On the state of cadet promotions

[Ron1319]

I have a lot of thoughts on this matter, but I have decided to offer some questions to start the thread.

1) What do you consider to be an appropriate rate of promotion for cadets?
2) Does that rate change depending on whether a cadet joins CAP at 12 years old or 14 years old?  16?
3) Do you have examples of high ranking phase IV cadets at your unit?  In your group?  In other words, do you or the cadets in your unit have Phase IV leaders to look up to?
4) Are there fewer high ranking cadets now than there were in your past?
5) Are cadets sticking with CAP less often after 18 years old now than they were in the past?
6) Do you believe after answering these questions whether we need to make fundamental changes either in our approach to CAP or the program to improve these situations?

Thank you for your consideration.  These are not intended to be rhetorical, as I am genuinely VERY interested in the answers.  Please include where are you located and at least whether you are a cadet or senior as I am new here and do not know very many other people involved in these forums.

[Eclipse]

1) What do you consider to be an appropriate rate of promotion for cadets?
3-4 per year, no less than 2, regardless of phase.
2) Does that rate change depending on whether a cadet joins CAP at 12 years old or 14 years old?  16?
Not in my experience, though older cadets who join with a specific goal, such as Mitchell before enlistment tend to charge harder.

3) Do you have examples of high ranking phase IV cadets at your unit?  In your group?  In other words, do you or the cadets in your unit have Phase IV leaders to look up to?
Unit - N/A, Group, yes, but not enough, and not distributed evenly.

4) Are there fewer high ranking cadets now than there were in your past?
Not that I see, the cycles are about the same overall in my wing, the peaks just move around.

5) Are cadets sticking with CAP less often after 18 years old now than they were in the past?
Not that I see.  Again, there are peaks and valleys, but the overall line has been almost flat.

6) Do you believe after answering these questions whether we need to make fundamental changes either in our approach to CAP or the program to improve these situations?
No.  The primary issues are with the general lack of volunteerism and community spirit coupled with far too much competition for adolescent attention, with a dash of schools pushing harder on free time.

[PA Guy]

1) What do you consider to be an appropriate rate of promotion for cadets?

3 promotions per yr.

2) Does that rate change depending on whether a cadet joins CAP at 12 years old or 14 years old?  16?

No, the promotion rate should be the same for all.  The proposed "fast burner" programs have not worked.   

3) Do you have examples of high ranking phase IV cadets at your unit?  In your group?  In other words, do you or the cadets in your unit have Phase IV leaders to look up to?

No, there aren't enough Phase IV cadets participating on a regular basis in squadrons.  Most are tied up in college or jobs.

4) Are there fewer high ranking cadets now than there were in your past?

No.  Like all things in CP it is cyclical.

5) Are cadets sticking with CAP less often after 18 years old now than they were in the past?

I haven't noticed any big changes.  If anything maybe a few more.

6) Do you believe after answering these questions whether we need to make fundamental changes either in our approach to CAP or the program to improve these situations?

Overall the cadet program is in the best shape it has ever been.  Most of the materials coming from NHQ/CP are top notch and heads above the cut and paste materials published 10-15 yrs ago and before.  The problems arise from a lack of trained seniors to conduct the program.  Do we need to make fundamental changes?  No, I don't think so.

I'm an ex cadet senior member in PCR.

[coudano]

1) What do you consider to be an appropriate rate of promotion for cadets?

Most of my cadets go 3-4 months.  I find this to be reasonable.
Every 2  months really is unreasonable for -some- cadets...   a few can pull it off though.
Twice a year is the reg standard minimum...  if a cadet fails to promote after 6 months, we start administrative action against them that leads to counseling (6 months), demotion or suspension (10 months), and then termination for cause (failure to progress)(12+ months).  I take this very seriously, and consider it key to the program.  Unfortunately most of CAP does not.

2) Does that rate change depending on whether a cadet joins CAP at 12 years old or 14 years old?  16?

I don't "push" my 12 year olds.  I let them go at whatever speed they go at.  However, they *are* required to meet minimum standards...  (twice a year)

3) Do you have examples of high ranking phase IV cadets at your unit?  In your group?  In other words, do you or the cadets in your unit have Phase IV leaders to look up to?

Nope.  My squadron hasn't produced a phase 4 cadet since...   2002 or so.  And those guys stagnated at Captain...
We don't really have a group, effectively.  There may be a handfull of phase 4 cadets in the wing.  Not sure exactly how many there are, but that says something, doesn't it?  You'd think you'd know who they all are, based on their awesomeness, and regular contribution.  If there were more than 6 i'd be surprised.

4) Are there fewer high ranking cadets now than there were in your past?

I don't have any actual stats, but my general sense is that:  not really.
A 'typical' squadron of 20 cadets probably has an officer or two.  or they have had one recently.  or they will have one before long.  That's the way it's been since i've been a DCC and it's the way I remember it being WIWAC

5) Are cadets sticking with CAP less often after 18 years old now than they were in the past?

No, I lose *A LOT* of people at the end of high school, to places like the military, college (academies/rotc), and even just career tracks.  More than half of my cadets that stay with CAP after their 18th birthday flip to senior member and become FO or TFO until their 21st birthday.  The few that do stick, usually do well, however.

6) Do you believe after answering these questions whether we need to make fundamental changes either in our approach to CAP or the program to improve these situations?

I don't know...
I shovel cadets through my program roughly in "batches".
I have 3 Lt's right now, who all phased through the program roughly together.

Same for the block of NCO's
and the block of airmen (actually i have a block of older airmen, and a block of newer airmen that just joined)
They (loosely) year-group through the program, and of course, cadets attrit out along the way.
But basically if the Mitchell is supposed to be 10%
Then a squadron of 20 cadets ought to have
2 mitchells
maybe like 5 NCO's
and 13 airmen...

give or take.


If I could wave my magic wand and solve any uncrackable problem right  now, it would be how to keep C/2d Lt's engaged, actively, and advancing their personal careers, and the goals of the squadron after earning the mitchell.  Historically, mine have either got the mitchell and quit for college/military/life, or get the mitchell and then stagnate there and spin their wheels.


**edit:  I'm a deputy commander for cadets in missouri wing.  former c/lt col.

[jeders]

I'm a former Mitchell cadet who is now working with the CP in TXWG.

1) What do you consider to be an appropriate rate of promotion for cadets?

I like to see cadets promote as rapidly as they are capable of (read they have to also be mature enough, not just check the boxes). This usually ends up at around once every 3 months. I have some who have not promoted in nearly 7 or 8 months, and I'm currently working with them to find out why and to get them promoting.

2) Does that rate change depending on whether a cadet joins CAP at 12 years old or 14 years old?  16?

Not really. We don't push the younger ones quite as much as the older ones, but we always stress the importance of progressing in the program in order to get the most out of it.

3) Do you have examples of high ranking phase IV cadets at your unit?  In your group?  In other words, do you or the cadets in your unit have Phase IV leaders to look up to?

No, no, and no. GP 1 of TXWG is very sparse, so we have mostly Phase 1 and 2 cadets with a few Phase 3s.

4) Are there fewer high ranking cadets now than there were in your past?

More.

5) Are cadets sticking with CAP less often after 18 years old now than they were in the past?

Nope.

6) Do you believe after answering these questions whether we need to make fundamental changes either in our approach to CAP or the program to improve these situations?

I think that the changes that the National CP Team is already making are going to be a big positive change. Other than that though, what we've done in the past has worked to produce multiple AF Academy cadets and generally successful people. If that's not success in the program, I don't know what is.

[N Harmon]

1) What do you consider to be an appropriate rate of promotion for cadets?

I consider 3 or more promotions per year through phases I and II, and 1 or more promotions through phases III and IV to be the minimum appropriate rate for cadets. I make the distinction because some of the achievements in the later phases do not include promotions.

2) Does that rate change depending on whether a cadet joins CAP at 12 years old or 14 years old?  16?

The age at which the cadet joined does not affect the expectations placed upon them, however their present age could, not to mention their individual capabilities. Some cadets excel in aerospace, others in leadership. No two cadets are alike, even twins.

3) Do you have examples of high ranking phase IV cadets at your unit?  In your group?  In other words, do you or the cadets in your unit have Phase IV leaders to look up to?

Not at present. We had an Eaker cadet graduate to senior membership a few months ago. Our next highest cadet is in phase III.

4) Are there fewer high ranking cadets now than there were in your past?

We have had more high ranking cadets in the past, and we have also had fewer.

