UMC’s BSA shift is a blueprint, inflection, and opportunity

The United Methodist Church (UMC) is a huge charterer of Boy Scouts of America (BSA) units. It is changing its relationship with the BSA.

The UMC’s path forward is churches no longer charter Scout units. Instead, councils, which are the nonprofits that run Scouting in defined regions, will become the chartered organizations for all UMC Scout units.

Explainer: All BSA units are “chartered” by a community-minded organization. A charter is like a franchise. Under BSA’s charter agreement, the community-minded organization owns and operates a Scout unit. This is the longstanding model for BSA.

Formerly UMC-chartered Scout units will shift to an affiliation agreement with churches. This agreement appears to mainly provides meeting space. For Scout units that successfully navigate this, youth members should notice no differences.

I believe this change is:

  1. A blueprint for other major charterers.
  2. The beginning of the end of the chartered-organization model.
  3. An opportunity for BSA’s volunteer commissioners.

This change means a lot on the back end. The unit is no longer owned or operated by UMC churches, and major responsibilities are shifting to BSA councils.

A premise behind the chartered-organization model is a level of investment and ownership in Scout units that is rare. Even when I was a youth (decades ago!), most units had only a “key relationship” with their chartered organization: “here’s the key to the building, I’ll sign that form once a year, and don’t bug me until next year”. It’s no different today.

This is certainly not what the chartered-organization model anticipates.

I am not blaming the chartered organizations. I think the model is obsolete. Can you think of any other major, youth-serving organization that works this way? I can’t.

We need a new path forward. This is the first time a major, national organization has reached an agreement with BSA like this. Other large charterers are not comfortable with the chartered-organization model. Can the BSA deny them this blueprint? I doubt it.

Here’s a challenge: The chartered organization has important duties, such as approving adult leaders. Also, since units are owned by the chartered organization, units operate as a part of the chartered organization. For example, First United Methodist Church’s Troop 123 is literally acting as First United Methodist Church in anything it does. This even includes matters like tax reporting.

It’s a big responsibility.

In shifting the charters to councils, if we make no changes, we’re heaping a lot of responsibility on council staff, which is already typically lean and overtaxed. How will they take on the Chartered Organization Representative (COR) role?

Explainer: The COR is the chartered organization’s official representative to each Scout unit. Among the COR duties are approving adult leaders, appointing some positions, setting expectations on behalf of the chartered organization, and voting in council matters.

Now let’s be clear: if councils are chartering units, we’ve moved beyond the chartered-organization model. We need to rethink the COR! We can divide it into three parts:

  1. Superfluous: Some red tape is needed only because the “charterer” is independent. When BSA itself is the charterer, this red tape becomes junk work. Trash it! (Want to get rid of the loathsome, annual rechartering process? This is how!)
  2. Professional: Some parts, such as fiscal responsibilities related to ownership of a unit, may need to be handled by council staff.
  3. Volunteer: Much of the role may be handled by volunteers in the commissioner staff. This may include approving adult leaders, direct relationship with troops, and more.

Let’s talk more about point 3: As a prior District Commissioner, I found the commissioner role to be ambiguous. That makes it hard to recruit for. Even 15 years ago, technology had already obsoleted a lot of our function, and the remainder was scattered. A role-enhancement could boost the commissioner role by adding clarity, meaning, and authority. That will help us find more commissioners!

It is crucial that we align the right personality to the adjusted commissioner role. It’s crucial that we fill commissioner staff with service-oriented problem-solvers who thrive on the initiative, innovation, and independence of unit leaders.

In changing its relationship with the BSA, the UMC has laid out a blueprint for other chartered organizations. This will soon kill the obsolete chartered-organization model. Change is hard, but volunteer commissioners can take on a good deal of the former responsibility of chartered organizations. In doing so, commissioner service gains badly needed clarity.


Comments

10 responses to “UMC’s BSA shift is a blueprint, inflection, and opportunity”

  1. Brian C Avatar
    Brian C

    If anything good comes of this, maybe the death of the annual recharter? What a huge annual waste of time and resources.

    1. Aren Cambre Avatar
      Aren Cambre

      That’s a great example of silly red tape we might trash!

