So, right in the middle of recharter, with this new program for recharter, national decides to change the training requirements. Very frustrating and foolish of national to make this change at this time. I was suddenly left with 13 leaders that suddenly needed training though the reports showed they were each 100% trained. Same issue you all have been talking about. Yes, check the haz weather. At least it only takes 30 some minutes to complete.
Just thought I would give an update - SCO 800 only shows on the training report if you are never trained, you have to run the course specific report to see when Haz Weather (or any other course other than ypt) expires. This was not the problem I was having, it self corrected with the following sync. We run the Haz weather before every camp and the water safety classes before a float trip to make sure we are in compliance.
The person at my unit that is out of compliance for more than hazardous weather last completed his den leader training in 2004. There were significant den leader training updates this fall. I think the only thing that changed with SM/ASM is that hazardous weather was added to position specific.
The only change this year to SM/ASM might be adding the verification of SCO_800 (although itās actually been required for some time). Iām aware of several changes to the online training for SM/ASM since I took it some years ago, so itās likely not just changes to the overall SM/ASM training syllabus thatās flagging up. That was what I was trying to get at (albeit in a less than obvious way).
I concur that 2004 is a lot more āhistoricalā than my ASM training, though. :ā ^ā )
1 Like
LOL, sometimes itās more state of mind than the problem itself. Everyone else at my unit is like, oh wow, yeah Iāll find some time and get that done, the 2004 dude told this weekend āI hope national fixes this!ā when I told him he might have to redo his online training from 20 years ago 
1 Like
Thank you for the suggestion.
Posting here to follow up. National knows about this and itās on their IT todo list. Might be a while for it to be addressed but a fix will come at some point.
I have been researching why Trained Leader Reports changed Training in my.scouting.org under Training Manager as of November 2024. On December 19, 2024, a Scouter, William Nelson, with the Scoutbook User Advisory Council posted on this Scouting Wire Forum about what changes were made to Training. He stated that the Position Trained Requirements were updated in December 2024. Hazardous Weather Training (Code SCO_800 - 31 minutes) also called Weather Smart Training (online training video), has caused part of the Training confusion because it expires every 2 years.
National BSA has updated the Trained Leader Reports on my.scouting.org to reflect this requirement, which has caused Units to show a percentage of their members untrained. Members who complete this training and the other position trained requirements online help training in units get back to 100%.
When looking at your Trained Leaderās Report a member can complete either the classroom training or the online training to be considered Trained. They donāt have to complete both. Requirements C32 - BALOO (Basic Adult Leader Outdoor Orientation) for Cub Scouts or S11 - IOLS (Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills) for Scouts BSA are Classroom Trainings that are required for certain positions. Youth Protection Training (YO1) and Hazardous Weather Training (SCO_800) are to be completed every 2 years from the completion date.
This link has the information about this change: (Hazardous Weather Training Updates & FAQ)
Attached Documents are the FAQās of Hazardous Weather Training and BSA Training and the Position Trained Requirements updated December 2024
FAQ 12_2024 Hazardous Weather Training and BSA Training Reports.pdf (498.0 KB)
Position-Trained-Requirements-Dec2024.pdf (298.8 KB)
2 Likes
When the online class updates if you have not done the new class it drops you out of being 100% trained. If you do the in person class this will not happen again. I say do the online once then take an in person to talk and ask questions.
To clarify, the person will still show as trained, but the training progress on the individual training plan will not show 100%. If one is SM trained, and is an SM, and the online class changes, they will still be trained.
There is some question if one changes roles and changes back, but for sure if you donāt change roles, you will still be trained.
Matt,
Not the case. it drops you as 100% Ive seen it for SM, ASM, CM etc.
Thank you.
I just confirmed that as a Roundtable Commissioner, I am trained and have the patch showing in my records. So, I am considered 100% trained from a district metric standpoint as I had completed all modules in the past. Of the training modules, each now is shown at 0%, but as a total it is showing 100%.
I am no longer registered den leader. Some, but not all of the modules have been replaced. I am shown as 28% trained. I am pretty sure I would be shown as not trained if I reregistered.
Scouters in my unit who are missing their hazardous weather are shown as not trained and count as a 0 towards our unit training percentage.
I just went through our district and can confirm there are MBCs, RT Commissioners, and Unit Commissioners who did not do the classroom training, has only have a portion of online training listed done, thus as a blue completed, but a yes trained. This indicates that they had done all of the online training, but now are no longer complete for the online training, but have trained their status.
If you have examples of that for SM, ASM, and CM, please bring that to your district & council training chairs to float to the CST leads for training to find out what is going on.
