who can sign rank requirements

[Get Outdoors 15]

Does anyone know if the BSA has a written policy prohibiting a SM or ASM from signing off on their own son's rank adavancement requirements? I"m not looking for; is it right or wrong? I'm looking for the black and white version. I'm assuming this is adressed somewhere but I suspect I'm not looking in the right place.

 

Thanks

[Eagle92 110]

there is no national prohibition against it, but most units will have their own local prohibitions, unless the parent has a very specialized MB skill, i.e. atomic energy, and then usually other scouts are involved int he process.

 

I personally like the PLs and older scouts signing off on T-2-1 requirements. i also wish they broght back youth on BORs for those ranks, I still sitting on those as a youth. Since our troop's protocol was for the youth to be the chairman of the T-2-1 BORs, I was the one you got to say, 'We want to see you come back in X months...for Y rank Congratulations."

[evmori 11]

Short answer - No. I'm sure someone else will post the long answer.

[Beavah 205]

No BSA prohibition.

 

The Scoutmaster designates who can sign off for rank requirements. Can be ASMs or youth members like Patrol Leaders.

 

The Scoutmaster approves boys for beginning MBs with a particular counselor.

 

Wise Scoutmasters (or wise troops) do everything in their power to avoid the possible appearance of impropriety, as well as givin' their son some room to grow and learn from other adults, by not signing off on their own boy's advancement.

 

Beavah

 

[Stosh 3452]

In my troop:

 

PL signs off on his members.

 

ASPL signs off on Troop Officer Corps members.

 

SPL signs off on PL's and ASPL (PL of TOC).

 

And SM signs off on SPL.

 

Written reports on what got signed are done by:

 

Patrol Scribe -> Troop Scribe

 

ASPL -> Troop Scribe

 

SPL -> Troop Scribe

 

SM -> Troop Scribe

 

Troop Scribe complies all the reports and turns them over to ASM Advancement who records them in the computer and then returns reports to Troop Scribe who keeps the paper records.

 

This way we have record of advancement in the boys' book, Troop Scribe reports and ASM-Advancement computer.

 

Stosh

[Get Outdoors 15]

Thanks everyone, this info is very helpful!

 

Our troop has a policy prohibiting leaders from signing off on their own boys. During a recent BOR our commitee denied a scout first class due to his father, an assistant leader signed off on a requirement that I know was completed correctly. (identify native plants) In this case the commitree is going by the Troop policies which is fine but this is coming from the same commitee that is presuring the SM (me) to sign off EAgle rank when the scout has been "Active" in about 10% of Troop activities. Our Troop also has a minimum policy for participation. (BSA's definition of "active" is being registered)The fact that the commitee is choosing when and when not to enforce the troop policies for their own son's benifit isn't right.

 

Our DE has explained to me; Troop policies are not enforcable outside of BSA policy.

 

 

[John-in-KC 311]

1) Mr Scoutmaster, YOU are the program officer. YOU sit down with the CC someplace offsite and have a friendly cup of coffee. You establish the program standards within the broad context of Scouting guidelines. You'll find them in the Scoutmaster Handbook.

 

2) No, there is no prohibition against parents signing off on their kids. Wise leaders don't most of the time, because that helps set a higher bar for the rest.

 

3) When you and the CC are on the grid together, you have a friendly visit with your COR and make sure your collective vision and goals conform with your Chartered Partner.

 

4) Then... the rest of the parents can sign up, or move along. For those that move along, that's the sound of helicopters leaving the area...

 

5) On the Eagle candidate... look at the BSA requirements objectively. Visit with your UC on the young man. If you cannot in good faith sign his Eagle app, speak with him, immediately follow it up in writing, and tell him how to improve or how to go to the next step. Then, if a District or Council appeal board decides otherwise, you've done what you need to do in good faith. Just don't play headgames with the Scout

[FScouter 24]

Just to be clear, BSA does NOT define "active" as being "registered". What BSA has said is the a troop may NOT define "active" with an arbitrary percentage.

[Narraticong 15]

I agree on Scouts signing off on T-2-1 requirements. Other than Scoutmaster Conference and Board of Review, I really don't want adults signing off on anything for T-2-1. Boy Leadership. That being said, we had to have adults sign off for the first year our troop existed, because we had no higher ranking Scouts. Now, that responsibility goes to the PL's and other Scout leadership.

 

I'm also on board with the concept of Scouts making up the BOR for T-2-1. Train them, give them the tools, then give them the responsibility.

 

As to adults signing for their own sons, why not? If we have entrusted an adult with a position on our committee or as an ASM or SM, should we not trust that person to do things the right way? As I see it, there are only 12 rules we need to obey to run our troop. If an adult leader (or youth leader) is Trustworthy, there will be no favoritism. If a Scout or parent perceives favoritism by a leader, it needs to be examined and dealt with.

