Dilemma

[Scoutmaster Teddy]

I have a young man who finished all of the requirements for Second Class before January 1st EXCEPT for the BOR. He's a two-sport athlete and wasn't available for a while. Does he have to complete the new requirements?

 

Thanks!

[Col. Flagg]

I have a young man who finished all of the requirements for Second Class before January 1st EXCEPT for the BOR. He's a two-sport athlete and wasn't available for a while. Does he have to complete the new requirements?

 

Thanks!

 

I wouldn't think so. Though strictly speaking he hadn't completed Second Class by the deadline, so technically he would have to complete them according to this blog on the topic.

 

If the mistake in not getting him the BOR was an adult-driven issue (e.g., could not get volunteers) then you would err on the side of the Scout.

 

If the Scout sat on his posterior knowing he needed a BOR and waited and waited, then this might be a good opportunity for him to learn.

[RememberSchiff]

Bring it up in his BOR and move on with the Scouting program. Summer camp will be here before you know it.

[NJCubScouter]

I would do the same as RS.  The Scout must do the new requirements for First Class though.

[Col. Flagg]

Bring it up in his BOR and move on with the Scouting program. Summer camp will be here before you know it.

 

 

I would do the same as RS.  The Scout must do the new requirements for First Class though.

 

But here's a potential problem with that approach: What happens when someone at council looks at his records in Internet Advancement and says, "Gee, your BOR was after 1/1/17 and you should have been using the 2017 requirements."

 

We had that happen 2010 when the requirements changed last time. A guy going for Eagle went past the "grandfather" date given by national for the new EDGE requirement, so he had to complete that to get rank. He didn't because his SMC and BOR were after the start date of that requirement. Council told him to go back and do the requirement.

 

Good thing too, because he would not have made Eagle as a result. I'd get council to weigh in and note in his record their response, otherwise, as well-meaning as everyone is this may come back to bite him.

[RememberSchiff]

But here's a potential problem with that approach: What happens when someone at council looks at his records in Internet Advancement and says, "Gee, your BOR was after 1/1/17 and you should have been using the 2017 requirements."

 

We had that happen 2010 when the requirements changed last time. A guy going for Eagle went past the "grandfather" date given by national for the new EDGE requirement, so he had to complete that to get rank. He didn't because his SMC and BOR were after the start date of that requirement. Council told him to go back and do the requirement.

 

Good thing too, because he would not have made Eagle as a result. I'd get council to weigh in and note in his record their response, otherwise, as well-meaning as everyone is this may come back to bite him.

 

Most boys leave scouting before that and even more never reach Eagle, so I would worry about that if and when it happens. 

 

As SM, I would be doing my best to do right by the scout and keep him interested in scouting especially after after two sports programs. Hopefully, he will earn his First Class before some "adults" change the requirements again.

 

My $0.02

[Col. Flagg]

Most boys leave scouting before that and even more never reach Eagle, so I would worry about that if and when it happens. 

 

As SM, I would be doing my best to do right by the scout and keep him interested in scouting especially after after two sports programs. Hopefully, he will earn his First Class before some "adults" change the requirements again.

 

My $0.02

 

Huh? His Eagle application got kicked back from National because of the problem. They spotted it and told him he had to "fix the problem" because he had a date that was considered "invalid" by the system and National.

 

All I am saying is that 1) This is a VERY real problem, and 2) Get council to give you a decision on how to proceed, then save that for a rainy day should national kick back his application.

[4CouncilsScouter]

I'd go to the Guide to Advancement for a clear-cut answer.

 

Off the top of my head though, my answer goes to what's been said. If the youth, through no fault of his, was unable to have a BOR, then I would probably say no to restarting the requirements. However, he should be afforded the opportunity to have a BOR as soon as possible, including via phone conference or video conference.

 

That's my two-cents.

Edited March 22, 2017 by 4CouncilsScouter

[Cleveland Rocks]

But here's a potential problem with that approach: What happens when someone at council looks at his records in Internet Advancement and says, "Gee, your BOR was after 1/1/17 and you should have been using the 2017 requirements."

 

How would council know that he didn't complete the requirements using the new version? Internet Advancement doesn't keep track of individual requirements met.

 

It's now March, how would council (or National) know that in these first 3 months of 2017 he did or did not complete the new requirements for Second Class?  I could maybe see if it was January 5, say, and this came up, but we're 12 weeks into 2017.