  2. Ernest Schmidt Avatar
    Ernest Schmidt

    Will not work because the commissioner’s staff does not do much now. I’ve been scouting for over 30 years and the infighting among them is not good. My troops and Pack commissioner did not get along with the so-called self-appointed district commissioner so he pushed her out. and it has been well over a year and we still do not have a commissioner. I have asked , matter of fact the district Commissioner has not even talked to the Charter units and it’s a fight to get him to do his job. and what do you think the councils will do when they see troops that have great bank accounts like over $10K. they will take it to pay their staff. what about Equipment i already see favoritism at the district level. Why does a rich troop get two trailers, when one that needs it gets nothing? or I’ve seen troops that only the chosen few can join that troop, and then the question of leadership. why does the same guy go as the Troop leadership to all national events and no one else gets a chance? The same family has run our district for over 25 years. but they are good guys. if you cross them you are out.

    1. Aren Cambre Avatar
      Aren Cambre

      Will not work because the commissioner’s staff does not do much now.

      Your description of your commissioners staff suggests some cultural sickness in your area. It needs to be addressed if your council wants growth in your district.

      Also, today’s commissioner role lacks clarity. By providing more clarity to the role, it may be taken more seriously and may attract better candidates.

      While the rest of your comment has validity, I feel it reflects concerns that already exist, and addressing it may need measures beyond what just the end of the chartered-organization model may provide.

  3. If the councils now ‘own’ the units, does that mean unit trailers, equipment, etc. Are owned by them? How does that work?

    1. Aren Cambre Avatar
      Aren Cambre

      Per the UMC+BSA agreement, “ownership” transitions from the church to the council. The church’s remaining role is “support”. Given that plain language, it would follow that all Scout unit-exclusive assets would transfer to the council. I think that would generally include the trailer, checking account, and equipment.

  4. Our Pack unit has been sponsored by Council for 1 1/2 years so far. We don’t have a commissioner; the DE is acting commissioner, but we get much from them. Our COR only comes in for signatures and confirm the roster. Our assets technically belong to the Council charter, but are ours. We have never heard from anyone regarding the bank account; although, I keep everything ready at anytime they could ask. It would be nice if Gold level JTE units could do more of their own background stuff so we didn’t have to wait a year to get scouts in the system correctly. District and Council need to focus on their side of the program. Stop ignoring the Cub program.

    1. Aren Cambre Avatar
      Aren Cambre

      What council role acts as your COR? A commissioner or council employee?

  5. I’m from Sea Scouts’ side of things. The Councils dumped our historic 70-year-old boats we use – years ago. Our Chartered Foundation owns them, the gear, and all the bills to keep them usable. Would the Councils want them back? Would they pay for insurance & operating costs $30k+ each year (the program is about 40-70 kids and 7 boats over 25 feet) if the Ship/Troop doesn’t have it? This program is funded by only a few alumni otherwise it’s broke year-round.

    It sounds like the Council is only looking at bank accounts (they don’t care about the equipment the way Troops do) and not liability and maintenance. It may give the church some liability protection, but the article does not go that far into the weeds.

    How does this protect the Church, BSA, and most important the Scouts and leaders?

    1. I agree with you Steve. How will this move protect the Church, BSA, leaders and especially the scouts. The centralization of decision making has been a problem with the program for many years. It is the adult leaders who make this program happen and not the Councils or National. If anything, we need a governing body/association of volunteers to provide greater guidance and oversight of the National and Council level organizations. The abuse scandal tells us three things. First, BSA was never well prepared to handle the attraction all who abuse children have for organizations involving children (and this includes both public and private schools too). Second, by the admission of the keeper of the perversion files under deposition, the conscious decision was made to not refer serial abusers to law enforcement in far too many cases. The echo chamber nature of an elite centralized governing body was clearly in place. Lastly, the salaries of the upper level management of the National organization have been wildly out of proportion to the decline in membership despite an increasing of population. Whether it is the National or Council’s fault or not, we have seen a precipitous decline in scouting under their tenure. A position of this importance should not be isolated from valid critique and necessary (forced) turnover. As volunteers, we need to ask ourselves if the abuse scandal and decline of scouting is to be OUR legacy? Is this what we have worked for?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Discover more from Scouting Maverick: Scout Better

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading