Some are of the opinion that CAP can learn little from other organizations due to the supposed uniqueness of our organization.  I happen to have a much more open mind about this issue and think that there are many things other organizations do that we might be able to adapt to our own uses.  I often use the CG Aux as an example (and I bring CAP up often as an example on a CG Aux board) since it is the organization that is most similar to what we do.  Every once in a while we here something said about the Boy Scouts, usually in relation to a cadet protection-type issue. 

But, leaving the CG Aux aside, I'd like to hear about some other organizations, volunteer or paid, that might have some good ideas about doing things that might makes sense for CAP.  This can be in any area you'd like ranging from youth leadership development, general organization or administration, disaster relief, SAR, or public education (AE or other), etc.. 

No need for a thesis on this, but lets here about maybe one or two things that another group you're familiar with does that you think might work in CAP.  Name the group and describe the idea. 

Anyone and everyone.

With the caviate.....if it isn't broke....don't fix it. 

I would think community based, "civilian" emergency services agencies would be a great source of learning material.

I've always thought that CAP could learn a whole lot from BSA (Boy Scouts of America).  Not so much in the way that they run their actual program, but the way they run their business; fundraising, advertising, recruiting, etc.

If we exclude our appropriated funds, BSA has a fundraising ratio to us of about 265:1 on our corporate funds. 

As a business, the BSA should be a strong role model of "what to do" when it comes to ensuring financial stability of a non-profit.

Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 08, 2009, 12:44:10 PM
If we exclude our appropriated funds, BSA has a fundraising ratio to us of about 265:1 on our corporate funds. 

Cappie the Eagle Cookies?

I think we can learn about uniforms, rank structure, and fund raising from the Salvation Army..

ARES/RACES - no rank, no uniform, very loose structure. Very few requirements other than an Amateur License and some ICS courses. Extremely mission focused and technically savvy. And there whenever the balloon goes up.

Quote from: RRLE on December 08, 2009, 03:43:20 PM
ARES/RACES - no rank, no uniform, very loose structure. Very few requirements other than an Amateur License and some ICS courses. Extremely mission focused and technically savvy. And there whenever the balloon goes up.

And only ONE, VERY LIMITED mission. No development training for members. If you aren't into radios, don't bother them.

The Red Cross and Salvation Army Disaster Response Services...any organization that can mobilize a large contingent of well-trained volunteers to respond to mass disasters is who we should seek out for advice and instruction.

Quote from: GroundPounder73 on December 08, 2009, 05:16:44 AM
I would think community based, "civilian" emergency services agencies would be a great source of learning material.

I  agree with you.

Quote from: AirAux on December 08, 2009, 02:41:14 PM
I think we can learn about uniforms, rank structure, and fund raising from the Salvation Army..

Fund raising could be improved.

Others have provided ES-related things, so here are some more on the cadet side:

US Navy Sea Cadets
http://www.seacadets.org/public/
They have a good relationship with the Navy, Marines and Coast Guard...a possible model for building bridges with the Air Force?
Also, they ask a lot more of their adult members...you're not even considered for appointment as Ensign until you've completed a one-year training phase.
http://www.seacadets.org/public/officer/trifold-faq-officer-low.pdf

Young Marines
http://youngmarines.com/

Army Cadets/American Cadet Alliance
http://goarmycadets.com/
Their requirements for their "senior members" are also a lot more rigorous than ours
http://goarmycadets.com/officer-and-nco-corps.php

And, of course, our foreign equivalents:

UK Air Training Corps
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Training_Corps

New Zealand Air Training Corps
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Air_Training_Corps

Royal Canadian Air Cadets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Canadian_Air_Cadets

Australian Air Force Cadets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Air_Force_Cadets

However, their officers are actually commissioned reservists in the RAF/RCAF/RAAF/RNZAF and are paid, and these organisations are a lot more closely connected with their parent Services.

^ I wouldn't disagree with the idea we could take things from those other cadet programs, but it needs to be said that none of
those have an operational or adult component, the entire focus is on the cadets, which changes the dynamics of involvement and
training required.

Lets assume for the sake of this thread that we're looking for bits and pieces of other programs that might be adaptable to CAP, not wholescale transformation.

In particular I'm interested in hearing from those who are intimately involved with the programs in question and really know what is working and what is not about some particular idea.   I guess I was also looking for much more specific ideas that we can steal.  For example, what exactly about the BSA fundraising could we use? 

