fred8033

It can be wonky though.

It does support pictures. Physical signatures are an issue. At times, we've used printed emails from the reviewers as evidence of their approval in lieu of signature. Redundancy ... yep ... most if it is because things are written three times ... once as a concept / proposal ... once while doing the work ... once in hindsight after everything is done. I agree it can keep improving and evolving. It will never be perfect. I'm just very glad we have it. I really hope the project is more about the service than about the paperwork.

Because of the sins of the past, I am a strong defender of the project workbook. In our district before 2011, the district advancement chair (and his team) were from the troops that felt it was their job to require formal presentations and require the XXX hours and require large project proposal binders submitted in advance. I truly believe they perceived their job as adding steps so that the scout could appreciate earning Eagle. I also believe if they did not think the scout's experience was enough or the scout was not "worthy", then they would add even more hoops. Worst, they were effectively using their own troop's extra expectations for the rest of the district even though it was nowhere described in the requirements for earning Eagle or any of the BSA published guides. Our troop's scouts often had to go thru multiple months of project proposal review. In 2010, one of our scouts had four plus months of district reviews and was always was sent away with requests for more information. The last month was the district asking for the project proposal to include a map to the hospital just in case something happened. The project was painting rooms at his church and installing shelving. ... THEN ... THEN ... They lost the his three ring binder of the project workbook. The project workbook does NOT exist to make the scout's job harder. It exists to reign in the adults and to set level expectations across all units, districts and councils. IMHO, the workbook and the G2A have been a true gift.

Always refer to the G2A ... Guide To Advancement. In my view ... The Eagle Project is about service and leadership in doing that service. The workbook is well laid out and explicitly describes the steps. The project is enough in and of itself. Adding troop unique expectations makes the Eagle Project more about jumping hoops and than giving service. IMHO, we teach bad lessons when we make advancement about jumping hoops. Not required and can't be required ... but troops still do it. Is it harmful? Mostly no. Is this a hill to die on either direction? No. Is it a good idea? No, but I flip flop and can see both sides. Does it help the scout? Maybe a few scouts, but mostly no. The scout MUST fill out the Eagle Project Workbook in detail. That is the scout's commitment. A PowerPoint is extra and just decorative. Committees ... chair or designee(s) ... must review the workbook. That is what is being signed and is effectively a contract. A PowerPoint presentation is NOT what is being signed off. I've had scouts show me their PowerPoint presentation required by their troop. I sat nicely and listened. ... THEN, we went section by section thru the workbook write-up because that is the commitment. Bad ... Could be the unrequired extra hoop to jump thru that causes a scout to give up on Eagle. Good ... Might give some scouts presentation practice that helps scouts later in the process ... IMHO this is a big stretch. Why do troops do it? Biggest reason I've seen is the worst because it does not match Guide To Advancement. Troops justify it as it gives scouts experience presenting to groups and talking in front of groups. IMHO, that's what the Communications MB is about. That's what the rest of the scouting program is about. Eagle project is about service and leading that service. IMHO, it smells more of committee self-importance. If a troop wants to do it, it's not a hill to die on. Smile nicely. Listen. Don't promote the practice and point out the scout requirements are in the Eagle project workbook and the Guide To Advancement. ... Sorry if I am long winded. This was a hot button topic for me as I've been involved in many Eagle project proposal reviews.

8 to 11 is "possible" and not "unusual", but it's still far from normal. ... It's just very doable. A few independent studies offered by camp. A few camp special events (such as an afternoon Fingerprinting for the Fingerprinting MB). Add a pushy parent. etc, etc, etc. Heck, you can probably earn one or more Citizen MBs just while at camp if the scout does some self-study before camp.

This is what I view as key. Focus on outdoors and growth. I've always held the view that the MB value is lowered when so many key MBs are light weight compared to public school. Using my own education, the Citizenship, Family, Personal Management and Physical Fitness badges would have been easy except for checking off boxes. When the challenge is about checking the boxes, the message learned is how do I game the system to get it done. That gaming the system then bleeds into the other MBs.

