Looking Ahead - Program Health

Fifth and final entry  in a series of thoughts about looking ahead.

Do we meet key indicators of effectively presenting our program?

The quality unit award (now the centennial quality unit award) has been the generally accepted standard for assessing unit program. Quality unit metrics do give some indications of the health of the program but we should take a closer look.

Quality unit metrics report adult leader training, youth recruitment and retention, parent participation, youth advancement, outdoor program participation, program planning. Meeting these indicators is somewhat like having a pulse - the unit is alive and kicking. Problem is a unit can meet these criterion with a program led and administered by adult leadership as well as one administered by youth leadership.

My choice of indicators would be a little different:

Patrol System

• Patrols plan, purchase and prepare their own meals on camp outs.
• The patrol leader was elected by the patrol.
• Patrol leaders routinely sign off rank requirements.

Youth Leadership

• Patrol leader's council meets regularly
• Senior patrol leader is elected by Scouts
• Youth plan and present weekly Troop meetings and outings

Troops that meet these key indicators will almost certainly meet or exceed the quality unit metrics but not necessarily the other way round.

Comments

[Walter Underwood]

The SPL handbook has a troop self-assessment that includes details like this. I haven't found it on-line yet, but it is NOT the same as this one: http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33618-27.pdf

I like your list a lot better than that one.

The "Patrol Quality Award" is the National Honor Patrol Award, which does a pretty good job of describing an active patrol.

For a Scoutmaster, I find the SPL Handbook far more useful than the Scoutmaster Handbook. For example, the SM Handbook doesn't even describe youth leadership positions. How the heck are you supposed to coach them if they aren't described?

[Walter Underwood]

Here is a worksheet for unit commissioners, but it is heavily pushing the new scout patrol and the big binder of troop meetings. I'm also confused why the solution to a disorganized boy-run meeting is to teach the Scoutmaster about official BSA meeting plans.

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34126.pdf

[Walter Underwood]

Check out "A Troop Self-Assessment" on pages 65-66 of the SPL Handbook. It matches some of your list.

* Camping menus are planned and prepared by patrols.

* Troop meetings are planned at the monthly patrol leader's council meeting.

* Troop meetings are run by the senior patrol leader.

It does not specify that leaders are elected, but it mentions "newly elected youth leaders" under training.

[Larry Geiger]

Quality Unit awards are more about the council, and not about the units. It is vitally important to have a good council, but unit folks should concentrate on unit issues.

Historically there has always been tension between organizations and their organizational needs and the programs that they support. This true in the YMCA, in your local dog training club and in Scouting. Money sometimes seems to flow up and not down.

Program units get pulled asunder by competing parties and drift from their main purpose. Program folks move up in the organization leaving the program unit behind. Strong executives produce results but want a lot of control. Program units don't understand where they fit into training, development, membership goals, etc.

The SM, along wit the CC and committee should evaluate the unit's health using a unit evaluation tool. It should include the items listed above. The unit may, and probably should, utilize the council tools, being as honest as possible, but not get too freaked out about the details. Leave the details to the staff.