Eagle Board of Review - National v. Local Policy

[Boris 10]

Seems that I read somewhere that it is national policy that Scout leaders and Assistant Leaders are forbidden to participate in an Eagle Board of Review?

Can the Local Council ignore national policy and staff the Eagle Board of Review with ASMs?

 

Second Part: Seem to recall reading that national policy permits two types of Eagle Boards of Review: A District one or a Troop one.

Can the Local Council deny a Scout's choice of requesting a District review?

[scottteng 11]

SM and ASM never sit on any BOR not for tenderfoot,second class. first class, star, life or Eagle. This is the committee's shot in your troop for all but eagle. District and council for eagle. You have had your say at all else through SM conference. Now you let your work and others be evaluated. Hold the flames I am an ASM too!

[Beavah 205]

Yah, Boris, welcome to da forums, eh?

 

Can I ask why you're askin', and what your position is in Scouting? Most of the time, the easy and polite thing to do is to ask your district advancement chair. Without really knowin' people and circumstances, it's hard for us to say much. But I'll give it a shot.

 

Seem to recall reading that national policy permits two types of Eagle Boards of Review: A District one or a Troop one.

Can the Local Council deny a Scout's choice of requesting a District review?

 

Actually, 3 types of EBOR's are allowed: by the troop, by the district, and by the council. Which is used is entirely at the council's discretion. The Scout does not have a choice in the matter. Of course, in the event of a negative decision, the scout can appeal to the next highest level.

 

For a troop EBOR, the troop committee chooses the board members, not the district or council. The district/council sends one representative to join the (troop selected) board.

 

Seems that I read somewhere that it is national policy that Scout leaders and Assistant Leaders are forbidden to participate in an Eagle Board of Review?

 

Nah, that's not exactly true. Unit leaders and assistant unit leaders should not serve as members on the board of review, but it is just fine for them to come and observe. In fact, it is normal practice in most areas for the SM to introduce the boy to the board and to stay around. The board may ask the SM questions if it desires, and generally most boards are pretty tolerant if the SM makes a clarification here and there on behalf of the boy. The reason for not allowing the SM to "participate" is to make sure the boy answers most questions on his own, without his adult leaders jumpin' in to help him.

 

Can the Local Council ignore national policy and staff the Eagle Board of Review with ASMs?

 

With what ASMs? There are plenty of ASMs and SMs who also serve at the district level and might very well serve on an Eagle BOR, as long as it's not for a boy in their troop. Otherwise, whatever level is doin' the board should use folks other than the boy's SM/ASM. SM/ASM's are generally viewed to be too biased in favor of the boy, and they've already had their say in recommendin' the boy for the EBOR.

 

All that havin' been said, occasionally somethin' weird will happen, where in a rural area or such an ASM will fill in as a board member at the last minute because of an emergency or some such. But it shouldn't be a normal practice.

 

Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Boris 10]

Thank-you for your prompt responses. Your opinions clearly reflect your deep love for Scouting and your desire to educate neophytes.

 

That being said in total genuine respect, I still would like to ascertain source policy from the BSA Headquarters on this topic, but to date, I have failed miserably. Any suggestions for how one gets an answer directly from the BSA Headquarters? Please do not direct me through intermediaries, e.g., the Council.

 

Again, thank-you.

 

 

[TheScout 10]

There is an advancemment committee manual available from your local council. It has all the answers you need for advancements.

[scoutldr 732]

I believe the manual cited above is the "District Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures", which is available on the shelf of many Scout Shops.

 

Boards of Review is a function of the Troop Committee...SM and ASM are not members of the Committee, and therefore should not participate actively. In our local council, Eagle boards are conducted by the troop committee with a District Rep present as a participating member of the board. If the Eagle is not awarded, the scout can appeal to the District Advancement Chair.

 

That being said, it sounds like there's more information you're not telling us???

[FScouter 24]

You asked for source policy:

 

Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures book #33088

 

Troop Committee Guidebook #34505

 

Board of Review training:

http://www.scouting.org/boyscouts/supplemental/18-625/index.html

[John-in-KC 311]

In my District, the NESA representative to the District Committee maintains the roster of Eagle Board of Review guest members. The CC calls in and gets one, and makes arrangements as needed for date, time and place.

 

The District Advancment Chairman trains these folk and together with the NESA rep watches over what they do and how they do it.

