Congratulations, Karen Stanbary, CG!

“My passion for genealogy began as a high-school senior watching the Roots mini-series on TV,” says Karen Stanbary. In the early 1980s, the show inspired her to “take a local community-college class, explore the collections at Chicago’s Newberry Library, and (best of all) interview my grandparents, their siblings and my great-grandmother.” Karen borrowed a mimeograph machine to create family group sheets and pedigree charts.

Decades later, faced with an empty nest, she returned to her passion and stumbled upon two articles that questioned the validity and reliability of Alex Haley’s work.[1] Feeling a bit betrayed, she resolved to learn valid genealogical methods. That combination of inspiration and critique bore fruit, and in April she qualified to become Certified Genealogist #1071.

Karen Stanbary, CG

Karen was born in Burlington, Iowa, where many of her deceased ancestors remain. She grew up in a western suburb of Chicago. She and her husband currently practice specialized clinical social work in Chicago. She is fluent and literate in Spanish and completed graduate anthropological work in Mexico, one of her genealogical areas of expertise. She teaches three twelve-hour seminars for the Newberry Library’s Adult Education program:  Genetic Genealogy, Genetic Genealogy–Advanced Practical Applications, and Proving Your Pedigree. She will teach in the Practical Genetic Genealogy course at the Genealogical Research Institute of Pittsburgh (GRIP) this summer.

Karen credits her successful portfolio in large part to the teachings and guidance of Tom Jones, PhD, CG, CGL, Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, Sandra Hewlett, CG, Debbie Parker Wayne, CG, CGL, Blaine Bettinger, PhD, JD, CeCe Moore, Angie Bush, MA, and Jeanne Larzalere Bloom, CG. Her experience in the ProGen Study Group, Mastering Genealogical Proof Study Group, and NGSQ (National Genealogical Society Quarterly) Study Group—as well as classes at GRIP, Salt Lake Institute of Genealogy, and Institute for Genealogical and Historical Research (IGHR)—also improved her genealogical critical analysis skills.

Karen especially wants to thank Harold Henderson, CG. “He is a fantastic mentor who helped keep me accountable to my timeline. He provided just the right balance between understanding and accountability.”

She committed to the certification process and created a routine. “Early each morning, when my brain works best, I would spend focused quality time with my portfolio. I prepared a ‘portfolio space’ with all the essential materials at hand—the BCG Application Guide, Chicago Manual of Style, Evidence Explained, Genealogy Standards, Numbering Your Genealogy, and the IGHR writing course syllabus.  I bought a second monitor so I could see the docs on one screen and write on my laptop.

“And I took the time to dig deep into the records. Doing that helped me to keep the Kinship Determination Project (KDP) interesting. I spent three years with the KDP family. I think I would have become bored with them without those unusual records and social histories. And a bored writer does not write.

“It was a significant breakthrough to realize that one size does not fit all—that there is no universal template or formula. Within the standards, I had to learn to trust my own decision-making, to feel the freedom to tell the story.”

Karen’s case study identifies the Mexican father of a Michigan adoptee using documentary research, interviews with potential relatives, and analysis of nine people’s autosomal DNA test results, including triangulated matches. This work is contracted for publication in the NGSQ.

How much overlap is there between clinical social work and professional genealogy? “More than I expected, especially in genealogy cases with real present-day emotional impact, such as unknown paternity, misattributed paternity, the appearance of previously unknown half-siblings, and adoption cases.” And the skill sets are similar: “Both require the careful creation of timelines, critical consideration of the source(s) of information, and empathy—the ability to step out of one’s cultural comfort zones in order to view events through the participants’ eyes.”

What’s next for Karen?  She plans to teach and to increase her client work, especially helping people solve family mysteries and break through brick walls using a combination of documentary research and targeted DNA testing. “It’s an exciting time to be a member of the genealogy community.”

Karen can be reached at karenstanbary@gmail.com.



[1] Elizabeth Shown Mills and Gary B. Mills, “Roots and the new ‘Faction’: A Legitimate Tool for Clio?” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 1 (January 1981): 5–26.  Also, Elizabeth Shown Mills and Gary B. Mills, “The Genealogist’s Assessment of Alex Haley’s Roots,” National Genealogical Society Quarterly 72 (March 1984): 35–49.  Both articles can be viewed at Historic Pathways.

