I’ve been a little reluctant to contribute to this thread, in part because it’s been long enough since I was active in Girl Scouts that I’m not really up on the state of the organization today.
But my initial reaction to the thread title was definitely that “ashamed” is a very weird emotion word in this context. A certain degree of mismatch between girls, volunteers, and thus available opportunities is inevitable in a large organization.
Also, I must admit, most of my camping experience as a Scout was in Platform Tents, and I liked it that way-- I don’t mind camping, but wilderness camping has never been my thing.
I got my Silver Award but not the Gold-- partly because I moved halfway across the country, and partly because the Gold Award called for a level and type of leadership and commitment that weren’t really my thing.
I got a lot of Good out of being a Scout, and only some of that was Outdoorsy stuff. So I’m very sad to hear words like Death Spiral being thrown around. But not neccessarily surprised. The number of my troop mates who appeared to enjoy 6th grade as scouts, but opted to be Individual Scouts as 7th graders . . . was large.
(And a little baffled by what increasing membership numbers is supposed to accomplish, if they all just quit again when there isn’t enough Vision to keep people interested and involved?)
Yes. Historically, one of Girl Scouts’ greatest strengths was that it was very open and accepting. Unlike Boy Scouts, the organization has historically been very tolerant of various religious beliefs and homosexuality. A lot of staff and volunteers wanted Girl Scouts to be a place where a girl could feel she belonged, even if she didn’t belong anywhere else. They didn’t want to put too much emphasis on any one activity (like camping) because the idea was that Girl Scouts could be the platform to explore any interest, no matter how unusual. The most dedicated staff and volunteers talk about how they believe the organization should be there for girls who would otherwise slip through the cracks.
But this strength is a huge weakness when it comes to rallying support. It’s hard to market yourself to potential members and donors when you aren’t specifically for or against much of anything, and actual completion of activities is optional.
Interestingly, the organization is still doing some great work in targeted programs, like the one for girls who have a parent in jail or prison. In our council, Lego League has been huge–some girls invented and patented a robotic prosthetic hand. But the core program is in shambles because the core program was always about a broad variety of choice and interests. That’s harder to support in today’s environment, where parents are more protective and fearful, donors want to see “measurable outcomes,” and the pool of adult volunteers is shrinking because of the increasing demands on their time. You need a strong message to rally people in that environment, and Girl Scouts has shied away, time and again, from really advertising its mission or narrowing focus to certain activities that would be both popular and develop female leaders.
Now I read HERE the reason they sold off the camps was because they could not afford the high salary and benefits packages their corporate leadership voted themselves. So they sold the camps and instead of that money going to say buy another camp, it just went into the pension fund.
From the above article "According to the lawsuit filed by Friends of Eagle Island, GSHONJ CEO Susan Brooks defended the sale by saying, “I have pensions to pay.”
Another
"However, in a memo dated May 24, 2013 from then GSUSA CFO Florence Casilles to council CEOs regarding the National Girl Scout Retirement Plan (NGSRP), it appears that GSUSA was actively considering the sale and leaseback of council properties to fund the pension plan as well as donations of property to the plan, and the “identification of a national real estate broker to assist councils in selling property with use of funds to contribute to the plan.”
“High” salaries and benefit packages have never existed at the council level. Councils cannot even pay competitive salaries for the markets they are in. Ours certainly can’t. This is part of why there is high staff turnover.
Historically (not anymore), there were good pensions offered to employees. Councils were ordered to merge in 2007, and a lot of people took early retirement then. Then 2008 decimated the invested assets of the councils. The organizations have struggled to pay what was promised to former employees ever since. These days, our council employees get crappy benefits and most can’t even afford to elect them because their salaries are so low.
This is a problem many companies had around that time. Many of those just declared bankruptcy and screwed their employees. Girl Scouts has struggled for years to find a way to meet their obligations. FWIW, in our council, when camps were sold, NONE of the money went to pay pension obligations. It all went into the trust fund. But some of the councils are in much more desperate financial straits. Most councils pre-merger were operating in the red.
The Iowa council cited has about 50 employees. $3.5 million for salary and benefits is not so extraordinary when you consider that. GS has struggled to find affordable health insurance to offer, which is a big part of the cost. And then the historic pension obligations.
