Questions about FIRST Future

[marshall]

I'd like to see FRC become more sustainable (financially and on the time commitment side as well) and my personal opinion is that an easy way to accomplish that is to get rid of bag day and make the season open ended.

Also, after talking to colleagues in Europe and elsewhere (not the US), it seems that the FRC season does not align well with their educational calendars so making the season more open ended and maybe even year long might help. It has the added benefit of helping with mentor/volunteer/student burnout. It also gives teams time to compete and iterate more (which we know works because districts).

Just my thoughts though. Like Dean, I don't have all the answers, just ideas.

[Michael Kaurich]

Originally Posted by staplemonx

What are their 5 / 10 year goals? What is their plan? Why should we do more to help FIRST than we are already doing? What is in it for FIRST's workforce (teachers, mentors and volunteers)? What is in it for FIRST's customers (students, schools, school districts, counties, states)?

This question is pushed down to the local level more as FRC transitions towards districts in some areas and FTC/FLL have started to hit capacity limits with team growth. The stated goal for FIRST is to have the progression of programs available in every school district, preferably in every school. The partner organizations are working on answering these questions locally. To simplify this by a ton it usually means growing individual programs by about 10-15%, which includes adding teams to replace those that are lost.

Originally Posted by staplemonx

Don't take my questions above as negative. I am willing to help FIRST get where it wants to go, but I want to know where it wants go and why before I start.

JJ you have been a great help this season and I know you are looking out for the best for the program and the students.

[TheMilkman01]

I'd really appreciate it if FIRST could actually stop their formalities and actually be transparent about these topics concerning the future, goals, etc. They're becoming too much like an anonymous corporation for my taste, regardless of how awesome FIRST is in general. I like to think I'm not exaggerating when I say their PR needs a massive overhaul. Not branding, but media and public relations – something that actually has a tangible impact. The larger they grow, the more transparent and less strictly formal they need to be, if they wish to continue to feel like a family. Right now it feels like the teams are a family, but FIRST itself is distant relatives and the only thing that makes FIRST awesome are the people participating in it – not the people actually working for FIRST. This is not good, and I hope they strive to change this in the future and be less ambiguous about... well... everything.

I don't doubt other people have had different experiences than mine, but I also am fairly sure others feel similarly to me on this one.

[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by marshall

I'd like to see FRC become more sustainable (financially and on the time commitment side as well) and my personal opinion is that an easy way to accomplish that is to get rid of bag day and make the season open ended.

I actually worry that if FIRST could double in size it might actually cause more harm than good if they don't get more sustainable to the people doing it.

Picture what happens when you take a body of people that large and put them in a situation where they get dragged, and sometimes must neglect, certain things like taxes and personal expenses because of the fiat situation FIRST creates.

What good is twice the number of teams with less quality and quantity of mentors?
I think we put too many eggs in one basket and if FIRST still won't change; the way people engage with it needs to change.
I am just not sure that FIRST is yet important and visible enough (since it's not in all 50 States) to make society change around it.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by EricH

Production: FIRST pays a production company, at least for regionals.

This a big issue, along with venue rent. In LA I think the combined cost approached half a million.

[BeardyMentor]

Originally Posted by techhelpbb

I actually worry that if FIRST could double in size it might actually cause more harm than good if they don't get more sustainable to the people doing it.

Picture what happens when you take a body of people that large and put them in a situation where they get dragged, and sometimes must neglect, certain things like taxes and personal expenses because of the fiat situation FIRST creates.

What good is twice the number of teams with less quality and quantity of mentors?
I think we put too many eggs in one basket and if FIRST still won't change; the way people engage with it needs to change.
I am just not sure that FIRST is yet important and visible enough (since it's not in all 50 States) to make society change around it.

I agree completely a lot more effort from the community and some organizing from FIRST is going to be needed for sustaining existing teams. Right now the rookie year support seems to drop away far too fast. We all talk a big game about helping other teams, but we need to make sure we extend this out beyond the pits. Making it easy to ask for help locally should be a big priority of better situated teams.

[dag0620]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

This a big issue, along with venue rent. In LA I think the combined cost approached half a million.

Regionals are expensive, don't get me wrong, but that number seems a little high. I'd hope that isn't the actual case.

[MrRoboSteve]

Originally Posted by staplemonx

They already have a pretty hefty amount in the bank ($38,790,221 if I read the 990 right), what are they saving up for? http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocument...0c47c2e8-9.pdf

Some subtleties to the 990 that you might not be aware of.