5) Are cadets sticking with CAP less often after 18 years old now than they were in the past?

It is hard to judge because some cadets go off to college or the military and we do not know how active they remain in CAP. However we are finding more cadets are staying in the unit past age 18, which may be related to the economy, or may not.

6) Do you believe after answering these questions whether we need to make fundamental changes either in our approach to CAP or the program to improve these situations?

No.

Please include where are you located and at least whether you are a cadet or senior as I am new here and do not know very many other people involved in these forums.

I am a former C/Lt Col, presently a senior member Captain in the Monroe Composite Squadron, in Monroe, Michigan.

[Ron1319]

OK, my turn.

1) What do you consider to be an appropriate rate of promotion for cadets?

I agree with the previous poster who said something to the effect of "as rapidly as is right for them."  For me that was one achievement every two months pretty much until I left for college where I lost a little bit of time as a c/Maj or c/LtC before getting my Spaatz.  I joined just before turning 15 years old.   

2) Does that rate change depending on whether a cadet joins CAP at 12 years old or 14 years old?  16?

By rate, I didn't mean what the book says.  I meant my (your) personal expectations for the cadet.  I expect a 16 year old to consider the academic material that is challenging for a 12 year old to be borderline trivial.  We have a 16 old female cadet who is taking college classes.  She is finally promoting regularly because she now is able to compare the CAP academics to her college material and understand that it is relatively simple. 

Therefore, I expect most 16 year olds to be able to promote (achieve?) at least once every 2-3 months (16-24 weeks).  Put in perspective, that means that a cadet who is 16 years old and is now a c/CMSgt should be at least a c/1Lt and probably c/Capt 12 months from now.  Therefore, I don't understand why we would have so few Phase IV cadets. 

3) Do you have examples of high ranking phase IV cadets at your unit?  In your group?  In other words, do you or the cadets in your unit have Phase IV leaders to look up to?

Not yet, but we're about to.  I'm predicting our first Spaatz cadet from the group in January or February 2012.  He just got c/Capt and is the first in the group for a while.  I have 3-4 more cadets that I expect to follow shortly after.  We lit the fire and now they're all pushing each other.  I credit drill team and CAC for bringing them together so that they can push each other.

4) Are there fewer high ranking cadets now than there were in your past?

OMG, yes.  From the Spaatz Master List:

1112   Darren Makela   04 May 1992   OH
1133   Brian Merrick   14 Sep 1992   OH (my first cadet commander)
1163   Rebecca Ausprung   13 Apr 1993   OH
1211   Joshua Springman   02 Jun 1994   OH
1212   Vincent Cyran   02 Jun 1994   OH
1260   David R. Smith   31 May 1995   OH (2 cadet commanders after me at my original unit)
1267   Heather Cross   15 Aug 1995   OH
1295   Derek M. Britton   18 May 1996   OH
1296   Devon M. Britton   18 May 1996   OH
1299   Johnny L. Adams   02 Jul 1996   OH (my 2nd cadet commander, before me.)
1319   Ronald R. Thompson   12 Feb 1997   OH (my middle initial is D, I've emailed twice about that)
1350   Laura E. Thompson   26 Jan 1998   OH (my sister who is also part of the squadron here in California and talked me back into CAP)

Five or six of us were on the NCC team in 1997 (and two future Spaatzen) and all worked together frequently.  This is only to illustrate that my CAP experience had lots of diamonds in it.  I'm struggling to figure out why that isn't the case everywhere, and I think it may have to do with complacency.

5) Are cadets sticking with CAP less often after 18 years old now than they were in the past?

I don't know.  This CAWG squadron now has three cadets over 18 and has never had any in the past.  I think we'll retain all three of them, and have more in the future.  I don't think they had examples of older cadets and I think that just being told it was OK and that we'd done it is helping.

6) Do you believe after answering these questions whether we need to make fundamental changes either in our approach to CAP or the program to improve these situations?

I do.  Strongly.  I think what I'm seeing in the previous responses is solid evidence of people accepting a cyclic nature to CAP.  Why would we accept that?  What about CAP would lend itself to that?  We had solid meeting attendance throughout the last year.  My CAP experience in the past did not show meeting attendance to be cyclic on a micro scale (meeting to meeting) and I can't imagine what would cause the nature of a squadron to require that it die back to regrow.  As long as we're training replacements -- future cadet and senior leaders -- there should be no need for this?  I'm envisioning not only phase IV cadets in the next 12 months, but more after that and more after that.  Why would I spend my time mentoring them if my goals and intent were any less?

The business that I am in was historically cyclic.  I think that most people in the business that I am in consider it cyclic.  They believe that sometimes it will be strong and other times business will be weak.  I've built my business immune to that and we're pretty solid all of the time.   Why wouldn't we construct a CAP squadron the same way?

I have a couple more points.  If we were to assume that 10% of cadets who join CAP get their Mitchell awards, then 2 of 20 now is a failure to meet that 10% because you've had attrition along the way.  You have probably had to go through 40 cadets to get those two cadet officers and that's actually 5%. 

One of my challenges here has been trying to effect a paradigm shift.  If c/2Lt is the highest ranking cadet that anyone has vision of, then c/2Lt has a certain amount of "unattainability" to it.  My super chart here says 18 months to Mitchell, which hardly makes it seem unattainable to me, and I see that as the first step towards becoming a senior cadet officer, not the goal.  Being a senior cadet officer isn't for everyone, but how many are being left behind because of complacency?  There are numerous cadet NCO's in the unit I'm in that have been members for more than four years.  It's taken us a year, and we're starting to see them promoting.  We're not yet seeing them bring the new cadets along with them as well as I would like, but we're working on that.

I had to look up complacency to ensure that it means what I think that it means:

–noun, plural -cies.
1.
a feeling of quiet pleasure or security, often while unaware of some potential danger, defect, or the like; self-satisfaction or smug satisfaction with an existing situation, condition, etc.

This is illustrated most perfectly by the answer I received from a now-c/1Lt who was a c/SMSgt when I first came to the unit and asked, "Where are all of the cadet officers?"  I got a rather smug, "We have a great NCO program here."  I think that the cadets will be better served in terms of life-changing growth by the opportunities they will have with three diamonds as their goal, not a single silver pip.  It amazes me that everyone in cadet programs (and some of the former c/LtC posters in this thread) is not as fired up about this as I am with as many examples of units with only a cadet officer or two and so many with none.  I'm equally astonished that not one response to this thread has been "Yes, we have two c/Col's in the group and our unit has been without a Spaatz Cadet for a couple of years, but our c/LtC is testing next month and will be able to be cadet commander and then an advisor in the next couple of years."

One more point -- when a cadet goes away to college, they don't disappear.  I had an opportunity to be a cadet commander again during engineering school, and the majority of my drill team participation was while I was "away" at college.  In truth, I was about an hour away, but to me it seemed like I'd gone away to college.  I've had some very astonished looks and epiphany moments when talking to cadets lately just from saying that.  It was like that hadn't occurred to them before.

[Eclipse]

So...where have you been?

[DC]

I have a lot of thoughts on this matter, but I have decided to offer some questions to start the thread.

1) What do you consider to be an appropriate rate of promotion for cadets?
2) Does that rate change depending on whether a cadet joins CAP at 12 years old or 14 years old?  16?
3) Do you have examples of high ranking phase IV cadets at your unit?  In your group?  In other words, do you or the cadets in your unit have Phase IV leaders to look up to?
4) Are there fewer high ranking cadets now than there were in your past?
5) Are cadets sticking with CAP less often after 18 years old now than they were in the past?
6) Do you believe after answering these questions whether we need to make fundamental changes either in our approach to CAP or the program to improve these situations?

Thank you for your consideration.  These are not intended to be rhetorical, as I am genuinely VERY interested in the answers.  Please include where are you located and at least whether you are a cadet or senior as I am new here and do not know very many other people involved in these forums.

1) 3 - 4 times per year. A few more mature cadets can handle more, and those that cannot sustain this at least in the first two phases tend to quit after a year or so anyway. 

2)It depends. I don't expect a huge difference, but older cadets tend to be a little more mature and can handle faster advancement.

3)Not in my squadron currently, but there are several in my group, especially in the larger squadrons.

4) Not really...

5) Again, not really. I have found that most cadets remain cadets when they hit 18. The majority stay active, or maintain a cadet membership, even if they are not going to meetings regularly. Very few choose to convert to SM status at 18.

