Board of Review

[mncaa]

Our boy and girl troops are linked by having one CC, COR, and Secretary but with separate Treasurers, Advancement Chairs and Scoutmaster teams. A handful of adults registered as ASMs in one troop and as committee members in the other troop since they have youth in both units.

Our CC just announced that the committee members who also served as ASM in the other troop cannot sit on BORs in the troop they are registered as committee members. Can the CC make that rule?

This doesn't affect me personally but I know a few ASM in my troop who are committee members in the other troop will be disappointed they can't help out. The reason given by the CC is that people are confused as to whether the adult is MC or ASM (in which the ADV Chairs can always verify on Scoutbook) and this allows the ASMs to concentrate on their troop.

TIA

[Eagle94-A1]

Since the CC is over all committee members, yes he can make that rule.

Depending upon how "linked" the troops are, I can see it as an issue. I have seen "linked" troops that are the case only on paper, and can see where confusion lie. Those troops do everything together, and essentially are 1 troop. So I can see the point of no ASMs of either troop serving on BORs because at some point they are interacting with the other troop in an ASM role.

Currently the only guidance  on BOR members is the following

"8.0.0.3 Composition of the Board of Review A board of review must consist of no fewer than three members and no more than six, all of whom must be at least 21 years of age. For further specifications, see “Particulars for Tenderfoot Through Life Ranks,” 8.0.2.0, and “Particulars for the Eagle Scout Rank,” 8.0.3.0. Unit leaders and assistants shall not serve on a board of review for a Scout in their own unit. Parents, guardians, or relatives shall not serve on a board for their child. The candidate or the candidate’s parent(s) or guardian(s), or relative(s) shall have no part in selecting any board of review members." page 52

 

"8.0.2.0 Particulars for Tenderfoot Through Life Ranks The preceding applies to boards of review for all Scouts BSA ranks (except Scout rank), but there are a few differences for the ranks other than Eagle: 1. The board is made up of three to six unit committee members—no more and no less. In units with fewer than three registered committee members available to serve, it is permissible to use knowledgeable parents (not those of the candidate) or other adults (registered or not) who are at least 21 years of age and who understand Scouting’s aims. Using unregistered adults for boards of review must be the exception, not the rule. Registered committee members familiar with the unit program, who have had a background check, and who are Youth Protection trained are preferred. Scheduling boards of review when and where unit committee members can attend usually alleviates the problem of not having enough committee members for a board." P55

and

8.0.3.0 Particulars for the Eagle  Scout Rank The particulars below pertain only to the Eagle Scout rank. 1.  Council advancement committees must determine— and make known—method(s) for conducting Eagle Scout boards of review: whether unit committees or the council or district advancement committees administer them, and also how board chairpersons are selected. 2.  If conducted at the unit level, at least one district or council representative, who is not affiliated with the unit, must serve as a member. If the unit requests it, more than one may do so. 3.  There shall be no fewer than three and no more than six members, all at least 21 years old. They need not be on an advancement committee or registered with the Boy Scouts of America, but they must have an understanding of the rank and the purpose and importance of the review. This holds true for Eagle boards of review held in any unit, whether troop, crew, or ship." page 55

 

 

 

[T2Eagle]

AS CC, certainly he can decide who can and cannot serve on a BOR consistent with the rules Eagle94 posted.

The real question is the wisdom of it.  The primary purpose of the adults on the BOR is not deciding on the scout's advancement, but rather learning how well the troop is accomplishing its mission, from the perspectives of the scouts, of delivering a program that accomplishes the Aims and Methods of Scouting.  

If the decision helps accomplish this purpose than it's wise, if it hinders it, it's unwise.  If it falls somewhere in between than it's probably fine on it's face, but then you look and say what's the point of the change?  Was someone annoyed before, is someone else or more someones else going to be annoyed now?

I would say that if the ASMs are supposed to be MCs of the other troop, than if they're not getting the feedback and knowledge about that troop's functioning through the BOR, how are they getting it?  They have a separate role to play in each troop, they should have the tools to play both those roles.  I'd also ask what the Advancement Chairs think of the idea, after all, if you limit the pool of possible BOR members than you might be making their jobs more difficult, and if that's the case, why do it?

[skeptic]

Just think; if they still allowed supervised adult, but TLC reviews, maybe there would be less issue.  And, the youth might even learn something about life and how to make rational and fair judgments.  In the years when that was still the method, I do not recall but one or two instances where the youth overstepped, and in one case, we determined after review that it really was not the case.

[DuctTape]

Or when BORs were conducted by "men of the community", which allowed scouts to get an early preparation for job interviews with unknown business leaders.

[mncaa]

The two linked troops operate independently of each other in programs and events except for a handful of joint events a year (tree fundraiser, scouting for food, CO clean-up and recruiting event). So the ASMs of one troop do not work directly or attend outings of the other troop.

 

5 hours ago, T2Eagle said:

I would say that if the ASMs are supposed to be MCs of the other troop, than if they're not getting the feedback and knowledge about that troop's functioning through the BOR, how are they getting it?  They have a separate role to play in each troop, they should have the tools to play both those roles.

This makes lot of sense. The CC's new rule hinders the committee members getting to know the troop and its scouts, unless CC makes other provisions. I'll point that out and also ask how the BOR Coordinator feels about the change.

Thanks everyone's replies.

[SSScout]

I am registered as an ASM in  my home Troop, which has a sister Troop under the same CO.   I am also a ADC, and MBc....   Yeah, I might bleed Khaki....

On the occasions when I am able to attend a Troop meeting, It is not unusual for the  CCh (a wonderful dedicated woman of no mean personal aura)  to come up to any random parent  (or me) and say "we have some  Boards of Review happening tonight for Hermiani  and for George.... Could you sit in?"    It is HARD to say no to this woman.  And thus, we have a very active parent group.  

Limiting the BoR personnel officially can be both a good thing and an unfortunate thing.  "Choose wisely...."