Feasability of a FRC team at our school?

[Greg Needel]

Originally Posted by EricH

Do a trial run this year: raise the $6,000-10,000 needed for FRC

Eric,
your figures are a bit low. Assuming that they have nothing at the school and are starting from scratch the minimum I would recommend is 12,000. On average it takes about 15,000 to run a FIRST team and more in the Rookie year because you have to buy everything.

[Molten]

Does Nasa still pay the entry fee for rookies? If so, that will save 6000. Also, if your willing to make your bot with a kitbot chassie and random stuff, your extra costs won't be much.(maybe less then it cost for your FTC)

As for the event goes, road trip. Have parents fill their cars and drive. That saves quite a bit. If you are within an hour of a regional, drive each day. If your more, you might need some hotels which might be costly depending on your regional.

1766 has built its bot pretty cheaply over the years. They use aluminum tubing which is reasonably cost and a few odds and ends, but most of it is cheap.

So, YES, it is definitely feasable. Go for it, it is well worth it.

[Greg Needel]

Originally Posted by Molten

Does Nasa still pay the entry fee for rookies?.

While there are NASA grants for rookies I HIGHLY recommend not counting on them. While it might take a big chunk out of your financial needs, nasa grants are only on a year to year basis and you want to start a sustaining FIRST TEAM. The only way to do it is to assume you will not get a NASA grant and try to get enough funds to cover your team. In the chance that you do get a NASA grant keep the extra funds in your account for the next year or the championship if you qualify.


I also must say that FRC is not for everyone. There are many teams in FRC which probably should be in FTC or Vex only due to resources such as engineers, mentors, sponsors, build location/facilities, etc. Remember you can learn just as much from building a small robot as you can from a large bot because all of the key concepts are the same.

[Rick Wagner]

And all that being said, remember JFK's words to the effect that we did not go to the moon because it was easy. It will be hard, but it will be worth it 10 times over.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

Eric,
your figures are a bit low. Assuming that they have nothing at the school and are starting from scratch the minimum I would recommend is 12,000. On average it takes about 15,000 to run a FIRST team and more in the Rookie year because you have to buy everything.

I was running the absolute minimums, and not including travel or tools. That's why they're so low. If they can't do that, then they should stick with FTC and start building a base so they can, at some point in the future, transition up a level to FRC.

I would actually recommend $20-30K+ the first year, if at all possible. This way, they will be able to continue for one year with no fundraising, if needed. Then fundraise enough for each year.

Molten, if the location listed is right, Google it. I think you'll be surprised.

[Molten]

Originally Posted by EricH

I was running the absolute minimums, and not including travel or tools. That's why they're so low. If they can't do that, then they should stick with FTC and start building a base so they can, at some point in the future, transition up a level to FRC.

I would actually recommend $20-30K+ the first year, if at all possible. This way, they will be able to continue for one year with no fundraising, if needed. Then fundraise enough for each year.

Molten, if the location listed is right, Google it. I think you'll be surprised.

I have a feeling your team does funds quite different then 1766. For instance, we empty our account every year to avoid tax problems. Also, grants help a lot. I don't have a clue what regionals are in that area. I'm quite a ways away.

All I'm saying is that many teams have a ton of stuff they don't need to be competitive. For instance, hand outs can be costly and unnecessary. Shirts can be done with iron ons. In some places, PVC will make do. If you compete, I wouldn't expect to have 3 sets of team shirts, hundreds of buttons to hand out, water jet cut parts, and a practice robot. However, you can expect to make it through the season with an educational experience. Remember, "where there's a will, there's a way."

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Molten

I have a feeling your team does funds quite different then 1766. For instance, we empty our account every year to avoid tax problems. Also, grants help a lot. I don't have a clue what regionals are in that area. I'm quite a ways away.

We have our own account... and we don't empty it. We're a 501(c)(3), or operating under one, so it's a little easier on us.

The nearest regional to the area is probably Seattle.

[dsm]

There is a wealth of official guidance on this subject here:

http://www.usfirst.org/what/frc/content.aspx?id=5504

They include sample budgets in the handbook...though I personally think their estimates are somewhat low.

[Rick TYler]

A variety of random comments:

1. Starting with FTC and choosing to switch to FRC is not "moving up," it's "moving differently."

2. I would rather be part of a successful, well-funded FTC/VRC program than struggle to build a BLT as part of a marginal FRC team.