My wife and I were talking. Cancel culture is alive and well. Previous years it canceled conservatives. Now, the opposition is in power and progressives are being canceled. Soon everyone will be canceled. Failure To Stay Neutral ... IMHO, much of this is BSA's fault. BSA has repeatedly burnt goodwill by picking sides social debates. Orientation. Membership. DEI. Worse, BSA has been on both sides. In late 1990s and early 2000s, BSA alienated progressives with Dale v BSA. Then in 2010s to now, it has been with membership and DEI changes. BSA should have been staying neutral. "We leave that to our charter partners ... as an organization, BSA teaches universal values such as Trustworthy, Loyal, ... and encourages outdoor adventures.". Perhaps I'm naive. It feels like there is a dance to be done where BSA could have endorsed universal values without taking stances on the storm of social change.

I'm fine with that. I think skeptic is flagging the hypocrisy of first opening limits when it doesn't affect the state's finances, but then later tightening when the lawsuits start hitting state finances. The laws should be consistent. Cities, school districts and other organizations should also be facing the same liabilities.

This is a scouting forum and it's fair to express opinions and views. We should not assume who can and who can not wear a victim badge. Many people can claim victimhood as few people make it thru childhood unscared. Scouting is only one venue where bad people did bad things. Those bad people also existed in youth sports, schools, churches, police, medical and others.

100%. I always wonder how many parents have paid for their scout's registration, camping and event fees, but then wrote it off as a donation to the troop. ... BUT ... that's between them and the IRS. It's not troop business. I've seen a few cases where the parent solicits their employers charitable donations (sometimes matching; sometimes based on hours donated) and have used the funds 100% to benefit their own family directly; especially when they were one of the key unit leaders. The most egregious was a company donation used 100% to pay for the parent and scout's high adventure even though it was clear the company intended it to be a charitable donation and no one else from the troop went. It just felt wrong. IMHO, does it smell wrong? Can you tell all the parents and scouts in the troop that's how the funds will be used? Can you write a thank you note to the donor? ... "Dear ACME Inc, Thank you for your company donation. We greatly appreciate the donation and have credit Mr. W. E. Coyote's son's scout account to cover their future scouting costs. Thank you for supporting this scout. Sincerely, Mr. R. Runner" At minimum, your whole unit committee should know how it's being used. My gut says more than one person will say this is wrong.

@Eagle94-A1 is right. For advancement, read BSA/SA Guide To Advancement. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf Section 4.2.3.6 Fulfilling More Than One Requirement With a Single Activity "At times it may be appropriate for a Scout to apply what was done to meet one requirement toward the completion of another." Your situation is also explicitly answered. "Some requirements may have the appearance of aligning, but upon further examination differ. These seemingly similar requirements usually have nuances intended to create quite different experiences. The Communication and Citizenship in the Community merit badges are a good example. Each requires the Scout to attend a public meeting, but that is where the similarity ends. For Communication, the Scout is asked to practice active listening skills during the meeting and present an objective report that includes all points of view. For Citizenship in the Community, the Scout is asked to examine differences in opinions and then to defend one side. The Scout may attend the same public meeting, but to pass the requirements for both merit badges the Scout must actively listen and prepare a report, and also examine differences in opinion and defend one side."

Just thinking ... Just like current DOGE, I'm not sure it's really true savings. A good CE would raise at least his salary in donations to the council. Will reducing CEs reduce total donations? Do people donate because the top dog (the CE) asks for the donation ?

I'd hope. If the average salary cost is $50,000 (low considering we also have executives, directors, etc) and that a council probably needs at least three staff (probably way low), the per-scout council cost is at least $150. I assume the majority of council finances happen thru donation or endowments. Even then, council finances have never made sense to me. I don't understand how small councils can stay in business.

