scheherazadesghost

To claim that whistleblowers wouldn't want SCV around is rich. If anything, we want it around more than the general public and we want it at a higher standard that doesn't subject members and staff to harmful environments. Everyone I know who has blown the whistle also offered to help, before and after blowing the whistle. Just because all you see a whistleblower do is post online, doesn't mean that's all we do. We're doing the public a service by reporting out what we find when we have consent to do so. And there are legal protections for us for a reason... what we do is difficult. Most of the other alum are fully disengaged (can't be contacted) or have stepped away in frustration. Sorry Vanguard is stuck with me... Perhaps Vanguard didn't really "choose me" like it did the others.

Whistleblower protection laws (state and federal) could also apply here. Non-employees can be protected in some cases, (especially if they are former leadership, former members, or stakeholders I'm thinking, but I am not a lawyer.) And again, if they're telling the truth and have evidence to back it up.

This sentiment is universal among everyone I've talked to.

Donors can still close checkbooks. I hear rumblings, unconfirmed, that this was happening before news of the delinquency status came out. As for replacing with their own people, sure, I suppose, but it is not a fun process. (TBH, my whole relationship with Vanguard these last several years started with my initial interest to apply for the board, specifically to focus on DEI. I rescinded my interest and have kept my rationale confidential to protect Vanguard and current leadership.) My real reflection on your question is: what power do stakeholders who can't talk with their checkbooks have? In a healthy non profit, their donations of time and experience are valued and integrated as equally as financial donors. If your org is focused solely on money, finances, and donors as the primary ways of maintaining the institution, it's really easy to let the other types of stakeholders fall to the wayside. Totally fine in a for profit model. But again, without experienced np pros in leadership, it's too temping to run logistically like a for profit and muck up the np model. I see no single np pro in Vanguard leadership with more than 3 to 5 years' worth of experience. Rut roh. No one wants me, a np professional, to come in and run a for profit business. For obvious reasons. But it works both ways.

In the successful non profits I've worked for, they answer to a wide variety of key stakeholders. This ideally includes members/customers, their loved ones, alumni, individual donors and staff first... all internal stakeholders. External stakeholders are like corporate sponsors, institutional funders, as well as local and other activity based communities. If you don't have someone in leadership, board or staff, who has experience mitigating these oft competing stakeholders, you're gonna have a bad time. NP stakeholders are the same thing as for profit share holders, only they invest in more ways than money. But they should be treated with the same respect because they bring the boys to the yard. Alumni are stakeholders. But you have to make sure they all have an equal voice or a clear mechanism for advancing goals fairly. As far as I can tell, most alum just want positive news exclusively. So what is the best way to accept and integrate constructive feedback when only good news is welcome?

One of my censored comments in this thread described my interactions with some alum in those meetings. Guess I'll keep the rest to myself again. I mostly stopped going anyway.

Isn't leadership conventionally balanced between the board and c-suite/director level admin? If one element is not present, or under restructuring, things can get clunky. Happens more often than you'd think. (Also, still thinking the c-suite level jobs are strange in this size of nps.) Whatever the senior admin role is, it generally guides and channels the board in some way, even if only logistically. But I've seen all kinds of admin-board power dynamics and truly, unless you've worked both sides (in the np space) you're likely out of your depth. Someone else on that board def knows how to play the game better than you. So it's easy to become a pawn. (And this is speaking based entirely on experience outside of drum corps.)

Robert's Rules may be to blame, in part anyway. If they are still in use.

.

We're still in the following phase at least as far as public statements go, IMHO:

whimpers in Orawa, featuring full body layered lycra 🫠 Every positive experience alumni share is a win. Niche legacy art forms are precious and fragile. Trust me, I came up as a contemporary dancer who earned municipal grants to support the work, I get it. But thanks to some brave alum from the Cadets and others, those of us with "less than positive" experiences are gradually building the courage to speak about them. If anyone has interpreted my own report as anything less than abuse/neglect/ harassment, they haven't had the cojones to say it to my face. And it was internally corroborated. So they happen. For context, my report makes some others that have been disclosed to me look paltry by comparison. It would kinda be one thing if it were one or two others maybe, but that's not the case. And the beginning of 2023 surprised me with whistleblowers who had institutional/organizational level info to disclose to me. It had been predominantly member level info prior. But here's what I've realized: every single reporter wants to help make it better for future members, without exception. Sadly, few agree about how to do that. Fewer have the capacity to do the volunteer work. Even fewer acknowledge the issues and/or have the training and mental health literacy requiered to do reporter-alum justice. So here I am, continuing to advocate for those the mission failed. 🤷🏽‍♀️ Edit to add: and we could help make Vanguard the leader in safeguarding.

I've gotten a strong sense that Vanguard has improved in this area, especially since I marched, so "beating the ####" out of them is an intense way to describe it, even for me. Overtraining can fall in that category, but I have no evidence of intentional overtraining. Just an inability to recognize it, as well as how to better use the members' time once they reach the overtraining stage. But my bar is for actual successful improvement in this area is very high. Most members still seem to leave satisfied with their experience. Great. That's a victory for everyone. I'm just looking out for those who fall through the cracks, cause there were other alum who did the same for me when I was broken.

