Civil Air Patrol Association

[Pylon]

This topic of conversation came up in another thead on CAP budget cuts.  The idea being tossed around is:  Should there be a national association for Civil Air Patrol to look out for the interests of CAP and its members?  (i/e: increased funding, public awareness, better support, etc.)

Pros I've seen presented so far include the idea of having lobbyists and others who continually promote CAP in the eyes and ears of the public, politicians, and military and government officials.  Having such an association may also help increase awareness of CAP and its missions amongst those in power and the general public.

Some Cons I've seen mentioned include: why have a 501(c)(3) with dues-paying members to promote a 501(c)(3) with dues-paying members, with likely mostly overlapping membership.

Discuss! 

[MIKE]

There is something in the Dec 05 BoG Minutes about forming a foundation or something... But that's different right?

[Pylon]

There is something in the Dec 05 BoG Minutes about forming a foundation or something... But that's different right?

Yep, a Foundation is a 501(c)(3) corporation that primarily raises money to support the missions of something.  For example, I work for Arc of Onondaga (a non-profit that works with the developmentally disabled).  We also have the Arc of Onondaga Foundation.  The Foundation simply holds annual fundraising events, handles planned giving, and collects donations for Arc of Onondaga.  The Foundation builds a large reserve of cash to invest, with the eventual idea of just the income earned off the investments being enough to support the cause.

An Association would be more of an interest group.  It would consist of members who have an interest in seeing CAP become better supported, or more prevalent, or used as a resource more, etc.  An association often lobbies local, state, and federal government officials to support causes and funding for CAP.  Associations also may help raise public awareness of the organization they support.  Some associations are also a fraternal group for those who have retired or left the "parent" organization (as often is the case with the various military branch associations).

Definitely different ideas. 

[smj58501]

I concur that a 501c3 assn set up to support another one is unusual, but we have this unique tie to the USAF by being their official auxilliary. My concern is sometimes that can inhibit us from being able to stand up for ourselves and defend our interests like we should be able to. I am glad to see a forum started on this topic. I think it is something that needs to be discussed...

My concern is we need some type of organized method to provide a unified voice for CAP..... something the USAF, congress, state, and local officials will stand up and take notice of when approached by them. Maybe a seperate assn isn't the answer, but we definitely need a true lobbying arm that can voice the concerns of the membership.

[JAFO78]

OK Guys are we going to do this or are we just a bunch of arm chair HQ want a B's.

[smj58501]

I think it is a good idea and worth the effort. My concern is only a handful of people have rung in on the topic, so I am not sure:

1) how much commitment we have at this point to a CAP Assn?
2) do we want an actual Assn, or do we just want to better organize and resource our lobbying efforts?
3) if 2), how do we go about doing this?
4) Who is going to take the lead on this? Something this big almost needs a retired CAP member who has both the time on his/ her hands and the experience under his/ her belt
5) other ideas??

Bottom line is I don't see too many speaking up on this idea, so we don't know where we stand on it. Maybe we would have an overwealming level of support, but then again maybe the majority of our members don't feel the effort of starting a CAPA is worth the potential lobbying benefits. The only way we are going to know which direction to go is if more people ring in.

(PS- if you are reading this, here is your invite to speak up)

[fyrfitrmedic]

 I support this idea and feel that such an entity would be useful.

[arajca]

Reading the minutes from the Dec BoG meeting, the CAPA is going forward. The BoG will also be the board of the CAPA. It is estimated that the CAPA will cost $5-6K annually initally to get running and until donations/grants/other moneys come in. The constitution of the the CAPA is included as an attachment to the minutes.

[smj58501]

Reading the minutes from the Dec BoG meeting, the CAPA is going forward. The BoG will also be the board of the CAPA. It is estimated that the CAPA will cost $5-6K annually initally to get running and until donations/grants/other moneys come in. The constitution of the the CAPA is included as an attachment to the minutes.

Please clarify.... is the CAPA you mention the foundation detailed in the quote below from Pylon:

There is something in the Dec 05 BoG Minutes about forming a foundation or something... But that's different right?