Agree with much that you wrote. Big dollar payouts to those in the legal system drove this case. But then again, that's how the system is setup. I watched the monthly bankruptcy billing invoices that paid firm partners far over a thousand an hour, other lawyers at $600 plus and hour and para-legal staff charging hundreds per hour. The whole case is about getting money out of deep pockets. Spent money won't be recovered. Courts approved the payments. The legal system won't start a major case against itself. Plus, it can be argued that this is the nature of complex cases especially when the Supreme Court changes case law interpretations. Legislative momentum for this has fallen off. Perhaps, a few states could start again. BUT, I really doubt it. It's old news at this point. Could very well be and it could be a good thing. It's more important to get youth outside having adventures than focusing on a single national scouting organization. This is where we all have different opinions. "My opinion" is that this case has never been about justice and accountability. This is about finding someone to blame for the ills of society.

I've heard lots of good exit interviews. The real challenge is reaching a meaningful solution such as just focus on outdoors, camping and fun. Then, let the rest happen naturally result.

What about 27 thru 82 years old ?

Age limit for Eagle ... I've turned the corner on this. I'm thinking this might be a good thing. * Some adults want to work on skills at the same time as their kids. ... Example - Karate black belt * Some adults want something in their life to work toward. * Some adults want to make up for opportunities lost as a kid. * Many adults are lonely and seeking friendship and social connections. IMHO, I don't see harm in this. Perhaps a correction to scale rank requirements should to age and capability. Perhaps keep the same.

My sons each have at least 100+ qualifying nights. If the troop is active, it's not hard. Opportunity exists for 7 years * 12 months * 2 nights a month = 168. Add summer camps ... now 203. Add other special high adventures. ... Two of my sons worked at scout camps. I swear one of my sons probably had 300 nights in a tent before he turned 18. 20 nights is low bar to pass.

Odds are it will work better or reasonably well. Individual YPT situations can be addressed. Also, similar YPT challenges exist in the other approaches too. IMHO, lots of this can be solved by focusing on activities and adventure more than the theoretically perfect way to run a troop. Follow YPT 100%. Beyond that, all the learning happens naturally by focusing on being an active, adventurous troop.

Though I always differ on "age based" and "traditional patrols" and NSPs, I 100% agree on a few key points. 100% agree ... Adults "screw things up. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.". Let the scouts decide ... with very minimal guidance ... and try to balance patrols (somewhat with many caveats). Even this point... I've often seen adults saying the scout's are deciding, but then I watch and the adults subvert the scout's independent decision making. Scouts want to be with their friends. The best patrols are where the patrol are (or become) friends and want to spend time together. ... Since the scouts plan, camp, cook, eat, sleep, game, and go to activities together, it really helps if the scouts naturally want to spend time together. IMHO, patrols start to fail when scout ditch their patrol to spend time with their friends in another patrol. Perhaps the scout should be in the other patrol then? IMHO, new scout patrols work well when 10+ join at the same time and NSPs are used to rapidly get scouts up to speed. But, there is no reason to keep those scouts in that patrol long term. Let the scout's decide.

Wow. So much of what you wrote seems extremely predictable. BUT, we've seen that happen many times in scouting. My scouting days are over mostly, but in my two decades as a leader, the registrar was critical to fixing so so so many issues. In fact, the registrar was pretty much the only person who could fix unit specific issues.

That's the grey area. Similar things can be said for band booster clubs, but IRS did go after them. Individuals are charged for their experiences. If only one kid (the kid who earned the money benefits), then that's a strong argument for private benefit. On the other hand, if the scout has $10,000 in his account because he raised $50,000 for scouts, then it can be argued it's an incentive that raised more money for scouting than if the private benefit incentive was not there. There is nothing new here. No new information or updated guidance.

Great point @InquisitiveScouter !! Always answer with an authoritative reference when possible. Eagle scout service project workbook, Guide To Advancement and Guide To Safe Scouting are great tools.

To clarify ... I've seen good district commissioners, roundtable commissioners and such. My criticism is very specific aimed at the "unit commissioners". I believe the concept of "unit commissioner" is fundamentally flawed.

Contingent representation means a percent of the award instead of billable hours; usually. The lawyer won't earn more money by returning the client's calls. So not getting a response in a large class action is not surprising. Effectively contingent cases means less earned per hour with each extra hour invested. The least hours invested the better for the law firm.