Re: POR Changes : Was Insurance - new POR

On 13 Nov, 13:04, "Dave" <dave.barwic...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"GAGS" <gags...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

The SA has decided to move to a system that complies asap with the
upcoming ISA process. The ISA register is being phased in over 5
years. That's where the 5 year review comes from.

I think our county went for 3 years and review in the end - unless it has
changed again but the info not been passed on. (so you get 2 in 5 years).

I've got a sneaky feeling that up/down/across here the review has been
set to 3 years, but I don't think the disclosure 'update' has been set
at the same time. If we do go to every three years for disclosure then
I will can only foresee the number of frivolous checks increasing. If
that happens I will not continue to support the free checks for
voluntary organisations.

I would guess that DCs are probably going to be sent records (dates)
of disclosures for checking in their districts. (Or maybe they have
already been sent out!)

I will take your word on that.


I kid you not; it will happen.

I don't disagree that the checker should have been checked - just asking
whether it was a National thing or local.

It is now!

There is another that states that the form must be dated within a month -
so
if someone signs it 1 November the person checking it must ensure it gets
to
District Sec within a month.

Now that's a local 'rule' AFAIAA. The CRB says it's 'best practice'
for applications to be despatched asap after completion. It seems
round your way they're suggesting that asap is 'within a month'. Not
too unreasonable IMO.

I agree that it is not unreasonable - but I do thing that it is unreasonable
for it to be returned to the group or applicant to redo as it is out of time
just because someone has forgotten to hand it over. Hardly going to inspire
them to help you - but neither is not sending it off.

Quite agree Dave.

The process most districts use with regard to CRB/AA forms is not to
send them offf to Gilwell one-by-one as soon as they receive them but
to wait a short while and then send off a number all at once. That's
reasonably sensible, however, it isn't if a 'short while' becomes more
than say (IMO) 14 days.

I know they shouldn't be stored but why a month what does it matter.

The longer you leave it between completion and despatch the more
likely that relevant information (e.g. addresses) on the application
will change.

I agree but if it is stuck at group hopefully they would know that.

They should.


But why a month?

It might be nothing more than the person handling forms in your
district sends them off once a month on a particular date; a simple
office/admin reason.

Could be - but who knows.

Ah yes those two quite secret domains - are they really parallel
universes? - the district secretary's briefcase/filing cabinet and
that grey area behind the clock on the DC's mantlepiece. Once things
end up in these places you can consider them lost for a long while

Information needs to be up-to-date AFAIIRP (as far as it is reasonably
practicable) for the check to be effective.

I totally agree - but I would also hate to loose help because someone has
been lapse.

Quite.

But in the future 'lapse' is going to become part of the system!

For example, a prospective leader comes to you and says they'd like to
be your new ASL (say). The following week the SL informally
'interviews' them and says: 'We'd like you on board'. The following
week the candidate gets the AA/CRB forms. The week after that they
fill them in and the GSL checks off the id docs. Next they send it off
to the DS. They're away for a week. They return and the DS waits 2
weeks for possibly other forms to come in. (Plus possibly give the
forms a 'holiday' in their filing cabinet.) The form finally gets sent
to Gilwell. They process it in about 14 days say, then send it on to
the CRB. Finally the CRB processes it in about 4 - 6 weeks. 8-12 weeks
later notice comes back they're ok and the disclosure comes back a
week after that. What do you do then?

Choose A or B.

A: Tell the prospective leader that they've been cleared and are now
'provisional'.

B: Spend two evenings trying to contact the prospective leader on the
phone, plus a couple of days writing to them, and finally two nights
standing in the rain on their doorstep.

B may be the more likely outcome. I kid you not.

Why? Surely you'd be seeing the prospective leader at meetings while
the checks are being done? They can attend meetings, provided they're
supervised, while checks are being done?

They can now, but when the ISA starts they won't be allowed to. You
won't be allowed to take anyone on before they're cleared, supervised
or otherwise.

Now cast your mind back to not so long ago on here when we heard
someone had been waiting God knows how long for their AA/CRB. (Sorry I
can't recall who it was!)

Do you really believe that someone will be so desperate to join that
they'll bother to wait around for two or three months?

Don't answer that, we already know the answer, don' we? :-)

GAGS
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Radical Leader Training !
    ... not quite that long normally and if it looked that way I would have thought that the CC might have found someone after a few years or suggested that the District start looking for a replacement. ... who informs HQ what the next review date is - they do not inform ... the GSL so in most cases he must assume it will be 5 years. ... The own agenda bit seems most likely as surely they would not select someone to be a LTM who couldn't comprehend and follow simple instructions. ...
    (uk.rec.scouting)
  • Re: Publishing Web Sites
    ... >Publishing websites using ISA on SBS2K3 is not ... >priority than finishing the final review), ... >> Business Card Web site on SBS2003. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Publishing Web Sites
    ... Publishing websites using ISA on SBS2K3 is not ... priority than finishing the final review), ... > Business Card Web site on SBS2003. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: My Top 25 (and other ramblings)
    ... >you are the first person i've seen give this a bad review. ... > only the Old Man's Child disc coming close to it. ... >single bad album in their discography. ... I just don't dig "Isa". ...
    (rec.music.artists.queensryche)
  • RE: SBS2003 Webhosting
    ... Publishing websites using ISA on SBS2K3 is not ... My final review completion has been delayed to a spate of ... priority than finishing the final review), ... >Then I would create a Web Publishing Rule in ISA. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
Loading