 

 

SpringBoard Brings you Skillbuilding from NGS 2016

SpringBoard is an official blogger of the NGS 2016 Family History Conference to be held 4–7 May in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, and we’re poised to bring you the BCG from the conference.

The Board for Certification of Genealogists will again co-sponsor the Skillbuilding Track. In sixteen lectures over four days BCG associates will educate all levels of genealogists about resources and methodologies to make our research the best it can be.

For those who are unable to attend the conference or who have too many lectures to attend at the same time, SpringBoard’s guest bloggers will present summaries of all BCG Skillbuilding lectures. Watch for them beginning a couple days after the conference begins. All the Skillbuilding lectures will be recorded and available for purchase through PlaybackNow, which will also offer two-minute teasers of each lecture recorded. Watch the SpringBoard posts for links to the individual recordings.

Three of BCG’s Skillbuilding lectures will be streamed live Friday, 6 May, as part of Day Two: Methods for Success:

Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG, FNGS, FUGA, “Reasonably Exhaustive Research: The First Criteria for Genealogical Proof

Thomas W. Jones, PhD, CG, CGL, FASG, FNGS, FUGA, “Systematically Using Autosomal DNA Test Results to Help Break Through Genealogical Brick Walls

Stefani Evans, CG, “Doughnut Holes and Family Skeletons: Meeting the GPS Through Negative and Indirect Evidence”

The live streaming will include five more lectures by BCG associates. So there are many ways to learn from this conference even if you can’t be there. SpringBoard will keep you posted.

The words Certified Genealogist are a registered certification mark, and the designations CG, CGL, and Certified Genealogical Lecturer are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®, used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluation.

BCG Education Fund Trustee News

Debbie Parker Wayne, CG, CGL, is stepping down after four years of volunteer service with the BCG Education Fund. While serving as a trustee Debbie organized an online repository for the Fund so all trustees have immediate access to the same set of documents and helped create checklists and timelines to guide future trustees.

Debbie Parker Wayne, CG, CGL

Debbie specializes in genetic genealogy. She writes a column on using DNA analysis for genealogical research for NGS Magazine, and she developed an online course, Continuing Genealogical Studies: Autosomal DNA, for the National Genealogical Society. Debbie saw the need for more in-depth genetic training for genealogists and developed the first week-long course to be offered in the U.S. at the Genealogical Research Institute of Pittsburgh (GRIP). She also coordinated courses at the Institute for Genealogy and Historical Research (IGHR) and the Salt Lake Institute of Genealogy (SLIG) and teaches DNA and traditional research topics at national and regional conferences and the Forensic Genealogy Institute.

Alice Hoyt Veen, CG

The BCG Education Fund Board of Trustees welcomes new trustee Alice Hoyt Veen, CG,of Bouton, Iowa. Alice is a sixth-generation Iowan and life-long genealogist who became Board-certified in 2014. She specializes in Midwestern and territorial records with an emphasis on military history and Midwestern connections to American colonial roots.

Alice’s special interest in genealogical education makes her a natural fit for a BCG Education Fund trustee. She has taught classes on Iowa and territorial records, traditional records, and research methodology. She serves on the education committee of the Iowa Genealogical Society and writes a column for the society’s newsletter. Alice believes genealogists at every level benefit from excellence in education and looks forward to working towards that goal.

All the best to both as they pursue new challenges.

The words Certified Genealogist are a registered certification mark, and the designations CG, CGL, and Certified Genealogical Lecturer are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®, used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluation.

Welcome, Angela McGhie, CG!

Angela McGhie is a familiar name to many for her commitment to excellence in genealogical education. Now we welcome her as a new BCG associate!

Angela P. McGhie, CG

Angela credits her parents’ family history interests and her grandmother’s Swedish and Danish research for an early introduction to the world of genealogy.  As a college student, Angela interviewed both grandmothers and combined photographs with collected stories to present her family’s history. She has been a dedicated genealogist ever since and for the past fifteen years has focused on in-depth research and education.

