What is routine maintenance?

[penst8 10]

This topic has been touched on in some threads but I didn't find one devoted to it.

 

What is considered routine maintenance? In the Eagle Service Project Workbook it notes routine maintenance as weeding, etc. But is there a better definition of "routine maintenance?"

 

About 7 months ago I took over the advancement position in our Troop. Since then I've been invited by our District Adv. Chair to sit in on about 8 EBOR. One candidate's service project was painting a church. At a round table meeting a year or so ago I saw an approved project book for oddly enough, painting a church.

 

Last spring I took a group of Scout's on a backpacking trip on the AT. One night we stayed by a shelter that needed some repairs and paint. The painting would require the most time and materials. The scout mentioned it to one of our ASMs who said it wasn't a good project because painting is maintenance. He was a former Dist Adv. Chair in another council.

 

Obviously painting projects are being approved in our District. My question is should they be and just what exactly is routine maintenance?

 

In my opinion weeding and painting aren't the same. One is done often and truly is routine, the other is done every 10 years and doesn't meet Webster's definition of routine.

 

I hate to see good projects by our scouts never get out of our Troop because of one person's opinion of what routine means.

 

Thanks.

[click23 66]

Here is the definition according to the Guide to Advancement, http://scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf

 

 

9.0.2.11 Routine Labor - Routine labor is not normally considered appropriate for a project. This might be defined as a job or service that a Scout may provide as part of his daily life, or a routine maintenance job normally done by the beneficiary (for example, picking the weeds on the football field at a school). But the real test has to do with scale and impact. If routine labor is conducted on so large a scale it requires planning, development, and leadership, it may have sufficient impact

[Stosh 3452]

I can see a definite separation between painting as routine maintenance, unless one is in the process of restoration. Is the painting being done on a on-going already used building/project, or is the building/project one that brings it back into use?

 

It's not just painting that fits this category. A trail through the woods needs the occasional trim to keep it in passable condition, but if it's overgrown, and no longer useable and an Eagle candidate wants to restore it back into useable condition, that's a whole different story.

 

Just my 2-cents worth.

 

Stosh

[Twocubdad 665]

I agree with you. Painting, repairs should be okay. Simply pulling weeds, mowing grass, and janitorial chores would not.

 

But more to the point is how the project is structured. A thorough landscape renovation at the CO could be considered just pulling weeds and cutting grass. But if the project is of sufficient scope, involves multiple tasks, lots of people and requires substantial leadership and organization, I'd could be convinced.

 

To many folks look at phrases like "no routine maintenance" and try to figure how to exclude projects instead of trying to figure how to work with Scouts to make it happen.

[CalicoPenn 729]

I would define routine maintenance as maintenance that is done on at least an annual basis, if not more often. I might even stretch that to include maintenance done on a biennial or triennial basis, depending on the project.

 

Mowing the lawn is routine maintenance.

Washing windows is routine maintenance.

Polishing the floors is routine maintenance.

Installing and removing window screens is routine maintenance.

Clearing an established trail after a season or two is routine maintenance.

 

On the other hand, just because something is maintenance in scope, doesn't mean it's routine maintenance. I wouldn't consider painting a building as routine maintenance. It is maintenance, but it's not done on a routine basis. It might not be something that is done for 7 to 10 years (or longer).

 

However, that doesn't neccessarily mean all painting is not routine. The beneficiary organization may paint a day care nursery walls every year - I'd call that routine and wouldn't allow it as an Eagle project. They may paint parking bollards and stops, hydrants, and other miscellaneous items on an annual or bienniel basis - I'd call that routine.

 

Some things we'd automatically dismiss as routine maintenance might turn out not to be. You might have an established trail that has been neglected for years that a Scout wants to rehabilitate - though it may essentially be the same type of labor involved, I'd argue that it isn't routine maintenance, it's rehabilitating a neglected trail and getting it back into shape so that routine maintenance can be performed on it. This is where those biennial and triennial routine maintenance comes in to play - if the beneficiary has a history of doing this work every three years, and this year is that third year, then it's not a neglected trail - it's routine maintenance. But if it's been 10 or 15 years since the last time someone's done maintenance? I'd call it non-routine. Oh, and just to point out a possibility, if a trail is regularly maintained but there's been severe storm damage and a Scout would like to take that on as a project, I'd let it go through as well. Just because something is routinely maintained doesn't mean it shouldn't be eligible for a project if there is extenuating circumstances.

 

Removing and installing window screens is routine maintenance, but I would suggest that removing old window screens, building new window screens, and installing the new ones is not routine.

 

I'd even be cautious about declaring weeding as routine. The beneficiary may have a corner of their property that has been negelected for years that a Scout might take on to turn into something useful (a sitting/reflection area, a labyrinth, a tot playground, or whatever) and weeding may be part of that project. As long as it's a part of a larger project and is not just weeding, listing weeding as an activity shouldn't be cause for denial.

 

That's how I'd look at a project to see if it's routine maintenance.

 

As for your particular example of the shelter on the AT - I'd probably agree that it wouldn't be eligible as a project, but not because it's a painting job. Most of the shelters on the AT are regularly maintained. Many are touched on at least once a year, and many are touched every two to three years. Unless this particular shelter is falling into disrepair because no one has been maintaining it (and you'll know because the roof might be falling in or floor boards are rotting away) then it's pretty likely that someone, usually an AT hiking club, has it on their routine maintenance list.(This message has been edited by calicopenn)

[Engineer61 19]

Routine Maintenance is any recurring, preventative or on-going maintenance to delay or prevent a failure of a system.

 

Examples:

 

Filter changes.

 

Lubrication replacement.

 

Sealants (Paint, Caulk, Water Sealers)

 

Repair or replacement of minor components designed to have a limited life. (Brake pads, motor brushes, bearings, bushings.)

 

Replacing roof rafters or decking is not routine maintenance, whereas replacing a worn-out roof is.

[Basementdweller 608]

Paint is routine and preventative maintenance.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, I'd be in perfect agreement with CalicoPenn, jblake, and TwoCubDad. Especially TwoCubDad's bit about how lookin' at the routine maintenance thing as a way to shoot down a boy's project is exactly the wrong way to go. Yeh use that as a starting point to help him develop a better project.

 

I'd put many painting projects more in the capital repair/depreciation category than the routine maintenance category. Not all painting projects, but many. So it should not be excluded automatically, it should be supported and built on.

 

B

 

[DeanRx 69]

I'm with Beav and 2cub on this one. Committees should be looking for ways to approve the Eagle project, not shoot it down repeatedly. I know when I was a scout, our CO was a church, we had two Eagle projects I helped with...

 

One was sandblasting (not sure that would be allowed nowadays) the old, faded parking striped off the church parking lot and repainting the lot. I think we built a disabled parking spaces and ramp to go with it and maybe added some park benches around the parking area.

 

Another project was removing and cleaning storm windows and refurbishing the exterior of some of the stained glass windows the storm windows covered. Now, I'd agree this would be considered routine maintenance, but if memory serves me these storm windows hadn't been taken off the church in the time I had been around (at the time about 15 years)... so it was actually quite an undertaking and as the church was pretty large, it took a good amount of coordination of the volunteers to make it happen.

 

Both of these were just as hard to pull of as the one Eagle project I helped with planting trees and shrubs as a windbreak on the grounds of a local school. The planting, while its impact lasts longer (trees still there today vs windows washed / sealed probably at least 3 times since then), is no less work than the other two.

 

All three guys passed their EBORs with these projects. As a youth, I would have no idea that one would be considered more deserving as an Eagle project over the others.

[John-in-KC 311]

A re-roof job is IMO capital maintenance. Roofs are supposed to last up to 40 years. It may be cyclic for the donor, but it's a major muscle group for a 15 year old.

 

I'd also be looking very carefully at the safety issues of a roofing job. I've been on my father-in-law's roof. Not so easy...

[fred8033 1592]

Ya know, I flip back on forth on what's "routine maintenance." Our local DAC says an aggressive interpretation of "routine maintenace" would eliminate most Eagle projects.

 

Giving leadership - To decide what is or is not "routine maintenance", I'd try to decide from how the project can be used to demonstrate leadership.

 

If it's routine maintenance, it's probably effectively scheduled, such as it gets painted every two to five years. It's probably a well known process with well known steps. It's been done enough times that volunteers can almost do it "automatically". There's probably a storage closet at the site with supplies from the last time it was done.

 

 

But how can the scout show leadership? And thus decide if it's "routine maintenance"?

 

- Making a difference Will the Eagle candidate drive the project? If he wasn't there, would the project happen anyway? Would the project result look the same? Would the project happen in the same way?

- Influence Does the Eagle candidate's leadership role have any choices or options? Or is the project obvious and it just needs bodies to get it done.

- Challenge Does the Eagle candidate need to learn OR teach anything to get the project done? Do people have to grow to get it done?

- Coordination Does the Eagle candidate need to schedule the work? Coordinate the facility? Coordinate volunteers? Orchestrate the resources to get the job done? Or, is it pretty much laid out for him in advance.

- Ownership Will the Eagle candidate have something he can look back on and take pride for making it happen? And it wouldn't have happened without him.

- Perception Will non-scouters look at the result and think that the Eagle candidate made a difference in his community? Or was he another cog in the wheel that makes things happen for the community?

 

 

 

So, I think painting may or may not be okay.

 

- Probably okay - Painting that has not been done recently or routinely and that needs someone to make it happen.

 

- Probably not okay - Painting a wooden boat to fight off salt water decay ... that happens every two or three years ... using the same paints as last year ... with supplies stored in a closet ... coordinating and handling the boat ... THE SAME AS THE LAST TIME IT HAPPENED.

 

....

 

and IF IN DOUBT, FAVOR THE SCOUT.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

[GKlose 24]

I know this is kind of a digression, and under the "old rules", but last October I observed a Scout's Eagle Board (I was an invited troop rep -- but did not address either the board or the candidate). I wrote about it in a thread last October.

 

The project in question had been approved the prior spring, I think, and had been carried out over the summer. I don't think by the time the EBoR was held, in October, the board chair remembered signing off on the project the prior spring. The three Scouters sitting on the board did not review the entire application, letters of recommendation, and project writeup prior to the board. They skimmed the paperwork as they each peppered the candidate with questions.

 

When they finally got around to discussing the project with the candidate, they zeroed in on (of course) his leadership on the project. But they also questioned the project itself somewhat.

 

The project: clear a little more than a mile of a fire road in a local state park, and then rebuild the decking on a bridge on the road. Although I don't know the exact number, I think it was close to 200 Scout-hours of labor.

 

The board chair focused on one thing at first -- I think he worded it like this: "Since Eagle projects are required to have lasting value, what do you think about clearing a fire road? Isn't it just routine maintenance?"

 

The candidate handled the question fairly well -- he said the fire road, according to the ranger, had been overgrown for about 20 years, and that it was really only a small part of the project. More effort had actually been put into the bridge -- after old rotting decking had been pulled up, they had realized that some of the underneath structure had to be replaced at well. And he summed it up nicely by saying that for many years, due to the condition of the fire road, large parts of the State Park were not accessible to fire trucks, and they now were.

 

The ranger, by the way, thanked the candidate (and his dad, the SM) by saying "we've got a couple more bridges that could stand rebuilding" :-). Future Eagle projects, I think.