I donāt understand this from the point of view that if training has been updated, why not just take the new module and get the training? Wanting to know why someone dropped out of trained status is important and worth asking; however, if the answer is training changed or training was updated, why not make the problem go away by just doing the training (especially if it can be done free online).
1 Like
My missive got kinda long, because Iām pretty passionate about training and updates thereto being both readily available and actually useful, as opposed to just being a box-ticking exercise.
It kinda depends on what weāre asking volunteers to do in order to āre-trainā and how frequently. Consider this use case:
- Volunteer has recently completed position-specific training for their current position, whether in total or just the very last bit of training sequence.
- Scouting America updates one or more courses in the sequence the day after the volunteer completes training.
- Release of updated training course(s) automatically triggers everyone in the Trained status falling out and everyone in the process of completing training needing to start over (at least on that updated sequence).
- How long are volunteers likely to continue putting time towards running after the ātraining trainā when they could, instead, be putting that time towards the purpose they actually volunteered (i.e. supporting youth in the program)?
- How does the answer to Question 1 change if the changes to the courses are minimal (< 5% new information) and non-critical for safety or program operation?
- How does the answer to Question 1 change if the changes to the courses are entirely cosmetic (e.g. replacement of BSA and associated logos with Scouting America and associated logos)?
- How does the answer to Question 1 change if significant changes to a single course requires re-doing the entire training sequence due to minimal changes in other courses in the sequence?
- ā¦
I totally concur that there is merit to pursuing up-to-date training on significant changes. Itās a regular part of my professional world, and I support it there, too. Thereās likely even some merit to at least discussing an expiration date on some position-specific training, in the same vein as we retrain on YPT, Hazardous Weather, and other topics regularly, even where there might not be significant changes. I also think that having to retake an entire position training sequence because minimal changes have been made to the sequence is not a good use of the volunteersā time. After all, it would (at the very least) be pretty unfair to scouters who completed their training on a Monday to discover that they are no longer position-trained Tuesday because one of their courses was updated overnight. Consider that the District Committee Member-at-Large training sequence is 258 minutes (i.e. almost 4.5 hours!) long.
I get that this thread is related to SM/ASM position-specific and expiration of training courses therefore. At the same time, the underlying principal should be reasonably applicable across the training spectrum. Otherwise, it starts looking awfully arbitrary who is required to complete how much retraining how frequently and with what degree of predictability.
To be reasonable, there likely would need to be some active determination by Scouting America staff as to what degree of changes ā and across what breadth of the training sequence ā merits expiration of training, not just a binary āare one or more courses new or not?ā automated test. Itās not clear whether or not Scouting America has the staff time for or the interest in micromanaging the curriculum to that degree. There would also likely need to be some sort of grace period, otherwise units would constantly have leaders cycling in and out of position āTrainedā status on a non-predictable cycle. YPT and Hazardous Weather, for example, expire two years from the date of completion. That makes any status changes due to expiration of those predictable. Scouting America doesnāt announce when position-specific training courses will be updated, which makes that status change unpredictable. Since some COs and some councils require that their unit scouters be fully position-trained (not just current YPT), unpredictable disappearance of Trained status poses a nearly insurmountable obstacle to unit operations for those units.
Thereās also the point of most training modules are less than 10 minutes in length. If a person has the time to chase posts in the forums, ruminate over how or why a module is not listed as complete, or spend time in meetings (will follow with a story), they probably could have just redone the training and saved time.
Iāll illustrate with a story: Had a leader fall out of trained status, he would spend all day talking about how ānational needed to fix itā, burn time in committee meetings, message me about it, etc ā¦ all he needed to do was about 30 minutes of retraining, but instead he literally burned hours gritching about having to redo the training. No remember, he burned time in meetings gritching, multiple all of the time that was wasted against all of the leaders trapped in those meetings with him while he was complaining instead of just redoing the training.
Our training attitude should be more like Scouting UK, not optional. If your training is not completed on time they revoke your membership until it is done.
I have no sympathy about not being trained. Of all the leaders I have known over the years, the ones that resist training the most are the ones who can sit down and talk about watching tv shows and playing video games the most. If people have time for tv and games, they have a few hot minutes to wrap up and keep training current.
1 Like
Hi folks - this might be a new question but as a District Commissioner, we canāt seem to pull a report on who has/needs Baloo - C-32 training. Any tips on this? thx
Training Manager - Reports - Specific Training Course Report will give you a list of registered leaders in your district who have completed a specific course.
Great tip!
However, when I run that report, the screen never resolves, just a blank white page - ?
Try logging out, then log back in again
