pic: America FIRST Team Map

[Bill Gold]

Originally Posted by Cory

Doesn't help that darn near everyone lost their NASA sponsorship after 2000 in CA

I picked out the KPC&B grants specifically because of their "mentorship" grants. This encouraged veteran teams who wanted an extra $2,500 to recruit a team (or if they wanted $5,000, they'd recruit 2 rookies, or for $7,500 they could recruit 3, etc.) that could be entirely paid for by the KPC&B “Rookie Grant” ($6,000), and then just ditch that 2nd year team the following year, leaving them to fend for themselves. Then, their 3rd year this team, while usually hanging on by the skin of their teeth (if they’re still in existence), they’re forced to fight an uphill battle for corporate sponsors or other lower level sponsors (especially in stagnant / declining economy) with the established veteran teams who started them up in the first place. This happened to 20 teams that I know of, and, no doubt, to countless others. I think that encouraging this environment is wrong, and counterproductive to FIRST’s interests.

The NASA grants didn’t give veteran teams the financial incentive to recruit rookies. This is what differentiates the KPC&B grants from other “rookies only” grants, and imho made the KPC&B grants a net loss for FIRST, while the NASA grants, relatively speaking, had a better success rate for starting sustainable teams.