 

The assumption within a troop absolutely MUST be that every member is Trustworthy. By making rules to guard against potential improprieties, we are then just asking for them to happen. As SM, if I say something is so, then it must be. If a Scout tells me something is so, then it must be. If either one of us is not telling the truth, it will come out in the end.

 

We had a boy say he passed his swimmer test at summer camp last year. No record was provided by the camp. Several other Scouts said they don't think he really did. But I took his word for it. And he therefore earned First Class. Did he or didn't he? I'm not totally sure. But I do know that he is going to camp again this year and will have to take another swim test. If he passes, fine. If not, he will have a very embarassing question to answer during his next Scoutmaster Conference.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, hmmm...

 

I wonder if there's an element of Trustworthy which applies to Scoutmasters bein' trustworthy when doin' signoffs where the lad is supposed to demonstrate an ability, not simply claim an ability? Even if a lad is being honest, he might not really understand what swimming 75 yards "in a strong manner" should be, eh? His doggy paddle might be his version of "a strong manner." That's why feedback from others is part of da process.

 

Besides, if we really trust da youth leaders with T-2-1 signoffs and the youth PL says that he doesn't think a lad achieved the requirement, then shouldn't we respect that youth leader's decision? Isn't the Patrol Leader trustworthy?

 

I expect rather than futzin' around with varying memories of summer camp, most PLs would just take the boy to a local pool or lake and do a swim test. Takes all of a few minutes. The boys can even meet after school and use the school or community pool durin' open swim. Seems like a better approach. Yah, and kinder than havin' all the boy's buddies whisperin' for a year about how he "cheated" to get First Class. Plus it means the SM and PL are bein' trustworthy about a signoff.

 

We're workin' with kids, eh? We want 'em to learn to be trustworthy, but every kid worthy of the title is goin' to look to get away with what he can, eh? I expect none of us just assume the (adult) treasurer is trustworthy. I bet we do things like require two signatures on checks, or have someone else review the monthly account statements. Just prudent, eh? I know we all do reference checks and criminal background checks on adult leaders, right? And if we don't just assume adults are trustworthy, seems like it's prudent not to simply assume the lads are always trustworthy, eh? They're still learnin'.

 

Trust, but also observe and teach and give feedback.

 

Beavah

 

[Beavah 205]

Just to be clear, BSA does NOT define "active" as being "registered". What BSA has said is the a troop may NOT define "active" with an arbitrary percentage.

 

Yah, all depends on whether you're followin' da Rules & Regulations version, the SPL/PL Handbook version, or the current view of da national advancement folks, eh?

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[evmori 11]

We had a boy say he passed his swimmer test at summer camp last year. No record was provided by the camp. Several other Scouts said they don't think he really did. But I took his word for it. And he therefore earned First Class. Did he or didn't he? I'm not totally sure.

 

Nothing wrong with taking him to the local pool & finding out. No proof, no requirement completed.

 

We have all had Scouts who couldn't swim or were afraid of the water. I had one Scout who was afraid of the water. He went on vacation with his family & his dad filmed him completing his rank swimming requirement in the pool at the hotel where they were staying. He brought the tape in, we watched it together, requirement was signed.

 

Yeah we are to be trustworthy, but being stupid isn't trustworthy.

 

Ed

[FScouter 24]

Seeing as how all the versions are the same, it doesn't make any difference. The differences come from different individuals reading the same thing and choosing to interpret it to support their own purposes.

 

If a boy is not participating in the troop program, a rule written by the adults is not going to make him active. BSA makes it clear that it is the job of the Scoutmaster to engage the boys and create a program such that they will actively participate. Writing a "you must attend or else" rule only shows that the SM has failed.

 

Instead, he should be conferencing with those boys whose participation is waning and determine ways to increase it.

[Get Outdoors 15]

What I'm determining here is our Troop P&P is pretty much worthless unless it's supported by BSA policy.

 

FScouter where did you find this?

"Just to be clear, BSA does NOT define "active" as being "registered". What BSA has said is the a troop may NOT define "active" with an arbitrary percentage. "

 

I don't want to get to a topic that has been discussed in another threads but what the BSA Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures says is " A Scout will be considered "active" in his unit if he is 1) Registered in his unit 2) not dismissed from his unit for disciplinary reasons 3) Engaged by his unit leaders on a regular basis (informed of unit activities through SM conferences or personal contact, ect.)

 

The boys in our troop that were not participating were all 17+ yr olds. They didn't want to be in scouting anymore, regardless of the program provided. What's that saying? "you can lead a hourse to water but ya can't make him drink" The parents wanted them is scouts to earn eagle and put it on a college application. They want to tell others how wonderful their kids are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BDPT00 41]

Narraticong said: "I'm also on board with the concept of Scouts making up the BOR for T-2-1. Train them, give them the tools, then give them the responsibility."

Does this mean that you would prefer this, or that you do it? If you're doing it, it's against advancement guidelines. Boards of review are to be conducted by the committee. If you're turning in advancement paperwork to the council, who is signing it?

BDPT00