The BSA hires council (wing) and District (Group) executives.  They are charged with three primary duties.  Recruiting (new units and sustained units), Training (leader training) and fundraising.

They are hired full time to do these jobs.

If CAP adopted this....we could hire full time people to be wing commanders.  Doing their current operations job and add the fund raising part to it.

This would help to eliminate the politics involved with corporate command.

Also on the BSA model.  The District Executive has a volunteer staff headed by the District Commissioner.  The DC has a training staff and a cadre of Unit Commissioners.

The training staff conducts training on the level of SLS.  The Unit Commissioners are the eyes and ears of the DC.  Each UC has 1-4 units that he/she reports on.  They are required to make periodic visit to the units to check up on basic things....uniforms, following the program guidelines, etc.  They are the conduit where the unit leaders ask for help from the District staff.  If a unit has a bunch of new members and they need training the UC will report to the DC who then starts the ball rolling to get the required training.  If a unit is loosing members they can ask the UC for help who goes to the DC to get help on recruiting.

This is how the Council keeps eyes on the remote unit and insures that everyone is doing what they are supposed to.
The UC's are not inspectors like an IG team....but are more of a mentor/guide/pipeline to the larger BSA resource network.

Another aspect of the BSA model we could use is their summer camp system.

Most Councils hold summer long camps, that run 8-10 week long sessions.  They hire their staff for the entire summer.  Scouts attend the summer camp as units and not individuals.  If a scout can't attend a particular particular session he joins another unit and attends with them.  Each unit brings their own adult leadership (at least 2) at a ratio of 10-1.  The program is broken up into first year attendees that would be a canned program designed to bring brand new cadets to their curry-wright brother level...the rest of the encampment would be break out sessions offering different skills and activities (ES, Comm, model rocketry, advanced drill, honor guard, rifle shooting, O-rides).  Instead of the current system where everyone must more or less do what everyone else does.

Being regionalised we can get permanent facilities and it become easier to standardised the program.  Smaller wings would not have the burden of putting on their own programs.  It becomes easier to arrange military support for transportation, O-rides and weapons familiarization.  We save on overhead staff by consolidating (8 staffs instead of 51).

An added bonus would be that the facilities (assuming they were CAP property) could be used throughout the year for other events and even rented out to other groups.

Costs could be held down by using dedicated fundraising activities to support the facilities and subsidise the participant costs of the encampment.

Quote from: Eclipse on December 08, 2009, 07:50:26 PM
^ I wouldn't disagree with the idea we could take things from those other cadet programs, but it needs to be said that none of
those have an operational or adult component, the entire focus is on the cadets, which changes the dynamics of involvement and
training required.

Unless I'm mistaken, the RAF(VR)T does have an 'operational' mission training university cadets (think ROTC) as well as providing them leadership training. Not the same as CAP's operational mission of course, but perhaps there needs to be a seperate between the Cadet Program and Senior program, ie, have CAP SM's NCO's and Officers in one organization and cadets in another.

The American Cancer Society does a great job with branding and volunteer training. Their style guide shows how logos are to be used and details include use of fonts, acronyms, capitalization, etc. Anyone not familiar with the ACS logo?

They have a volunteer training program that includes real job descriptions and shows how to establish and reach recruiting and fundraising goals, using a train-the-trainer approach to bring the message to the local level.

Quote from: JThemann on December 08, 2009, 09:56:35 PM
Unless I'm mistaken, the RAF(VR)T does have an 'operational' mission training university cadets (think ROTC) as well as providing them leadership training. Not the same as CAP's operational mission of course, but perhaps there needs to be a seperate between the Cadet Program and Senior program, ie, have CAP SM's NCO's and Officers in one organization and cadets in another.

You might as well just turn out the lights now.  It would cut the legs of CAP right off if members had to make a choice, plus, the split in organizations would add even further to the administrative burden.

^I don't think there ever will be a "separation" however, there have been some small rumblings about a possible integration of the cadet program with AFJROTC.

Quote from: FW on December 09, 2009, 04:15:15 AM
^I don't think there ever will be a "separation" however, there have been some small rumblings about a possible integration of the cadet program with AFJROTC.

That might make for some interesting discussions, but the issue of ROTC happening on school time by paid people vs. CAP happening off hours would be difficult to reconcile.