Wens

John in KC - Would you believe parents are CC and an Asst SM. Two eagles in the family already. They know the drill and have respectfully stayed quiet until we figure this out. However, they do want to take part in our special meeting that addresses these issues for the entire troop. We are working on Plan B now, thanks for the advice.

Sandspur, Your right, the entire committee feels like we are sinking in the swamp because we realize its our fault. We are doing just as you suggest, holding a committee to raise standards, let the PLC vote on them, let the boys know what is to be from now on, meet again with the scout and ask him the recommended questions. I agree with Beavah and anyone else who said it, adults at fault, many of us owe him an apology. We have good leadership with Powderhorn and Woodbadge training. Most of the time things run smoothly but every now and then we have change of leadership, change in spl, etc. and standards end up slipping. We have no intention of making board of reviews like a fortune 500 company but the scout should feel like he accomplished the rank when he is done with one!

I love the passion that boyscout volunteers take with their positions, it's evident in these boards. In our situation, we messed up as a troop. We (all committee and leadership) let this kid down by not making sure he had someone checking up on him. The scoutmaster agrees that he had no definition of what the job should be. We are going back and reviewing this so it can't happen again. This scout though held up his end of the bargain as far as the standards were (poor as they may have been). He made one or two attempts but not what we would like to see. If we over the last year boys were passed without stricter standards, do we pull the rug out from under this scout, or change the standards, pass him and ask him to redo the position under his new rank. ??

The SM signed off on the POR. That was my concern that the Board would be over riding the SM. Is it worth it or is it better to fix the problem by making sure from now on the scouts do a better job in their resonsibility and have this scout work on another position as a life scout with close supervision from the troop.

The BOR was two days before the 6 months. We were holding the review and then signing off the following troop meeting. We will meet as a committee with the CC and SM to discuss the SPL/ASPL and even SM making sure these responsibility positions are being upheld to the best of the scouts ability. My question was actually if a Board of Review can even deny advancement and if I understand correctly, the answer is yes. I don't actually think that in this case, it is the right thing to do considering the SM Conference and lack of instruction from leadership for him. The SM passed him through to the BOR. I believe this is where it should have been said "wait, you need to work on that position of responsibility" and then instruction should have been given by spl/sm/aspl/pl before holding the SMC.

When the board ended, the scout was asked to step outside so the board could discuss his advancement. Since it was time for the troop meeting to end, the scout ended up seeing his parent in the parking lot and leaving. His 6 months of Star actually is in the middle of the week so he knew his book could not be signed until the next meeting. We did have this problem before, we called in the scout master and discussed POR problems. We had a scout who was the OA rep, but our OA was having problems so they weren't meeting. Our scout then had no information to report. Our problem now is we passed him, is it fair not to pass the other scout who actually did do a few instructions. Fortunately, we have a wonderful troop where we are not fighting over this. We are trying to find what is right and not take it out on the boys because we do believe the root of it is in our program. However, what do we do NOW with the scouts that are advancing. Thanks for all your input.

I just want to say the scout does not yet know that it was advised that he failed the BOR. At this time, I think we need to pull the board back together and explain what our job as a board is and let the SM know that we have concerns with the scouts fulfilling their positions. His position was Instructor.

This scout was a Star for the exact time (6 months) and met all the merit badge requirements. I do not believe this scout was able to shadow anyone in his position or if the PLC made any arrangements to prepare him. I am not sure if the SM had any training with him. This is not an isolated problem as we have had other boys come to the board with the SM conference signed off but no evidence of them working in their position. Does the board of review have the authority to deny the scout advancement? I think that the boards position is to bring it up with the SM and fix it at the troop level, not an individual scout.

Hello, We had this situation come up in our troop (not my son) and I am wondering what the policies are concerning not passing a scout for his board of review. First of all, I have read that the board of review is for the purpose of reviewing the troops, not the scout so retesting is should not be an option. That being said, the scoutmaster has the authority to sign off during the SM conference and that validates that all the requirements have been met. The board was for a young scout that was advancing to Life Scout. The board felt that because it was the rank before eagle the scout had not shown enough leadership in his position and should spend more time doing so before advancing. The scout did hold the position for 6 months but did not function in that role more than once or twice. I'm interested to hear your comments on what the purpose the board of review should serve and when should a scout be denied advancement?