6) Not really. An increased minimum promotion time (say, 90 days) wouldn't hurt, but if the cadet program leaders in the squadrons are doing their jobs right it shouldn't matter.

[N Harmon]

I think what I'm seeing in the previous responses is solid evidence of people accepting a cyclic nature to CAP.  Why would we accept that?

We accept it because our experience shows that demand for our program is not static. That a program equal in every way will attract a lot of youth sometimes, and other times very few. And we have to be realistic about how much effort we put into drumming up interest during those low times, and the diminishing returns that come with that.

It is a simple matter of numbers. We all have X number of hours per week to spend planning and executing a cadet program. The more hours we spend recruiting, the less hours there are for improving our program execution. We have all seen squadrons that look really good on the outside, and then barely function on the inside; they tend to be full of inactive cadets. Nobody wants that.

The business that I am in was historically cyclic.  I think that most people in the business that I am in consider it cyclic.  They believe that sometimes it will be strong and other times business will be weak.  I've built my business immune to that and we're pretty solid all of the time.   Why wouldn't we construct a CAP squadron the same way?

What business is that? I happen to work in the banking industry as a computer analyst. Our business is very cyclic, largely dependent on economic conditions and interest rate markets; little of which we have any control over. So what we do is spend the good times preparing for the bad times. We do things like improve capitalization, diversify our loan portfolio, and expand our market.

Similarly in CAP, when interest in the cadet program is low we prepare for times when it will be high again. We concentrate on building leaders who will lead the influx of new cadets a few years down the line.

I guess what I am saying is there is a difference between complacency, and being realistic about the things you can control while mitigating the effects of things you can not. There is also the question of whether cadets taking longer now to complete the program is really a problem. I think you should judge our program by the quality of individual who exits it,  and not whether they exit with stripes, pips, or diamonds.

However, if you have ideas on how to improve things, we're all very interested in reading them.

[coudano]

Ron, are you *SURE* you aren't running a promotion mill?
I'm not saying you are, just seen that sort of thing before.

Just because a 16 year old can master 12 year old reading material doesn't mean that 16 year old has mastered the phase skillset.  And until they master that set (whether they've passed all their tests or not) they won't promote into the next phase (not in my squadron anyway).  Even some sharp, older cadets, i've found, can master the academics and marching, but still have trouble with things like values and respect.  In these cases, they need time to adjust to standard.  It's also important to me that cadets manage each other's careers, and motivate each-other.  It's not me driving my cadets to promote, it's them driving each-other, which inherrently takes more time and doesn't always work as well.

I mean I could "make high ranking cadets" all day and night long, if I wanted to.
Running cadets through the checkboxes as fast as they can possibly be pushed is pretty mindless.
But that's not the mission of the cadet program.  The cadet program needs to be producing people with real capabilities, and some level of mastery of defined skillsets.  I definitely trade quality of cadet for quantity of cadet, and quantity of promotions.  And I wouldn't have it any other way.

[Eclipse]

The reason it is cyclical is because we have no fixed influx of cadets.

BMT in any service runs like a clock because they have a separate command filling the funnel - we have the same people
filling the funnel and working the pipes.

Further, cadets are first and foremost, kids, so summers aren't a big time to be starting anything - we usually get them in the Spring as school winds down, or Fall as they are joining "other" and meet back up with their friends.

The higher-speeds tend to cluster because those cadets so inclined, usually, have strong family structures and friends who like the same things, so they all go a long for the ride, including mom & dad.  One year the unit is a Spaatz factory, two years later they are struggling to keep the doors open because the parents were only in it for the kids.

A couple of other points - attending a tech school an hour away is not exactly "going away to college" - we have cadets and seniors who commute farther than that on meeting nights.  Kudos to you for staying active, but that isn't the same as packing up your life and moving to another state where you don't know anyone and have 12 other things competing for your attention.

When they go away to college, actually go away, you generally lose them, either in the real sense that they drop CAP, or in the practical sense that they aren't at your meetings.  In either case, even if they join another unit, they are gone from "your" program, and no longer a factor.

The other thing is that it appears you did exactly that - made Spaatz and then left CAP for a prolonged period, and when you came back it was in another wing.  How are you different from all the other cadets who do the same thing every year?
Namely take what they can from CAP and then high-tail it for a decade or two?

I am only making these pointed comments because the tone of your response to your own questions is such that you
are surprised no one else "gets" how to run the program the way you do.  Yet outside the last year, which is not enough time to even see the cycles, let alone re-mediate them, you've been gone.

[coudano]

Another thing i'd like to point out is that your unit according to your sig has 62 cadets in it,
which statistically speaking compared to CAP overall is monster-huge.  That sort of unit allows economies of scale that smaller units can't touch.

There are *a lot* (vast majority) of squadrons out there with a dozen cadets.
Some with even fewer.
When I took over the squadron that I have right now, there were TWO cadets.  That's it.

For two reasons mainly:
1)  A lot of squadrons are in rural areas, and there simply aren't that  many people around to join CAP, even if you maximize your draw from the community.

2)  There is a maximum number of cadets that a unit can sustain based on the number of senior members willing to work with cadets, and *most* squadrons can't get or sustain "a lot" of senior member support.  I prefer a ratio of 1:6 but you can get away with a few more if your senior members are being "superman".  The big problem with that is when superman leaves, moves away, takes a job at wing, or whatever, then the squadron collapses into the void left behind.

[Bluelakes 13]

The "nature" of the cadet has changed over the last 10 years.  When I joined I would say close to 50% of the cadets were military inclined.  CAP was a stepping stone to ROTC/AFA/etc.  Today, I would say it's closer to 10%.

Regarding rate of promotion, unfortunately, the answer is "it depends".  I've had cadets where they promoted every two months without skipping a beat (and were able to take on the responsibility without a problem). Now this is rare.

If a cadet joins later (15+) they generally promote faster because they can absorb the material and responsibility faster than a 12 year old.

When I was unit CC, I had several Level 4 cadets, a couple are still with the squadron, although will be 21 soon.  And they were/are great leaders.

College is the biggest obstacle to cadets remaining active after 18.

I do not see how these answers point to opportunities to improve the program.

[BillB]

One answer to cadets moving on to college. Start a Squadron with flights at each major university in the Wing. This allows cadets to inter-react and maintain progress through the cadet program. This was done years ago in Florida and the Squadron produced more Spaatz awards than the rest of the Region combined during an 18 month period. While most of the flights are small, the fact that they are able to meet and study with other cadets operating under a single charter number has shown a worthwhile effort. Most college age cadets don't like to join local squadrons in communities where the universities are located. By organizing a flight it allows the cadet to be among their peer group and they are more at ease rather than being involved with 12-17 year old cadets.

[Ned]

One answer to cadets moving on to college (. . .)

I've always wanted to start wing e-squadrons for full time college students.  With some aggressive mentoring, cadets can continue to be challenged and progress.  They participate with their home unit during the summer, but meet on-line during the academic year.  Pod-cast AE and leadership lectures from notable figures and current ACSC students.  On-line safety briefs; allow the college cadets in turn to do some remote mentoring of cadets in units that lack PIII and PIV cadets; etc.

We might even be able to get in-residence SOS or ACSC students to mentor the e-squadron cadets if we give them a bullet on their OER or some sort of academic "atta-boy"

And we coordinate with the local unit as necessary for things like CPFT.

[coudano]

One answer to cadets moving on to college (. . .)

I've always wanted to start wing e-squadrons for full time college students.  With some aggressive mentoring, cadets can continue to be challenged and progress.  They participate with their home unit during the summer, but meet on-line during the academic year.  Pod-cast AE and leadership lectures from notable figures and current ACSC students.  On-line safety briefs; allow the college cadets in turn to do some remote mentoring of cadets in units that lack PIII and PIV cadets; etc.

We might even be able to get in-residence SOS or ACSC students to mentor the e-squadron cadets if we give them a bullet on their OER or some sort of academic "atta-boy"

And we coordinate with the local unit as necessary for things like CPFT.

Crap ned, that sounds better than MOST of the -in person- squadrons i've seen...
Let's just go there with the whole program...

[nesagsar]

One answer to cadets moving on to college (. . .)

I've always wanted to start wing e-squadrons for full time college students.  With some aggressive mentoring, cadets can continue to be challenged and progress.  They participate with their home unit during the summer, but meet on-line during the academic year.  Pod-cast AE and leadership lectures from notable figures and current ACSC students.  On-line safety briefs; allow the college cadets in turn to do some remote mentoring of cadets in units that lack PIII and PIV cadets; etc.