Yep, a Foundation is a 501(c)(3) corporation that primarily raises money to support the missions of something.  For example, I work for Arc of Onondaga (a non-profit that works with the developmentally disabled).  We also have the Arc of Onondaga Foundation.  The Foundation simply holds annual fundraising events, handles planned giving, and collects donations for Arc of Onondaga.  The Foundation builds a large reserve of cash to invest, with the eventual idea of just the income earned off the investments being enough to support the cause.


Definitely different ideas. 

or has someone already been working the association idea as also detailed below by Pylon:

"An Association would be more of an interest group.  It would consist of members who have an interest in seeing CAP become better supported, or more prevalent, or used as a resource more, etc.  An association often lobbies local, state, and federal government officials to support causes and funding for CAP.  Associations also may help raise public awareness of the organization they support.  Some associations are also a fraternal group for those who have retired or left the "parent" organization (as often is the case with the various military branch associations)."

Please clarify what type of CAPA is going to the BoG.

[Pylon]

The CAP BoG is establishing a CAP Foundation.  This is totally different from what was proposed in the other discussion thread (a CAP Association).  A Foundation is a fundraising and monetary support organization.  The Foundation's job would be to support the Civil Air Patrol's units and missions monetarily, when and where needed.

An Association is an interest group, whose primary purpose is to help promote Civil Air Patrol with the government, legislators, other agencies, and raise general public awareness.  The Association would lobby for funding increases in state and federal legislatures, raise awareness of CAP's capabilities and missions, promote our programs, perhaps help with national ad campaigns, etc.

So... to continue the discussion--  is a group like this valuable, and if so, how should it be organized and structured? 

[Earhart1971]

Lobbying for money in Congress is a WASTE of TIME.

I have been to Washington and I have been Politically active, CAP is going to get cut (budget wise) every year, Maxwell AFB likes JROTC better than CAP, and JROTC they feel can accomplish the same thing that they want CAP for, funneling people to an Air Force Career.

The Association should focus on private fund raising, folks.  The Boys Scouts learned this years ago.

There are people that will give CAP all the money needed, IF YOU ASK FOR IT!

The Cadet Program sells, and the money is needed at the Squadron Level, not at Wing, Region, or National.

If National gets more money its not likely to filter down to the Squadron.

The Canadians will not let a Air Cadet Squadron form unless they have at least 20K in annual funding commitments.

CAP needs to do this, I would recommend the National Association help raise the funds and send it directly down to deserving Squadrons and also create programs that help local squadrons raise funds.

And the Squadrons need to form a finance committee to raise their own funds.

[Pylon]

Lobbying for money in Congress is a WASTE of TIME.

I have been to Washington and I have been Politically active, CAP is going to get cut (budget wise) every year, Maxwell AFB likes JROTC better than CAP, and JROTC they feel can accomplish the same thing that they want CAP for, funneling people to an Air Force Career.

The Association should focus on private fund raising, folks.  The Boys Scouts learned this years ago.

There are people that will give CAP all the money needed, IF YOU ASK FOR IT!

The Cadet Program sells, and the money is needed at the Squadron Level, not at Wing, Region, or National.

If National gets more money its not likely to filter down to the Squadron.

The Canadians will not let a Air Cadet Squadron form unless they have at least 20K in annual funding commitments.

CAP needs to do this, I would recommend the National Association help raise the funds and send it directly down to deserving Squadrons and also create programs that help local squadrons raise funds.

And the Squadrons need to form a finance committee to raise their own funds.

Okay, perhaps I'm still being a bit vague here.  Everyone seems to be completely missing the mark.  The CAP Board of Governors has already set into motion the establishment of the CAP Foundation, whose job it is to primarily raise money for CAP.

A Civil Air Patrol Association is more than simply a tool to lobby for more money in the U.S. legislature.  In fact, it's entirely much more than that.  The point of an Association is to lobby for and raise awareness of CAP on numerous levels, including state governments, other agencies and organizations, and with the general public.  There's a lot more to the world than Congress.

