type event helpful? 

[Armymutt]

4 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

From what I've seen, it's definitely not worth standard conference price. I have no idea if this is typical for NAM, but when I plunk down almost $1000 (well, really, my employer does) for a professional conference I leave with new research information, new connections, and a sense of where the field is heading and who's currently pushing the limits. I'd expect the same for NAM, then, but if taking an airport train counts as a highlight that was absolutely not worth $750. The normalization of most cub dens could have been an email.

Have to wonder about the ROI of NAM, and even the opportunity cost even if the attendee fees pay for it. Scouting isn't a research field and it's not something to sell at a giant expo. Why is a professional conference-type event helpful? 

That was my question.  Normally a meeting is a discussion to reach a conclusion.  This sounds more like an expensive briefing on how things are going to proceed from here.  That could be published rather than spending thousands of dollars that the organization doesn't have to spare.  How many units could have been stood up in poor areas for the amount that was spent?