We might even be able to get in-residence SOS or ACSC students to mentor the e-squadron cadets if we give them a bullet on their OER or some sort of academic "atta-boy"

And we coordinate with the local unit as necessary for things like CPFT.

I think you just wrote the strategic vision statement for 2015.

[A.Member]

One answer to cadets moving on to college (. . .)

I've always wanted to start wing e-squadrons for full time college students.  With some aggressive mentoring, cadets can continue to be challenged and progress.  They participate with their home unit during the summer, but meet on-line during the academic year.  Pod-cast AE and leadership lectures from notable figures and current ACSC students.  On-line safety briefs; allow the college cadets in turn to do some remote mentoring of cadets in units that lack PIII and PIV cadets; etc.

We might even be able to get in-residence SOS or ACSC students to mentor the e-squadron cadets if we give them a bullet on their OER or some sort of academic "atta-boy"

And we coordinate with the local unit as necessary for things like CPFT.

I very much appreciate Ned's knowledge and outside the box thinking on this topic.  However, I don't see it as being effective.   

The real issue is that we have a program that applies the same tools and concepts to 12 year olds as it does to 19 - 20+ year olds.   There is a world of difference between the two that needs to be addressed.  This of course is not a new argument but at 17/18 years old, a cadet may move away from home for the first time in their life.   It's a whole new world with a whole new set of rules and experiences to be gained.  Their lives are so different.  As stated in previous posts, they may go off to college, full class load, ROTC, etc.  They may begin working full-time for the first time ever.  Many possibilities and competing priorities.   They're ready to move to that "next level".   And while creating virtual squadrons and making material available electronically may aid in accessibility, it doesn't change the material itself and the fundamental fact that our program does not really support this change in their lives.  The program must have perceived value to them at this new stage.

It's an interesting conundrum because in some respects, isn't that what we've been helping prepare them for?  ...To go out into the real world with their learned skills and become leaders - hopefully with an aerospace focus/awareness?

[Ned]

The real issue is that we have a program that applies the same tools and concepts to 12 year olds as it does to 19 - 20+ year olds.   There is a world of difference between the two that needs to be addressed. 

Of course they are different. 

That's why we don't have many 12 year olds in Phase IV nor too many 20 year olds in Phase I.  Our program does indeed appreciate the critical changes that take place and adjusts the curricula as the cadets progress.

This of course is not a new argument but at 17/18 years old, a cadet may move away from home for the first time in their life.   It's a whole new world with a whole new set of rules and experiences to be gained.  Their lives are so different.  As stated in previous posts, they may go off to college, full class load, ROTC, etc.  They may begin working full-time for the first time ever.  Many possibilities and competing priorities.   They're ready to move to that "next level". 

I was with you right up to the end.  Of course things change significantly for everyone after high school, whether it is college, the military, or full time employment.

But any suggestion that our CP is somehow only suitable for middle and high school students is short sighted and inaccurate.  I certainly agree that a relatively small percentage of our cadets are over 18, but it is an age group where we do some of our best work.  This is where we see future leaders truly blossom as cadet commanders, activity commanders, CAC leaders, and as mentors to younger cadets.

I don't mean to minimize the conflicting priorities that older cadets face, but we have a great deal to offer our 18-21 year olds, whether they are college freshmen or the assistant manager at Radio Shack.

(It is kinda like the competing priorities that every one of our seniors face, isn't it?)

And while creating virtual squadrons and making material available electronically may aid in accessibility, it doesn't change the material itself and the fundamental fact that our program does not really support this change in their lives.  The program must have perceived value to them at this new stage.

Again, non-concur.  Advanced cadets do advanced work, entirely suitable for where they are in their lives. 

My modest suggestion was to address the accessibility issues you identified.  It is hard for a cadet going away school to engage and participate.  Local units near major universities have trouble integrating "visiting cadet officers" effectively without negatively impacting their home-grown troops.  I've seen it work well, but it is a difficult issue.

I'm just trying to get the best of both worlds - keep our older cadets engaged where possible, which should modestly increase our ability to retain them as they turn 21.  This in turn helps provide more experienced CP leaders for the next generation of cadets who would benefit from our training.

[Ron1319]

First, my own experience was not going away to a "tech school."  I went to a 5-year engineering program at a major accredited University and lived on or near campus.  Of course I had a million things pulling for my attention, but I prioritized the same (as Ned pointed out) as I do in my life, now.  Part of the engineering program was a mandatory co-op (internship) program where I moved from Cincinnati to Raleigh, NC for 7 months out of the year.  I was involved with drill team primarily while I was still in Ohio and while in Raleigh I was an advisor at the squadron at RDU the first year and then the second year one of the seniors (LtC Langley who is now director of ops for MER, I think) asked me to be the cadet commander of a new unit he was starting, so I had a 2nd opportunity to be cadet commander.

To answer where I went, at 21 I lost my diamonds and wasn't very active as a new senior.  I moved to California and never really got involved with a unit out here.  I got involved with such things as being an engineer for Intel, auto racing, swing dancing, starting my own business.. the list goes on and on.  I still genuinely believe that even a "super senior" is not nearly as effective as a senior cadet officer.  The younger cadets look at you entirely differently.

Next I want to address the post that basically said, "Your unit has so many cadets and seniors and we just couldn't do that with a smaller unit."  Our unit didn't have nearly as many cadets a year ago.  The unit does have the distinct advantage of having the positive influence now of my sister, her husband and my support.  That said, I biggest things we've done that have been to encourage the cadets, help set goals, and to give them more opportunities to work with other cadets in the group through drill team and CAC.  The unit did have some excellent seniors when we joined, but only about 12 cadets attending meetings.  The Great Start program was already sitting there for us to implement, and we encouraged them to go promote.  They got excited by the first batch of 12 or so new cadets and after they finished Great Start, they went and got another 12 or so.  We've been running Great Start programs approximately every 8-10 weeks and we're going to continue to do that.  We have another recruiting drive planned for January.  We're trying to figure out what the prize will be for the cadet who recruits the 100th cadet. 

We're having some attrition, but we're averaging about 40 cadets in attendance at a meeting in three flights.  Our influx of new cadets continuously outweighs our attrition.  The process basically involved making the entire cadet membership at the time the new staff and we're finally seeing a year later the new cadets from a year go start to take leadership roles.  If we're successful we'll need more cadets in order to have cadet staff positions for the new leaders that are coming up the pipe.

My personal business is the largest swing dancing business on the West Coast.  You can see more at www.MidtownStomp.com if you're interested.  Prior to starting our dance, the accepted norm in Sacramento for a swing dance was 50 dancers and the dance would dwindle and die after a year or so.  We average 300+ dancers/week and have an awesome 6,000 square foot ballroom that was built for swing in the 1920's.  We are ALWAYS advertising, flyering, and doing new things to bring in new dancers.  And we throw a party. 

I think there are many more parallels to my dance rather than to the nightmarish banking industry.  I don't see any reason why any unit can't grow year round.  I don't see any reason why attendance at meetings should be cyclic.  We've had a constant influx of new cadets all year and we haven't noted a dramatic decrease in attendance at any time during the year.  You can argue that I haven't been back long enough to see it yet, but I am not going to accept it as a given that it will happen and just expect it to happen.  I don't happen to believe that if you will it to be that it will happen, but in this case, if we planned for it and expected it to happen, it would.

Ned, I love the ideas of making the program systematically more accessible to cadets who are away at college.  As far as the program not being designed around college students, I believe that my sister, her husband and I all agree that we got more from CAP after 18 than we did before 18. 

I really want to address these two things specifically:

1)  A lot of squadrons are in rural areas, and there simply aren't that  many people around to join CAP, even if you maximize your draw from the community.

There are less things in rural areas to compete with.  You honestly don't get much more rural than Placerville, CA.  We're at least 20 minutes from the furthest-out Sacramento suburb and we are in the foothills.  The population of Placerville is 9,610 according to the first Google result that I found.  We do draw from surrounding communities as far away as El Dorado Hills which is about 20 minutes away and has a larger population (~20,000).  This is the same argument that could be used to explain why the Bay Area has such a large swing dancing community and Sacramento could never have as large of a dance as SF.  I run a dance weekly that draws 2x the largest SF dance.

2)  There is a maximum number of cadets that a unit can sustain based on the number of senior members willing to work with cadets, and *most* squadrons can't get or sustain "a lot" of senior member support.  I prefer a ratio of 1:6 but you can get away with a few more if your senior members are being "superman".  The big problem with that is when superman leaves, moves away, takes a job at wing, or whatever, then the squadron collapses into the void left behind.