3. The quality of science, engineering and math available in Vex and FTC is not inferior to that of FRC. In FRC you will learn more of the machinist and fabrication trades, but that is the only real technical difference.

4. A team of five or six building an FTC or VRC robot is a much more hands-on, involved experience than being a "cheerleader" on a 60-person FRC team. Most FRC teams I've spoken with, been part of, or read about on Delphi end up being 8-12 core builders and programmers (some of whom are mentors) and 10-30 people around the fringes. All that other stuff is part of "team" but it doesn't have much to do with STEM. In some ways, a big FRC team is a better simulation of a whole business rather than just the engineering department. In VRC and FTC, it's 90% technology and 10% other stuff.

I think FRC is terrific. I am simply trying to argue that it is not necessarily an end-goal for every robotics program, and that it does not fit everywhere or everyone. Too many FRC teams have folded when the easy money ran out or the mentors burned out. VRC and FTC can be successfully run at any level the team wants. We have about 40 students who built and competed four VRC and three FTC robots this year. We raised more than $10,000, we are already going to the VRC world championships, and at least one of our robots has a better than even chance to qualify for Atlanta at an FTC event in Seattle tomorrow. I would have to go count to be sure, but we've added about 10 trophies to our VRC/FTC collection so far this year, with three events to go. We didn't start this way, though. We started in 2006 with one FTC robot that won a regional finalist trophy in our only tournament. Last year, we earned three awards, including Inspire, with 18 students and three FTC robots. This year we doubled the number of students and added VRC. I positively don't think our students have learned anything less about the engineering process than a similar FRC team.

Wow -- quite a little speech, huh? Don't feel that doing FTC makes you a second-class citizen. Do what's best for you and your school -- what you can be successful at and can sustain from year to year. That's how you can do some good. That might be an FRC program, but don't feel like it's a tragedy or failure if you can't handle the resources and money involved.

[kmcclary]

Originally Posted by Molten

I have a feeling your team does funds quite different then 1766. For instance, we empty our account every year to avoid tax problems. [...]

WHOA, there! There is absolutely NO reason to "empty your account every year"! In fact, that's a *horrible* idea! You can't build up any working capital, nor build up reserves in case something happens to your primary sponsor!!!

FYI, (at least in the US) public schools are inherently non-profit because they are technically "governmental agencies", and therefore non-taxable. You MAY keep surplus funds in the account at year's end, and it is not taxable. Talk to your school's accountant. (And if they disagree, your school better find a REAL accountant, that knows the law!)

Even IF you've made your team a 501c3 (non-profit corp), that too does NOT require you to "flush your account" each year. Non-profits need working cash too! Think about it. A non-profit dumping their reserve annually would have ZERO cash to pay their workers (yes, non-profits CAN have paid workers) until the new year's donations arrived! That would crash them!

The one thing you can't do with a non-profit is DISTRIBUTE PROFITS. The mere fact you have cash left over does NOT in and of itself "constitute a profit". As long as the money still sits in the account and does not go out to the "shareholders" in the form of a distribution, you're fine. Talk to any licensed accountant to get the full lowdown on this, and how to account for your surplus correctly.

IMHO, EVERY team should be striving (over a few years) to build up a "reserve", of at LEAST: one "kit fee", plus robot build costs. That keeps the loss of a primary sponsor from becoming the death of the team. Personally, I suggest budgeting a "surplus goal" of at least $1K-$2K per year. (IOW, don't stop fund raising until you have at least that much MORE cash than you intend to spend this year!) This allows you to build up a decent "safety net" in just a couple of years, and a "one season death defying reserve" in about 4 years.

Then, if a sponsor loss happens, until such time as you can find new sponsors you simply "borrow against your reserve" to continue for that season, and work to fund raise to replace it by the school year's end.

In fact, one of our county's teams has been doing that for the past three years, which was when the local factory that supported them closed down. Yes, it's painful (and stressful), but they're still here, BECAUSE they planned ahead and had that cash reserve!

Go find a REAL accountant, and discuss this with them. The feeling that a team "needs to be broke at year's end" is one of the biggest financial misconceptions I run into with teams. If left uncorrected it can EASILY cause a team to crash and burn at the first trivial cash problem they encounter. You NEED a cash reserve.

Does this make sense?

Originally Posted by Molten

Remember, "where there's a will, there's a way."

...Personally, I prefer: "Where there's a will, there are always a bunch o' greedy relatives hanging around..."

- Keith