New World-Class Criteria

[garfield]

1 hour ago, Poppycock said:

With respect to the price of meat will go up reference is directly related to the cost of adding woodwinds to the ensemble. Another incurred cost that is really not needed. But there might be some who want to hear that woodwinds sound from Crown. 

What if membership is increased to 208 and Crown adds 54 more horns, would the "price of meat" go up?  Or is it just those beefy flute and clarinet players that eat all the protein?

Edited November 27, 2019 by garfield

[Poppycock]

37 minutes ago, garfield said:

What if membership is increased to 208 and Crown adds 54 more horns, would the "price of meat" go up?  Or is it just those beefy flute and clarinet players that eat all the protein?

Don’t have the tolerance for a war of linguistics acrobatics, so please try not to abuse your privilege to act imbécile. 

[drumcorpsfever]

An annual operating budget north of $1 million and only a $50,000 net worth requirement?   Sure glad they “raised the bar”!  
Not to mention DCI’s generous show earnings. 

Edited November 27, 2019 by drumcorpsfever

[PioneerWebmaster]

11 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

My understanding (based on the freshly revised DCI Policies and Procedures) is that there is no such thing as seasonal evaluations in DCI.  If you were a pre-existing WC corps, and you avoid total administrative meltdowns, your corps never gets evaluated.  Is that fair?  Is that wise?

As Garfield mentioned, corps have to submit the most recent copy of their 990.  If an organization's accounting period follows the calendar year, they have to submit their 990 to the IRS by May 15th.  That means that DCI could potentially get a relatively fresh copy right before the season begins and spot potential issues.

However, if the corps is using an accounting period that doesn't follow the traditional calendar year, then the 990 must be filed with the IRS by the 15th day of the 5th month after the end of the organization's accounting period.  That means that the most recent 990 available could potentially be quite dated when the corps takes the field for the first time in a season.

Outside of the 990 requirement, the Policies and Procedures Manual has a whole section that addresses the potential triggers for an organizational review:

Quote

Organizational Review Triggers

If the CEO and/or DCI board of directors believes an organization review is in order, one may be requested.  CEO and/or board will have the authority to request:

-Organization documents
-Financial statements
-Meetings with board members, staff members, volunteers, members, etc...

Possible Review Triggers (not an inclusive list)

-Owe money to DCI that is more than 60 days past due
-Submission to DCI whistleblower that merits investigation
-Contact by one or more third parties about past due bills
-Any incident or report that may involve jeopardizing the health and safety of members, volunteers or staff
-Signed request by five member representatives for an audit of an organization

 

[Jeff Ream]

5 hours ago, garfield said:

I think it's completely reasonable for DCI to be aware of the precarious nature of every single corps, bar one or two, that perennially cut their budget right to the bone.  After all these years, the ED and his financial CEO are exceptionally good at spotting situations both in the numbers and in the trenches that indicate financial stress worth monitoring throughout the season.  This is a small activity; the ED and his staff are all in touch with every member corps and most of their boards of directors.

Of course, thin budgets without any "safety nets" for black-swan events (or stupidity) are easy to spot.  I'm confident those discussions go on consistently and DCI is aware well before talk of the tour gets serious.  Don't forget, corps have to "pre-commit" to the tour in November when corps are measuring demand for their tryouts. 

All that said, a tremendous component of DCI's structure places responsibility for proper management in the hands of the corps' operations.  DCI isn't a bunch of mind-readers and corps are required to report issues that risk financial stress.  They risk getting no financial help from "The Bank of DCI", being sanctioned for not self-reporting and likely suspended or barred.  They all agree to these requirements as a condition of them being in the dance.

i'm not so sure honestly. I think it depends on WHEN the books are looked at. if in the past admin of YEA if you looked at the books AFTER USbands money was in, they look great. Look in July, you see a totally different story.In pioneer's case, sure they had money in the bank, but it's clear they didn't spend money on things that could have kept the corps out of several of the problems that led to last summer's insanity, and had been building over the years.

