Without knowing more there is always the chance that the unit were in the wrong.
1 Like
Small point: Was staff from around the Wing providing DofE at Wing level.
A Wing is a Unit is it not?
Iâm not sure Iâve ever heard of a Wing being referred to as a UnitâŚ. But sure, why not 
I mean, a wing has a UIN, so i guess by definition it is a unit!
Indeed, but Wings or Regions are also referred to as âhigher formationsâ I think?
Any chance we can swing things back towards the topic?
So apparently what happened was as follows:
DofE Silver Expeditions carried out by a Wing Level team.
A group were failed for various reasons, including lack of team cohesion and other breaches of 20 conditions.
Parent of one member of said team complained directly to HQ RAFAC, complaint was upheld at Region, all staff from the expedition were suspended from any further DofE activities until they completed some retraining.
Money was paid to the parent for the cost of a private silver expedition - still unclear as to where this money came from; HQAC, Region, etc.
1 Like
the whole situation sounds very intriguing.
if HQAC received the complaint and was upheld at Region were the involved CFAVs contacted to get their side?
was this over zealous attitudes applied by the CFAVs towards the 20 conditions? (given numerous were broken seems unlikely it was just one factor that was missing) or was this a disgruntled parent annoyed that their child spent time on a event and âfailedâ perhaps due to the fault of others (there could be an innocent party in the group) and there was a cost involved which would need to be repeated?
I am leaning towards the latter but given the CFAVs need retraining is that simply to appease the right people that a control measure has been put in place, or was it due to significant failings on the CFAVs part?
either way without more details hard to make a fair judgement - I do however doubt the CFAVs were contacted given their decision was overruled by regionâŚ
2 Likes
I think this might be the key bit. If the wing team did not document & record properly their rationale & the actions taken to prevent the failure then the complaint will be upheld.
âTeam cohesionâ can be quite a nebulous term open to personal interpretation so if this was the main reason for failing or the group was failed on mass then this will be what stung them.
2 Likes
Putting 2 & 2 together, you think youâre getting 4, but any decent accountant will ask youâ what do you want the answer to be?
The fact that the WHOLE Wing Team of staff involved were suspended really causes me a lot of concern⌠why tar all with the same brush if itâs wa a a breakdown with one or two⌠or; if the whole team WERE at fault, how was this not on the cards alreadyâŚ?
Lack of team cohesion - and a serious complaint, sounds like antisocial behaviour / bullying / inappropriate behaviour of some kind.
â20 reasonsâ⌠sounds a bit excessive, as though someone (the parent?) felt complaining about one or two things wasnât enough - so then found fault with everythingâŚ
But, this is problem, weâre all drawing our own conclusions - and such idle gossip does no one any favours,
My admiration and loyalty towards CFAVs is such that I find this whole situation rather confusing to say the leastâŚ
1 Like
They were referring to the 20 conditions. These are the ârulesâ of DofE expeds, and if you break them you fail. For example you must be self sufficient. So as an assessor if I catch the group using a bus instead of walking Iâd pretty much have to fail them.
Itâs the â20 Conditionsâ not 20 reasons why they failed.
The 20 conditions are what the expedition section is assessed against.
1 Like
The Wing Team in this instance is⌠2 people. Or at least, was. I think one of them was the Wing DofE Officer.
So this action has completely stopped any Wing level DofE. Individual squadrons can still run their own if they have suitably qualified staff, but not all do.
To play devilâs advocate, it is very unusual for a whole team to fail a DofE expedition. Sometimes you have to take people off for injury, but for a whole team to fail is quite serious. Quite a few of the conditions are taken care of before you turn up for the assessment. A team failure has never happened on any expedition Iâve assessed.
Of course speculating isnât really going to get us anywhere. Incidents like this should be made public in some kind of report that people can learn from. Either we can stop further incidents like this happening in future (which I have to assume someone thinks, if retraining is required) or we would see that the investigator made a mistake. Lots of CFAV suspensions or dismissals are just swept under the rug unfortunately with no one really knowing what happened.
Either way, I wouldnât have paid loads of money for a private expedition, Iâd just have given the cadet a free space on the next exped, assuming they had a valid complaint.
5 Likes
Youâve never caught a team having a pizza delivered to a campsite, or having a lift from an older brother from just after A to just short of B, or blagging a tow from a motorboat while on a canoe exped!
1 Like
Interestingly the DofE have said in the past that this isnât a reason on its own for failing a group (as long as they also cooked). It was even used as one of the scenarios on the assessors course.
Nope. Iâm not saying it wouldnât happen, but like I said it is rare.
Yes, technically getting pizza delivered to a campsite isnât in itself against the 20 conditions. It also isnât against the rules to buy ice cream en-route.
We once failed a cadet because as soon as he was out of sight of adult staff, he changed out of his walking boots into trainers.
Harsh? Maybe; but he put the safety of the group (in the Brecon Beacons*) at risk.
Parents were furious, but not with us, with him 
*yes, I know
1 Like
See I was always taught that you fail or pass as a group, not individuals. In your example, the other members of the group should have made them keep their boots onâŚ
2 Likes