gumbymaster

The question is, did you do this training before or after the change in the way on-line training is presented, which happened about4-6 months ago. The old system was not bad. 10-15 minutes for fast start. 30 minutes for basic and another 30-45 minutes for the final training module. The new system has so many little modules, that the overall training time required of our volunteers has gone up significantly. Whats worse, in my opinion, is that after the first module, the leader sees how many more are required, and decides it is not worth their time. In my view, the only real advantage to the the new system is that you don't have to relearn repetitive training components when you move between positions (i.e. Cub Scout purposes is only gone over once and not repeated when moving from Tiger to Wolf den leader, etc.). Now, when we get a leader willing to do all that without significant complaint - they are a keeper!

I imagine they are available on-line, but at the Disney parks in their pin kiosks, they carry a very small locking pin backing (like 5 to a package), that uses a small Allen head set screw to clamp and lock onto the pins. So far, these have held up for me very well. They even survive the washing machine. They protrude a little, so I haven't used them on my devices, but they work very well on my Scout jacket and on my daughter's girl scout vest.

I've been on several Boards of Review for Scouts at all levels of our Troop. Some of the bigger items we (troop committee) learned were: 1. A Life Scout who really did not know how to find a merit badge counselor on their own. Most merit badges he had were either Summer Camp, MB Fair, or Troop offered; not where he had to seek out a counselor on his own (or from the District List). It turned out most Scouts did not know about this option, so that was discussed with the Troop. 2. Some reasons why it is difficult to get Scouts to step up and run for SPL. (We're still working on a plan here, including using ILST). 3. Roses and Thorns (or SSC) would be applied at a macro level (i.e. "do we want to do that type of campout again"), but would not get implemented on a micro level (i.e. how can we improve meal preparation, etc.)

I've been very fortunate. In my years of Pack leadership I (1) never had adult drama (at least not that I knew about) (2) Always had lots of help (ACMs, CCs, and activity organizing parents). So I really got to have the fun of planning activities for the Scouts and seeing their reactions - and I fully admit, not everything worked as planned, but the landings weren't too hard. Each year I offered to step down and be an active assistant if another parent wanted to try the job. I finally had a taker; and as it turns out the timing is just about right. I could feel that some of my planning and conducting the meetings was starting to be "autopilot" for me. I still plan to help - that's my nature, but the relief that came with the pass off was unexpected. I do miss the job, but I also enjoy mentoring and helping, so this will be my new adventure. And maybe that's the moral. @@Stosh, while you have been in a while, it always seems to be a new adventure for you; a new challenge, and I think that is what reduces the burnout for someone who wants to stay active. I can see where 5 years of Den Leader can start to be repetitive and boring to the DL, even if the tasks and activities vary. Or if someone had to do everything themselves.

I've occasionally had this internal debate myself regarding my son's troop. There are many things that, as an experienced Scouter, I would like to see done, or done differently; but I have to remind myself that as a Webelos, my son visited several troops, and saw how they worked and what they did, and this is the one he chose to join. He could have chosen one closer to my vision, but he did not. Presumably many of the other Scouts are in a similar way of thinking. So while I can, and do work to improve (in my opinion) some of the things in the Troop behind the scenes, I'm not prepared to try an invoke a major change in the way things are done, just because I think they should be. Now, with Safety, and YP I am a little more forceful; but otherwise, it would be limited to making Scouts (TC->SM->PLC) aware of options, or aware of reasons why doing something differently might be beneficial. What I don't want to see in an exodus of Scouts looking for a new unit, because this isn't the unit they signed up to join. The balance is I also don't want lethargy and tradition interfering with the Scouts themselves deciding what could be different. Sometimes all it takes is a motivated youth leader to take over and show the others the possibilities - if the Scouts don't like it, they don't reelect him or those like him; but the Scouts don't get to elect the Scoutmaster - here they would vote with their feet. For the discussion above, it sounds like the Scouts of the troop might be ready for the new vision of your Son, someone with new ideas, training, and experience -> leadership. I hope that he is successful in-spite of the challenges the current SM poses.

