New issues between CAP and BSA/Venturing?

[seacamper]

Hello All,
My squadron was just about to send a package for a dual chartered CAP/Venturing charter. I was told to hold off because something just came up. Does anyone have an idea what that might be?
Thanks

[Spam]

National is in the process of reviewing the relationship with BSA.

Some CAP units have had a special relationship with the Boy Scouts of America and may currently hold what CAPR 52-16, para 10-2, refers to as a "dual" charter.   National has asked that we determine exactly how many units may be in this category.

Not sure what the strategic direction which may result might be, but tactically the direction seems to be to hold short while they analyze if we're going to continue the program.


(My unit held a dual charter as "Air Explorer Post 155" for perhaps 20 years, performing as the Explorer/Venturing Post when we went rappelling and so forth, but we reviewed the increased requirements for BSA rappelling six years ago and decided it was no longer worth it due to how often we did such activities vs. the costs in mandatory equipment refresh and so forth).


V/R
Spam

[seacamper]

National is in the process of reviewing the relationship with BSA.

Some CAP units have had a special relationship with the Boy Scouts of America and may currently hold what CAPR 52-16, para 10-2, refers to as a "dual" charter.   National has asked that we determine exactly how many units may be in this category.

Not sure what the strategic direction which may result might be, but tactically the direction seems to be to hold short while they analyze if we're going to continue the program.


(My unit held a dual charter as "Air Explorer Post 155" for perhaps 20 years, performing as the Explorer/Venturing Post when we went rappelling and so forth, but we reviewed the increased requirements for BSA rappelling six years ago and decided it was no longer worth it due to how often we did such activities vs. the costs in mandatory equipment refresh and so forth).


V/R
Spam

Thanks! Do you know how long the hold short will be? What office at National would deal with this? I am just curious because a lot of time and commitment has gone into this project to get to this point, and now I need to explain the hold short backwards.  LOL, that is going to be fun.

[Spam]

I understand. I've just postponed our own rifle training HAA for the second time due to the need to have the ORM paperwork and instructor credentialing paperwork completely in line and approved. It can be frustrating for all to hear "maybe later", so being candid with our volunteers can be critical in keeping esprit de corps alive.

I really don't know anything further than what I've shared, as this info came from our Wing/CC, unless perhaps we could derive something from his request for feedback by 25SEP16. Going from that timing, one might assume that NHQ is seeking to make a decision by 1OCT or thereabouts, but that's speculation on my part.

V/R
Spam

[GroundHawg]

I know of at least 2 squadrons that will cease to exist if the cancel the joint CAP/BSA Venturing program. I hope that if any changes are made, it is to strengthen the relationship and make it easier for squadrons to dual charter!

[Spam]

Only one data point here: leaving the BSA program hasn't made a blip for my unit, but that should be viewed in context that we used it for only one purpose, now discontinued after review:

My unit has historically been strongly involved for several decades with the ES mission (a few of our GAWG units had a history of rappelling as much as 200 foot free rappels, all over the southern Appalachians - you should see some of or old Kodak "hero shots" going down). The BSA dual charter allowed a, lets call it a "safety valve" (others might call it another term, like "dodge" or "cover"!) to conduct rappelling and high angle rope work outside of CAP's now mandatory High Adventure Activity review and approval measures, once those were introduced a decade or more ago. When my unit held an FTX during which we rigged the ropes, guides, and safety gear, we did so as BSA members, not CAP members, and just did the training to local standards without even informing Wing, let alone seeking approval and outside oversight of risk via the CAP ORM process for HAAs outlined in 52-16.

In beginning my last tour as CC of the unit several years ago, I sat down with my staff and reviewed this. I felt that this process was opening us up to a situation where we were intentionally avoiding CAP risk controls, and needed to make sure that we weren't claiming BSA sponsorship while not complying with BSA processes/controls (in other words, playing the system to hover between two programs to keep playing at rappelling). If we were going to be BSA, we were going to do it right, by the numbers, in other words.