Why would you need one senior for every 6 cadets?  What advantage does a senior have over a Phase IV cadet?  I still only see it as a disadvantage being a Capt instead of being a c/Col.  Our unit does have senior support, but in terms of seniors who are specifically active in growing the cadet program, we have 4 who are extremely active and another 4-5 that are supportive but who do not attend very regularly.  I don't know what we would do with a few more seniors.  Note that I'm not saying less leadership.  I'm just saying that if you really have a problem finding more seniors that want to be active in the program, the leadership can be supplemented by senior cadet leadership.  The last time I was a cadet commander it was essentially two seniors and me running the program, and we build a unit of 25 cadets in 6 months, complete with ES training, active ES participation and promoting cadets.

The other thing is that it appears you did exactly that - made Spaatz and then left CAP for a prolonged period, and when you came back it was in another wing.  How are you different from all the other cadets who do the same thing every year?  Namely take what they can from CAP and then high-tail it for a decade or two?

I sort of already addressed this, but I want to address it directly.  I wore my diamonds for two years and was active during that time.  That's specifically the difference between what you describe and my case.  At 21 I left the program and I would love to address retention of 21 year old Spaatzen, or 21 year old cadets.  I haven't given that enough consideration to have ideas on how to improve the retention.  Further, they high-tail it and generally don't come back.  I'm back.  Probably for a long time.  I am attempting to build something that will not rely on my being there.

Ron, are you *SURE* you aren't running a promotion mill?

Yes, I'm sure.  I think just the case where the cadet staff has to now plan for three flights (the next cadet staff, the 1-3 stripe cadets and the great start cadets) is enough to ensure this.  However, in the case where we have cadets who have been members for as long as 5 years and don't have very much grade to show for it, there is some catching up that needs to happen for some of them.  I have an 18 (almost 19) year old c/CMSgt who I wish I could pin c/Maj on.  He's good.  Really good.  He was halted with two stripes for way too long.  We figured out at NCC that he can get his Spaatz approximately a month before his 21st birthday and he's not missed a beat since. 

Here is the thought I've been working with for a while.  How far in terms of leadership development can a cadet go with 5 or 6 stripes?  We were at the CAWG Cadet Program Conference last year and instructing a class.  We were having a round table discussion with the cadets and my brother-in-law asked the cadets if they felt that they could get everything out of the cadet program as NCO's.  One of them said "yes."  That, or statements that I perceive to mean that, is where my perceived tone that I believe that I know better is coming from.  I think the point about a c/LtC at encampment looking at a different response when applying for staff positions was lost in the details.  Being a Phase IV cadet doesn't just mean wearing the grade.  It means starting to understand executive leadership, long term planning and leadership of larger groups of cadets.  I didn't mean to imply that they would automatically be given some position, or that they had it coming and that nobody would dare overlook them.  What I mean is that in my experience cadets gain a certain skill set on the way to c/LtC that I don't see them gaining at c/SMSgt.  They have different opportunities. 

If I need to make the point further, how many cadets with 5 stripes do these things:

1) Chair the National CAC
2) Command an NCC team at national competition
3) Attend IACE
4) Attend COS
5) Command a wing encampment

The list goes on, but I hope I've made the point that without the grade they're not going to have the opportunities.  I understand that passing the tests and automatically getting promoted does not grow leadership, but we're getting them out there and involved.  My brother in law started this, too, which although in it's infancy gives them more opportunities for training and leadership outside the unit.

http://gp5.cawg.cap.gov/node/110

[A.Member]

Our program does indeed appreciate the critical changes that take place and adjusts the curricula as the cadets progress.

I'm not convinced that it does. 

To illustrate, what advanced AE material exists to challenge our older/more advanced cadets?  The AEX II material is not even robust enough to satisfy most early high school cadets.  There is a lot of unexplored opportunity in the STEM arena, although it potentially raises questions as to instructor availability for truly advanced topics.

From a leadership perspective, once a cadet earns their Mitchell, learning opportunities are not significantly different/unique in most cases.   This probably explains why so many cadets stall out after this achievement. 

...But any suggestion that our CP is somehow only suitable for middle and high school students is short sighted and inaccurate.  I certainly agree that a relatively small percentage of our cadets are over 18, but it is an age group where we do some of our best work.  This is where we see future leaders truly blossom as cadet commanders, activity commanders, CAC leaders, and as mentors to younger cadets.

I don't mean to minimize the conflicting priorities that older cadets face, but we have a great deal to offer our 18-21 year olds, whether they are college freshmen or the assistant manager at Radio Shack.

(It is kinda like the competing priorities that every one of our seniors face, isn't it?)

No, it's not at all.   

The difference is that seniors have already worked through that portion of their life.  They are now established/in a routine and can now look to fill a void/desire.  This probably explains why we have so few senior members under age 30 as well.   

Our cadets on the other hand are young people now looking to establish themselves in the real world and exploring their new found freedoms.  You need look no further than one of your first statements above as evidence to this.   If the program is truly so compelling to older cadets, why do they not stay active?...why are they such a small percentage of our membership?

Advanced cadets do advanced work, entirely suitable for where they are in their lives. 

How so?  What advanced work is so significantly different or value add?  There are only so many o-flights, encampments, cadet competitions, etc.  I have cadets that are 14-15 years old that have already cycled through those activities a couple times and are already becoming leaders in those activities.   Now, fast forward 3 - 4 more years down the road...how will the program keep them engaged?

My modest suggestion was to address the accessibility issues you identified.  It is hard for a cadet going away school to engage and participate.  Local units near major universities have trouble integrating "visiting cadet officers" effectively without negatively impacting their home-grown troops.  I've seen it work well, but it is a difficult issue.

I'm just trying to get the best of both worlds - keep our older cadets engaged where possible, which should modestly increase our ability to retain them as they turn 21.  This in turn helps provide more experienced CP leaders for the next generation of cadets who would benefit from our training.

I understand what you're trying to do and as I stated earlier, I truly appreciate the thought and effort.  My intent is not to be a nay-sayer and I hope my observations and experience are wrong.   I'd love for your idea to take off.   However, there is also the realistic side to me that observes and hears what cadets are saying.  I find cadets thrive on challenge and new experiences.  That challenge and those experiences begin to escape them at a certain point - or at least replaced by other opportunities.  I don't know the solution but I do know that a void exists and at least you're probing ideas in an attempt to resolve it.

[Eclipse]

To answer where I went, at 21 I lost my diamonds and wasn't very active as a new senior.  I moved to California and never really got involved with a unit out here.  I got involved with such things as being an engineer for Intel, auto racing, swing dancing, starting my own business.. the list goes on and on.

You've just answered your own question as to why CAP is cyclical and why we lose older cadets and seniors - people
decide they want to do "other" or have to do "other".

I'm sorry, but you dropped from the program for about ten years and then come back acting like a typical Spaatz cadet - "We could do so much better if we 'x', and 'x' is so simple, why aren't we doing it?"

Because "x" takes people to do it.

There is no magic answer to older cadet retention until there is more incentive to stick around.

Another factor is that CAP success is not system-based, but personality-based, as are most volunteer organizations.  You indicate that the success is due to you and your family.  Wonderful - FYI, you don't scale, and assuming your own personal growth, you will leave at some point and move on to "other", which means the unit's continued success will be solely dependent on the random people you are able to recruit.

As to Ned's idea of remote membership.  No thank you.  CAP is not a correspondence school, the majority of the real value is in personal, in-face participation.  Either you are there or you aren't.

If you want to fix this - start lighting up real units at these colleges, not letting cadets click through more presentations and pretend to listen to podcasts.

The program is already slipping towards watered-down with online open-book testing, you start making this a remote learning program and in 5 years you will have hundreds of home-schooled Spaatz cadets and squadrons that exist nowhere but on paper.

I agree with your main point, that running a good, consistent,  program is the key to a unit's success.  The ability to do that in the current model is not as simple a you propose.

[davidsinn]

1)  A lot of squadrons are in rural areas, and there simply aren't that  many people around to join CAP, even if you maximize your draw from the community.

There are less things in rural areas to compete with.  You honestly don't get much more rural than Placerville, CA.  We're at least 20 minutes from the furthest-out Sacramento suburb and we are in the foothills.  The population of Placerville is 9,610 according to the first Google result that I found.  We do draw from surrounding communities as far away as El Dorado Hills which is about 20 minutes away and has a larger population (~20,000).  This is the same argument that could be used to explain why the Bay Area has such a large swing dancing community and Sacramento could never have as large of a dance as SF.  I run a dance weekly that draws 2x the largest SF dance.