Prior to the new requirements, when the majority, but not all, of the scouts were able to complete they rank awards by Blue and Gold; we held a themed ceremony that matched the Blue and gold theme. When we had a pirate theme, they walked a plank - jumping off into the unknown, When we had a Lego theme, they each took a (quatro - oversized lego) brick and built up a sturdy wall as they crossed the stage. When we had a spy theme, the scouts were all graduating spy school and received a dossier (that also included their ranks). Under the new program, we are planning to hold more of a court of honor, since ranks would not be done at the B&G. This does not, have to be a dry affair. Choose a theme, and then build a fun ceremony the Scouts will remember around that theme. There are a lot of on-line resources available for "meaningful ceremonies" as well, in fact, I'm taking that class this weekend at our University of Scouting. (never too old to learn new ideas) The real key is to individually recognize each Scout's achievement, call out their names. If you are smart, you also plan for the Scouts' parents to take a photo as their child receives the award. Do not confuse this plan with making the Scouts wait for award ceremony to get the ranks. If they complete early, they get the award early, at a separately themed (to match the pack meeting) ceremony. They will then be re-recognized at the larger awards ceremony. Likewise scouts who do not complete, still got to do the march, and instead received an "almost there, good job and keep it up" type award. And welcome to the forum, thank you for what you do for our Scouts.

To turn the question around slightly ... And this assumes (yeah yeah) that the paperwork (application) was correctly filled out ... The BSA (national) was happy to take the Scout's registration fees The BSA (Council) was happy to take the Scout's summer camp fees The BSA (unit) was happy to take the Scout's dues and camping fees, etc. So if we propose that the Scout would receive the consequence of having to repeat/reearn the efforts prior to eligibility; would that not also necessitate that the Scout also be refunded their costs, since they were not eligible? How many of us think that that would happen? I do not mean to cheapen the Eagle award, as others have drawn from my prior statements. If the Scout does not know their stuff (which is a completely different problem), then by all means, hold back on the advancement. But no one here has said that the Scout's progress was unearned (just could not have been earned); in fact, considering the younger age, in many ways it is all the more impressive that the Scout has achieved what they have. Has anyone talked with the Scout and their family about what the problem was, and looked at what they might consider a resolution to be? Again, not advocating ignoring the rules (and if someone deliberately went around them, I have no sympathy), but age is often an arbitrary distinction used to generally gauge when certain developmental and emotional abilities would come into play. As a thought experiment, if this youth had been promoted a grade, and was thus in the 6th grade on their 10th birthday. The Tenderfoot rank could theoretically be earned on their 30th day (req. 10b) Second class rank on their 31st day (I do not see a time-delay requirement in the 2015 requirements, feel free to correct me if I missed it) First class rank on their 32nd day (again I seem to be missing the time-delay requirements that I thought were there, now admittedly 10 troop activities, 3 of which are overnight camping in those 32 days are unlikely, but go with me here). Star rank on their 152nd day (req. 1, 4 months) (we'll assume a short February here). Life rank on their 336th day. (req. 1, 6 months) So while the circumstances to make it possible are extremely unlikely, we could have a 10 year old Life Scout. (or the more scary thought, only 17 months to earn Eagle). Do I want such a thing, by no means; but I am also not in favor of Scoutmasters who arbitrarily hold back an otherwise qualified scout from a rank simply because they don't believe that he is old enough.

An interesting conundrum... I am not advocating running around the spirit of requirements, but the GTA also clearly indicates that youth are not held responsible for the mistakes of the Adults. To Life or not to Life is really more of a unit issue. If the council's advancement records indicate at least 6 months since Star was earned, I do not think anyone will go out of their way to backtrack the age of the scout before that. So the real issue is when the Scout is ready for Eagle. If the Scout could have legitimately been in the unit for 22 months by that point in time, it again is unlikely to become an issue. If it does become an issue, the Scout's best defense would be to have copies of the registered scout card showing that they were members for the time enrolled; and ideally backed by the unit (or council's) physical copy of the original application to show that the scout did not misstate their date of birth. All of that said, while it is good to have the Council or District aware of the issue, what is the stance of the parents and Scout? If they are aware of the issue, and they willing to work with a plan (whatever that may be) to help correct for the original mistake. that plan could be the Scout taking more time to earn their remaining rank; maybe spend more time enjoying the experience; or taking the time to plan and execute such a kick*** eagle project that Council/National would be too embarrassed to raise the age issue. Clearly, if the original application was correct and summer camp physicals were correct, then a lot of adult eyes had an opportunity to observe and correct this mistake and did not. Now if those documents reflected an incorrect birthdate, they all bets are off; the parents (and indirectly the Scout) clearly have a responsibility here.

