Are eagle projects "official troop functions"?

[Fred Johnson]

Question for those in the know.

I've been in debates online and in person in my district about eagle projects now being official troop functions. I don't hold that view beyond how it applies for policies, procedures and G2SS. But ... it seems ... others use that risk management statement as cart blanche to interpret what they want to see happen.

What is the BSA intention? Is there more clarification elsewhere that I'm missing? Are eagle projects now something that unit leadership and unit committees need to filter, monitor, track and report? Should units be approving scheduled work dates or some other type of progress phase gates? Should units be demanding stuff from the eagle candidate to guarantee policies, procedures and G2SS are being fulfilled?

My interpretation is that the eagle candidate is responsible for all aspects of his project including compliance with policies, procedures and G2SS. And the candidate needs to interpret all those rules as his project is an official troop program. In no way should the troop run, coordinate or schedule the project. But unit leaders should show enough interest to yell stop if there's an issue. Does that sound right?

Thanks for your help in advance. I just want to make sure I'm not advocating a position contradicting the position of the BSA, GTA and workbook.

(I'm sure it will come up at the next roundtable again.)

[smtroop168]

Question for those in the know.

I've been in debates online and in person in my district about eagle projects now being official troop functions. I don't hold that view beyond how it applies for policies, procedures and G2SS. But ... it seems ... others use that risk management statement as cart blanche to interpret what they want to see happen.

What is the BSA intention? Is there more clarification elsewhere that I'm missing? Are eagle projects now something that unit leadership and unit committees need to filter, monitor, track and report? Should units be approving scheduled work dates or some other type of progress phase gates? Should units be demanding stuff from the eagle candidate to guarantee policies, procedures and G2SS are being fulfilled?

My interpretation is that the eagle candidate is responsible for all aspects of his project including compliance with policies, procedures and G2SS. And the candidate needs to interpret all those rules as his project is an official troop program. In no way should the troop run, coordinate or schedule the project. But unit leaders should show enough interest to yell stop if there's an issue. Does that sound right?

Thanks for your help in advance. I just want to make sure I'm not advocating a position contradicting the position of the BSA, GTA and workbook.

(I'm sure it will come up at the next roundtable again.)

Fred...contrary to some people's beliefs, Eagle Projects have always been "official Scouting activities" and never intended for the scout to go off on his own without unit support. National just finally put it in clearer language. UL and Committees sign off on the project (read the statements they have to sign on pg 10) so they "filter, monitor and track" and the UL "reports" by his signature after the EP is completed.

Should units "approve" work dates? No but the Committee signature says they will provide the level of support agreed upon with the candidate. Direct conflicts with other scheduled troop events should be discussed but the scout doesn't have to use any of his troop to do his project if he doesn't want to (shortsighted maybe - but not required)

Should the unit "demand" compliance with the rules? The candidate must address safety in his Proposal and Final Plan and this is a key approval criteria on pg 5. So if he's missing the needed safety stuff, my guess is that the beneficiary will be the first one to not want to sign.

Your "interpretation" paragraph is correct. The scout attests to this by his signature. This is actually a key change as the scout now is on the hook as having saying he has read the rules.

Curious of course as to what the other interpretations you are getting at RT.

[Fred Johnson]

What I'm hearing is people emphasizing an "official troop function". I have had multiple debates with online and local people. The issue is that since it's now an "official troop function", the unit feels some level of ownership and responsibility for the project as it's a reflection of their troop. I have not seen any specific examples yet, but it seems like scouters now feel responsibility to create their own procedures to oversee eagle projects as they are "official troop functions".

I put quotes around "official troop functions" because I believe that statement is wrong. They are part of the troop program and such need to follow BSA policies, procedures and G2SS. But they are NOT a troop function ... unless the eagle candidate chooses to tightly coordinate with the unit leadership. Emphasis on candidate making the choice and not on the unit requiring coordination.

[smtroop168]

All Eagle Scout service projects constitute official Scouting activity and thus are subject to Boy Scouts of America policies and procedures. Projects are considered part of a unit’s program and are treated as such with regard to policies, procedures, and requirements regarding Youth Protection, two-deep leadership, etc.

This is the quote from the GTA. Remember this paragraph relates to EP safety. I have yet to see a sponsor not think the EP he was sponsoring did not have the full backing of the BSA.

You are right, they CAN be a troop function but do not have to be. I do think they should be on the Troop's calendar.

[Bill Pitcher]

Ditto, AND, the Eagle Candidate now needs a "Project Coach", and that person should be from the Troop.

[Fred Johnson]

As it's an "official troop function", can the troop "require" anything beyond what's documented in the eagle workbook?

Example, requiring the final plan or requiring a very detailed budget or requiring schedule coordination with troop.

[wagionvigil]

NO!
let me say that again
no

[Fred Johnson]

Okay. You guys rock. That's what I thought. Thanks for letting me feel through the details.

I know I only affect a small group of 50 to 60 scouts, but I'd like to get it right and keep it friendly, supportive and by the book.

Thanks everyone.

[smtroop168]

Fred...you know the answer but here's the refs for you:

PG 2 GTA: No council, committee, district, unit, or individual has the authority to
add to, or subtract from, advancement requirements.

PG 31 GTA: No council, committee, district, unit, or individual has the authority
to add to or subtract from advancement requirements.

EWB pg 21: Councils, districts, units, and individuals may not add requirements or ask you to do anything that runs contrary to or exceeds the policies, procedures, or requirements of the Boy Scouts of America.

Also on EWB pg 21: If the candidate believes he has been mistreated or his proposal wrongfully rejected, he will be provided a method of redress. This will include the opportunity for a second opinion and approval, either through another volunteer or professional advancement administrator*, or the Scout executive, as determined by the council advancement committee or executive board.

[Fred Johnson]

Great quotes and I reply on them all the time to keep myself in line. But it feels like the cat is out of the bag with the workbook and GTA by saying ... "Projects are considered part of a unit’s program ...". The "AND" clause can be read as a secondary after thought.


Perhaps a minor edit would help.

REPLACE: "Projects are considered part of a unit’s program and are treated as such with regard to policies, procedures, and requirements regarding Youth Protection, two-deep leadership, etc."

WITH: "Projects shall apply the same interpretation as that of a scouting unit with regard to the policies, procedures, and requirements regarding Youth Protection, two-deep leadership, etc."


IMHO, there's no change in the new GTA and workbook that pulls an eagle project closer to being a troop activity. It only changes in applying policies, procedures and safety. Saying "projects are considered part of a unit's program" opens a can of worms.

Thanks again for all the great help!

[smtroop168]

Not sure if National would agree. In the interim, have the scouts use the quotes, particularly pg 21 about getting jerked around

[ScoutMomGWRC]

Question:
Are the boys in a troop required to help another boy with his project?

[Mrw]

Question:
Are the boys in a troop required to help another boy with his project?

No, they are not required to help. Being helpful would be an ideal way to live the Scout Law though.

[jr56]

In regards to the scout oath and law, why would a scout "not" want to help with anothers Eagle project. I'm sure he would want the scouts in his troop helping when he is trying to do his.

[9009scoutmaster]

Question:
Are the boys in a troop required to help another boy with his project?

No not required, but strongly incouraged to help with any and every activity that the unit takes part in.

[Billiken]

Question:
Are the boys in a troop required to help another boy with his project?

No, but working on an Eagle Project counts as service hours for Star and Life.

[ScoutMomGWRC]

My son does service hours in many different places.. I am proud of him for looking outside the troop for the "easy hours."

That being said, the current Eagle project "manager" has been calling the scouts usually the day ahead, never to ask for help, but to offer service hours.

I can't drop everything for my son to get these service hours but would help if the scout asked for help and gave more than a day or two notice.

[Quailman]

When you say Eagle project "manager", are you referring to the Eagle candidate or an adult in the troop? If the latter, then there's a bigger problem than offering service hours vs. asking for help. In my troop, the Eagle candidate addresses the troop during a meeting to ask Scouts to sign up to help. He follows that up with a couple of e-mails to make sure he gives everyone the opportunity to help. The first request is made between four and two weeks ahead of the project date.

[ScoutMomGWRC]

manager = scout candidate because i couldn't think of the word candidate HA!

the boy hardly can make meetings and on the camp outs, my son tells me that he never even talks about his project.