In Part X, look at column B, which is the end of year.

Line 2 is cash -- $23.7 million. This you can spend. If you find a great deal on goats for next year's game piece, this is what you use.

The other lines in the Assets section aren't spendable.

Line 3 is donations people have promised, but not received. Think "we signed up a new donor at Champs, and they said they'd pay on September 30"

Line 4 is money they're due, but hasn't yet been paid, and isn't a donation

Line 8 is stuff they have that they intend to sell

Line 9 is things they've bought that they haven't yet gotten -- e.g., deposits on venues

Line 10 is improvements to HQ and fields, among other fixed assets

The 990 is a snapshot as of June 30. FIRST needs to pay bills between then and the fall, when payments are due (e.g., first regional payment for FRC was due on November 23). Imagine if you got one paycheck a year, on December 31. You'd look pretty flush if someone looked at your December bank statement.

25-50% of next year's expenses in cash, at year-end, would not be unusual for an organization that runs an annual program.

[staplemonx]

Originally Posted by MrRoboSteve

Some subtleties to the 990 that you might not be aware of.

Thanks for that.

[Design006]

The district model in Indiana has been great for our team. The chance to compete at multiple events for a comparable price was a big win for Indiana. We are interested in having additional states get on board with the district model and then utilize the agreed upon point system to make inter-state play more engaging.

[Arkive]

Originally Posted by staplemonx

What are their 5 / 10 year goals? What is their plan? Why should we do more to help FIRST than we are already doing? What is in it for FIRST's workforce (teachers, mentors and volunteers)? What is in it for FIRST's customers (students, schools, school districts, counties, states)?

tldr; FIRST needs to explain their goals in depth to more Board of Educations, so that they can plan and cooperate better.

So this is one of the biggest problems that this post brings up. It is extremely difficult for students, schools, and board of educations to back FIRST when they do not have any idea of where things are going.

I went to a party Saturday night that had every single high up person for the GABOE CTAE Department in attendance (it was a going away party for one of their people who happens to be my aunt). As the only one at the party who was still in school (for another couple of weeks at least ), a few of them asked about some of the career tech programs at my school to see how much of their work was actually reaching the school level. Through the conversation, I brought up FIRST and how amazing a program it was, and shockingly, it was only in the past couple of years that they were fully aware that FRC was a thing in our state. They asked me a lot of questions about the program, and all seemingly were about growth and how it could be shared with every high school in the state. Sadly I was not the best ambassador, for I could answer only parts of their questions, because I myself had no idea what the future held for FIRST.

The Board of Educations for most states can not fully back a program, if they do not know what they should be planning on. On top of that, FIRST is very expensive, and while there are lots of sponsors out there, the overall cost can be overwhelming. For example, there are 447 high schools in Georgia, and each one would operate with, let's say $30,000. That is still 13.4 million, which is very hard to get behind when a lot of GA schools are trying to keep their lights on.

Overall, FIRST needs to be more open about their future plans, so that students can be better ambassadors, and Board of Educations can be in a better place to assist them with their goals.

[Drakxii]

Originally Posted by staplemonx

FIRST keeps talking about adding more teams, when are they going to focus on sustainment / attrition of current teams?

I think this is the biggest issue for FIRST going forwards. Too often it feels like FIRST is only built for rookies and elite teams. Specially teams hours away from their home regional and/or teams that have existed for year yet only go to 1 regional and never move on.

Also I agree that FIRST (and RDs) should be far more transparent about what goes on behind the scenes and what their long range goals are.

[346CADmen]

Originally Posted by swootton

While the overall cost to attend "all" the events is more, the cost per play is significantly lower and makes advancement more achievable for the average team. At bare minimum we get 2 full events with 12 plays each for $5000 even with no advancement. That's half the cost per play than 2 regionals or the same cost for 2x as many plays depending how you care to look at it.

We would not want to go back to a regional model even if we had the choice.

Sorry the cost per play view is similar to saying I get a better deal on a restaurant meal if I chew more. But agree the district model does seem the better way for our team too. However am sure many teams in CHP district would say different. I think changes will come to ease the district burdens as well.

Back to thread topic. I too love this program and want to see it continue to grow. But worry that the growth may dilute the product in some way. Does FIRST have a team saturation number? Can their be too many?