501©3 corporations are not too hard to set up. Charter and Bylaws filed with the state (with a fee), An address (that needs to be updated) for who (individual or company) will be able to receive process if sued, EIN requested from the IRS and form 1023 (sometimes also with a potentially substantial fee). It also does not have to be 501©3 to be a non-profit corporation. The 501©3 designation is only necessary if the unit wishes to receive tax-deductible donations, it is not required for unit fundraisers and other fees and dues. Otherwise they can still incorporate as a non profit corporation (check your specific state for details, limitations, and responsibilities). Usually, the administrative headache is stuff they should be doing anyway - recording meeting minutes, open accounting books for those who make an appointment to review them, etc. It add the expense of having to file and pay a state franchise fee (in most states). You do have to file a tax return (even if not tax payment is made) for them, but if the accounts are maintained the Intuit or H&R block software make it a pretty painless process. That said, my understanding from Committee, Commissioner, or some other training I took and other BSA literature, is that these types of COs were at the very least highly discouraged, and possibly even that the BSA would not register any new "friends of" COs. The board of directors and the unit committee can be the same people. If properly set up, personal liability is rare. That said, Directors and Officers Liability Insurance is still probably a good idea. Passing on control from one generation to the next is really just who is elected to the board of directors of the corporation. As I understand it, even a for-profit company (i.e. Bob's plumbing) could technically CO a unit. I haven't looked into it as a Scouting CO group, but for other things I've done, even a "Trust" could probably be set up to be a CO. Looking at the 501© regulations, a Scout unit CO could also be a 501©4, 501©7, 501©10

I've seen a lot of differing opinions and implementations on these ... - Some Scoutmasters will wait (even indefinitely) for the Scout to request a conference and then to at that time arrange and schedule it at a time available to both the Scout and SM. - Sometimes these are before/after a troop meeting (although my Son's troop's SM discourages this) - Sometimes they are while on a camp-out - Sometimes they have been before/after a merit badge workshop (as in Mr. Smith demonstrating woodwork tools for some of the scouts in the troop learning that merit badge). - Usually they are scheduled for a weekend. Often in 30 min. increments before the next Scout shows up for theirs. - Sometimes they use ASMs to hold some of the conferences, especially for the SM's kids. As for the boards of review, If you have several Scouts ready, these are easier to set up all at once, as it is sometimes hard to get three or more committee members and/or parents scheduled for the same time. Before or after a committee meeting is a great time. Again, set them up back to back, if you have too many scouts, have two boards of review running at once (in different rooms). My Son's troop tries very hard to never make a Scout wait more than 30 days, usually less than 14. As for the Boards of review themselves, my Son's troop gives the parents or committee members a handout with the requirements for the rank, a printout of the Scouts' awards and achievements (should mirror the Scout's handbook), and a page of BoR instructions (i.e. not a retest of the Scout's skills) with a list of sample questions that could be asked of the scout, appropriate to each rank. It helps new parents really get a feel for the scope of the BoR.

The Leadership aspect was not stripped. In fact, that was one of the items the SM paid the most attention to while it was going on (at least on the campout I was on). It was important that the Scout did not do everything themselves and led the patrol in doing it. Mistakes were definitely made, and Scouts definitely learned some lessons about food preparation and storage. When I say they have a troop method as opposed to patrol method, I mean that I honestly do not know which boys are in which patrols other than most of the older boys are in one, and most of the younger boys are in the other, so with that malleable definition of a patrol, I do not think even that requirement was completely off target. Both patrols are (formally) 10-12 boys in size, which I think is their way of accommodating sporadic attendance (a different issue). In this case, it was a PLC decision to do it this way, so we can't even blame the adults for "pencil whipping" this one. Basically, once one of the newer boys started to advance, the other newer boys and some of the older ones (the SPL is only 2nd class) decided that completing requirements for advancement might be a good thing. In my son's case, he didn't budget or price out his menu, so he'll be repeating the patrol cooking requirement when he gets his turn. For the next couple of weeks, I'm still busy with my Cub Pack, and even after that, I'll work committee, but I am not planning to be a ASM or similar, and I have always been of the opinion that the one who agrees to lead, get to choose how they do so, so long as it is safe and conforms generally with GTSS, oath, scout law, and the methods and aims.

At this point, if this were my pack, my response would probably be to run out the clock. Let the year finish, your Webelos II's den will bridge and you will have less collateral damage to control. Make your plans for next year's wolf den, and try and find a parent willing to lead, or maybe the husband/father completing Webelos II wants to step back into it, and she was just keeping the seat warm for him. Were you happy with his performance? In either case, don't invite her to be the Wolf Den leader, primarily because ... (1) If she does not wish to use the methods of scouting (uniforming, etc), then she is not a suitable leader (2) If she lies, she is failing to follow the Scout oath and Laws and is not a suitable leader (3) If she is failing to follow the guide to safe scouting or other official scouting (not pack) policies (it is not clear if she is or is not), then she is not a suitable leader. While it is annoying to you that she wants to run a program independent of the pack, other than pack camping, I'm not sure she is breaking any BSA rules in doing so. I view my role as a Cubmaster as being there to support the den leaders, my pack program is there to help them complete the advancement of their Scouts, and to provide recognition and fun. If they have their own way of doing things, as long as it conforms to BSA rules (GTSS, etc) and is consistent with the Scout Oath and Laws, and achieves the aims and methods of Scouting, so be it. There are a couple of my Den leaders that do things differently than I would, and that is their privilege for stepping up to lead.