O well they didn't lose their non profit status federally or with the state AFAIK. They are delinquent status with the CA DOJ's charity registry. I was surprised how often it happens honestly. Any sense of timeline is unclear to me, but I might as well be in Ouagadougou, I'm so far away.

Good for them. Glad to hear it, and wishing them an excellent season ahead. I intentionally don't speak to my opinion of other corps' safeguarding practices because it's been oh so fun doing so with just Vanguard. But I've found red flags or gaps at every corps I've reviewed so far. 🤷🏽‍♀️ But Boston's competitors may not be so fortunate regarding rest/recovery... and how fun is to beat a competitor who isn't working at their peak performance? Yawn from me, since I'm the furthest from being competitively-minded one could possibly be anyway. The power and beauty of the shows are enough for me, flaws very much included. Buuut, drum corps shouldn't be given the luxury of using anecdotes anymore when its decades' long legacy is firmly planted in overtraining. Staff who exacerbated or turned a blind eye to clear signs over overtraining syndrome in me and others are still working in DCI/WGI right now. So, respectfully... show me the data. 🤓 Members and their loved ones deserve it. Arts education nonprofits collect and share this kind of data all day every day.

Because mismanagement on the organizational level has been known to filter down to member experience issues. I personally argue that they aren't separate at all, having gained plenty of experience with both. Good thinking. Point of clarification, as I've seen this wrong on reddit: they never lost 501c3 status federally or with the state. They lost a "good standing" status with the CA DOJ's charity registry for not filing required yearly paperwork, audits, and fees. The registry is a requiered transparency safeguard intended to enhance public trust. According to the DOJ, the status means they shouldn't be soliciting or operating. Apparently, my interpretation of what's on the DOJ website isn't the same as VMAPA's. Perhaps they've already started ironing it out with government entities... which is ideal before the status turns from delinquent to suspended. Delinquencies happen, and in cases with other delinquent CA orgs, donors have been the first to bring it to the attention of the orgs. There is a subtle but crucial differentiation btw over arching np status and the CA DOJ status, about which nuance begs for additional clarification. I probably shouldn't say more since my DCP presence is being watched like a hawk. If that's the only hiccup, and pending the DOJ's processing timeline, sure, all they have to do is provide the required audits, pay fees, and update their paperwork. Leadership and the alumni association are certainly trucking along at full speed for that 24 season, for sure. VMAPA will be providing a go/no go status to DCI long before September. I strongly believe that their whistleblowing/safeguarding game needs a reset before they consider fielding another season but what do I know?

The conventional training involved with drum corps exceeds that of most Olympians. And the drum corps industry expects members to "prepare their bodies" for the season? Let me be clear, there is no healthy way to prepare a body for overtraining! Some just adapt to it better. I've seen "overtraining" broadly defined as 30+ hours per week of max heart rate paired with inadequate rest/recuperation time. There are two stages of training before "Overtraining Syndrome" (OTS) kicks in called functional overreach (good, in moderation) and nonfunctional overreach (bad, first indicator of potential OTS.) Functional overreach is eustressful, or the "good burn," or the efficient challenge that muscles (and the body) need to grow and adapt... but it should only be sustained for short periods. All of this has been known by exercise scientists since before I marched. 🤷🏽‍♀️ I have anecdotal evidence of long-term digestive, hormonal, and neurological side effects of OTS that still flair up for me, but here's the harder evidence: https://irunfar.com/overtraining-syndrome-part-one "While these findings are troublesome, perhaps most frightening is a recent study by Collins and colleagues (2003) that has shown changes to DNA structure in the muscle cells of chronically overtrained athletes." Overtraining leads to muscle tissue damage, as well as metabolic and neurological effects "OTS can result in irreversible changes to multiple body systems, causing permanent changes to not only running capacity, but one’s overall quality of non-running life." https://www.twaamc.com/overtraining-syndrome.html check every single one of the symptoms for me https://www.naturalathleteclinic.com/blogs/sports-conditions-blog/treating-athlete-overtraining-syndrome OTS forces the body into chronic flight-flight-freeze-fawn responses. For marchers that enter drum corps already experiencing latent vulnerability (as I was), adding OTS to their life can be incredibly harmful and risky. Worst of all, one reporter who marched in the last five years disclosed to me that they developed an addiction to prescription pain killers on tour that extended beyond their drum corps life. I, and at least one other alum I marched with, was using maxed out amounts of OTC painkillers starting early in 2004. The real barrier I'm experiencing at the moment is helping alum of the activity to acknowledge they were possibly affected by OTS (or nonfunctional overreach,) given the nature of the beast. If we can't acknowledge it in ourselves, how can we possibly help future members? Not on-topic enough? One downstream effect inefficient management is we get to watch as injuries flair up each year, but there's no accountability for them within the institution. Saying "they're young and they'll recover" is outdated and verges on neglect. My symptoms of OTS are only just now waning finally... and my last partial season was 2005. According to math, that's, like, nearly 20 years of symptoms or something. Last season, I watched Vanguard field an incomplete guard practically until finals week. The pinwheel drill move by the drums in the closer (gorgeous) with guard members in each quadrant was a dead giveaway. There was always at least one member out all season in that drill move. I also saw how the injured guard members were treated (briefly) and know from my experience as a dance educator that it was unacceptable. The alum I hold closest to my heart have only one message: Please rest the members more than when we marched. Y'all are worried about money... meanwhile I'm all can we, like, not hurt the members anymore, pl0x? k thnxbyee