You need to get out more. My entire county only has just over twice the people your town does and we're not the worst in the state. We are 20 miles from a Walmart. I personally live 10 minutes from any kind of fast food. As for less things to take time in rural areas you need to watch less hollywood. In my unit we have had conflicts with sports, 4H, church, family obligations, school clubs, jobs and the list goes on. It is cyclical because of school. Everything here revolves around the school calendar. It is very difficult to run a program that is attractive to outsiders when it's 0 and windy outside because you're stuck inside at your meetings for months. In the spring and fall we can do orides and show recruits what they can do when they join. We can demonstrate drill. We can do a lot when it's warm that we can't do when it's very cold and snowy.

Around these parts for encampment it's July, August or thanks to Eclipse's hard work, April. Until you can ship them off to encampment you haven't really hooked them yet so you have to time your drives to put them at encampment when they are still new but actually ready to go.

[Eclipse]

You're drawing people from 20 minutes away!?!?!  In these parts it takes 20 minutes to get to a major expressway!

You're less than an hour to Sacramento, that isn't "remote" that is typical in my wing outside the major metro area.
In the Midwest  we have units that are 3 hours from >anything< that resembles a major city, and then "major" is subjective.

[Ned]

How so?  What advanced work is so significantly different or value add?  There are only so many o-flights, encampments, cadet competitions, etc.  I have cadets that are 14-15 years old that have already cycled through those activities a couple times and are already becoming leaders in those activities.   Now, fast forward 3 - 4 more years down the road...how will the program keep them engaged?

That's easy.

14-15 year old cadets are among our most enthusiastic encampment participants - as a basic flight member, or perhaps as flight sergeant.

I can only agree that an 19 year old is not really going to get much out of repeating the basic encampment experience.  But as an upper-level cadet staff member, the 19 year old is going to learn and do things that most college students can only dream about.

First, actually commanding a unit 24/7 for a week.  Whether that is a squadron with a 100 cadets or the whole encampment with a couple hundred, that cadet is going to learn far more leadership in a controlled but intense environment then they are ever going to learn by taking Psych 137 (The Psychology of Leadership) M, W, F from 0900 to 1000 in Room 516 in Reichow Hall.

Second, the cadet will have to actually engage in a full planning cycle for a major event involving hundreds of people.  Budgets, supplies, logistics, coordination with other staff elements, etc.  Not much of which occurs while participating in the UC skateboarding club.

If the encampment experience is too narrow, consider the CAC.  The CAC is the only place in CAP where we teach committee leadership.  Most cadets don't go into the military, of course, but every single one of us is going to wind up on committees at some point in our lives - quality improvement committees at work, stewardship committees for church, condo boards, school boards, PTSA, neighborhood watch, etc. ,etc. etc.

This is important stuff that relates directly to the real world. (Indeed, one need only watch a NB webstream to see how much CAC training would benefit our senior members as well.    )

Older cadets become key CAC leaders, serving at higher levels and as council officers.

Advanced cadets can and do perform important, high level work, at the group and wing level supporting CP officers and DCPs.  I've seen some incredible work prepared by some of our PIV cadets to advance our program.

I could go on for a while, but let me simply note that I agree that if all the 19 year old does is what she/he did when they were 14-15, you are absolutely right.  They will leave.  And they should.  Heck, I figure I have pretty much done my "drill around the parking lot until the next class starts at 2000 hours" bit.  If someone told me that was my job in CAP, I'd leave too.

It is clearly a leadership challenge to keep all of our cadets active and engaged, regardless of their time in the program.  It is up to dedicated seniors like you to specifically reach out to the older cadets and make sure that they are learning and progressing in the program.

I clearly understand that if you have a squadron with 20 cadets under the age of 16 and a couple of random 19 and 20 year olds, that most of your attention and effort will be devoted to making sure the program works for the majority of your cadets.  But that does not relieve you of the responsibility to reach out and engage the older cadets.  You may need to work with your colleagues at the wing, group, and region level to do so, but all of our cadets deserve our skill and attention.

[Ron1319]

We actually have several cadets going to the Oregon winter encampment.  It's cool that we can do that out here.  As far as getting out more, I grew up in small town Ohio and that's where my original squadron was.  We had snow and we still had solid attendance in the winter.  We weren't as big as we are now, here, but still solid and growing year around.  If you really are that entirely population limited, then your squadron size will be smaller and the issues you face in growing phase IV cadets would be different.  I don't see that as making the point any less valid.  I don't believe that anyone has to accept a cyclic nature to CAP.  Adopt an "If you're not growing you're dying" philosophy and continue to recruit.

As far as coming back and acting like a typical Spaatz cadet, what happened to everybody else where they DON'T believe that given "x" you can accomplish "y?"  That with "x" things would be better.  We are.  We have.  We will continue to do so.  It'd be entirely different if I were 21 and hadn't accomplished anything outside of CAP, but my point is that I have the same attitude in my business and know that it works.  We've accomplished a lot in the last year, and I don't see it as requiring our involvement in the future.  As I said, we're working on training the group.  We don't plan to abandon the squadron, but we are going bigger in our scope.  The idea is to build a system and leaders that continues to grow so that losing some people doesn't cause a dramatic decline.

That same exact situation happens in the swing dancing world.  You have some of your best dancers stop dancing, or move to another city.  You don't cry and accept that your dance will fail, you train more dancers all of the time so that as people leave there are people there to take their place and you provide something great enough that as new dancers move to the area they want to be a part of your dance.  It's an exact analogy, in case anyone missed that.

If we accepted complacency, and I'm reading "cyclic" as a code word for "allowing failure," then yes, exactly what you're suggesting will happen.  I'll go one step further and explain that my swing dancing business is aided dramatically by having observed this cyclic nature in CAP, and we take steps all of the time to prevent the down turns.

There seems to be a constant undertone from the nay-sayers in this thread that CAP sucks, nobody really would want to do it or stick with it, and that there is nothing for a cadet over 18.  Like I said, the majority of what I got out of CAP happened after 18.  With the attitude prevalent here, it's apparent that those cadets are not being encouraged to grab those opportunities. 

Let me tell you that there is a huge difference between being a squadron commander at an encampment and being the encampment cadet commander.  I already listed some other opportunities for cadets over 18, but the list goes on.  Mission Scanner and Observer, for instance, become available to cadets at 18.  I was active in both.  I was a ground team leader and actually had real sorties as the GTL as a cadet.  It's like pulling teeth trying to find a trainer for mission scanner and observer who will actually sit down and do pre-reqs here in NorCal, though.  We're working on solving that problem, too.

[Ron1319]

You're drawing people from 20 minutes away!?!?!  In these parts it takes 20 minutes to get to a major expressway!

You're less than an hour to Sacramento, that isn't "remote" that is typical in my wing outside the major metro area.
In the Midwest  we have units that are 3 hours from >anything< that resembles a major city, and then "major" is subjective.

Where are you?  I grew up outside of Dayton, Ohio.  Major cities in Ohio are only an hour and a half apart, and are primarily population centers of 500,000-1.5M people.  I'm willing to concede wholeheartedly that we would not be able to succeed in the middle of nowhere.  I don't believe you originally said isolated, I believe the word was "rural."

Oh, and brilliant post, Ned.  I agree with every word.   I have this feeling that we're going to get a response that says, "There is no CAC in BFE."  I'm going to shrug and say that I'm not in BFE and don't believe that most of the CAP membership is.  If that didn't make anyone reading laugh out loud, then they really don't get my sense of humor.

[Eclipse]

Where are you?  I grew up outside of Dayton, Ohio.  Major cities in Ohio are only an hour and a half apart, and are primarily population centers of 500,000-1.5M people.  I'm willing to concede wholeheartedly that we would not be able to succeed in the middle of nowhere.  I don't believe you originally said isolated, I believe the word was "rural."

ILWG, where everyone live North of 80 and beyond is a lot of farm.  Rural but not isolated is irrelevant to CAP.  We've got lots of rural around here that go more than 20 minutes everything.  Rural and isolated is where the issue is.

Oh, and brilliant post, Ned.  I agree with every word.   I have this feeling that we're going to get a response that says, "There is no CAC in BFE." 