[Back Pack]

How would council know that he didn't complete the requirements using the new version? Internet Advancement doesn't keep track of individual requirements met.

 

It's now March, how would council (or National) know that in these first 3 months of 2017 he did or did not complete the new requirements for Second Class?  I could maybe see if it was January 5, say, and this came up, but we're 12 weeks into 2017.

I wouldn't risk it. What's the problem with contacting council to get a ruling?

 

I'd rather listen to Council instead of five guys on the internet with their opinion.

[qwazse]

I wouldn't risk it. What's the problem with contacting council to get a ruling?

I'd rather listen to Council instead of five guys on the internet with their opinion.

Rule #1: never ask for a ruling.

He had his SMC in December, right?

The board is not a re-test. So ...

Wrap it up.

 

Get a few adults together and meet the boy wherever, find out from e boy what he thinks of your program, give him a few pointers .... Including the new FC rank requirements. Move on.

 

In the three months of prevarication by adults the boy could have done those new reqs and more.

 

If you do have council HQ call national about this, let us know what they say.

[Back Pack]

Sure. Why trust the organization that creates the rules? Trust some guys on the internet instead. It's not your Scout that's risking anything.

 

Honesty, I read in this forum so many times folks saying, "check the source" or "show me the quote". Well the new rules are pretty clear: Earn rank by 1/1/17 or you have to use the new requirements. Not like units weren't warned or given advanced notice. We reminded our guys every month. SPL even had a count down so guys wouldn't forget.

 

It's 2017. New requirements are in force. But by all means just wing it and don't ask for clarification.

[4CouncilsScouter]

Back pack,

 

I agree with you 100% that we have resources developed to help our volunteers and professionals. However, every "what-if" can't be covered.

 

Several moons ago, a few more than I'd admit  , I was advancement committee chair for our district. We had a similar case happen: a young Scout, very involved with his church, was unable to attend troop meetings due to other, important commitments. He had missed the date for a change in requirements, but all he lacked was a board of review. His committee chair asked our district what to do in the situation. At the end of the day, the district advancement committee unanimously decided that the forcing the youth to repeat very similar requirements would be of no benefit to him. We deferred to the principle that the youth had a situation beyond his control and "through no fault of his own" should have a board of review as soon as possible. That youth used the new requirements for the rest of his time in Boy Scouting, and, now, I'm proud to see him as a member of my crew's committee.

 

At the end of the day, we use the resources provided to us, find the course of action for our situation, and use our best judgement when there is a gray or ambiguous area. We are here for the youth and that's what's important.

[andysmom]

I guess I am missing something.  On the Eagle application they look at date of first class rank and above.  Internet advancement does not know what requirements a boy used, in fact, the original poster's scout could have been using the new requirements for second class since Jan. 1, 2016.  How is anyone (except the unit) to know what requirements he used?

 

Our troop viewed the deadline for boards of review the same way that national looks at the board of review requirements for the eagle rank.  If a scout had finished all the requirements up to and including the SMC, the board of review could happen after the "deadline".  I believe we had 2 or 3 scouts have their boards of review within the first 2 weeks in Jan.  I am not anticipating any problems.

[Eagle94-A1]

A couple of points.

 

1) Internet Advancement and SCOUTNET do not keep up with individual requirements. Otherwise a similar situation we encountered in my district would have been uncovered earlier. Long story short, one former troop ignored requirement changes until it got to Eagle. So Scouts used the requirements in their book regardless if they were current or not. Problem was not uncovered until the troop folded and some of their Scouts went to another troop. That troop's leaders followed the rules, and it was a complete shock to the Scouts and family who transferred in about requirement changes affecting them. And the family in question was involved with the folded troop for 20+ years.

 

2) If the council's records are screwed up, the handbook is the final, official record. If it is discovered that the wrong requirements were used, it could, stress COULD, cause issues later on.

 

3) Knowing national's policy of not penalizing Scouts for the actions of adults, the problem most likely cause a delay, but not outright denial. I know the Scout I mentioned in #1 above was given an extension of 30 days for Eagle because of the situation he was in ( all requirements except time were met. Time was not met b/c A) original troop folded and took 2 months to find a new troop, and B) new troop discovered the irregularity and fixed it, hoping he would win an appeal). FYI, the Eagle is still active with the troop, when he is home from college.