Holy moley do I welcome the good news. Who wouldn't? That's the thing though. And I know this firsthand. Two members, marching right next to each other, can have wholly different experiences.

Why we haven't all dropped what we're doing to address reports like this is beyond me. The members are literally the only people that matter. Student, customer, stakeholder. A member experience audit is needed just as much as any financial audit. My anger aside, thank you for sharing @MikeN. I'm humiliated to hear (again) that a recent alum left their season feeling this way. Unacceptable.

Nono, don't hop on the mods necessarily. We communicated and I didn't object. I'm thinking about MAASIN. But not feeling pushed to that extreme yet. I don't think folks understand how dedicated I am to an in house solution.

I'm already in hot water so I'll let someone else answer your questions. There are ways to make wise, responsible donations to orgs that are in the process of regaining public trust. Provide and request as much detail as possible. Provide full names, bios of your fraternity bros/my fellow alum, even images. Share that publicly if it feels appropriate. Then 1. provide as much detail about how you want the money to be spent as you can. The categories for VAA's fundraiser are food, housing, travel, and scholarships for the 2024 tour. If you have a more specific prospective allotment in mind, detail that. Or, 2. be their darling and tell them it's unrestricted, but require semi-regular updates. Then put in writing that you expect the required donor acknowledgement letter in a reasonable timeframe. Also, you can reach out to VAA or VMAPA and negotiate any of this directly. They don't bite. These are fundamental np donor safeguarding practices. And to be completely fair, they often require a lot of people power. Every successful np I've been with has a dedicated role or two just for donor cultivation. It's what today's responsible donors demand when competition is stiff.

sad trombone, the post of mine you've responded to is now hidden. 🤷🏽‍♀️ MAASIN or the law truly are the only options. I've exhausted all other channels, besides those painstakingly crafted by a few alum. Even those are incredibly delicate. Retaliation and censorship are never good signs. I retain testimony from more than one other alum that both are happening.

I appreciate this distinction and the apt metaphor. Thank you, I'm sorry I missed your comment. We all can understand how risky it is (for everyone on the road) to drive without insurance. I live rural and see it all the time. Meanwhile, I'm super curious about the timing between the first delinquency letter and the start of the Texas Affiliate.

Since we're talking about my home team, I'll just leave this here: https://www.sportscasting.com/troy-aikmans-biggest-regret-is-how-he-overtrained-throughout-his-cowboys-career-i-just-got-obsessed/ "Aikman clearly wishes he’d had somebody to guide him toward a more sustainable model of conditioning. Who knows how many seasons that might’ve added to his legendary career?" And lest I am accused of being OT, I've always said that mismanagement in any area can easily affect the member experience negatively.

I can only speak to the statement being made.

For example... My opinions regarding internal culture redacted by request here. Nevermind that I have been an arts education np fundraiser, educator and director outside of drum corps with nationally and internationally known legacy nps, and continue to participate in dialogue in hopes of supporting sustainable growth and alumni engagement. Nevermind that the CA DOJ's charity registry status and communications with VMAPA are publicly available, I essentially said "hey this is upsetting, what's going on here?" It's increasingly emotionally laborious for me when my attempts to help from the outside are misinterpreted, yet few alum can actually accept that the institution harmed me and others first, leaving us with lasting effects on our adult lives that go beyond a bum knee, arthritic hands or a bruised ego. (Seriously, web search the long term effects of overtraining and you might as well discover my picture next to what you find. Then pile on the effects of bullying, harassment, and medical neglect to that, which were all internally corroborated by VMAPA.) To this day I still get elder alumni responses like, "yeah my instructor was mean too" or "didn't we join Vanguard cause we wanted to do something difficult?" The harm described in my report make those responses look like a toddler's booboo. It took me nearly 20 years to understand the difference. Seriously, if your first response is "it couldn't have been that bad" you might want to check yourself before your wreck yourself cause I have receipts. I need them because people across this industry are too quick to gaslight survivors. None of my report would matter to anyone except me if I didn't also have testimony from alum who report that members, staff, and alum faced similar risks and retaliation as recently as last season. In both corps. Providing critical feedback at a critical time is more hurtful apparently. And yet I'm still here trying because our younger alum deserve better.