CAC is such a non-factor in most wings, and many whole regions, that if CAC or NCC is your only hook to keeping older cadets, you're already cooked.   The average 19 year old is not going to stay in CAP for a quarterly pizza party or teleconference where a bunch of younger cadets argue about cord colors.

[Ron1319]

ES?  Mission Scanner and Observer, Ground Team 1, 2, 3, GTL? 

Defunct CAC in whole regions isn't good, but that's not exactly my job.

That still also leaves encampment opportunities, something fabricated like our group training academy, and the whole list of national special activities.  I'd consider the top of that list to be COS, NCC and IACE.

[Ned]

The average 19 year old is not going to stay in CAP for a quarterly pizza party or teleconference where a bunch of younger cadets argue about cord colors.

I absolutely agree.

Which is why it is your responsibility and mine to make sure that they have far, far more to do that eat pizza and argue cord colors.

Commanders and senior CP staffers have the absolute responsibility to train and engage the CAC.  Which is NOT an optional part of our program.  If Wing and Region Commanders allow a significant part of their program to wither and die because they don't attend to it as they should, then shame on them.

And by extension, it must be up to people like me to come up with senior commander performance metrics that ensures that commanders pay attention to their CACs or suffer measureable consequences if they do not.

Thats why we get the big paychecks. 

[Eclipse]

ES?  Mission Scanner and Observer, Ground Team 1, 2, 3, GTL?

All good ideas, and may keep the cadet around, but don't do much for your program as a whole, nor will they help a cadet progress.

[Eclipse]

Commanders and senior CP staffers have the absolute responsibility to train and engage the CAC.  Which is NOT an optional part of our program.  If Wing and Region Commanders allow a significant part of their program to wither and die because they don't attend to it as they should, then shame on them.

This is old road, but I doubt it is news to anyone here that the CAC is pretty dysfunctional and lacking any real mission or direction.

Citing WIWAC doesn't change that.  The world and CAP were night and day different in the mid nineties.

[Ron1319]

The world and CAP were night and day different in the mid nineties.

Why?  And I don't think Ned was a cadet in the mid-nineties. <-- that was a joke by the way

And why do you think that ES participation will not contribute to the program as a whole and to cadet progress?

[Ned]

This is old road, but I doubt it is news to anyone here that the CAC is pretty dysfunctional and lacking any real mission or direction.

I accept your admission that your CAC is "pretty dysfunctional and lacks any real mission or direction."

I'm a little surprised that any CAP commander would admit that, but I figure you know best.

The question then becomes, what are you going to do about it?

If your first impulse is to answer "nothing because I think the program is flawed" ask yourself if you would accept an answer like that from your Safety Officer who had chosen not to comply with existing regulations?

(I'm only going by what I read on CT, but some have suggested that the CAP safety program is less than perfect and unevenly enforced.)

Acceptable answers include things like:

"Hey, group cadet program officer.  I am unsatisfied with our CAC.  It appears to be dysfunctional.  That is, of course, unacceptable.  I want you to know that the CAC program is important to me as a commander and I am directing you to place emphasis on this within the group until it is functioning correctly."

"Hey, Group CAC chair.  I imagine you must be pretty disappointed in how it is going.  As you know, a highly successful CAC is pretty important to me; as I'm sure it must be to you.  What can I do to better resource this valuable program?"

"Hey, Boss (Wing Commander).  Sir/ Ma'am, I know how imporant an effective CAC is to you, but frankly the wing CAC seems a little underperforming at this point.  Would you like me to work up a "How to Have a Successful CAC" presentation for the next Commanders Call?"

"Hey, Boss (Wing Commander).  Ma'am/Sir, I'm sure you remember when you were a group commander and how many different '#1 priorities' you had then and how few resources in time, personnel, and treasure you had to address them.  I'm afraid that I may be letting you down because our CAC is not as functional as we would all like.  But I'm convinced that it is not our fault, but the result of a badly designed program that has been overtaken by the changing demographics and interests of our cadets over the last several decades.  I've drafted a proposed revision to the 52-16 to eliminate this costly and little-used program and I'd like you to introduce it as an agenda item at the next NB meeting.  Until then, of course, I will continue to work as hard as I can to support the existing regulations .. . . "

[Ron1319]

I'm sorry, but you dropped from the program for about ten years and then come back acting like a typical Spaatz cadet - "We could do so much better if we 'x', and 'x' is so simple, why aren't we doing it?"

I'm still mentally stuck on this point a bit.  Other than the modification that it's really a, x, z and all of the letters in between, I don't see why that's a bad thing.  People as a resource can be grown and it's our job to develop them.  I've given multiple examples of how we're working on that.  I'd like to again point out that I'm 32, not 21.  I've done a lot in that time including customer visits to Korea to sign $100M corporate deals, domestic design-win deals with $1B impact, some corporate hiring, account management, project management, getting married, and staffing and growing my own business.  I'm not just dreaming in a box.

[Ron1319]

Around these parts for encampment it's July, August or thanks to Eclipse's hard work, April. Until you can ship them off to encampment you haven't really hooked them yet so you have to time your drives to put them at encampment when they are still new but actually ready to go.

Are you implementing Great Start?
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/P052_009_7603F5B468886.pdf

[DakRadz]

I accept your admission...

Bowchickawowwow.

ES?  Mission Scanner and Observer, Ground Team 1, 2, 3, GTL?

All good ideas, and may keep the cadet around, but don't do much for your program as a whole, nor will they help a cadet progress.

Why can't these be side missions/activities? Say you have a ~C/Maj who is beginning to wonder what he's getting out of the program. Say this cadet is very involved but losing steam because mentoring and leading is great, but they can do the same thing in (activity here).
Introduce this cadet to any of these programs to give them something other programs can't- just because mentoring and leading is a wonderful reward, it doesn't mean they can't do the same thing elsewhere, and possibly with less hassle.

Earning those Observer wings is a personal accomplishment that is pretty satisfying- and it complements attending the Mitchell ceremony of a cadet that was mentored for most of their time in CAP by this C/Maj.
That combination of pride and fulfilling their "serve my community, state, and nation" pledge is something that no other civilian/cadet/teen organization I know of can rival.

You cannot simply offer the exact same recipe as JROTC (great for the 3-4 years it's offered, but it can afford to be narrow), Big Brothers and Sisters, or any other volunteer organization, and still expect to be the "Top Dog" of the list of volunteer opportunities simply because cadets earn shinies and wear a uniform- leadership is not exclusively taught by the Civil Air Patrol.
Yes, we have a great program and mission, but if you mean to say that cadets stay with the realm of CP only, the program would not prosper and retain. It would truly become an inconvenient JROTC. And I love both programs.
If used properly, the other opportunities provide that extra motivation to stay in CAP as opposed to something else or nothing at all.

[Eclipse]

^ the simple answer is because those are personal accomplishments, not directly program related, and few units do so much ES as to be able to keep an otherwise exiting C/Maj so engaged as to stay, and even if they were, that C/Maj still needs to be doing the progression work for the privilege of staying in the program.

All this at the same time that as a C/Maj he is supposed to be mentoring other cadets and paying back the program.  I personally this this is one of the many reasons we lose older cadets - the realization that it is payback time for those that came before to those that are coming up.  That doesn't make them bad, per se, it just makes them teenagers.

Getting a struggling cadet into ES may well save that cadet, but it does not a program make.

[DakRadz]

^ the simple answer is because those are personal accomplishments, not directly program related, and few units do so much ES as to be able to keep an otherwise exiting C/Maj so engaged as to stay, and even if they were, that C/Maj still needs to be doing the progression work

At the squadron level, catering just to keep one member? Not at all what I was aiming for.

I was thinking of the Group or Wing level. Introduce cadets to opportunities. If I know not of its existence, how can I participate? I know wings are different from one another, but there is an annual Winter Ex (Frostbite) for GTMs across the state. Recently we had an email go out specifically about 18+ cadets who might be interested in Observer training.

I would not leave CAP for lack of things to do. I will not leave CAP for some years. All of this because my CC merely forwarded some emails when the opportunities existed.
I know that isn't too much to ask.

[Eclipse]

This is old road, but I doubt it is news to anyone here that the CAC is pretty dysfunctional and lacking any real mission or direction.

I accept your admission that your CAC is "pretty dysfunctional and lacks any real mission or direction."

Sorry, Ned, this is about the CAC, not my wing's.  It has been floundering for most of recent memory.
Whether you want to point to individual personalities involved, or the history and application as a whole, things have been less then optimal for a long time.

