Listening to Leaders: The Survey Results



The first phase of the Camping Michaels visioning process was open discussions with summer camp leaders to collect their needs, ideas, and perspectives regarding the property. The second phase was an online survey, opening in October 2010 and closing in February 2011, and hosted by the Ku-Ni-Eh Lodge of the Order of the Arrow. The survey was promoted through a button on the front page of the council website, flyers distributed at events, district roundtable meetings, and council events, and through messages sent to district email distribution lists.

The following is a high-level summary of the participants and the data gathered, intended as a prelude to the third phase of the visioning process – the Camp Michaels Visioning Committee. You can also download the full Camp Michaels Visioining Survey and Analysis:

Participant Summary

A total of 292 unique participants completed the survey. Participation was open to all Scouts, leaders, parents, and the general public. Personal information was optional, however, each question’s results could be matched to a participant to better analyze responses based on the demographic questions.

The participants of the survey showed the following diverse qualities:cm_chart1

  • All age ranges were represented, with 60% of results coming from participants ages 36-50.
  • All Scouting experience ranges were represented, with 31% of results from participants with 11-25 years of Scouting experience and 26% with 6-10 years of experience.
  • 68% of participants had a child in Scouting at the time of the survey.
    Every county of the council was represented, with the exception of Brown County (Ohio). Boone County (Kentucky) represented the highest number of participants at 30%.
  • Every level of the Scouting program was represented, with 85% of participants identifying themselves as being most closely associated with a unit.

Camp Michaels Current Usage

The first visioning process analysis revealed that nearly 25% of council camp usage (excluding summer camp programs) was at Camp Michaels. The survey asked questions to reveal the type and frequency of usage from groups using Camp Michaels.

  • 97% of participants had been to Camp Michaels at least once.cm_chart2
  • Of the 3% that had not been to the camp, the response for the reason was inconclusive, but the highest response counts related to not knowing what was available at Camp Michaels and that the participant’s group did not use the camp.
  • Of those that had been to Camp Michaels, 46% had been to the camp more than 20 times. 47% responded that their group typically goes to the camp 1-2 times a year.
    Of those that had been to Camp Michaels, 92% believed it to be a safe place to camp (7% answered “I don’t know”).
  • All traditional Scouting programs were represented with Boy Scouting at 59%, Cub Scouts at 37%, and Venturing at 4%. No responses were submitted from Learning for Life or Exploring.

Program Idea Responses

A selection of possible program and facility elements and ideas was presented to each Scouting program level (Boy Scouting, Cub Scouting, and Venturing). The list of ideas were chosen based on age-appropriate guidelines, popularity in Scouting, and input from the summer camp leader meetings. The following is a summary of the most popular programs (multiple programs could be selected from the list):

  • For Cub Scouting, 96% of responders wanted an archery range, 94% wanted a BB range, and 71% wanted a bouldering wall.
  • For Boy Scouting, 86% of responders wanted wilderness survival programs, 86% wanted orienteering/GPS programs, and 83% wanted backpacking programs.
  • For Venturing, 92% wanted orienteering/GPS programs; and rifle shooting, high adventure training, and wilderness survival were chosen equally at 83%.cm_chart3

Facility Idea Responses

The next set of questions was related to facility ideas and needs. A selection of potential facilities were presented, chosen based on past requests, commonality of facilities at modern Scout camps, and input from the summer camp leader meetings. The following is a summary of the most popular facilities (multiple facilities could be selected from the list):

  • 71% chose “potable water throughout the property” as the facility they would most like to see.
  • 62% chose a “full-facility shower house” as the facility they would most like to see.
  • 45% chose an “outdoor education center” and “additional program shelters” as the facilities they would most like to see.
  • Regarding a bridge across Gunpowder Creek, on a scale of important of 1-5 (5 being “very important”), 55% rated a bridge was “important” at a rating of 4 or 5, 19% said a bridge was “not important” at a rating of 1 or 2, and the average rating was 3.6.
  • Regarding the location for potential new facilities, 37% said new facilities should be located on south side of Gunpowder creek (where current main camp facilities stand), 23% said new facilities should be located on the newer north side, and 40% responded “I don’t know.”
  • Regarding the name “Camp Michaels,” on a scale of importance of 1-10 (10 being “very important”), 45% rated the name “Camp Michaels” as important at a rating of 8-10, 27% rated the name as not important at a rating of 1-3, and the average rating was 6.1.cm_chart4


The survey results will be a solid source of input for the next phase in the visioning process. The variety and diversity of participants covers the major categories of the Scouting program well, including ages, location, Scouting experience, and program levels. No single group is over-represented, and the more thorough analysis of the data will reveal the common responses among differing markets (parents of current Scouts, Scouting veterans on the unit level, etc.).

The following conclusions can be gathered from the responses:

  • Basic facilities should be the first priority, including potable water and a full-facility shower house. A bridge may be necessary to make the full property accessible for usage.
  • All program levels should be included, with an emphasis on Boy Scouting programs.
  • The camp should generally remain primitive, with new program offerings that do not require large facility upgrades, including orienteering/GPS, backpacking, high adventure training, and program shelters.
  • Keeping the name “Camp Michaels” in some capacity should be considered, as this has an importance to many of the current users of the facility.
  • Important Note

  • The above information will be used for the development plans created by the Camp Michaels visioning committee. It does not necessarily guarantee specific programs or facilities and is only intended to be informational. 
Last Updated on Wednesday, 25 January 2012 13:20