Eagle project hours

[Stosh]

My only concern is why the council needs to "approve" some scout's project in the first place.  The purpose is not the project, but to show leadership on the project.  The SM and Beneficiary should be able to determine whether or not there was leadership or not.  If someone is going to short-change the leadership requirement, they are going to be able to do that whether the council approved the project or not.  it is a useless step of extra hoop-jumping that validates nothing, insures nothing and doesn't help the scout in anyway.  After all, is it the scout's project?  or is it the council's project? 

 

I have often wondered why this project has become so important in the first place.  If the SM is going to allow the boy to a lousy job on his project, he/she's probably cut a few corners on all the rest of the Scout -> Life requirements as well.  To me, those requirements are just as important that a single project requirement.

[fred johnson]

I'm with Flagg on this one. The board has no right to fail anyone. The requirements have been met.

 

I'm just reflecting what BSA has in the GTA and how EBORs can operate per those rules.  

 

IMHO, it's a good discussion whether or not councils need to approve projects.  Probably same argument whether districts/councils should approve the Eagle rank.  

 

Beyond that though, I like how it's setup.  Council can filter out during proposals some bad out of place projects.  Beyond that though, districts not approving projects is meant to be rare.  It's really the after-the-fact evaluation that happens during EBOR.  And even that is almost automatic as a project needs to be really out-of-normal to run into an issue. .... but some districts are not as supporting.  

[Back Pack]

I'm just reflecting what BSA has in the GTA and how EBORs can operate per those rules.  

 

IMHO, it's a good discussion whether or not councils need to approve projects.  Probably same argument whether districts/councils should approve the Eagle rank.  

 

Beyond that though, I like how it's setup.  Council can filter out during proposals some bad out of place projects.  Beyond that though, districts not approving projects is meant to be rare.  It's really the after-the-fact evaluation that happens during EBOR.  And even that is almost automatic as a project needs to be really out-of-normal to run into an issue. .... but some districts are not as supporting.  

They can "evaluate" all they want. They have no jurisdiction to fail a scout for theirnapproved project that's been signed off as complete by the unit Lead and beneficiarybb

[Stosh]

I would think it would be a good time to do a little bragging about one's project at the EBOR.  If the candidate is not as articulate, that shouldn't matter, but if the boy just does a couple of grunts when it is time to brag, it might indicate a problem for further discussion, but not as an opportunity to judge and fail.   An opportunity is opened up about the project, the candidate gets a chance to speak off the cuff a bit about it and a "good job on the project" from the board goes a long way to lead into a congratulation to the Scout and would be a nice way of finishing out the Review.

Edited March 20, 2017 by Stosh

[Eagledad]

Eagle project reviews (approvals) are intended to verify that all the parties involved know what to expect, and that the project is within the BSA recommendations. You would be surprised of how many scouts just take off and start a project without informing the beneficiaries of the project. And because some scouts take on more than they can handle, there are a few half completed projects littering communities. I remember one member many years ago explaining that their district was pretty tough on accepting projects because the local new paper had written a couple of uncomplimentary articles of unsightly uncompleted Eagle projects that left the community dealing with the cost for clean up.

 

Reputation can be a tall hurdle to bring down. Not and Eagle project, but the Canadian Border Agent that our crews had to visit before continuing through the Canadian side of the Boundary Waters had a book of pictures that showed the destruction of Canadian boundary water camp sites from the Boy Scouts. Now I could tell by the pictures that many of the sites weren't from Boy Scouts, but there must have been at least a couple of incidences that created the bad blood leaving the other 99 percent of the scouts suffering the long lecture by the Border Agent.

 

Barry 

[fred johnson]

They can "evaluate" all they want. They have no jurisdiction to fail a scout for their approved project that's been signed off as complete by the unit Lead and beneficiary.

 

Actually, per BSA GTA 9.0.2.8, BSA GTA 9.0.2.13 and BSA clarification from BSA Advancement News Aug 2014, an EBOR does have jurisdiction to consider the project.  It's not about failing the scout, but there can be postponement until issues are addressed.  