Moving into the professional field, Angela recognized the need for formalized training to hone her skills. She began attending genealogical seminars and conferences, and completed the National Genealogical Society (NGS) American Genealogy Home Study Course. In 2007 Angela joined the NGS Quarterly (NGSQ) Study Group; she joined the first Professional Genealogy (ProGen) Study Group in 2008.[1] Within six months she became its administrator, writing assignments and recruiting mentors to work with participants. The ProGen Study Group has grown to 328 alumni and over 110 current students. This success is due in large part to Angela’s tireless efforts.

More recently Angela completed a study of Tom Jones’ Mastering Genealogical Proof,[2] then initiated a study group based on the book; to date, forty-five groups have completed the program. She helped design and coordinates the “Advanced Evidence Analysis Practicum” course for the Salt Lake Institute of Genealogy (SLIG); students work to solve genealogical problems and sharpen their evidence analysis skills.

Certification was a logical step for Angela: “I decided that if I was going to be a professional genealogist I should have my work evaluated to show that I met standards.”

Angela prepared for certification through a combination of education and practical experience. She attended courses at genealogical institutes, including Tom Jones’ “Advanced Genealogical Methods” at SLIG and Elizabeth Shown Mills’ “Advanced Methodology” at the Institute of Genealogical and Historical Research (IGHR).

Whether researching her own ancestors or those of her clients, Angela found it exciting and challenging to apply the methods she studied, as each case required unique records and methods to solve. Once the methodology became an inherent part of her research process, Angela knew she was ready to complete and submit her portfolio.

Her most challenging project was her portfolio case study. Angela had searched for the parents of her third great-grandfather for about eight years. She performed what she felt was “reasonably exhaustive research,” then “exhaustive research.” The mystery was solved through discovery of her ancestor’s Canadian brother. Angela overcame conflicting information and researched in four countries to reveal their mother’s identity: an invaluable learning experience.

Angela’s advice to aspiring BCG associates? Get a solid education by taking advantage of the many opportunities available. Study the standards and the rubrics until you really understand them. Practice writing research plans, research reports, and proof arguments or case studies. Once you feel comfortable, prepare your portfolio.

Angela appreciates the many mentors who provided education, guidance and encouragement, including Elizabeth Shown Mills, Tom Jones, Claire Bettag, Craig Scott, Rick Sayre, Pam Sayre, Elissa Powell, and every mentor that has participated in the ProGen Study Program.

What’s next for Angela? She says “I love teaching and lecturing and have focused my career in this area for the last few years. I have been blessed with opportunities to teach at the genealogy institutes, and am very grateful as I am passionate about education. I want to continue my focus in this area, but will probably begin taking clients again.” Her blog, Adventures in Genealogy Education, journals Angela’s educational priorities and experiences.

Angela lives in Laurel, Maryland, with her husband and three children. She can be reached at mcghiefamilyhistory@gmail.com . Congratulations, Angela!

 

 

 


[1] The groups work through Elizabeth Shown Mills, ed., Professional Genealogy: A Manual for Researchers, Writers, Editors, Lecturers and Librarians (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 2001).

[2] Thomas W. Jones, Mastering Genealogical Proof (Arlington, Virginia: National Genealogical Society, 2013).

Numbering 4: Adoptions and Children of Multiple Partners

The William Walker–Margaret Lauderdale family has challenged us across the past three posts with several numbering complexities.

  • In the first post we assigned people generation numbers according to whether they were born in the U.S. or abroad.
  • The second post demonstrated how to number children born to unknown fathers.
  • Numbering informal adoptions and children born to a descendant by more than one spouse followed in the third post.

This post wraps up discussion of adoption and multiple partners.

Remember that we are looking at three numbers that would be used in a descending genealogy:

  • Individual numbers, arabic numbers (1, 2, 3, 4 . . .);
  • Generation numbers, a superscript number in italic font (1, 2, A, B, a, b); and
  • Birth-order numbers, a lower case roman numeral (i, ii, iii . . .).

Parenthetical summaries of descent abbreviate each descendant’s ancestry. They appear after the descendant’s name in the first line of the biographical sketch, for example, “8.  Margaret Maitland2 Walker (Thomas Watta-1, WilliamA, ThomasB) was born . . .”

In all cases our authority on numbering is Joan Ferris Curran, Madilyn Coen Crane, and John H. Wray, Numbering Your Genealogy: Basic Systems, Complex Families, and International Kin, ed. Elizabeth Shown Mills, rev. ed. (Arlington, Va.: National Genealogical Society, 2008). 