[Jeff Ream]

5 hours ago, garfield said:

OK, you can believe whatever you want.

I guess it depends on which "loops" you're in, but I think the actions against corps in recent years speaks for itself.  In case you disagree, is Cadets a "finalist organization"? 

 

their issues were about far more than financial. that was easy to add on to the issues that exploded in April of 2018, because their financial issues had been well known for a while, and they even got off of probation knowing they had an $800k hole and were slashing programs left and right, rifling through the archives to resell old guard uniforms and flags, you name it.  And now, the guy that took the job no one sane would have wanted and the super PR move of a female being named CEO of the new woke YEA both gone to cut costs.

[Jeff Ream]

5 hours ago, garfield said:

It was entirely possible that they would be refused participation.  They acted appropriately and they were allowed.  But they WERE suspended while they righted the ship to make a season.

but did making a season help the budget?

[garfield]

9 hours ago, Poppycock said:

Don’t have the tolerance for a war of linguistics acrobatics, so please try not to abuse your privilege to act imbécile. 

As I suspected.

In other words and, yes, words matter on a discussion board, "I got nuthin' left but virtue-signalling".

 

Again, I'll ask you with respect if you'd like to discuss your ideas for capping spending and how you think it would have a good impact.  I've got lots of fig leaves but, if you've come to hurl one-liners, at least follow it up with some "meat" we can discuss.

I'd enjoy sharing my views on parity, or whatever you were trying to ask me.  I just am not going to read your mind.  So far, you haven't responded to my ask for clarification.

I don't have any privilege for you to attack, but I have been known to act "imbecile" (sic) once in a while.  Especially driving.

Just engage, ok?

Edited November 27, 2019 by garfield

[cixelsyd]

12 hours ago, garfield said:

No, I'm sorry, that's not right.

There is a requirement in "Membership" of the By-Laws that requires all corps to submit their most-recent 990 to DCI prior to any payment can be made to the corps under the pool payment scheme.

Reviewing a 990 is not the same thing as a full evaluation.

7 hours ago, PioneerWebmaster said:

Outside of the 990 requirement, the Policies and Procedures Manual has a whole section that addresses the potential triggers for an organizational review:

Special circumstances triggering a one-time evaluation is not the same thing as an annual evaluation.

My statement still stands.  Full evaluations are not regularly (maybe never) performed on pre-existing member corps.

That said, I did ask whether that was fair, or wise.  Those were sincere questions, not rhetorical, so your responses apply there.  Maybe 990 reviews and evaluation triggers are adequate oversight.  I am glad to see there is something of that nature in place. 

Still, the raft of requirements for entry into world-class (combined with all the new the top-25 clauses) leaves me with the instinctive feeling that policies are more focused on controlling the size of the herd, rather than the health of those either in or outside of that herd.

[garfield]

6 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

but did making a season help the budget?

Ahh, the perennial question.  Debatable because we can't prove a negative.  But, of course, just HAVING a presence made a positive difference, reflections on design and execution aside.  I'm afraid that, if they "took a year off", they would end up like most every other corps that has done that.  Chances of support?  Out of sight is out of mind.

That said, it is absolutely demonstrable that there are LOTS of creative options for corps who want to take, or have to take, a more-limited budget to design and tours and costs.  The Cadets will be in GREAT COMPANY if they end up "down the ranks" of placements.  Financing, recruiting, touring are more dependent on the experience the corps provides than whether Cadets have the coolest props.

In an odd way, The Cadets may be "zagging" into to a period of frugality or, maybe, are joining the larger group of corps who's resources are more limited.  Who knows what judging incentives could emerge out of such a period?  Design and judge where "cheap" is rewarded?  Imagine!  (I've said for years that DCI finalist scores should include a point-system review of their financial records where corps are rewarded for finishing high on a limited budget that includes building actual assets on their balance sheet.)

In any case, it would hurt any corps not one whit to spend a year or four competing "to the sheets" when financial demands are more responsible.