My son's troop, which admittedly is more of a Troop method than patrol (2) method unit; the PLC inquired which boys needed the requirement (or the single meal for 2nd class), and worked with the patrol leaders to appoint scouts to be in charge of a patrol's (not necessarily their own) menu/planning/cooking over a couple of campouts to get most the boys through it.

In retrospect, yes. If I were to do it again now, yes. Back then, just like picking teams in school PE, it just never really occurred to us at the time. That said, after I was SPL, and got board with JASM (we didn't have trainers or guides at the time), I asked the SM if I could create a new patrol with all of the, shall we say ... high energy ... scouts that were typically disruptive to their current patrols. Again, I don't think there was any thought to what the scouts who were invited to join this patrol would have thought about why they were selected. In the end we didn't do too bad, and many of the Scouts later settled into Troop leadership roles.

When I was a boy ... [OldManRambling] Whenever there was more than a Scout or two joining, the existing patrols has a form of draft to select who they wanted as a part of their group. If it was just one or two Scouts, they usually got to choose from the least populated patrols. Every six months, just after the troop selection of the SPL and his appointment of his Senior Patrol/Leadership Corp members (2 ASPLs, Scribe, Troop QM, maybe one of two others with various functions), the Scouts that wanted to, applied to transfer patrols - join with friends, increase liklihood of being elected PL, fill in for lack of older leadership drafted to the Senior Patrol, if the patrol had room then the transfer was generally approved. The patrols then selected their own leadership for the next six months. Generally speaking, this system worked pretty well, most of our patrols had a good age distribution, and relatively even skills distribution. The system predated me, and predated the troop adult leaders around that time, so I do not know if the original tradition was set up by the youth or adults, but the troop itself, in my time, was very boy led and organized. Our summer camp also had a pretty good First Year camper program (if I do say so myself). I, for sake of this argument, leave out the negative consequences in esteem for last scouts drafted. [/OldManRambling] I have seen units where the NSP (bridged Webelos stay together for 6 mos to a year with an active Troop Guide and/or ASM) worked pretty well - but usually they were distributed out to other patrols after that time. The problem, as I have also seen it, is if the patrols are not aged mixed and if the troop (youth) leadership is not really strong, is that the adults use this as an excuse to step in a teach the boys - and while that works (usually) for teaching those scouts the skills they need to learn, it also denies an opportunity for the slightly older (12, 13, 14 year old) scouts to learn how to teach, and gain the confidence from seeing the success in their teaching. If the Scouts are kept together the whole time, while it does improve patrol spirit and comradere, it also sets up a problem in the future when you have several older (14-15 year old, 1-St-L) scouts competing for leadership positions within the patrol when they were not selected for a troop level POR. Adult leaders, often step in here and either expand the roster of PORs (i.e. bugler, librarian, etc.) without actually establishing how that position becomes one of leadership and responsibility (they can be, but it requires effort and clear expectations), and the boys get credit for marking time without really learning the skills we (as adult leaders) want to instil in the Scouts. I know it can be done (a working NSP model), I have seen it; but the level of effort (and restraint) required is beyond what most Troops I have observed are able to accomplish.

@@qwazse, I like the additions; it would be fun to do, but a major undertaking. One of the hardest parts is keeping the challenges interesting and doable-online. I like the gear photo upload as an example, I also like the closed time frame for participation.

Actually, that was partially my point, to use that role to teach the limited role of the adults in the operation. I thought about allowing several patrols to self organize into a troop, and elect one of the patrols to be the "senior patrol", but I decided to leave it out as the question was primarily concerned with the patrol method, not the troop structure.