 

I'm actually on your side of this.  Years ago, I was screaming mad about how our district treated scouts during the Eagle project approval process.  IMHO, it's a much better process now.  EBORs do have great latitude in what they consider, but it should be extremely rare.  In my 12 years, I've only seen one where a scout did not earn his Eagle rank out of all in our district and we have a very large district.  And in that case, it was pretty clear cut and a sad situation.  

 

EBORs need latitude as districts approve a concept and don't see it again until the EBOR.  Now you can argued that districts and councils should not pre-approve a project proposal and that the decision should be fully kept in troops.  Fine.  That is a valid arguement, but it's a different issue.  ... As long as districts / councils approve project proposals, they need latitude to consider the results.  

 

I have seen multiple close situations at EBORs.  Unusually it was a highly parent-ally motivated scout.  In one that I remember, the scout proposed doing a large project and that is what the district approved.  Then, the scout re-scoped the project much smaller.  Beneficiary and troop approved the completed project.  BUT it was argued in the EBOR that the scout did not do the project that was approved in the proposal.   It was not an argument that there was not enough hours or effort.  It was argued the scout did not do the approved project.  In addition, it was clear the scout did not show anything beyond incidental leadership in his project.  Scope changes happen.  Volunteer participation changes.  In another, the project report was approved by beneficiary and troop.  But the EBOR discussion with the scout showed the project was pretty much 100% immediate scout family work.  I forget how that was addressed as I was not directly involved in that EBOR.  I'm just using these two examples as cases that show EBORs need discretion.  

 

It should be extremely rare and EBORs should be looking for ways to pass the scout, but EBORs need discretion to consider the project.  

[Col. Flagg]

I think I see @@backpack's issue with the BOR doing anything with regard to evaluating the project for any reason, other than a simply, cursory review.

 

The proposal signature area for Council/District says:

 

"I have read topics 9.0.2.0 through 9.0.2.15, regarding the Eagle Scout service project, in the Guide to Advancement, No. 33088. I agree on my honor to apply the procedures as written, and in compliance with the policy on “Unauthorized Changes to Advancement.†Accordingly, I approve this proposal. I will encourage the candidate to prepare a project plan and further encourage him to share it with a project coach who has been designated for him."

 

 

So this rep has already taken in to account the GTA and the pertinent sections quote by @fredjohnson. So the project is reviewed and approved. As others have pointed out when discussing the proposal versus the plan versus the final report, BSA does not require ANY pre-work review of the plan or the report and THAT is a problem. Many issues could be discovered if the Scout were to develop and have the plan signed off and not just the proposal.

 

Next is the approval of the final report and Requirement #5. The workbook says:

 

 

"In my opinion, this Eagle Scout service project meets Eagle Scout requirement 5, as stated on page 4 of this workbook."

 

 

 

This means that the Requirements is signed off. This should be treated like a completed Blue Card or any other signed requirement. Remember, a Scout learns, is tested, reviewed and recognized. After the SM and beneficiary sign off on the requirement, the BOR cannot do a thing to revoke it.

 

They can find another basis to challenge him, but not on the project.

[NJCubScouter]

Actually, per BSA GTA 9.0.2.8, BSA GTA 9.0.2.13 and BSA clarification from BSA Advancement News Aug 2014, an EBOR does have jurisdiction to consider the project.  It's not about failing the scout, but there can be postponement until issues are addressed.  

 

I'm actually on your side of this.  Years ago, I was screaming mad about how our district treated scouts during the Eagle project approval process.  IMHO, it's a much better process now.  EBORs do have great latitude in what they consider, but it should be extremely rare.  In my 12 years, I've only seen one where a scout did not earn his Eagle rank out of all in our district and we have a very large district.  And in that case, it was pretty clear cut and a sad situation.  

 

EBORs need latitude as districts approve a concept and don't see it again until the EBOR.  Now you can argued that districts and councils should not pre-approve a project proposal and that the decision should be fully kept in troops.  Fine.  That is a valid arguement, but it's a different issue.  ... As long as districts / councils approve project proposals, they need latitude to consider the results.  

 

The BSA says basically the same thing.  The last paragraph of section 9.0.2.13 of the Guide to Advancement (which you mention) says:

 

 

 

At the board of review, if an approved proposal and any subsequent effort represents planning and development that was adequate to the project, and the project was well led and carried out to the satisfaction of the unit leader and project beneficiary, only in a very rare case would rejection result. It would have to be clearly established that Eagle Scout requirement 5—as written— was not completed. Under no circumstances shall project approval at any point in the process be withheld for reasons that have nothing to do with the project.

