Getting a eagle project shot down

[FrankBoss]

I had a kid with a eagle project shot down that I didn't understand.

First it's not My Child but a kid in the troop that I thought had a great project, that took unique resources and labor.

 

A youth camp that lends its self out free to youth clubs , schools and churches was hit really hard by Ice storms over a few years and the fence that was damaged by tree's and water run off needed totaly replaced. Over 700 feet replacing T post, reconstructing corner post and running 4 rows of wire for over 2100 feet of material there alone not to mention concrete and pipe for the corner foundation.

 

He went to eagle board and they shot him down because there WAS already a fence there in the first place.

 

I was shocked with the response so I'm looking for a little insite...

I guess I'm trying to get the boys to think out side of the "prefabbed Park Bench" box.

 

Thanks

Frank

[Gunny2862]

From BSA publication 512-927: "Limitations

 Routine labor (a job or service normally rendered) should not be considered.

 Projects involving council property or other BSA activities are not acceptable.

 Projects may not be performed for businesses or an individual.

 Projects may not be of a commercial nature.

 Projects may not be a fund-raiser. Fund-raising is permitted only for securing materials needed

to carry out the project.

 Donors to projects must be made aware of what entity is benefiting from the project, and that

it clearly is not the Boy Scouts of America.

 Any funds raised for a project and not used for the purchase of project materials must be returned

to the donors.

 No minimum number of hours is required.

 The project is an individual matter; therefore, two Eagle Scout candidates may not receive credit

for working on the same project."

 

So unless they think that Replacing the fence is routine labor - and I can assure you that tearing out and then constructing a fence is NOT routine labor, I would have to ask them under what criteria they refused it and for them to show me the reference.

 

If they can't or won't you may rest assured that you will most likely have to do it their way, but that you are probably correct.

edit=Quotation marks added...(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

[CA_Scouter]

That's a bad call. Throw the flag. Ask for instant reply. That woulda passed with flying colors in our Council.

 

They are probably citing 'routine maintenance', but this is reconstruction, not repair.

 

IMHO.

 

 

 

[Beavah]

Yah, I think da scope of the project is sound.

 

Perhaps they were redirectin' the lad for other reasons? Not enough planning? Safety concerns?

 

Is the "youth camp" perhaps a for-profit entity? Even if they occasionally lend their facilities out for free, most councils won't allow a capital improvement project like this for a commercial business.

 

You don't mention what your role in da troop is, FrankBoss. If you are the SM or the troop AC, then I'd put in a friendly call to the DAC. The way you approach this is that you're tryin' to understand the criteria so that you can help this boy and other boys in your troop do a good job. And then, if it seems right, yeh gently ask questions and refer to the stuff Gunny mentions. See where that gets you.

 

CA_Scouter is right, though. In terms of scope, this is a project that would sail to approval in any council I'm familiar with.

 

Beavah

[scoutingagain]

Agree with the above. Scope of this project would have been approved in my council as well...unless as others have noted, this is a private camp that occaisionally lends it facilities out to others. If that is the case it would be a no go.

 

A private summer camp that occaisionally does good deeds is no more eligible for an Eagle project than Goldman Sachs or ExxonMobil. Both do good deeds but are fundamentally private, for profit concerns.

 

SA

[Eagledad]

Since the old fence has to be removed, it looks to me like a pretty big project.

 

One of the trends I've seen in the past is Districts or Councils protecting their reputation of completing Eagle projects. Believe or not there is no requirement that the project must be completed to be considered successful by the EBOR. I seem to remember a district somewhere in Kansas that had a few ambitious uncompleted projects in a short period of time. One of these projects left an eye sore in the community, which led to an investigation by the local paper followed with an embarrassing article for the local Boy Scouts.

 

If the committee simply felt the scout was taking on too large of a project, they might not approve it simply for that reason. Something like this happened a few years back in our troop, so the way the scouts handled it was they spread the task over two Eagle Projects. We counseled the scouts to design and write each project so that if one failed, the other wasnt affected and they got the projects approved.

 

Barry

 

[Stosh]

Hmmm, how is trail clearing not maintenance? We had a boy clean up a hiking trail that was built back in the 1930's by the CCC. It was stone paved and needed to be found, cleared and surface turf removed to expose the original surface. Major project that the state park really appreciated. Sounds like there is more to this issue than what appears on the surface.

 

I have had Eagle projects questioned by the approval board as to its merits, but never rejected.

 

I had one project questioned where a boy was to go through multiple cemeteries, evaluate military graves to make sure there was a stone (family or military) and if the stone was legible and in good condition. The "labor" on the project was to evaluate all the stones and record their condition. This information was complied and the boys sat down and filled out applications to replace, which the VA did at their own expense.

 

Leadership was in the organizing teams, surveying the cemeteries and coordinating the follow up paperwork.

 

The board was not all that impressed but approved. The boy got front page press in his local community newspaper, front page/second section of the regional AND state newspapers. Even if BSA didn't quite see it's merits, the rest of the world surely did.

 

My most recent Eagle project was the restoration of a Veteran's park that had been left to deteriorate for 40 years. The park existed on paper, but one wouldn't know it existed. The boy did not "finish" the project because it was too extensive for one project, but what it did do was spark enough interest in the VFW and Am. Legion posts in the area to commit to future tables, benches, flag pole and memorial stone which he organized to make sure the park in it's entirety would be some day "completed" back to it's original state. I'm thinking that there are probably another 4-5 Eagle projects in that location to complete the park.

