FOS contribution levels

[Lisabob]

In the thread on "fair share" someone wrote that:

"Our Council has been asking for FOS levels of $115 per family. Our distict says that the district can make its FOS numbers if 25% of members contribute $20. That will make FOS easier for families to swallow. "

 

Makes me wonder. If your district can meet their goal by getting 25% of families to give $20 each, why on earth is council still banging away at $115? I'd think we'd get ten families to give $20 for every one that gives $115.

 

In terms of "selling" FOS to scouting parents I just have never understood the logic of asking for a big chunk of change, which as we all know turns a whole bunch of people off (witness all the posts complaining - perhaps rightly, perhaps not - about FOS) when the response would be so much more positive if the pitch were for a smaller amount.

 

For that matter - as I've noted elsewhere, the pack my son was in had a large percentage of families who were struggling to make ends meet. Yet the pitch we got was always focused on that $115-$125 range; even though there were usually asides about contributing whatever you could afford, the emphasis was on the larger donations. That just didn't fly with this group of people and on occasion came across as ridiculous or even a little insensitive. Do councils ever look at the socio-economic status of the various units when they plan out their FOS campaigns?

 

 

 

[Eamonn]

"Do councils ever look at the socio-economic status of the various units when they plan out their FOS campaigns?"

In our Council Financial goals seemed like "Let's make a deal!!

Step one:

The Key 3 would look at what the District Goals would be. We had the District Goal -Money that the members of the District Committee would donate. Community Goal -Money we would get from the local community (local businesses) and the Family campaign.

The Community goal was decided upon by meeting with the FOS Community Chair and the Team Captains.

The District and Family goals were decided upon by looking at how much we brought in last year. I tried to adjust the numbers to allow for changes in membership.As a rule I would take last years amount that came in and increase it by 3%.

This was sent to the SE.

He writes the Council Budget.

He would sent it back!! Saying it wasn't enough.

I would argue with him!!

The District Chairman before me got so mad about this that he quit!!

One time I went and counted the number of empty stores in our small town.

I pointed out that several local big employers had moved away or closed up shop. This didn't only effect the Community amount, it also had a bearing on the amount that families could give.

Still every year the goals went up.

When it came to asking for money, we had rewards for people who gave $100.00 for a patch, $175.00 to attend the Dinner.

The sad thing is that if you only ask for $25.00 that's all your going to get!!

Don't tell anyone but the way around it is to do your own FOS presentation and send the check to the Council.

Eamonn.

[Lisabob]

I'm not sure whether this is just a local thing? But around here the district has all kinds of incentives/strings attached to having the district person do FOS presentations (rather than units doing their own). I suppose that's so they can ensure the "proper amount" - read - a fairly high amount - is solicited. But it might actually work better to handle it within the unit. I know many parents are going to react better to someone they see at every meeting than to some unknown district rep.

[CNYScouter]

Do councils ever look at the socio-economic status of the various units when they plan out their FOS campaigns?

In the details about our councils new Fair Share program it said that they did a study on FOS contributions and it showed that Per capita income there was very little difference in the amount given.

 

I saw District Popcorn and FOS goals for the year.

Our Council has one District that is almost twice this size as the next biggest District.

But because this District has a large low-income area its popcorn and FOS goals were lower than the 2 other Districts in the same county.

 

So I have to say the answer is Yes councils do look at the socio-economic status of the areas they serve.

 

[Jeffrey H]

Yes, I think they do look at socio-economic levels to determine how much they can expect to receive. Our council claims that it cost $120 per year to fund each Scout. With that, they ask for an annual contribution of $120 or $10 a month. As a "carrot", They usually throw in a gift if you give the minimum suggested donation. Most folks, like myself, do the monthly gift. They don't ask anyone if they can afford it, they just go ahead and ask, make their sales-pitch, and see what happens.

 

Our council no longer depends on or receives large donations from United Way. Those days are gone and more emphasis is shouldered on FOS to fund quality Scouting programs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[John-in-KC]

The number in our Council is $130 now, more or less.

 

Our unit target is defined by 25% of the chartered youth x $130, or last years number, whichever is bigger. If the unit meets the target, Council funds basic advancement patches (Tiger, Bobcat, Wolf, Bear, Webelo, Scout, TF, 2C, 1C, Star, and Life) for the remainder of the calendar year from the day the unit meets the target.

 

The Family FOS campaign has about 1/4 of our Councils' FOS target; the rest comes from the Community (business) campaign.

[SemperParatus]

Our Scout Executive made over $250K last year.

 

FOS is a joke. Its a shake down of well-intentioned, dedicated people committed to serving our youth by a bunch of businessman whose primary motivation is to pay their ever-growing salaries.

 

I have given the suggested $100-$125 annual FOS contribution every year for nearly 20 years. Last year, the amount was $125, but when I wrote the check I accidentally made it out for $120. I was hounded like a dog over that $5. I received two notices in the mail. My wife was incredulous and forbid me to pay the $5 on priciple. Then I started getting phone calls from the Council finance director. I paid them the $5 (don't tell my wife), but darn if I will ever pay them another cent.