 

Many of our dsitrict units give substantial input to the Eagle Candidate for the EBOR: If there's a special Scouting place for the young man, they'll move Heaven and Earth to get him there. If there are special Scouting people in his life, they tend to be invited to sit the EBOR.

 

Other Districts in my Council have standing EBORS at District Roundtable: The only unit member allowed to sit the EBOR is the CC.

 

I'm very glad I live where I do.

[Beavah 205]

I still would like to ascertain source policy from the BSA Headquarters on this topic, but to date, I have failed miserably. Any suggestions for how one gets an answer directly from the BSA Headquarters?

 

Yah, Boris, it all depends what your role or position is in Scouting, eh?

 

But unless you're a council executive or council president, the answer to your question is "you can't." As an ordinary Joe, you are a consumer or customer. And let's face it, consumers or customers aren't really goin' to get answers from any large company's HQ, eh? At best, you get a help line in a call center in India . Just because you bought a Taurus doesn't mean you're goin' to be able to call up Bill Ford on the phone to ask him about your engine trouble. National doesn't have the staff to answer questions from every one of its several million members, and it's not their job. Just like Ford, though, da BSA corporation provides local dealers and service centers where you can get help and answers to questions.

 

The way the BSA works is that your troop is owned and operated by a Chartering Organization. So if yeh have a specific question about your troop or its operations, you have to ask da folks who work for your CO - the Scoutmaster primarily, and then the Committee Chair. For troop stuff, the buck stops at the Head of the Chartering Organization or his representative.

 

The BSA also provides a service center to assist the Chartering Organizations. The most common BSA services are provided by the district, but its job is to provide service to units and Chartering Organizations, not really to individual scouting consumers. If you're a SM or a CC or COR, you can get help from your district. So if you're one of those folks, you can call your Unit Commissioner or your District Chair, or your District Executive for help with BSA policy or procedures.

 

But if you're not servin' in an official capacity for a unit, then the BSA doesn't really provide any direct support for you (beyond publications like Boys Life or uniforms from Supply Division). So you really have to direct your questions to the troop's leadership. That means "ask the Scoutmaster", or for your son it means "ask your Patrol Leader".

 

Good folks here can answer questions in a general way, and can refer yeh to some documents to help. FScouter has listed the principle ones. Yeh just have to remember that general documents aren't usually enough to answer specific questions - you also need trainin' and experience and an understandin' of the background.

 

Hope all that helps, eh? If not, give us a bit more to go on in terms of your role and the specific issue you're facin'.

 

Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[packsaddle 753]

This is simply a complimentary comment. I think this is the most concise and information-packed thread I have ever read in these forums. The question was sufficiently vague to allow some very comprehensive answers that can help answer a broad range of other questions. I would like to thank everyone involved. I may print the whole thread and post it to our committee and leadership. It re-emphasizes many things I have been trying to communicate to them for a long time.

Nice.

[Eagle69 46]

In my Council we do Troop Eagle Board of Reviews and it isn't uncommon at all for an ASM from the candidate's own Troop to be on the board. As SM for thirty years and having been involved in 25+ Eagle Boards of Review, I have only sat in on two or three and then I was the mouse in the back of the room.

[acco40 95]

What is done and what is correct are often two separate issues. Just because some troops "do it" does not make it correct.

 

In fact, as Scoutmaster and not a committee member, the only Board of Review I may actively participate in is an Eagle Board of Review! For all other Boards of Review (Tenderfoot - Life) one must be a Troop Committee member. Now, before all jump to their keyboards to correct this apparent mistake let me expand on my response. As a Scoutmaster for Troop ABC I should not sit on the Board of Review for any Scout, nor observe these BORs. Only at an Eagle Board of Review may I be allowed to attend to observe and respond if questioned if the EBOR is for a Scout in my troop. However, one does not need to be a registered committee member or even a registered Scouter to sit on an EBOR so I could sit on an EBOR for any Scout not in my troop.

 

One of the purposes of a BOR is for the committee members to evaluate not only the Scout but the program being administered by the Scoutmaster and his assistants. To perform this function, it is best to have the Scoutmaster and his assistants not be present (EBORs are the exception). For the other BORs, it is best (IMHO) to have the SPL introduce the Scout to the BOR and then exit.(This message has been edited by acco40)

[scoutldr 732]

In my experience, it is left up to the Eagle Candidate if they want their SM/ASM in the room or not. Some do, some don't. If they do, the SM sits in the room, but does NOT sit on the board. They speak only if asked a question by a board member. It is also true that other board members can be selected by the Candidate, in addition to troop committee members. Frequently, we have the scout's Priest, neighbor, coach, teacher, or other significant adult in the scout's life also sit on the board. After a brief introduction on how a BOR works, they all do really well.