 

If the boy feels it is within the appropriate scope of an Eagle project, I would suggest to the boy he go back to the board and make his case. That's part of the leadership necessary for the project. As an adult, I wouldn't step in and take that opportunity away from him.

 

Stosh

[BklynEagle]

This project would've passed muster in my council too. Heck, and I'm sorry to have to admit it, merely repainting the existing fence would've been okay in these parts (That was an actual Eagle Project, and I know the Scout in question - For the record, NOT me)

[Eagledad]

If you have not been to an Eagle project review board, its worth a visit. I have seen a scout hand the board a one page hand written plan. It actually looked scribbled to me, but I didnt read the details. Now in my world, that doesnt disqualify the scout, in fact that might have been more the norm before the computer. We train our scouts to write a plan that typically requires several pages with pictures. So I would have to really interview the scout to make sure that he knew what he was getting in to. Im not sure if this fence project would pass in our District until I saw his plan in person. As someone said, removing and building a new fence is not normal maintenance. It is common for project however, we had a couple fence building projects in our troop.

 

The question to me is: Does the board really have the authority to turn a plan down if they feel the scout is at risk of failing even though the plan meets all the requirements given by the BSA? In my mind they do not. But I do understand the temptation to protect the Scout, his troop and the District the embarrassment of failing to complete the project even though completion is not a requirement for Eagle. So this is a tough one to call without seeing the plan.

 

Barry

 

[Beavah]

Yah, Eagledad, I've sat in on a few where we decided the project was too big, eh?

 

I can't think that we ever denied the project goin' forward for that reason. Generally what we did was say "This is really ambitious. We're going to let you select one of these three parts of your project to call your 'official' Eagle project. We want you to work on that one first and finish it up, and that will be sufficient for the rank. If you then want to continue to work on the rest as your gift to the community, that's great!"

 

I'd say about half the lads got into the work and realized they'd badly underestimated the time it would take, and were grateful working hard to finish the 1/3 they'd chosen. The other half did some or all of the rest of their original proposal just to "show us" what they were really made of. All of 'em made Eagle.

 

Beavah

 

[AG_Scouter]

I am a Council VP, that gets to help with Eagle projects & Boards. I have read through this and totally agree, but need to voice a bit more.

 

The project may have been shot down because of manpower. How many helpers were there for the project? Sometimes you worry about the scout being able to actually get the project done. I've seen projects that were VERY involved and the scout needed outside of Scouting help to accomplish. I've seen the opposite too.

 

I'm sure the board had reasons, I'd hope they followed the guideline that when you tell a scout "no", you also follow that up with a written explanation of what needs to be done. Granted, that has to do with turning down an Eagle Application, but I don't see why you wouldn't do the same thing for turning down a project?

 

I hope this gets resolved for you. I'm learning that there are many times when the politics of the group come into play.

[evmori]

Bad form. Was the only reason they gave there was already a fence there? Seems lame to me.

 

This actually sounds like a great Eagle project.

[AvidSM]

I agree, it sounds like a good Eagle project. I could see it being shot down if it was painting the fence only. That would be considered routine maintenance.

 

An Eagle project is something that should last a while - paint gets painted over again and all traces of what the scout did are lost.

[Buffalo Skipper]

Of course it is impossible for us to understand in a few sentences exactly what went on or what was going throught the minds of those on the other side of the table. But on the surface it sure looks like everyone here agrees that this looks like a good project, and I agree as well.

 

My my interpretation, "routine maintenance" would be interpretted as something that is regularly done, prehaps by professionals. As an example, lawn service to an existing lawn is routine; re-landscaping a neglected project is another story. Tearing out and replacing a (700') fence following damage from repeated ice storms is not what I would call routine or regular. Clearly it is not a part of a regular budget, nor is it something expected to be done repeatedly and expectedly.

 

Giving the Eagle Board members the benefit of the doubt, perhaps there was some other shortcoming of the project that they somehow described in this "category." Otherwise, it may well be a bad judgement or misunderstanding on behalf of the board.

 

Keep at this one and support your scout.

[Twocubdad]

There is no requirement that a ESLP be something that lasts a while. "Permanence" is one of those notions that eventually leads all PTL (pressure-treated lumber) projects. I joke that someone on our project review committee must have a brother-in-law in the pressure-treated lumber business. Committee members are quick to point out that they encourage non-construction type projtects, but the hurdles they throw up for them make most boys quickly realize they are swimming upstream and opt for PTL projects.

 

As a new scoutmaster, I tried to encourage our scouts to think outside the box and come up with something more meaningful. My criteria was to have a project such that the beneficiary of the project would want to brag on you at your Eagle Court of Honor. One of the first projects like that was a scout who worked with a local community center to develop a after-school literacy program for at-risk elementary school students. He was turned down cold. The explaination was that the project was a "glorified good turn" whatever the heck that means. I've yet to get a good explaination -- and yes, I've asked all the way up the advancement foodchain including the scout executive. What I was told was that the scout had no way of measuring the effectiveness of the reading program and would not be able to show at the end of the project if they had taught the children anything. And even if the children showed improvement, he couldn't say that the improvements were through his efforts, what the children were doing in school, their regular after-school program or reading at home. The ways in which that rational is ridiculous boggles the mind.

 

So the Scout dropped the reading program (he didn't have a choice - it was turned down cold with no recourse for amending it) and went with a traditional PTL project which sailed through the committee. To the boy's credit, he felt he had made a commitment to the after-school program so he completed both projects. Cool.

 

As for the committee's concern with the lack of measurable success, the Scout worked with one little boy individually. During one of their session the little fellow read a book cover to cover for the first time in his life.

 

Measure that.