Getting back to some of the original question, it seems you are looking for a time conscious (short), repeatable method to make adults understand the patrol method. I don't have all the resources to do this, but might help if the idea caught on ... Lets approach it like a social media problem. This can all be done on the internet, so at least to the adults participating, they will think it is being conscious of their schedule (in the end it may not, but that is a different story). People can come and go at any time, they start in a general "chat room", so they can get to know some of the others. When a group of eight of them agree to become a patrol, they start the challenges - together. They can do the challenges at any rate they want to, so it would be a good idea for them work out a schedule for when they will get together online an meet in their "patrol corners" chat room. If someone meets too many meetings, the others can vote them out and visit the chat room to add a new members. In many ways, this would work like the "clash of clans" model. As a team, they would have on-line challenges - menu planning, teach a skill - this would require more effort to implement, but the rewards could be team (patrol) awards and individual "advancement". Add some leader boards and team rankings and some of our patrol members will certainly be coming back. The patrols could face off in time trials against other patrols logged in at the same time. There would be some Moderators (SMs/ASMs), but their role would be very limited. Clearly a lot of effort, but might be able to achieve the desired goal, and might be a lot of fun if some good challenges could be designed to work on-line.

The Training still exists, but it is (may be) different ... 1. First you need to use my.scouting.org and your login account. 2. From the dashboard, you can get to "My Training" 3. From there, you can select "requirements" or "training center" If you are a registered scouter, the "requirements" section will tell you which courses you have to take to be trained. Otherwise, you can select courses from the training center. I am not sure if this is a moving target or not, back in November, the old courses had disappeared and been replace with ... 1. It is was longer a single ~30 min course for your position, it is necessary to take 4 sets of 6-9 videos and tests (~5-15 mins. each) to complete most of the position specific trainings. On the plus side, some modules are used by more than one position, and you only have to do each module once. 2. If you are not registered for your position yet, it is nearly impossible to figure out which training modules you need to take to complete the training for your position. 3. For the ones I have seen so far, it is some of the worst photo-shopping (clip the background away from the picture of the scout/scouter) I have ever seen. However, rechecking today, under the training center, the old courses seemed to show back up (i.e. Den leader specific, Cubmaster specific, etc.). In either case, that is where you find what you are looking for. Good luck.

I think that, at least initially, the former Scout (especially Eagles) DEs tend to put up with the job longer - they really believe in what they are doing, and giving back to the program. From my anecdotal experience, DEs seem to come in a couple of flavors ... 1. The young, just out of college type. (If a former scout, they usually last a year or more, if not they do not seem to last that long). 2. The older, nearly retired, former Scouter (these either last a long time - believe in the cause, or are beyond caring about SE pressure; or are gone within 3 months - disillusioned with the politics and finances) 3. The "between jobs" younger adult. They usually do not last past marriage/kids.

If you are using Scoutbook, it handles this very well. At the very top of the rank requirements page, you make a selection as to if the 2010, 2013, or 2016 requirements are being used, and it brings up the correct requirement numbers and sign off dates section. I do not know if it "error checks" for you - for example making sure that anyone who's first rank requirement signature is in 2016 uses the 2016 requirements, but you can select the right one before you start notating the signature dates.

Maybe some "junior UC" type position, for example a year of shadowing a UC or a role in a District Committee or RT staff for a while, is needed for this type of person. I agree that a fresh Eagle Scouter probably does not have the right experience to jump into this role right away. I do know, that If I had been more aware of the District Level Volunteer operations (I knew Troop level and Professional level), my ~17 year hiatus between college and my Son joining Cub would have been much shorter, and I would have very likely volunteered, if not as a UC - although I think I could have done the job - on District Committees, etc.

Technically, the Boy Scout "joining" requirements did change, effective Janaury 2016. The biggest difference is that "Scout" is now a rank. There are some minor additions and tweeks to what the Scout is expected to know, the details can be found ... http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/2016BoyScoutRequirements_8.14.2015.pdf Most Webelos earning the [new] Arrow of Light, should be able to complete these easily. As for the original questions, like others, I'm not as skilled in the specifics of how the one-year webelos program works within the LDS units, but for other units, say a boy in 4th grade worked on, but did not complete the Webelos badge; it is my understanding that any adventures he earned could be use to fulfil the elective requirements for the AOL (since they technically were not used for the Webelos Badge).

If the primary reason for not selecting you was your desire to re-establish a boy-led troop; and that is not what they would like to see; the real question is (1) why would you want to remain at all - if their philosophy is so different; and (2) does your son want to remain in the troop if it is not boy-led? It may be that your son is happy with this ... let him stay in the troop, you can leave ... I am confident that district level people would be pleased to have you participate at their level. If this is not what your son wants for his experience, I hope you are in an area where there are other nearby troops ... and If not ... Let your son remain for now and since you appear to have some skills at recruiting, establish a new troop and recruit into that, even if it has to wait until next year's bridging to fill out the membership. Best of Luck, and thanks for the service that you have and will continue to give.

I had the great pleasure for Mr. Mineta to be a guest speaker at my Eagle COR. I liked him, even if my politics don't always agree.