Technicality derails Eagle rank, prompts public appeal

[NJCubScouter]

On 8/15/2018 at 12:34 PM, T2Eagle said:

I have to strongly disagree with this assessment RS.  He broke no rules and missed no deadlines.  You imply he did something wrong or did something late that he committed to doing sooner.  But neither of those are the case.   Sounds to me like he conducted a good service project for his community and achieved a notable rank in scouting.

He then apparently followed all the rules in appealing the decision, and in fact the local Council supported his appeal.  And in the end he seems to have accepted the final decision with maturity and magnanimity.  

Well, but... yes, he broke no rules and didn't do anything wrong, and he conducted a good service project and achieved a notable rank in Scouting.  But he had also set a goal for himself of making Eagle and tried to make it, so based on HIS OWN goals and efforts, he did "miss a deadline" and he "did something late that he committed to doing sooner."  Nobody imposed that deadline on him other than himself, when he decided he was going to complete all the requirements for Eagle.  We don't know why he didn't make Life until after his 17.5 birthday, but he didn't make it.  There is no shame in it.  He seems like a great kid. But I don't see how you say he didn't miss a deadline.

[Chris1]

From the later article it is clear that he knew about the 6 month requirements, knew he would call short due to his own choices and accepted that he likely would not win the appeal. He chose to do the project, knowing that he probably wouldn't get Eagle.

He also has accepted Nationals ruling, and only blames himself for falling short. I highly respect his maturity. 

 

 

[Chris1]

On 8/15/2018 at 2:32 PM, ham_solo said:

I denied one recently for similar circumstances as SM, for a scout who had not been camping since 2014, had not correctly finished 5 eagle merit badges, never served in a position as Life, etc.. but the parents submitted what looked more like a legal brief to Council/National than a request, and in their letter made it sound like all of us leaders were incompetent, etc.  And eventually after even the Council Eagle Committee who performed their investigation and reviewed it did not give their approval, still when they sent it with their non-recommendation to National, the Troop was still overruled by National, and so the Council gave him a board and approved his eagle anyway.  None of us in the Troop were involved in the board, we refused. 

Well ham_solo, From what you stated it sounds like he used the entire "Board of Review Under Disputed Circumstances" and Appeals process as it is designed and described in the Guide to Advancement. You may not like the result, but it sounds like they followed the rules in how to proceed. Yes, it is his right to send it to national when the council says no.  This was not wrong for them to do. 

Similar holds for other stories on this thread. Like having 5 people on a Board, the policy says for an appeal There has to be an odd number of votes, either 3 or 5. Normal BoR has 3 to 6.

[perdidochas]

On 8/15/2018 at 7:05 PM, qwazse said:

Yes, it is an Eagle project. The requirement does not specify "while a Life Scout who has made rank by age 17.51..."

Personally, I would not want to go through the hassle of the project workbook just to do a service project. However, for a scout with aspirations to be an engineer, it might be a worthwhile exercise.  My kids (all chemical engineers -- not a creative bone in the lot of them) spend a lot of time filling out specs and tracking sheets and chasing approvals.

The article seems to indicate that the scout did the math. But, anybody who gives $ to a scout because they think he'll get a medal out of it should be flogged. Either the project is worthy, and we should contribute to it, or it's just for bling, in which case we should give the kid a shovel and tell him to dig for silver.

Actually, it does specify "while a Life Scout who has made rank by age 17.51."  That's what 6 months as  a Life Scout with a POR says. 

[qwazse]

2 hours ago, perdidochas said:

Actually, it does specify "while a Life Scout who has made rank by age 17.51."  That's what 6 months as  a Life Scout with a POR says. 

?? show me where in it explicitly states that as a condition for starting an Eagle project.

[ValleyBoy]

We had two Life Scouts present there Eagle project to the district advancement board last night for project approval.   On the first Life Scout we had no issues with his project and therefor gave the scout district approval to start his Eagle project.  On the second Life Scout we had two issues with his Eagle project the first was that project had not been signed as being approved by his unit committee.  We have had this issue come up in the past and usually what we have done is go ahead and review the project but inform the scout that we could not give district approval for the project until after he received unit approval.  District approval would be given for the project at that point by the scout contacting one of the district advancement committee that he presented his project to for approval.  The second issue we had with this Life Scout was that his Life Scout Board of Review date listed on his project application  was 5 days less than 6 months before his 18th birthday.  Both these two issues were discovered while we reviewed his project workbook before the Life Scout  came before the board.  We then called the scout and his father who was with him into the room and explained  to both of them that if the date of his Life Board of review was correct that he would not have meet the time requirements for Eagle before his 18th birthday.  We still reviewed his project with the Life Scout with the hope that he had the wrong date listed for his Life board of review.   

[qwazse]

@ValleyBoy I have seen more scouts with a paperwork mish-mash that I'm just waiting for my district advancement chair to approach me at round-table and tell me to have my scouts clean up their act.  These scouts are often the boys who drift into meetings only when they need something relevant to advancement.

They wouldn't admit it, but I suspect the boy and/or his dad who you talked to were intentionally running an end around the committee.

I think independent project plan review is good learning experience for scouts. We need to get it out of our heads that Eagle should possible or even probable for any scout getting reviewed by the district.

[ValleyBoy]

59 minutes ago, qwazse said:

@ValleyBoy I have seen more scouts with a paperwork mish-mash that I'm just waiting for my district advancement chair to approach me at round-table and tell me to have my scouts clean up their act.  These scouts are often the boys who drift into meetings only when they need something relevant to advancement.

They wouldn't admit it, but I suspect the boy and/or his dad who you talked to were intentionally running an end around the committee.

I think independent project plan review is good learning experience for scouts. We need to get it out of our heads that Eagle should possible or even probable for any scout getting reviewed by the district.

This boys Troop has a good SM who's work load has keep him out of town to a high extent the past several months.  The boys from his troop that come before the board are usually better prepared that the boy that came before us last night.  Also the Troop does not have a strong Troop committee.   After the meeting last night the 3 of us that sat on the board talked about this youth and the consensus was that he is just one of those youth that keep putting thing off and thinks his effort will be enough to get him by.  One of the members of the board has been to summer camp the past 2 years where two troops have gone in together so has seen this scout in action.  The boys father seemed to understand the information we gave to both of them last night and did not seem upset.

 

[ValleyBoy]

Learned yesterday that the Life Scout had the wrong date listed for his Life board of Review.