In the third and succeeding generations all the Walker descendants are American-born, so all have numerical generation numbers. Pre-American generation numbers (letters) appear only in the parenthetical summaries of descent. Likewise the descriptions we have used for Albert’s informal adoption and Edward’s treatment as a son of deceased William.

Generation Three

(Selected biological and adoptive grandchildren)

Margaret Maitland2 Walker’s daughter by an unknown father appears in Generation Three, although she has already been treated with her adoptive grandparents in Generation Two. Daughter Dorothy’s individual number (12) is not repeated here. She receives birth-order-number one ( i ) as Margaret’s firstborn.[1] Birth-order numbering of Margaret’s children with Louis Fox also begins with one ( i ) to distinguish the fathers.

Dorothy’s individual number is not repeated. The fathers of Margaret’s children are distinguished by the birth-order numbers.

The informal adoption of Albert Walker and his social Walker ancestry now appear in his parenthetical summary of descent.  Notice that although his children are in the third generation from WilliamA, their generation number is 2, not 3, because of adoptive son Albert’s generation number of 1.

In Generation Three, some children take the generation number of 3, some 2, depending on the generational status of their fathers and grandfathers.

What unique numbering questions have you encountered in your family? How have you used Numbering Your Genealogy to answer them?


[1] Margaret2 is a direct descendant with multiple partners, similar to the multiple marriages discussed in Numbering Your Genealogy, 18, bullet 2. See also, for example, Numbering Your Genealogy, 22, no. 12, Myrtle4 Mercer, child ii, Mason Mercer.

NGS 2016 Live Streaming Signup Deadline April 22

Can’t make it to Ft. Lauderdale for the 2016 NGS Conference? You can still take advantage of ten lectures streamed to you live. They will also be accessible for three months after the conference closes. Several lectures from the BCG Skillbuilding track are included in “Day Two: Methods for Success.”

The signup deadline is approaching, so be quick if you want access to these lectures.

The live streaming signup deadline is midnight, Friday, 22 April 2016. Register here.

Live-streamed BCG Skillbuilding lectures, Friday, 6 May, 2016

Jeanne L. Bloom, CG, “Sharing With Others: How to Convey Evidence”

Techniques to construct and arrange genealogical reasoning so that our research is useful to future generations and facilitates effective collaboration with other genealogists.

Thomas W. Jones, PhD, CG, CGL,  “Systematically Using Autosomal DNA Test Results to Help Break Through Genealogical Brick Walls”

A case study set in the early 1800s demonstrates methodology for using autosomal DNA test results to help solve longstanding genealogical problems.

Stefani Evans, CG, “Doughnut Holes and Family Skeletons: Meeting the GPS through Negative and Indirect Evidence”

When one Matteson family branch shunned its prominent renegade, it created a doughnut-hole pattern of negative evidence that, ironically, helps strengthen the case for connection.

 

The words Certified Genealogist are a registered certification mark, and the designations CG, CGL, and Certified Genealogical Lecturer are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®, used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluation.

BCG Certification Seminar, 2016 NGS Conference in Ft. Lauderdale

“Certification: Measuring Yourself Against Standards”

Thursday, 5 May 2016, 9:30am to noon, Sessions T211 and T221

Jeanne Larzalere Bloom, CG

Michael Ramage, JD, CG

Judy G. Russell, JD, CG, CGL

The BCG Certification Seminar will be held from 9:30 a.m. to noon on Thursday, 5 May 2016, at the National Genealogical Society’s 2016 Family History Conference in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. During this interactive seminar Jeanne Larzalere Bloom, CG, Michael S. Ramage, JD, CG, and Judy G. Russell, JD, CG, CGL, trustees and members of BCG’s executive committee, will demystify the certification process and answer questions like, “Am I ready?” and “Can I do this?”

Certification is open to every genealogist whose work meets standards. Among those certified by BCG are genealogists who study their own family history, researchers who specialize in a particular surname, and professionals who conduct research (for a fee or pro bono) for other genealogists, attorneys, geneticists, biographers, and academics in many fields. They include teachers at all levels; writers and editors of books, journal articles, and newspaper columns; speakers at local, regional, and national conferences; employees of private and government agencies; lineage and genealogical society volunteers; and librarians and archivists.

