No Unit Budget Allowance for summer camps

[Gary_Miller]

This is how we do it in our stake:

Stake pays the cost of a stake YW camp (no ward camps); participants kick in $35 for food.

Stake reimburses wards for the cost of Scout Camp; participants kick in $35

Stake gives wards $35/head for high adventure; participants kick in another $35 for food; ward budget funds cover any excess.

So if your wards and stake has had a surplus of funds for the last 5 years why the $35 from participants for food? With a surplus of funds there is no need for this and it takes you out of compliance with the activity funding guidelines in Handbook 2.

[NoahVail]

I need better understanding about this stuff, so I sincerely appreciate your posts.

This year, we have to come up with $275 per YM for our (multi-stake LDS) Scout Camp.
(Note: If our ward arranged the camp, the amount per YM would be similar and we'd still be fundraising the full amount.)

Now - I have no idea what our ward allotment amount is or what it goes to (outside of our low-budget activities).

So if we assume my ward exercises wise fiscal management, what are possible reasons that my ward consistently has zero funds for youth camps?

[mlh78]

So if your wards and stake has had a surplus of funds for the last 5 years why the $35 from participants for food? With a surplus of funds there is no need for this and it takes you out of compliance with the activity funding guidelines in Handbook 2.

We don't plan for surpluses, and they aren't big enough to enable us to just drop the food charge. In any event, they quickly disappear due to our compliance with Handbook I 14.7.2, third to last paragraph.

[russellhltn]

This year, we have to come up with $275 per YM for our (multi-stake LDS) Scout Camp.

I don't know what the norm is for Scout Camps. But given the amount of funding on a per-person basis that that church gives out, it seems like a real stretch to fully fund that amount in many, if not most, situations.

So if we assume my ward exercises wise fiscal management, what are possible reasons that my ward consistently has zero funds for youth camps?

Taken at face value, if the ward doesn't have enough, then that suggests the stake is taking too much. Note that all funds given by the church goes to the stake, where the SP decides how much to keep for stake activities and how much goes to the wards. But, I wouldn't be so quick to give the ward a free pass. The activities don't have to be at all extravagant to be more then what can be afforded.

But given that a single camp for youth is the only one that's allowed to fund raise, any shortages in the system gravitate to that area.

But bottom line is that the church leaders are responsible - each in their own area. Individually we have to carry on the best we can.

[Gary_Miller]

This year, we have to come up with $275 per YM for our (multi-stake LDS) Scout Camp.

I don't know what the norm is for Scout Camps.

This is about the norm. Its about $40 higher than our council camps, however we have not had an increase in about 4 years and I heard that its currently being looked at do to food costs.

But given the amount of funding on a per-person basis that that church gives out, it seems like a real stretch to fully fund that amount in many, if not most, situations.

While it may seem to be a stretch its been my experience that its possible just takes some planning ahead of time from both the stake and ward levels. I don't believe for a minute that the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve does not know what it cost to run a scout program and has figured that cost into the LUBA.

So if we assume my ward exercises wise fiscal management, what are possible reasons that my ward consistently has zero funds for youth camps?

Several people here will disagree with me but my take is. Its an inappropriate use of funds at the stake level in order to fund traditional activities, as well as equipment that should be funded from other sources. From my experience it stems from stake leaders not fully understanding the principles behind the the LUBA. Stake leaders still want to fund large stake activities, Aaronic Priesthood camps, and extravagant youth conferences that require long distance travel. All of which are not within the guidelines of the Handbooks and or which the Brethren have cautioned against.

[NoahVail]

Note that all funds given by the church goes to the stake, where the SP decides how much to keep for stake activities and how much goes to the wards. But, I wouldn't be so quick to give the ward a free pass. The activities don't have to be at all extravagant to be more then what can be afforded.

Typically, our activities are at free/cheap venues with the members providing refreshments. ie: One of the auxiliaries may rent a park pavilion for $20 (once a year). YM may rent a tent camp for $10 (6x/yr) but it's up to the families to bring their own food.

The exception is that we put on a big Christmas dinner (400 attending) at the ward each year. The ward pays for the food and the members cook it in their homes.

But given that a single camp for youth is the only one that's allowed to fund raise, any shortages in the system gravitate to that area.

I understand.

But bottom line is that the church leaders are responsible - each in their own area. Individually we have to carry on the best we can.

I get that too.

I don't worry so much about someone not following procedure. My concern is that I have 5 sons. The first two passed through a non-existent YM program and are now wondering what the point was.

Our YM program has gained some momentum since then. My 3rd son is 14 and he genuinely enjoys it.

But he also spends more of his YM time focused on on fundraising, than anything else.

I wish we would shift our YM priority more toward magnifying priesthood responsibilities
(ie: activating Quorum Presidencies, exercising Troop Patrol leadership),
to better help them learn Mission-Critical leadership skills.

[russellhltn]

But given the amount of funding on a per-person basis that that church gives out, it seems like a real stretch to fully fund that amount in many, if not most, situations.

While it may seem to be a stretch its been my experience that its possible just takes some planning ahead of time from both the stake and ward levels. I don't believe for a minute that the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve does not know what it cost to run a scout program and has figured that cost into the LUBA.

Well, if you take the entire amount for one youth attending church, use the entire "base" amount and "youth" amount, you're still less then 50% of the way there even with your cheaper camp. And that's assuming that the stake takes nothing and the other youth activities are funded in a different way.

So it's clear to me that a large ward with few youth may do well, but a ward with a high percentage of active youth is going to really struggle. The bigger the YM/YW, the more it struggles financially.

I'm sure that the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve knows what it cost to run a scout program, but that doesn't mean that a $200/person camp was part of their vision. And the numbers in the current budgeting system doesn't doesn't strike me as consistent with that idea.

[russellhltn]

I'm sure that the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve knows what it cost to run a scout program, but that doesn't mean that a $200/person camp was part of their vision. And the numbers in the current budgeting system doesn't doesn't strike me as consistent with that idea.

Just looking at the structure and numbers behind the current budget system, I can only come to one of two conclusions:

1) If the budget was to pay for everything, then Youth camps were envisioned to be much cheaper.
-or-
2) The budget wasn't really intended to cover youth camps, but that any ward "surplus" was to be used to help defray the costs.

Otherwise the current system doesn't make much sense to me when trying to apply it so broadly across the church where you can have so much variability between the number of youth in a given ward.

[mlh78]

Otherwise the current system doesn't make much sense to me when trying to apply it so broadly across the church where you can have so much variability between the number of youth in a given ward.

An astute stake president will take this into account when deciding how much to skim from the various wards.

[Gary_Miller]

Well, if you take the entire amount for one youth attending church, use the entire "base" amount and "youth" amount, you're still less then 50% of the way there even with your cheaper camp.

The single amount for an individuals attendance was never meant to fund the whole program for that individual. Its an accumulation of the entire ward that ensures there is enough funds to fund the programs of the church.

And that's assuming that the stake takes nothing

The stake still needs funds in order to administer the stake, they just don't need as much as some stakes seem to hold back. For instance my stake alone held 34% of our wards allowance for stake operations, a little over $5000. Calculate that by 7 wards its a substantiate amount of money for stake administrations.

and the other youth activities are funded in a different way.

As you well know other youth activities can only be funded using the LUBA.

So it's clear to me that a large ward with few youth may do well, but a ward with a high percentage of active youth is going to really struggle. The bigger the YM/YW, the more it struggles financially.

This is why the stake pres has an option to fund ward budgets by percentages. Early guidelines stated that a ward with more youth may need more funds than a ward with more elderly persons. Giving the option to provide more funds to the wards in the stake that may need more funds to fund youth programs. That would be one of the principles behind the budget allowance.

I'm sure that the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve knows what it cost to run a scout program, but that doesn't mean that a $200/person camp was part of their vision. And the numbers in the current budgeting system doesn't doesn't strike me as consistent with that idea.

When the budget allowance first started the cost of a scout camp was $150 to $175 per boy, I think the Brethren knew what it costs. Especially Pres Monson being he was on the BSA Board of Directors at the time. The increase of providing funds per youth and primary children that came about later was to off set the increase in camp costs.