[acco40 95]

scoutldr - you are correct except for one item, the eagle candidate may request (not pick) that certain individuals sit on his EBOR but the composition of the EBOR is determined by the board chair (usually the troop advancement chair) and not the Scout.

[Boris 10]

Original message:

"Seems that I read somewhere that it is national policy that Scout leaders and Assistant Leaders are forbidden to participate in an Eagle Board of Review? Can the Local Council ignore national policy and staff the Eagle Board of Review with ASMs"?

 

Thank-you for the counsel to get BSA national policy straight from the source, i.e., The Advancement Committee Guide. Policies and Procedures, publication 33088, 2006 printing, available in printed form through local Scout offices. Citing from 33088 , The 12 Steps from Life to Eagle, page 32:

 

Item 8:

 

The board of review for an Eagle candidate is composed of at least three but not more than six members. One member serves as chairman. Unit Leaders, assistant unit leaders, relatives, or guardians may not serve as members of a Scouts board of review. The board of review members should convene at least 30 minutes before the candidate appears in order to review the application, reference checks, and service project report. At least one district or council advancement representative must be a member of the Eagle board of review if the board of review is conducted on a unit level. A council or district may designate more than one person to serve as a member of Eagle Boards of review when requested to do so by the unit. It is not required that these persons be members of the advancement committee; however, they must have an understanding of the importance of the Eagle board of review.

 

Item 9:

 

The candidates unit leader introduces him to the members of the board of review. The unit leader may remain in the room, but does not participate in the board of review. The unit leader may be called on to clarify a point in question. In no case should a relative or guardian of the candidate attend the review, even as a unit leader.

 

It behooves all Scouters to refer to source national policy on a regular basis to assure that the quality product offered conforms to the CURRENT national will. It appears that many well-intentioned Scouters perpetuate the status quo (homeostasis not always being wonderful) without checking the pulse of the national will. Of course, what Scouter wants to continue BUYING source, policy material? Not me.

 

Bottom line: A very strong case can be made that all national BSA policy be made available NOW for on-line, literal text search via the BSA national web-site. This will significantly alleviate the pressure on our well-intentioned volunteers. Instead of having to interpret a stale policy statement or to resort to Weve always done IT that way, modern leaders will be empowered to lead based on a factual basis, not hearsay.

 

A secondary point raised in my initial posting: Are there any sanctions against local units/districts/councils that choose to ignore stated NATIONAL policy? Are inspections or audits done by any BSA official outside the council to assure compliance? Are there any penalties for failure to comply? No answers have been posted yet to those questions.

 

Original message:

"Seem to recall reading that national policy permits two types of Eagle Boards of Review: A District one or a Troop one.

Can the Local Council deny a Scout's choice of requesting a District review"?

 

Referring to Publication 33088, page 30, Eagle Scout Boards of Review, National policy does not permit a Scout to choose who does his review:

 

The Boy Scouts of America has placed the Eagle Scout board of review in the hands of either the troop, team, crew, or ship committee or the district or council committee responsible for advancement. The council will decide and promulgate which method or methods may be used.

 

The board of review for an Eagle Candidate is comprised of a minimum of three members and a maximum of six members, 21 years of age or older.

 

Again, Scouting is replete with many well-intended volunteers who have valiantly tried to piece together interpretations, while in reality diminishing the intent of the Scouting national will. Case in point: http://www.eaglescout.org/finale/bor.html Buried within the Guidelines is a statement (as if fact): A Scout may request a District Board of Review which will consist of members of the District Advancement Committee and/or District members who have an understanding of the importance of the Eagle Board of Review. This is NOT accurate, per national policy.

 

IMHO: BSA National would be well-served to create an Ombudsman and policy answer desk designed to unite the volunteers. The Ombudsman also would be invited to scour the on-line sources to do quality control spot-checks. The Ombudsman could be charged with posting changes to policy (synopses), so that the long-term Scouters can be kept apprised. Not all volunteers have the time or diligence to notice an un-official v. official ruling. Successful organizations encourage an open door policy, or a mechanism by which straight, current answers are produced. This is the age of the Internet. There are no real excuses to keeping policy buried.

 

Thank-you for listening to one persons thoughts.