Several examples of things a CAP Association might do:

• Every state bordering New York gives a chunk of money annually to their respective Civil Air Patrol wing.  New York, the state with the second highest taxes in the nation, gives nothing to CAP.  The Association would help promote Civil Air Patrol to the state assembly, assist with the Wing with lobbying for funding, aid with development of marketing materials that "sell" CAP's function to the state, etc.
• Help with a national public awareness campaign for Civil Air Patrol.  The aim would be to increase the knowledge of the average citizen on what CAP is, what CAP does, and how to find out more.  This may have added benefits of increased recruiting.  This could be achieved through working with AdCouncil and other national organizations to produce TV or radio spots, development of marketing materials about CAP, continual plugging of CAP in the media, etc.
• Keep Civil Air Patrol on the minds of leaders at all level of government and in other organizations through various means, including newsletter mailings, frequent contacts, and other methods.
• Truly utilize the members of the legislative squadrons to help promote the interests of Civil Air Patrol
• Perhaps produce some good promotional videos about CAP.  A few have hit the web in the last year or so, but more could definitely be made.
• Advocate for CAP in other manners that it might be deemed a conflict-of-interest or otherwise inappropriate for Civil Air Patrol to do so themselves.

Just because one method of lobbying might be perceived as difficult by a few doesn't mean that this idea has no legitimacy.  That's like saying "My opinion is that kids these days aren't really interested in O-Flights, so there's no good reason for Civil Air Patrol anymore."

Aside from that, fundraising should always be encouraged at every level, not just National CAP.  Though I don't agree with mandating units get committments for 20k a year, since most units can operate on a much smaller budget, I think that squadron fundraising can improve.  However, that's not really the focus of this concept.

Is anybody getting the point yet? 

[smj58501]

I get the point lima charlie. And lobbying congress or a state legislature or any other source of funds is not a waste of time. If you don't ask for the money, no one will give you any. PAC's are a lot better at asking for and getting money from elected officials because they represent an organized group of registered voters.... voters that may remember their generosity come reelection time. Politicians (whether we like it or not) respond to those who will keep them in power... and an organization of many voters with the same cause makes them take notice. One or two constituents calling their elected officials pales in comparison to an organization of lots of voters with the same concerns. An organization is also better at setting up a "contact your congressman" drive (when the time is right to do so) because its members are, well... already organized.

Bottom line.... the man with the plan usually wins, but execution is everything. If you are not organized, you can't plan, and you sure won't be able to execute.

As far as a suggested structure to a CAPA, I would recommend each state have a state-level association that can represent them to a state legislature, and organize state-level initiatives. It can be made up of an executive board (Chair, Vice Chair Elect, Vice Chair, Secretary, Treasurer, and Past Chair) elected by the CAPA members of that state, and a board of directors consisting of 1 representative per squadron and wing. These representatives are selected by the CAPA members from each sqdn/ wing. If it gets big enough, each state could also select an executive director responsible for day to day activities of the assn. CAPA State conferences could be conducted at the same time the "official" wing/ state conferences are held, with meeting times set up before/ after the conclusion of "official" activities.

A national organization would be similar in structure, with the exception of each state having a rep on the board of directors (elected at the state assn conference), as well as regional reps (selected at a national conference). The Executive Board could have a similar officer structure to the state associations (Chair, Vice Chair Elect, Vice Chair, Secretary, Treasurer, and Past Chair), with elections being conducted as part of a national conference.

A big part of these state and national conferences would be to decide upon legislative initiatives at the state and national level, and develop a plan for how these initiatives will be followed up upon with the various elected bodies.

In closing, associations work, or there would not be any. Look at the NRA, the AARP, NGAUS, American Legion, VFW, Trial Lawyers Association, etc to name a few. You may agree or disagree with what these associations stand for, but you cannot deny they are effective in getting their issues in front of the elected officials. Are they 100%... no, but alot more effective than the disjointed efforts of a few people calling their congressmen.

[Major_Chuck]

I feel the idea warrants a lot of merit and further study.  If you look at organizations such as the Air Force Association, Air Force Sergeants Association, Reserve Officers Association, etc you get the picture.  Associations work when they have a clear goal.  In our case further the interest of Civil Air Patrol.

