Councils Make Strides In Trained Leaders Achievement In 2013

Ensuring every youth member is led by a trained leader is critical when it comes to providing “life changing experiences you can’t get anywhere else.”

The year-end figures for the 2013 Journey to Excellence show that 71 percent of the councils in the BSA improved their JTE score in direct contact leaders trained. An additional 48 Gold or Silver councils had slight declines, but maintained Gold or Silver status.

In all, 226 of our councils (81 percent) met the Gold or Silver status for 2013. Thirty-nine more were Bronze. That means that 95 percent, or 265 of our 278 councils, met a JTE standard.

The Heart of America Council, headquartered in Kansas City, was once again #1 overall (and in the Central Region) with 96.99 percent trained leaders!

The rest of the top twelve were:

2. Heart of Virginia (95.26 percent) (#1 in the Southern Region)
3. South Florida (93.76 percent)
4. Rio Grande (92.78 percent)
5. Coronado Area (84.84 percent)
6. Chattahoochee (82.76 percent)
7. Minsi Trails (82.22 percent) (#1 in Northeast Region)
8. Cradle of Liberty (80.37 percent)
9. Chief Seattle (80.00 percent) (#1 in Western Region)
10. Monmouth (78.29 percent)
11. Mount Baker (78.22 percent)
12. Pennsylvania Dutch (78.01 percent)

In 2012, a score of 70 percent made the top 10, but that score would have ranked #17 in 2013.

We still have work to do in ensuring that every Scout has a trained leader, but congratulations to our councils for a great job in getting more leaders trained and maintaining more accurate records!

9 Responses to Councils Make Strides In Trained Leaders Achievement In 2013

  1. Kevin D Harner says:

    This goes out to the top 5….how do you get them to do it?

    Other then that less the 100% really bothers me! it’s why 7yrs ago I got involved. It’s why I take everything I can from online to actual classes. That’s why I teach classes.

    So I pose this….can we make 2014 the year of 100% BSA wide?

    • Jan Kimbrell says:

      In Coronado Council, Konza District we verified the accuracy of our training records and then we offered the sessions our leaders were really lacking in the units cluster areas as opposed to only having one larger training event in the district. And we had direct person-to-person contact with the adult leaders whose trainings were incomplete or inadequate for their positions. Good Communications and genuine help were key.

  2. hgilson says:

    My question is: What are you truly reporting?

    Is this completion rate measuring the percentage of all leaders who have completed the required training in order to be considered trained for their registered position. If so that is great.


    Is this a measure of Direct Contact Leaders per the JTE Criteria which reads:

    “Number of Cubmasters (CM), Tiger Cub den leaders (TL), Den leaders (DL), Webelos den leaders (WL), Scoutmasters (SM), Leaders of 11-year old Scouts- LDS (10), Varsity Scout coaches (VC), Crew advisors (NL), and Skippers (SK), paid or multiple registration, completing essential training requirements for their position by 12/31/13, divided by total number in the positions listed above on 12/31/13.”

    The definition of this metric does not include any committee members or assistant leaders.

    For Troops, Crews, and Teams this measure appears to just measure if one person in the unit is trained, the unit leader. At least with Cub Scout Units it includes the Den Leaders.

    For my District the difference between the two measures is about a 20% bump up in the numbers.

  3. Mark Griffin says:

    There are some tips that were gathered from a study of these councils in 2011 that were shared in the Spring 2013 Training Times on in the archives in the “Training Updates” section.

  4. Bill Givler says:

    In the Heart of Virginia Council, our Executive Board set a council policy to require direct contact leaders to be trained. For us, applications for new direct contact leaders must have proof of training attached for the registrar to process the applications. We also closely check every unit at recharter to make sure all direct contact leaders are trained for their position. 4 years ago, we required top leaders to be trained. 3 years ago, we added direct contact leaders. There was some push back 3 and 4 years ago, but there is no viable rational argument against training for volunteers who work with youth. If Scouters would not take training, we would not register or recharter them in a direct contact role.

    100% training is very difficult to achieve, mainly because to be considered trained, in addition to their position-specific training, adults must have current Youth Protection Training. YPT expires every 2 years. So, at the start of every month, roughly 4% of all adult volunteers are suddenly officially untrained. Once they renew their YPT online, they count as trained again.

  5. Will England says:

    Easy – they cannot turn in their registration paperwork as a leader without position specific training. They cannot attend camp if they are not a registered leader. No training, no camp. And we have some fantastic camps!

  6. Doug M says:

    Visit those councils’ web sites and read their posted training policies for the answer. At least one of those councils uses the Unit Scouter Reserve position (code 92U) to register a new/untrained adult until that adult completes training for his/her desired position. Doing that makes it pretty easy to get 90+ percent trained adults. I’m just not sure that is what the 92U position was envisioned/designed/advertised to be used for. I wonder how many of those units still quietly allow their 92Us to act in leadership roles (SM, VC, NL, CM, DL, WL, CC, MC, etc.) anyway.

  7. Connie Knie says:

    Until National makes it mandatory, there really is not a way it can be enforced. My counsel this year did it for Top Leaders. And while it was a struggle it got done. But I do know that if a CM or SM was not 100% trained it did not stop the charter since National isn’t mandating it yet.

    And a counsel wants all charters to go through…..bottom line.

  8. Jeff Mc Houl says:

    Ultimately, the question that will need to be addressed is just what do the numbers actually mean. A Council may achieve 87% or 92% of their Leaders being “trained”; but as we all know, there is a significant difference between “attending training” and truly learning, understanding and internalizing the lessons of the training program.
    Our goal should always remain to effectively train quality leaders.

Leave a Reply

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


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>