Bragging about ACA's successes.

Did you ever feel like bragging? Of course you have. We all do at various points in our lives. The reasons we feel that way are almost always the result of something very positive happening either as a result of our own actions or the accomplishments of those close to us. Of course, bragging can also be negative if it is based on a false sense of pride or an attempt to put others down.

Well, I want to spend a little time bragging in this column, not about my accomplishments, but about the accomplishments of the American Camping Association this fall. Too often ACA has not taken credit for the excellent programs that it has developed, or for the things it has done for members.

ACA had multiple successes this past fall, of which there are two I want to highlight.

J-1 Visa Resolution

First, I want to talk about a major accomplishment in the legislative/regulatory program for camps in the United States. For more than 25 years, camps in this country have been able to provide United States children with excellent international cultural interaction by hiring international staff utilizing the J-1 visa program. This was made possible with the Fulbright-Hayes act passed in the early 1960s.

As most of you know, new regulations governing the J-1 program for camp counselors were published in March of 1993 that limited participants in the program to two visits in their lifetime. ACA had provided input and testimony regarding the new regulations as they were being drafted and then actively objected to the proposed new regulations when they were published for public comment in November of 1992. We were surprised when the final regulations were published in March with the two-year limitation intact.

We contacted the United States Information Agency (USIA), which is responsible for administering the J-1 program, in April to express our concern over the new regulations and to request that the two year limitation be rescinded. At the same time, the New York Section conducted a survey to determine what impact the new regulation would have on camps' participation in this program. The results of that survey indicated that the new regulation would have exactly the opposite effect from what the USIA expected.

When a new director for the USIA was confirmed by the Senate, Connie Coutellier and I requested a joint meeting with him to share the concerns of the camp using this program. At the same time, ACA's legislative council, Dave Gray, contacted camps in Vermont to build support for having Vermont Senators Leahy and Jeffords intercede on camps' behalf to have the regulation rescinded. Camps responded to Gray's request and we were able to enlist the aid of Leahy and Jeffords, both of whom contacted US1A requesting reconsideration of the regulation. Gray continued to work through out the summer with the senators' staffs and staff at the USIA to rescind the regulation.

In late September Dave Gray met with the acting general counsel for the USIA, the USIA congressional liaison and senior program staff to present the case for eliminating the two-year limitation. At the same time the New York Section organized a letter writing campaign to enlist the aid of Senators Monihan and

D'Amato and Representative Levy. Senator D'Amato wrote a letter on camps behalf asking that the agency meet with us to discuss our concern.

Finally, in late October, Dave Gray was contacted by the USIA and offered a compromise that would permit a limited number of repeat visitors to return as camp counselors. Following an ACA Executive Committee decision to accept in principle the compromise offer, ACA sponsored a meeting in Washington with the J-1 sponsoring organizations to develop a consensus position before meeting with the USIA. A consensus position was developed and finally accepted by the USIA. An "interim final rule" is to be published that will allow each sponsoring agency a up to a maximum of 10 percent of the total number of camp counselors to be threeyear plus repeat visitors.

This compromise will allow camps to continue to offer United States children the opportunity for cultural interaction with foreign counselors. Camps will be able to rely on a limited number of repeat visitors who are crucial to the success of their programming. The USIA has assured that their policy concerns have been addressed and that the program will continue to be a model of international exchange.

Risk Management Forum

The second major example of achievement I want to discuss is the Risk Management Forum that was held in Richmond, Virginia in November. Traditionally, ACA's fall conferences have been successful, but have only drawn about 100 participants. The Risk Management Forum drew over 350 registrants and, if space had been available, could have had many more. The overall rating of the forum was one of the highest that ACA has ever received for an event of this size.

Participants in the forum saw how ACA standards and a camp's policies, procedures and documents are actually used in a legal setting. A mock trial was held in which a fictitious camp, "White Cloud," was accused of negligence in the hypothetical death of a camper. Experienced trial attorneys "tried" the case in front of a judge and a jury of camp directors selected at random from the audience. The experience was enlightening to say the least.

The Risk Management Forum developed out of ACA's endorsedinsurance program with Markel Rhulen Underwriters and Brokers. In early 1992 Markel Rhulen reported to ACA's Insurance Committee that there were clearly identifiable areas of loss occurring in camps. The Insurance Committee felt that it was important that ACA respond to this information by developing educational programming that would focus on reducing the risks in these identified areas.

The Western Association of Independent Camps (WAIC) had just completed a mock trial at its meeting in the Fall of 1991 and members had reported that witnessing that trial had a major impact on them. ACA asked Markel if they would cosponsor a major education event, built around the mock trial format with specific sessions on the identified high risk activities. They agreed to help ACA put on this effort.

The National Education Council adopted the project and appointed a planning task force to develop the education sessions, based on loss information supplied by Markel Rhulen. Division Director of Member and Camp Services Marge Scanlin worked with Ray and Vickie Kalman from the Northern California Section to develop the case for the mock trial. Rich Smikle, ACA's litigation defense attorney from the firm of Ice Miller Donadio and Ryan in Indianapolis worked extensively with Marge and the Kalmans on preparing materials for the trial.

The Forum structure held the mock trial sessions each morning followed by an opportunity to visit exhibits over the lunch hour with multiple break-out sessions on specific areas of risk in the afternoon. The break-out sessions were repeated several times during the three days.

The final session of the trial involved closing arguments by the attorneys and jury instructions from the judge. The jury that was seated at the beginning of the trial was then asked to bring in a judgement. The rest of the audience was broken into multiple large juries so that everyone had a chance to experience jury deliberation procedures. The final result was that the seated jury brought in ajudgement for the plaintiff, against the camp. Plans are now underway to use a videotape of the mock trial to build staff training materials, which we hope to have available before next spring for camps to use.

Implications

What made these two very different efforts by ACA so successful? I think it can be summed up in a single word -- teamwork. Both of these efforts required the coordinated activities of many different parts of ACA.

In the case of the J-1 visa effort, we depended on the efforts of individual ACA members in several sections, formal action by ACA's Executive Committee and by the New York Section Board of Directors and legislative chair, the international exchange sponsoring organization, ACA's legislative consultant and the national staff.

In the case of the Risk Management Forum, we depended on an ACA business member, the National Education Council and the Program Planning Task Force, Ray and Vicki Kalman, ACA's litigation attorney who worked "pro bono" on the project, and all of the divisions of the national staff.

For both projects, each individual and group had specific responsibilities, some small and some large, to carry out. Those responsibilities were fulfilled and all of ACA members benefited in some way from the efforts. Way to go!