The problem I have with CAP Foundation is that it is not a true association in the terms that you are defining it as.  Its purpose is to promote CAP and answers to the BoG.  A CAP Association would support CAP but should not answer to it.  Membership should not be confined to CAP Members, Patrons, etc but to all that would want to join and promote the mission of CAP.

[BillB]

Great idea.  To bad it won't work. 
1st where are you getting the funds for the Association lobbyists? Travel to state capitols, expenses while talking to members of the legislature etc.
2nd 60,000 CAP members scattered over fifty states plus PR, doesn't have many potential votes to a member of a legislature.
3rd, What can you show that indicates CAP has a value to the particular state? We can't even define our own missions.
4th how do convience a Wing Commander that a CAP Association can exist using the name of Civil Air Patrol, and that the Association can do a better job that may be currently done in each state?
Lastly  Isn't the name Civil Air Patrol copyrighted/trademark or something?

[smj58501]

The problem I have with CAP Foundation is that it is not a true association in the terms that you are defining it as.  Its purpose is to promote CAP and answers to the BoG.  A CAP Association would support CAP but should not answer to it.  Membership should not be confined to CAP Members, Patrons, etc but to all that would want to join and promote the mission of CAP.

I agree wholeheartedly, but most importantly, I feel specifically we need to emphasize the association should not answer to the Air Force, the National Commander or any other "official" CAP commander on down the line. Of course coordination with these individuals would be a good idea to ensure the CAPA is aligned with the needs of the official CAP, but they need the ability to part from these individuals as required. The association answers to their dues-paying members (be they CAP members or any other supporters who want to join), with the greater interest of CAP the USAF Auxilliary in mind. The traditional CAP command chain can (and should) participate as members of the  CAP association, but as far as leadership within a CAPA... it may be wise to only allow them to be ex-officio non-voting members of the Board of Directors at both the state and national level. That would keep the lines clearer.

On another note.... the foundation sounds great, and I wish there was a way to combine their efforts with a CAPA-type association. Unfortunately, it appears the train has left the station and they will answer to the BoG.... an alignment that would be unacceptable for a CAPA to be able to accomplish their objectives

[Major_Chuck]

Why just talk about it, how about just doing it?

Why not sew the grass roots for such an organization, CAPA, Civil Air Patrol Association and model it on such successful associations like AFA, AFSA, etc.

Why not use CAP Talk (with current owners permission) as the Official On-Line Forum of CAPA?

I'm game to be a Charter Founding Member of CAPA.

[smj58501]

Why just talk about it, how about just doing it?

Why not sew the grass roots for such an organization, CAPA, Civil Air Patrol Association and model it on such successful associations like AFA, AFSA, etc.

Why not use CAP Talk (with current owners permission) as the Official On-Line Forum of CAPA?

I'm game to be a Charter Founding Member of CAPA.

Therein, of course, lies the infamous rub. SOMEONE with time on their hands who is dedicated to the vision of a CAPA and has the energy to follow through on it needs to be found. They may need to be recruited, peer pressured, or blackmailed 

Seriously, it will probably need to be a core group (that could end up comprising the first executive board) of people. This forum, as you so eloquently stated, is excellent as a place to communicate the message of a future CAPA. The first "test" could be using it to find that core group. Any nominations? Any volunteers??

[Major_Chuck]

Start small and move forward.  The only problem I would foresee at this point is CAP sactioning use of the name "Civil Air Patrol" and its emblem. 

[Pylon]

Start small and move forward.  The only problem I would foresee at this point is CAP sactioning use of the name "Civil Air Patrol" and its emblem. 

It all sounds good, sure.  But as all of you have begun to point out, there are hurdles to get over. These include:

• Use of the Civil Air Patrol name and logo likeness
• Source of funding for startup, filing as corporation and 501(c)(3) status
• Determining in which state to file for corporation
• Volunteers?  Who's going to staff this and do a lot of the needed work (developing the business plan, serving as the initial corporate board of directors, auditing the finances and tax-exempt paperwork, etc, design the website, create the promotional materials, ad nauseum).
• Who is going to negotiate with NHQ and CAP-USAF to ensure that there is a working relationship there all along

There are a lot of kinks to work out, and that requires people and time, above all.  This would lead me to suggest that perhaps first a group of interested individuals get together to begin working on the various details, start-up materials, mission statement, and marketing materials before incorporating.  This would allow everyone to ensure that there will be sufficient support for such an organization first, before making the leap towards becoming an official organization.

Thoughts?  Ideas?

[dwb]

I think it's a bad idea, actually.

An alumni organization takes the time and talent of numerous people, especially when starting up.  And you have to offer something substantive (discounts, conventions, scholarships, fancy glossy newsletters, etc.)

Look at TSA: Even with the scholarships they offer, they're still struggling to shake the perception that it's just an organization for a bunch of old cadets to pat each other on the back.

What is a CAP Association going to do, really?  Especially with a small group of people who already have too much on their plates (*ahem*, Mike) trying to put together something of significance with no mission and a shoestring budget.

And for what?  Increasing awareness?  Look at the budgets and staffing of the associations that can actually increase awareness, like AFA or VFW.  They're funded in the millions of dollars.  Is there a rich CAP uncle somewhere that can foot that kind of coin?  Because you're not getting it from people that are already spending too much on CAP (which, coincidentally, is probably your target audience for membership).

I don't mean to rain on the parade here, but I just think waxing poetic about something that can't realistically happen without people working on it full-time with substantial startup capital is a waste of time and energy.

[Capt Rivera]

Over a year has gone by.... 20 months for those counting...

What do we as a community/organization think of this past idea today?

[pixelwonk]

meh.

[SAR-EMT1]

With the budget cuts of today, is this something worth revisiting?

[Pylon]

In retrospect?  Not really an important thing on my list of things CAP needs to accomplish in the next 5.  Ultimately, as CAP grows, becomes more successful, and more financially robust?  Maybe.  But not right now.

[Capt Rivera]

In retrospect?  Not really an important thing on my list of things CAP needs to accomplish in the next 5.  Ultimately, as CAP grows, becomes more successful, and more financially robust?  Maybe.  But not right now.

hmmm The next 5.....  Does CAP have a "Strategic Plan"?

Do we have a Vision Statement?.
Do we have a mission statement?
Do we have a list of goals set with a corresponding time line?

[Major Lord]

To form an association to merely support CAP seems to me somewhat redundant. We have such an organization with 501 status in place: CAP, Inc. The real issue to me seems to be frustration on several counts. CAP members feel that they have no voice in CAP to address the issues that concern us all. These include corruption at various levels of the organization, misuse of funds, capricious use of discipline, lack of input over regulations, irresponsible use of Corporate funds, usurpation of our mission, disenfranchisement from our parent organization, and general left-handed -bed-wettingness. Have I missed anything?...sure I have. I see a CAP member sub-org having only one real purpose, that is, to have oversite over the occasionally glaring missteps of the Organization and to have some input in the direction of CAP. Given that there is no mechanism for inititiatives, referenda, or votes of no confidence by the membership, a members' group could be a perfectly reasonable means to provide the representation members want. Good luck with that!

Major Lord

[NYWG Historian]

Something like this (more along the lines of the Association) was tried many years ago.  I don't know a lot of details, but on March 1, 1944, Thomas Beck, president of Crowell-Collier Publishing (and a big booster of CAP from the start), announced the formation of the Civil Air Patrol League, Inc. as an entity "to promote aviation now and in the post-war period in military, commercial and civilian fields."  Beck headed the board initially and it was located at 515 Madison Ave., NYC.

My guess is that in addition to recruiting folks to get involved in aviation (though not necessarily recruiting them into CAP), this was an effort by CAP to find a post-war niche for itself.  Similar to the AFA's mission of promoting the importance of a strong USAF, I believe the CAP League idea was to promote the importance of aviation, with the side benefit of additional public visibility for Civil Air Patrol.  It may even have been the genesis of our aerospace education mission.