How do I know if I am ready to apply? Practicing genealogy is often a solitary endeavor. Knowing when we produce work that consistently meets standards is often the hardest part of self-evaluation. There is no one right way to prepare for certification. Successful applicants come from all walks of life. They usually demonstrate some combination of focused genealogical education and experience.

If you are curious about certification and what is required to earn the post-nominal title of Certified Genealogist, these are the sessions for you. Part 1 of the BCG Certification Seminar begins at 9:30 a.m. The focus is on the organization, preparing for certification, and the application process. At 10:30 a.m. there is a half-hour break. Part 2 begins at 11:00 a.m. The focus is on the elements of a portfolio and strategies for compiling a successful portfolio.

BCG wants applicants for certification to succeed! Successful applicants often say that their attendance at certification seminars at national conferences was an integral part of preparing for their accomplishment. The seminars will be recorded and available for purchase.

We look forward to seeing you in Fort Lauderdale!

The words Certified Genealogist are a registered certification mark, and the designations CG, CGL, and Certified Genealogical Lecturer are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®, used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluation.

Numbering 3: Adoptions and Children of Multiple Marriages

The Walker family showed us how to accommodate numbering children born to unknown fathers in the second numbering post. Complexities continue in Generation Two with two types of informal adoption and children born to a descendant by two spouses.

Remember that we are looking at three numbers used in a descending genealogy:

  • Individual numbers, arabic numbers (1, 2, 3, 4 . . .);
  • Generation numbers, a superscript number in italic font (1, 2, A, B, a, b); and
  • Birth-order numbers, a lowercase roman numeral (i, ii, iii . . .).

Parenthetical summaries of descent outline each descendant’s ancestry. They appear after the descendant’s name in the first line of the biographical sketch, for example, “8.  Margaret Maitland2 Walker (Thomas Watta-1, WilliamA, ThomasB) was born . . .”

In all cases our authority on numbering is Joan Ferris Curran, Madilyn Coen Crane, and John H. Wray, Numbering Your Genealogy: Basic Systems, Complex Families, and International Kin, ed. Elizabeth Shown Mills, rev. ed. (Arlington, Va.: National Genealogical Society, 2008).

Generation Two

Only two children of WilliamA Walker and Margaret Lauderdale fathered and raised children, William’s biological son Thomas Watta-1 and Margaret’s son Edward1. Their parenthetical summaries of descent reflect their biological or social English ancestry through father WilliamA and grandfather ThomasB.

When she was still unmarried, the eldest daughter of Thomas Watta-1 and Mary bore a child to an unknown man. Thomas and Mary raised granddaughter Dorothy as their own child, as a sister to her mother. Dorothy takes the next individual number after Thomas and Mary’s children (12).[1] She has no child-list number, as she was not their biological child. Her introduction, below, cross-references her biological mother Margaret Maitland2, no. 8.[2] Her superscript generation number follows that of her biological mother, not her adoptive parents.[3]  

Individual number, no birth-order number, generation number following her mother’s

Thomas Watta-1 also had a stepson borne by his wife Mary to a father unknown before she married Thomas. Albert was raised by his Lee grandparents until his mother’s marriage. Although Thomas did not adopt Albert legally, he raised him as his own son, and Albert consistently used the Walker surname throughout his life. Adoptee Albert takes a sequential individual number after Thomas and Mary’s children (even though he was born before them) and after Dorothy, their biological granddaughter.[4] Like Dorothy, Albert does not take a child number because he was not a biological child of this union.[5] His generation number is one (1) because he is the first of his biological line to take the Walker surname.[6] A parenthetical description explains his origins.[7]  

Individual number, no birth-order number, generation number of 1 as the progenitor of a new biological Walker line

 

As we saw in the last post [link], Edward1 Walker was neither a stepson of nor adopted by William2 Walker, but his mother treated him as if he were William’s son. He retains the Walker surname and the continuity of the social family in his parenthetical summary of descent.[8]

Individual number, generation number 1, explanation of relationship to William in the parenthetical summary of descent

Edward married twice and fathered children by both wives. The children of each marriage receive sequential birth-order numbers beginning with one (i). Sadie’s children are i–iii, and Margaret’s son is i. They could just as well be numbered sequentially as children of the same descendant father, i–iv, without focusing on their mothers’ roles.[9]

Individual numbers, birth-order numbers that distinguish two mothers, generation numbers

Next time we’ll look at another example of numbering children by multiple partners.