We found that the BSA rappelling and climbing processes have been similarly tightened up (pun intended) from a risk control standpoint and now basically make rope work an expensive proposition (log descents and discard ropes after x tensions, expensive instructor recerts and mandated gear, etc.). That maintains BSA standards at their standing activities (i.e. BSA facilities with instructors and facilities and frequent use). When comparing the cost/benefit against the mission analysis for our actual mission set (where on 45 years of actual missions in Georgia, we've at most rigged man ropes to help bring one live victim and a couple of cadavers down a slope, and only infrequently did rappelling training) we didn't justify the expense vs. risk, nor the apparent "dodge" of the CAP policy, in keeping the BSA dual charter, and so we declined to renew it. Since then, we continue to focus on low angle rope work only, IAW our NIMS resource typing claims, as this is more reasonable for our expected tasking.


V/R
Spam

[seacamper]

Could any of this be caused by a disparity in CAP and BSA over it's transgender/gay policy? If that is the case, this may be a long "hold short".

https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/dont-clap-just-yet-boy-scouts

[Eclipse]

I have yet to personally see a legitimate reason for CAP to be involved with this and have seen several of these go South
quickly.  It's almost always because CAP wants access to some particular facility or resource owned by the BSA.

Unit CC's who think this will be a recruiting bonanza are kidding themselves.

Way more trouble then it's worth.

[Robert Hartigan]

Remarkably, I found the local BSA Council to be more supportive of youth career exploration and activities than CAP's Wing or Group HQs! When I was a squadron commander we tried to run the BSA and CAP programs separate but parallel without a dual charter. Wing HQ CC and Staff seemed hard wired to say "No" to any activity that wasn't their idea. The BSA allowed us to take advantage of tours and activities without having to jump through bureaucratic hoops to get approval from Wing HQ. My impression was BSA's attitude was be safe, make friends and learn something interesting while having fun; while Wing HQ was mired in busy work and hassle in the name of safety, ORM and protocol theater; oh and don't forget to stand at attention and salute because we're in the military. Why did I have to provide a fire evacuation plan for a public venue like an IMAX theater that we were just visiting as part of the public? If I had it to do all over again I would shut down the CAP unit and stick with BSA because they treated their volunteers with respect and appreciation.

[TheSkyHornet]

I personally don't understand why CAP even permits a dual charter. I'm not saying I'm opposed to it, but the regulatory standpoint of it makes no sense to me. The fact is that the venturing group permits you to do stuff that CAP otherwise says you can't do with cadets, albeit certain exceptions. But define the line between it being a CAP event and a venturing event. If it's being talked about in CAP at the unit meeting, and information is being sent out to CAP members, and it's part of the squadron recruiting tool, all signs point to "this is a CAP activity...now, fill out these forms so we can get away with non-CAP activities." It has always seemed like a very fine line to cross, and if you don't go about it in the precise way, you're looking at a lot of headaches.

[SarDragon]

I see it as the distinction of "who's in charge".

If CAP folks are in charge, they operate under CAP regs. If BSA folks are in charge, they operate under BSA rules. It may not be that simple, but that's how it looks to me.

[Eclipse]

CAP's regulations always trump the BSA's in this regard, at least for CAP members.

CAP has to be the "host" unit or charter for the relationship.

[NIN]

it used to be that the BSA had very good luck doing a career survey thing in schools (because, you know, everybody knows BSA in the schools.. "Oh, BSA? Right this way..").

Dual chartering gave us access to that career survey data, and you could pick "aviation," military, etc and then get a list of names & addresses for recruiting.

[DakRadz]

So does this create an all male squadron, or activities exclusively for male cadets?

Something that occurred to me since some activities are through  BSA.

1st Lt Raduenz

[RogueLeader]

So does this create an all male squadron, or activities exclusively for male cadets?

Something that occurred to me since some activities are through  BSA.

1st Lt Raduenz

When I was part of a Venture Crew(99-2000), Females were specifically included as being authorized members.  Last I checked, they still are.

[DakRadz]

Gotcha. Just not familiar and what with the name...

Thanks though!