 

I drove by my Scout Exec's house the other day. Its in a very upscale neighborhood, a veritable McMansion of 5,000+ square feet. There was a Mercedes SUV and a BMW in the driveway. He doesn't need anymore of my money.

 

Take that FOS contribution and put it to use in your unit where it can do some real good.

(This message has been edited by SemperParatus)

[Jeffrey H]

"Last year, the amount was $125, but when I wrote the check I accidentally made it out for $120. I was hounded like a dog over that $5. I received two notices in the mail. My wife was incredulous and forbid me to pay the $5 on priciple. Then I started getting phone calls from the Council finance director."

Sad and funny at the same time.  What makes your experience so ridiculous it that it likely cost your council more than $5 in labor cost and postage just to collect the $5.  This is a classic example of cost exceeding the benefit.  This is all about meeting sales goals and appearing successful with a complete disregard for expense control.  Maybe FOS would not be so high if administrative expenses were better managed.

It's interesting that the Council Finance Director has time to make a phone call over $5.

 

 

[FScouter]

Pledges are keyed into an Excel spreadsheet. When the checks come in the amount is credited to the pledge. Then someone pushes the print button and gets a batch of mailing labels for all the pledges that are short-pay or no-pay. A letter gets mailed. The result is more pledges get paid up.

 

It surely isnt cost effective to pay a staff person to analyze each short-pay and decide whether a 39 cent stamp would be wasted effort to collect whatever the balance is. So they send a letter to everyone. That keeps administrative costs down.

[Oak Tree]

Yeah, that extra (IF Amount > $10) calculation in the spreadsheet would take a lot of work.

 

And if the council finance director has time to call about $5, he has time to use common sense.

 

To answer Lisabob's original question, I'd expect that council is very interested in asking for the amount of money that maximizes their return. And a smaller number of $120 contributions could very well beat a lot of $20 contributions. I wonder if they run experiments in some districts to see how much it varies.

 

We've had a couple presentations from district over the years, but we've recently been telling them that we'll do our own, just to tone down the stridency of the message. We had a lot of parents say that they felt the district presentation was too much.

 

And I still have trouble figuring out where that money actually goes.

 

Oak Tree

 

[FScouter]

It wouldn't make sense to send out a 39 cent letter to get a 2 cent donation, but I wouldn't blow off $10. If only 1 person out of 25 sent in $10 to correct their error, you'd be money ahead. If 25 people forgot their pledge, or sent less than they intended, I'd guess nearly all of them would respond to a letter.

 

Regarding a finance director making multiple phone calls after two letters failed to correct a $5 error, I'd say there's got to be more to that story.

[scoutldr]

Wow...250K!!! And I was outraged over the measly $130K for the SE in our council. I have made the same decision. My donations will go directly to my unit...that way I know the money is spent on program and not for someone to live way above MY means.

[AvidSM]

I seems more than a coincidance that several posters have given about the same cost-per-family figure, around $120 per scout. Could it be that a typical Council is restricted to a $120 per scout budget?

 

I think the biggest problem with FOS is that most families don't know anyone at Council and don't know how exactly how their donation is spent. Most folks are willing trust their troop leaders with their money because they know where it's going and that it directly benifits their son or sons.

 

One solution to this would be for the troop leaders to vouch for council; to speak to the parents and tell them that what they give to FOS will benefit their son indirectly. This would work if the troop leaders knew and trusted the professionals to do their jobs and to give them support. This does not always happen.

 

The souting professionals need to see that you can't ask for money from complete strangers. That they need to solicit the FOS donation via the troop leadership. That the professionals need to win over the troop leaders by getting off their high horses and giving them the support they need.

[John-in-KC]

A couple of years ago the FOS family spiel including discussing a Harris survey, done for the National Council.

 

As I understand it, the $ figure actually is fed downhill from Council.

[Lisabob]

I too have heard that the $120 estimate comes from National.

 

I've never met our current SE. He may be a fabulous guy. I do know our DE reasonably well and while we don't always agree on everything, he has always gone out of his way to help me, the units I've been associated with, and anybody else I've referred to him for assistance. He is at every event and meeting the district is involved with. I don't begrudge him his salary.

 

In our area at least, district or council presenters typically do a reasonable job of pointing out that FOS supports (among other items) the council camps, one of which runs a highly popular 6-8 weeks worth of cub resident camp (catches the pack's eyes) and another of which is being refurbished to be used for more troop and crew events. These are worthy causes and it is reasonable to ask scout families to help support them, since scout families benefit directly from these camps.

 

My concern is that when some unknown district person comes in to give the FOS spiel and they keep coming back to that really large donation of $115+ (and yes I do think that's a lot of money - good cause, etc, but still a lot of money) then if they're not careful about how they do it, they may turn off all those folks who would give in the $10-$25 range.