What similar examples have you found in your family?

 


[1] Numbering Your Genealogy, 24, bullet 1. This is a variation on the example in Numbering Your Genealogy, 22, no. 46 (adopted child of no. 42, who has no biological children).

[2] Numbering Your Genealogy, 21, bullet 1.

[3] Ibid., bullet 2.

[4] Numbering Your Genealogy, 18, bullet 2.

[5] Ibid., bullet 3.

[6] Numbering Your Genealogy, 18, bullet 5, and 25, bullet 1.

[7] For the format of this explanation, see Numbering Your Genealogy, 24, “Adoption—Child of a Spouse.”

[8] Numbering Your Genealogy, 18, bullet 7. The invention of “posthumous stepson” follows the idea of informal adoption, as in 18, last paragraph, and 24, “Adoption—Child of a Spouse.”

[9] Numbering Your Genealogy, 12, “Birth-order Numbers,” and examples on p. 6, children of Matthew Moss (numbered as separate families), and p. 7, children of Matthew Moss (numbered all together).

Numbering Adoptees in a Genealogy

Why are adoptees treated differently from biological children in numbering a genealogy? It’s a great question and deserves a reasoned answer. The response relies on background information in Numbering Your Genealogy.[1]

A genealogy describes a family as it descends from a progenitor. In its simplest form it includes the genetic descendants of that person, what is sometimes referred to as the “bloodline.” It becomes more complex as the family grows to include stepchildren and adopted children. Some carry the DNA of the progenitor. Some do not. Some carry the same surname. Some do not. All, however, belong in the family, and we want to include them.

Adoptees are in a unique position, as they belong in two groups of genealogies. One group represents all the lines of their social (adoptive) family. The other group comprises the lines of their genetic family. How adoptees are described in the numbering scheme depends on which genealogy is in use. In a social genealogy, their generation number (1) indicates that they are the progenitor of a new genetic line within this family. In a genetic genealogy they take the appropriate generation number from the progenitor. Both assignments are accurate for the person, depending on which family the genealogy represents.

A good genealogical numbering system accommodates both genetic and social members of a family. With the popularity of direct-to-consumer genetic testing, genealogists are becoming more and more aware of the need to include all family members in genealogies. We want to use a numbering system that is flexible enough to describe everyone’s relationship to the progenitor accurately.

The examples used for this series of posts are drawn from a real genealogy that includes the genetic and social descendants of William Walker. All the “fathers unknown” are truly unknown. If someday their identities are discovered, the adoptive children in this Walker genealogy could also be numbered in the genetic genealogies of their paternal lines.

The adoptees in this Walker family all have a genetic relationship to one member of a Walker couple. The numbering principles used to describe them are equally appropriate for adoptees who have no genetic relationship to either member of a couple. The overarching goal is to include adoptees and stepchildren in a genealogy, acknowledging them both as part of the family and as having their own, new DNA signature in the family. Numbering Your Genealogy, which underpins this series of SpringBoard posts, gives us the tools to do just that.

 


[1] Madilyn Coen Crane, “Complex Families,” in Joan Ferris Curran, Madilyn Coen Crane, and John H. Wray, Numbering Your Genealogy: Basic Systems, Complex Families, and International Kin, ed. Elizabeth Shown Mills, rev. ed. (Arlington, Va.: National Genealogical Society, 2008), 17–25.

BCG Webinar Update: Fonkert on Identity

Jay Fonkert’s March 2016 BCG webinar, “Genealogical Fingerprints: Merging and Separating Identities in Family History Research,” is now accessible on demand from Vimeo. It is available for twenty-four-hour rental ($2.99) or for purchase of unlimited streaming and download ($12.99).

Go to the BCG Webinars tab at the top of this page for free previews and links to Vimeo recordings of all BCG webinars.

BCG Webinars are generally presented the third Tuesday of the month. Watch SpringBoard and Facebook for notices about two weeks before each webinar.

The words Certified Genealogist are a registered certification mark, and the designations CG, CGL and Certified Genealogical Lecturer are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®, used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluation.