From: Dave Edelman (dedelman@iname.com)
Date: Thu Dec 26 2002 - 06:30:35 CST
Dave,
Well I seem to have at least engendered a response :-) Kevlar suit not
necessary but I guess that my point of view is that if it was being done for
nothing, then the competitive bid that the CE made needed to meet or beat
that number. The alternative would be for the CE to provide additional
benefit which is not obvious in this instance.
I deal with pretty large budgets and the concept that we use is one of
marginal costs. If no additional staff or equipment is necessary to
accomplish a job, then the cost is absorbed "on the margin." By the way,
this is a generally accepted accounting procedure but I am not an accountant
:-)
At GNYC we look at Philmont as a service that we provide in an effort to
enhance the program and to help retain older youth. These two goals are so
important to the program that we do everything short of direct revenue
support to make it happen.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-philmont@troop47.com [mailto:owner-philmont@troop47.com] On
Behalf Of David Lyons
Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 10:21 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list philmont
Subject: [Philmont]: Council Fees for Contingents
From: owner-philmont@troop47.com [mailto:owner-philmont@troop47.com]On
Behalf Of Dave Edelman
If council were to tack on any administration fee, the arrangement would be
unacceptable. My suspicion is that the new CE described in Jerry's message
is doing what he or she did because the volunteers let it happen.
From: owner-philmont@troop47.com [mailto:owner-philmont@troop47.com] On
Behalf Of HICKER1@aol.com
A new CE came in and kicked the volunteers out. Now our council tacks on a
substantial administration fee for doing practically nothing. The cost to
the individual scout and scouter has gone out of sight and less than half of
the council's reservations are filled each year.
What is a substantial administration fee by a council?? And why would "any
administration fee" be unacceptable?
Our council sends 70 plus member contingents to council almost annually.
There is an exec who puts in time, there is a clerk who logs in all the
payments, makes copies, helps with mailings, and answers calls, finally,
there is a bookkeeper who maintains the official records and pays the bills
incurred by the event. Charging a small amount of these people's time to
the Philmont account rather than to another account is a more efficient way
to run an organization. It helps the Contingent Coordinator (a volunteer)
set a proper budget that reflects the true cost of the event. It is the
Contingent Coordinator's responsibility to monitor the charges and he/she
can question if excessive time or costs (postage, paper, copying) are
charged.
Let's look at the following example. I work at a large electric generating
station. We contract out major engineering projects. If we get charged for
time or materials spent on another's project, we object, and the company
that did it probably will not get another contract. They may even become
the next Enron or WorldCom, if mischarging time and materials is a common
practice of theirs. If a company has a large general overhead charge
because their accounting is sloppy, they probably will not be competitive
and not get the bid. So, do you agree that a person's time must be properly
charged?
Yet, you want your council to charge the time of council employees that
support the Philmont Contingent to another account. You want those going to
Philmont to get a lower cost at the expense of another Scouting event having
to charge more. Because, believe me, the council must break even. If there
are not enough donations (and there never are) costs for events will go up.
Now about excessive - here I must agree. The Admin cost added by the
council must not be excessive. They should not use a popular event such as
Philmont to cover losses elsewhere. Just as they should not use other
events to keep the cost pf Philmont down. It is a responsibility of the
volunteer contingent coordinator to make sure this does not happen.
Our Philmont fee in 2002 was $1250. Included in this fee were a $5 admin
clerical fee and a $25 contingency fee. The contingency was set up to cover
unexpected costs and emergencies with the understanding that if there were
none it would be returned to council. I do not consider this excessive.
The $30 is approximately 2% of the total fee. If you want details on the
budget, write me off list. I'll agree it is a high number.
After this response my new Christmas Kevlar suit will certainly be put to
good use!!
Dave Lyons
1997 - 722P, 2000 - 729M-6, 2002 - 709D-6, 2004 - 727???
PTC - 1991, 1994, 1999, 2001 (twice), 2003 (June 22, CS Pow Wow)
Friends Of Scouting presenter 1989 - present (Yes, I may be a little
brainwashed)
-------------------------------------------------------
Scouting E-mail Discussion Lists @ usscouts.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe at http://usscouts.org/lists/
Listserv Commands at http://usscouts.org/lists/lc.asp
-------------------------------------------------------
Send listserv commands to: listserv@troop47.com
Send postings to: philmont@troop47.com
List FAQ found at: http://usscouts.org/lists/faq.asp
List Administrator: philmont_owner@troop47.com
-------------------------------------------------------
As you gather around this virtual campfire with fellow
Scouts and Scouters, do your best to be trustworthy,
loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient,
cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.
-------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Thu Mar 13 2003 - 10:37:40 CST