 

Additionally, section 9.0.2.1, paragraph # 4, says:

 

 

 

4. Guidance that maximizes the opportunity for completion of a worthwhile project will be readily available and strongly recommended. Ultimately, however, the responsibility for success belongs to the Scout, and final evaluation is left to the board of review.

 

So the EBOR has the final word, but given the steps that come before that, a rejection would be "very rare."  I have sat on about 20 EBOR's and I have never seen it happen.  I think the fact that our district adds an optional "post-project review" by the district project reviewer makes it even less likely that it would happen.  But it is theoretically possible.

[NJCubScouter]

 

They can find another basis to challenge him, but not on the project.

 

 

That is not correct, based on the Guide to Advancement sections that have been cited and quoted.

[Col. Flagg]

That is not correct, based on the Guide to Advancement sections that have been cited and quoted.

 

Read my post again. The Eagle workbook requires the Council/District person to read THOSE SAME SECTIONS and ATTEST to applying them. Note the quote above. 

[fred johnson]

 

I think I see @@backpack's issue with the BOR doing anything with regard to evaluating the project for any reason, other than a simply, cursory review.

 

The proposal signature area for Council/District says:

 

 

So this rep has already taken in to account the GTA and the pertinent sections quote by @fredjohnson. So the project is reviewed and approved. As others have pointed out when discussing the proposal versus the plan versus the final report, BSA does not require ANY pre-work review of the plan or the report and THAT is a problem. Many issues could be discovered if the Scout were to develop and have the plan signed off and not just the proposal.

 

Next is the approval of the final report and Requirement #5. The workbook says:

 

 

 

This means that the Requirements is signed off. This should be treated like a completed Blue Card or any other signed requirement. Remember, a Scout learns, is tested, reviewed and recognized. After the SM and beneficiary sign off on the requirement, the BOR cannot do a thing to revoke it.

 

They can find another basis to challenge him, but not on the project.

 

 

Ummm ... That is a desired reading, but not a clear reading of the explicit words.  As quoted, BSA GTA sections 9.0.2.8 says "Boards of review should " and BSA GTA 9.0.2.13 says "At the board of review, ...".   This is repeated in the BSA Advancement News that adds discussion and information.

 

Given BSA says "Boards of review", I'm going to go out on a limb and say they meant "Boards of review".  

Edited March 20, 2017 by fred johnson

[NJCubScouter]

Read my post again. The Eagle workbook requires the Council/District person to read THOSE SAME SECTIONS and ATTEST to applying them. Note the quote above. 

 

And some of those same sections say that the EBOR can decide that Requirement 5 was not satisfied by the Scout, but that this would be very rare.  I would say "extremely" rare would probably be more accurate.

[fred johnson]

Read my post again. The Eagle workbook requires the Council/District person to read THOSE SAME SECTIONS and ATTEST to applying them. Note the quote above. 

 

Yes, that is correct and that signature quote says "I agree on my honor to apply the procedures as written,".  Those procedures discuss how the EBOR can consider the project.    

Edited March 20, 2017 by fred johnson

[fred johnson]

And some of those same sections say that the EBOR can decide that Requirement 5 was not satisfied by the Scout, but that this would be very rare.  I would say "extremely" rare would probably be more accurate.

 

Agreed.  

 

I must admit I cringed slightly when I read your reference to an optional "post-project review" by the district project reviewer.  It scares me as someone trying to make the process more sacrosanct or more important.  To be honest, the EBOR project evaluation is not a high hurdle to jump.  Things really have to be out-of-whack to fail. 

[Col. Flagg]

And some of those same sections say that the EBOR can decide that Requirement 5 was not satisfied by the Scout, but that this would be very rare.  I would say "extremely" rare would probably be more accurate.

 

But there would have to be a process not followed by the Scout, missed by the SM or some other issue that goes against other sections of the GTA applying to the project and Eagle rank.

 

But assuming all the correct processes were followed in both the workbook and GTA, the EBOR cannot do anything about the project or Requirement #5, and that's my point.