Well I’m not sure they are even doing that well considering my son is in a scout group that has both boys and girls (Venture scouts) in it. The Boys attend Rotary camp which is run by the Boy Scouts but since the girl scouts dont want to do a similar camp a new group called Girls Can Camp was created to give girls with disabilities the chance to go to camp.
I agree with you than when it comes to marketing, just saying “We are open and accepting” is not a great a slogan as say talking about camping, backpacking, and sitting around a campfire. Heck even “teaching them to become leaders” really falls short. Parents and kids want to know the “cool” things a group can offer.
This is a nonsensical argument. The mere existence of other organizations that emphasize camping for girls is not an indication of failure on the part of the Girl Scouts. Especially since all the female Venture Scouts I know are also Girl Scouts. It certainly has no bearing on the open and accepting position of the organization.
Yes, I see your point. But it also goes back to the original issue of why some girls are looking outside the girl scouts for a camping experiences.
Now I have to ask, are you saying those girls in Venture scouts have still kept their membership and are active in the girl scouts or are you saying they used to be girl scouts?
A good friend of mine helps lead a Venture Scout troop. The girls in it are all active Girl Scouts; the boys are all active Boy Scouts. (Does that similarly lead you to conclude that there is something lacking about the main Boy Scout program and camping?)
My friend, and many other people I know as Girl Scout volunteers, are active in both BSA and Girl Scouts, and sometimes also Venture and other outdoor organizations. I spent a lot of time talking to them about what each organization offers, and mostly they concluded that there are pros and cons to all of the offerings. Which was why they were involved in so many organizations–so they could have access to what they liked about each program.
My friends involved with BSA and Venture Scouts have complaints about those organizations that are far uglier than “Girl Scouts don’t have good camping.”
I’ve never once been on a camping experience that did not keep the girls and guys separate when sleeping. Camping means complete darkness and a lack of supervision once sleepy time comes.
Then again, apparently a lot of other places have co-ed rooms or floors in college, and coed showers. That’s something I’ve never seen, either.
Well thats good. I know some similar people. “Scout people” I like to call them who have enjoy the programs.
The reason some of our boys do Venture scouts is because they have aged out of Boy scouts to some degree or they feel the Venture crews offer new opportunities. Plus its a way to meet girls.
From what I’ve heard is the kids do a pretty good job of policing each other and anyone who goes into it with the idea of sneaking off into the woods is usually sent home. Frankly most outings are only 2-3 days and the kids are pretty exhausted after hiking all day. Now in a 5 day camp where their is lots of down time then boredom can set in and problems do occur.
I remember when I was a boy scout there was always one or two groups at scout camp with some girls in it. I believe the rule was they could join a boy scout troop only if there was no girl scouts in a given area.
Uh - to earn Eagle you need to be Life, but then you have to run an Eagle Scout Leadership Service Project. In our area, the total service hours is rarely below 200 in total. The Eagle candidate has to show both service AND leadership. My older son put in around 50 hours, and the sum of the hours of the people working added another 450. On Sunday I was supervising another project that had 10 boys working under the leadership of the candidate for 4 hours (and that got them about 25% finished).
BSA projects can not benefit the BSA, and must benefit a non-profit.
The challenge I have observed with the Girl Scouts is that the Troops are smaller, and tend to be single age group. My Troop has boys from 11 to 17 in it. The younger ones learn from the older ones.
We camp every month, plus one week of summer camp. We also have a one-day activity every couple of months (right now - focused on a series of 10 mile hikes for Hiking Merit Badge). We also have service work every month that boys can join.
For camping, I need 2 + N adults, where N is the number of additional seat belts needed to get the boys to the trailhead / campsite. I have seen BSA troops cancel campouts due to a lack of adults going (not my unit though). I have also heard of the same with GSA troops who could not get enough moms to participate, and dads were not made to be welcome.
My wife earned her Gold, and her mother was very active. Her father also attended, but that was tolerated since her mother was the Troop leader, and her father was only there with her. I don’t know what a single dad would do, for example.
The best BSA venturing units I have seen are co-ed. The Girls seem to run it, and the boys happily join in the fun. Venturing opens up more opportunities, since the youth are older and have a different level of maturity.