1st Lt Raduenz

[Eclipse]

it used to be that the BSA had very good luck doing a career survey thing in schools (because, you know, everybody knows BSA in the schools.. "Oh, BSA? Right this way..").

Dual chartering gave us access to that career survey data, and you could pick "aviation," military, etc and then get a list of names & addresses for recruiting.

OK, fair enough - CAP can mine their mailing list.

Before reviewing the CAP policies on this, I knew it was an idea which was iffy at best and generally not worth the hassle
unless there is some specific BSA resource CAP wants to use...

...after reviewing this:  http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/996/~/dual-membership-in-cap-and-boy-scouts-of-america
I can't begin to imagine why the BSA would want or need to be involved with CAP. The relationship is decidedly one-sided.

Dual-hatted members are CAP members first and have to wear the CAP uniform.

Scouts-only can't fly in CAP planes, nor could they participate in ES or just about anything else "fun" from a CAP perspective.
On top of that, anything the units do together has to be done under CAP regs, which, for better or worse, are generally
far more restrictive from several vectors.  Scouts who want to go rock climbing, go, on a whim, with no notice.
Cadets need the Wing CCs retinal pattern for approval.

Remind me again?

(What I have seen is CAP members who spend time w/ Scouts, see that Scouting is much more a local social organization then
the more regimented Cadet Program, and jump ship.)

[stillamarine]

So does this create an all male squadron, or activities exclusively for male cadets?

Something that occurred to me since some activities are through  BSA.

1st Lt Raduenz

Explorer posts and venturing crews are not restricted to male only units. At one time the LE Explorer post I am an adviser for only had females. 

[NC Hokie]

...after reviewing this:  http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/996/~/dual-membership-in-cap-and-boy-scouts-of-america
I can't begin to imagine why the BSA would want or need to be involved with CAP. The relationship is decidedly one-sided.

<SNIP>

(What I have seen is CAP members who spend time w/ Scouts, see that Scouting is much more a local social organization then
the more regimented Cadet Program, and jump ship.)

I think you answered your own question.

[THRAWN]

I commanded a dual chartered unit. It did nothing for the CAP side. Neither org really gained any obvious benefit from the relationship. When my son recently became a Cub Scout, I found out that I had an award from the Scouts for my work with the unit, but other than that, meh....

[seacamper]

What has happened to us is that our recruitment had stagnated. I am fairly new to the squadron, and was tasked with finding more bodies with color guard experience. That started a thought process which led me to resurrect a dead Boy Scout Troop, convert it to both Sea Scouts and Venturing, and we have benefited from it greatly. Administratively, I am now ready to swap the Venturing charter organization from the American Legion to the CAP per CAPR 52-16 and leaving the Sea Scouts charter with the Legion. We have already grabbed 4 enthusiastic Seniors and a couple cadets, and we have not even started recruiting yet until I can iron out the details. It may not last, but so far, so good. We do have a Boy Scout facility close by, and that is a large part of the drawl.

[Eclipse]

How do non-hosted BSA and Sea Scout charters "benefit" your CAP unit?

[THRAWN]

What has happened to us is that our recruitment had stagnated. I am fairly new to the squadron, and was tasked with finding more bodies with color guard experience. That started a thought process which led me to resurrect a dead Boy Scout Troop, convert it to both Sea Scouts and Venturing, and we have benefited from it greatly. Administratively, I am now ready to swap the Venturing charter organization from the American Legion to the CAP per CAPR 52-16 and leaving the Sea Scouts charter with the Legion. We have already grabbed 4 enthusiastic Seniors and a couple cadets, and we have not even started recruiting yet until I can iron out the details. It may not last, but so far, so good. We do have a Boy Scout facility close by, and that is a large part of the drawl.

I'll echo Eclipse's question. As you indicated, it may not last. Strike that, it will not last, especially in light of how you're already referring to potential members as "bodies". Sounds like you did a lot of work for very little return. From actual real world experience, not just reg reviews, these units have no benefit to either program.

[seacamper]

Modified Answer:
Hey guys, thanks for all the help.