[wingnut]

I think the problem  lies in the fact that most CAP members feel as if the field folks are not being represented by the HQ

thats why we blog

I think an association is a good idea, maybe a CAP UNION too

[A.Member]

That it was a rather poor idea a year ago and still think it's a rather poor idea today.   

We are the association.  Each of is a PAO - by title or otherwise.  The idea of establishing a group for what appears to be the simply purpose of establishing a group is kind of silly for our volunteer organization.

[Dragoon]

The one purpose of a non-CAP entity is to have a place to hold money and stuff without Government Oversight.

For example, we went to the Wing Banker program not for efficient finanical operations, but rather for centralized control, so we could better pass a govt style audit.

Some squadrons have "Boosters Clubs" so that they have access to money and items WITHOUT making those things a part of CAP, Inc, and subject to all the finance and logistics oversight.  It works well.

As for being a lobbying entity - that's what CAP, Inc is already for.

As for for being a representative entity for members.  It's not needed.  We each have a vote - with our feet.  If you don't like it - bail.  Volunteer somewhere else.  After all CAP isn't here to help the senior members - it's here to use the senior members to accomplish missions for customers.  As long as there are enough senior members to get the job done, there's no real reason to change the working conditions.

Now, if things get so bad that the good folks are all leaving and the mission suffers, then it's time for a change.   We're not even close to there yet.  Haven't been for at least 25 years.

[thp]

There should be.

By members, for members.

Help with recruiting, fundraising, etc.

[Capt Rivera]

The one purpose of a non-CAP entity is to have a place to hold money and stuff without Government Oversight.

For example, we went to the Wing Banker program not for efficient finanical operations, but rather for centralized control, so we could better pass a govt style audit.

Some squadrons have "Boosters Clubs" so that they have access to money and items WITHOUT making those things a part of CAP, Inc, and subject to all the finance and logistics oversight.  It works well.

As for being a lobbying entity - that's what CAP, Inc is already for.

As for for being a representative entity for members.  It's not needed.  We each have a vote - with our feet.  If you don't like it - bail.  Volunteer somewhere else.  After all CAP isn't here to help the senior members - it's here to use the senior members to accomplish missions for customers.  As long as there are enough senior members to get the job done, there's no real reason to change the working conditions.

Now, if things get so bad that the good folks are all leaving and the mission suffers, then it's time for a change.   We're not even close to there yet.  Haven't been for at least 25 years.

Well thats just stupid! If you love being a part of the organization you should look for ways to improve it!... Not leave it because it is not perfect! How un-American would that be?

Your saying people should let or want it to fail in order for needed changes to be made? I don't want to assume but it seems as though your saying, who cares if its not as good as it could be, and that in order for it to ever get better enough of the people who actually care and keep CAP alive, need to leave and watch it fall?

I hope to God that if that is your view that you do not nor ever will hold a position where you make decisions that affect CAP or its members. [On any level]

If this seems like an attack on you personally... think of it this way... I hope no one who shares your view [if I understood it] has a chance to ever shape CAP or its membership at any level. In fact... they should be the first to leave.

CAP is NOT a flying club! It is NOT the boy scouts either... It should be managed, organized, and advertised better then both!

I hope & believe that under our current General, this will happen.

[MIKE]

Personal attacks are against the MCoC.

[Capt Rivera]

woops.... had 2 many tabs open and posted a comment to the wrong thread... will repost it to the correct one... sorry.

[RADIOMAN015]

Frankly, isn't the reason we all had to put our funds into the Wing Banker program so that CAP would be able to get more grant money since they wouldn't get a qualified audit opinion?  We don't need ANOTHER national association.  Basically if you are going to do something like this, in my opinion do it at the local level as a Booster club.  Some members with many years of volunteer service are still of the opinion that IF a squadron has too much money, the wing is going to find a reason to get some of that money.  Most if not all unit funding is accomplished by the unit's members contributions and not any funding that national hq, wing(s), group(s) are providing to the individual units.  Fortunately, this proposal died!!!     

RM

This URL seems abandoned:
any more info?: