Does it matter in what order signatures are obtained?

[Bill Pitcher]

It's all good. The DE is going to act as the mentor for the project.

This sounds like the candidate is looking for a way around the well established proceedures of BSA. Why would a DE step in at this early stage? All he has to do is request a meeting with the CC or an assigned committee member to obtain the needed signature. Are we missing "the rest of the story" here?

[WeeWillie]

During the SMC the SM handbook recommends that the SM discuss future advancement requirements and that Life SMC be 30 or more minutes. Presumably this is to discuss the ELSP requirements. The SM should help the prospective Eagle establish milestones that include allowing adequate project review and approval regardless of the time of the year. Since many ELSPs occur in the Summer, the troop should have a process in place that allows the timely and effective review. That process should be followed. The process should not include hop scotching the approval cycle.

We hold the SM (and ASMs) accountable for the troop program. We require substantially more training for the SM and ASMs to receive the Trained badge. That is because the responsibilities are greater. SM approval means that the project meets the G2SS, and ELSP program requirements. It also means that the Scout has a viable plan.

The SM handbook describes the committee as the board of directors. The role of a board of directors is oversight, not operations. CM Training prepares a CM for oversight, not program responsibilities. It is not their responsibility to duplicate what the SM is responsible to do and should have already done! What happens when the committee approves a project and the SM disapproves it for a valid reason? I've returned projects for safety issues, work for a commercial organization, lack of 2 deep leadership, conflict with troop camping trips (twice), and copying Scout's project from another troop (it was in the folder with my Scout's work book).

T

[evmori]

During the SMC the SM handbook recommends that the SM discuss future advancement requirements and that Life SMC be 30 or more minutes. Presumably this is to discuss the ELSP requirements. The SM should help the prospective Eagle establish milestones that include allowing adequate project review and approval regardless of the time of the year. Since many ELSPs occur in the Summer, the troop should have a process in place that allows the timely and effective review. That process should be followed. The process should not include hop scotching the approval cycle.

A 30 minute or longer SMC? The ELSP should be discussed AFTER the BOR. Too long!

[FrankJ]

Corporate models do not fit the troop management model completely. For example the quartermaster typically will have a lot of interaction with the equipment manager. The advancement chairman has a lot of interaction with all scouts. Our past CC was an ASM wannabe . He was on all the outings include HA. He just would not sign off on advancement although he could have.

In our troop the primary review of the project is a committee function. In the past we have had ASMs do the same job. It is nice to have that flexibility.

[AquilaNegra2]

It's all good. The DE is going to act as the mentor for the project.

This sounds like the candidate is looking for a way around the well established proceedures of BSA. Why would a DE step in at this early stage? All he has to do is request a meeting with the CC or an assigned committee member to obtain the needed signature. Are we missing "the rest of the story" here?

The DE is a general contractor who has historically helped those boys with plans that called for engineering and construction knowledge beyond their abilities. The troop breaks for summer, and doesn't have regular meetings during that time. The CC has a busy and structured calendar. It's not about jumping around authority. Everyone will have to sign off on the project before any construction begins.

One of the things he was running into was "can't start the project without approval" - "can't get approval without detailed plans (which means engineering, which means starting the project)". Catch-22. It works to swap the DE and CC. She still has the ability to send him back and rework it, if necessary.

[smtroop168]

It's all good. The DE is going to act as the mentor for the project.

This sounds like the candidate is looking for a way around the well established proceedures of BSA. Why would a DE step in at this early stage? All he has to do is request a meeting with the CC or an assigned committee member to obtain the needed signature. Are we missing "the rest of the story" here?

The DE is a general contractor who has historically helped those boys with plans that called for engineering and construction knowledge beyond their abilities. The troop breaks for summer, and doesn't have regular meetings during that time. The CC has a busy and structured calendar. It's not about jumping around authority. Everyone will have to sign off on the project before any construction begins.

One of the things he was running into was "can't start the project without approval" - "can't get approval without detailed plans (which means engineering, which means starting the project)". Catch-22. It works to swap the DE and CC. She still has the ability to send him back and rework it, if necessary.

No Catch 22 here...the detailed plans are part of the Project Plan details and is not considered starting the project. When you start banging nails or clearing trails or whatever with your workforce, then you are starting the execution of the project.

That's why the Project Details section is in the workbook before the approval signatures.

[FrankJ]

Last I looked the DE (district executive?) does not sign off projects anyway. That is for the district advancement committee. Maybe I am misunderstanding the acronyms.

[AquilaNegra2]

No Catch 22 here...the detailed plans are part of the Project Plan details and is not considered starting the project. When you start banging nails or clearing trails or whatever with your workforce, then you are starting the execution of the project.

That may be our problem, then. He was told that bringing others in to work on it constituted starting it.

The DE in question is the DAC - which makes THAT part *very* easy

[FrankJ]

The DE in question is the DAC - which makes THAT part *very* easy

That explains that. I always thought of 'DE' to be the council professional for the district, who should not be routinely involved in advancement.

[smtroop168]

No Catch 22 here...the detailed plans are part of the Project Plan details and is not considered starting the project. When you start banging nails or clearing trails or whatever with your workforce, then you are starting the execution of the project.

That may be our problem, then. He was told that bringing others in to work on it constituted starting it.

The DE in question is the DAC - which makes THAT part *very* easy

I agree there is a fine line sometimes on "starting" vs "planning". If the "others that are brought in to work on it" are folks like th esponsor who might be providing technical help in making sure the bases are covered, that's okay. If they are swinging hammers, it is not.

[Bill Pitcher]

Okay, AN2, now it all makes sense!!