This is not a local problem, or one that can be fixed through the brute force efforts of a few people trying to do things
right.  Been there, done that.

[Ned]

This is not a local problem, or one that can be fixed through the brute force efforts of a few people trying to do things
right.  Been there, done that.

Negative, Ghostrider.

Your group CAC is either doing a good job or not.

By definition that is indeed a local problem.  And one that you are personally accountable for, sir.  And part of what you promised to do when you accepted command.

You can have a highly successful group CAC even if the Wing CAC has not met for 60 years.

And it bears repeating that this is not an optional part of the program.  You or I may disagree with the regs, but we give our best efforts to comply.  And are accountable if we willfully fail to obey them.

Bob, are you really telling us it is OK to blow off regulations you personally don't believe in?

No wonder your CAC is not thriving.

The good news is you are not the Lone Ranger here - you have a Group Cadet Programs Officer to help.  And you should be insisting that your squadron commanders support the CAC, and hold them accountable if they do not.

Members and staffers normally have a pretty good idea of what is important to the boss.  If you don't care about following the regulations and insisting on a viable, healthy CAC, why should they care?

[Eclipse]

Bob, are you really telling us it is OK to blow off regulations you personally don't believe in?

Who said I was blowing anything off?

However.

I would like you to please cite where a CAC is required below wing, as you have now made the assertion 3 times or more that this is somehow a compliance issue.  Further, you and I both know that there are any number of wings that have a CAC that begins and ends with a PA.

I'll leave the comments about holding Squadron Commanders responsible on the table.  We all know how far that goes.

Also, and more to the point, on at least one occasion I have asked here and on CS for viable missions and direction for a strong CAC.  The majority of the answers are just quotes from the pamphlets, interspersed with a few people who had examples that were somewhat of a stretch.

If the CAC is as objectively important and vital as you are asserting, I'd be happy to entertain two or three real-world things that a CAC should be legitimately involved in.  Recruiting and retention are not #1 & 2, despite the fact that
this is generally #1 &#2 on every annual CAC agenda I have ever seen.

[davidsinn]

Around these parts for encampment it's July, August or thanks to Eclipse's hard work, April. Until you can ship them off to encampment you haven't really hooked them yet so you have to time your drives to put them at encampment when they are still new but actually ready to go.

Are you implementing Great Start?
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/P052_009_7603F5B468886.pdf

I have tried. It failed. It's a very good program and I would love to have it working but we are having a very hard time getting kids in the door. My problem that caused the failure is I got a group of cadets in at one time and no sierra, but every last one of them had a mental issue. That caused massive issues with some pre-existing cadets driving one off and now I'm down to just two cadets. I will restart my efforts after the new year when the holidays stop jacking with my schedule.

[coudano]

Ned, i've been watching various people try to force feed CAC at the wing and group level for 20 years now.
And I haven't seen it work yet (including when I was *IN* it).

CAC, from the senior member perspective (and that's where the requirement lies which is a large part of the problem), is a lot of effort and strife for pretty low payoff, due to a few fatal flaws that have yet to be addressed.  From the cadet perspective it is something that they do because senior members twist their arms into doing it.  This is one of the fatal flaws of CAC... it is a requirement of the Cadet Program...  but it's not a requirement of the CADETS.  A few cadets who are model government nerds (like I was, when I was in it) will do it, whether it produces or not, because that's their "thing".  The CAC requirement forces your wing CP staff to spend time, energy, and limited availability enthusiasm and trust of the cadets, to put something on, because "it's required", that "sucks".  Asking cadets to push a boulder up a mountain, and like sysiphus, when it falls down to the bottom (and it always does) to push it up again, is a recipe for bad attitudes, and boycotting of the program.

The result is that I comply with the requirement.  I appoint a rep and an alternate.  And I keep them informed of upcoming meetings.  And that's about it.  The cadet isn't *REQUIRED* to do anything at all.  So I meet my requirement so I don't ding on a SUI, and move on with my life.  Doesn't stop 'forces of nature' from doing what they do best.  Neither of our appointed CAC personnel are *active* in CAC, -when- it is active, which is...  not very often, anyway...

In terms of retaining a cadet in phase 3 or 4 in the program...  or after they turn 18...   CAC is NOT an attractor that is going to attract someone who might otherwise leave, to stay in the program.  It just doesn't have that kind of draw.  There are a thousand other environments where a 'model government nerd' can find a FAR better environment to do that sort of thing.  Organizations that *specialize* in that sort of thing, and do only it, and have adult staff that are experts in it.

As always, until the echelon commander -really- understands what CAC is (most don't)(heck, most CP officers dont REALLY understand it), and supports it, and EMPLOYS it by seeking its advice, even its stated purposes (which provide fairly low training value) are moot.  CAC meeting without something to advise the commander on, and/or without access to advise the commander, is a waste of time, before attendance is even taken.

There are simply far better things to spend my time and attention on, in terms of return on investment, training and retaining my best and brightest cadets.

[DakRadz]

I nearly entered into this once again- but if this is to shift into the CAC's problems, there is a thread here:
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=11224.msg204971#msg204971

Or this thread could be locked for being extremely OT. Either way..
Still, there is the potential for an educational debate here.

[Eclipse]

And to quote myself in that thread...

Yes, it is the commanders who set the tone and herd the cats, I agree - but in a volunteer organization, people do things for a reason, or with specific goals in mind, especially cadets.  In this situation, in most cases, especially at the unit level, it is for the cord and the ribbon, with no reason or motivation beyond that.  And frankly, if participation itself is the goal, I'm fine with that, but setting up cadets to believe they have a voice where none exists is worse than them not having a voice at all.

Pointing out the acknowledged "challenges" of other parts of the organization doesn't address the specific issue, nor will it fix it.  It is also clearly part of the whole.

I have been trying for two years to get some momentum behind it locally, with a strong cadet chair (2 diamonds with a third on order.  If he's not the best cadet in the wing, he's certainly on the list) and an experienced senior advisor - we take the time and effort to cull the the 2a's, setup the meetings, and then the crickets start chirping.  The cadets are no call / no show, despite having made personal commitments to participate and being excited about the cord they are wearing, and then the circle of life begins again.

I don't personally have any issues that cadets can impact that I need a council's advice on - that's not to say we are perfect, or I know all - it means I /we have the same issues that 90+% of the units have - too few people, too few resources, and no top-down mandates beyond the marketing collateral.   As a whole my units meet the mandates, we have an encampment in my AOR, two successful wing-level activities, fly the wings off the planes for O-Rides and ES, and are doing fairly well in comparison to the rest of the wing.

I can't reach to the wing for my piece of the puzzle, because there is no plan, wing can't reach to region for the same reason, and region isn't getting anything from NHQ, so everyone is doing it on autopilot, which means mostly flying in circles to check the CI boxes.  Is it possible there is a roadmap of epic proportions that NHQ is executing but I am unaware of because it's not being passed down the chain? Yes, but that should be communicated in the magazine, the website, and word of mouth. 

You tell me to "take that hill", and I can work with that.  Tell me to "take that hill by surrounding it with bulldozers and digging it out from the bottom..." I can work with that too.  Even a generalization like "we have too many hills..." has some action around it, but simply mandating the existence of an advisory body with no guidance or input on what is appropriate for them to advise "on" gets us where we are today.

Is the rest of the country hitting high and hard on the CAC and my wing is unique?  Not based on discussions here and elsewhere or from what we see in national collateral.

Give me some SMART objectives, show me a set of real goals that have concrete issues that really need discussion and advice, then provide some assurance that every once in a while the effort will be appreciated and acted upon beyond arguing over whether I have enough signatures on the check request for the pizza party.

And by the inverse, in the words of a local commander, when I ask for the time, don't build me a clock.

As a mid-point leader (at best) in this organization, insinuating this is somehow my failing in a sea of otherwise successful commanders isn't fair either.  If you were able to point to a string of accomplishments and activity that left cadets with a good feeling about how they were spending their time (like you see with NESA, NBB, encampments, NCSA's, etc.), then I would be willing to accept that this is a local issue and a personal failing, but all we have seen at the national level in the last say 5 years is cadets who are either trying to settle personal scores, fix petty pet peeves, insert themselves into the senior programs, and banquet photos.  The lack of senior guidance at all levels is also clear.  The CAC can't stay in its lane because the lane isn't even marked.

Whenever I have the opportunity (as I did here), I ask cadets what they expect to accomplish in the CAC.  I ask senior leaders who are involved now, and used to be.  I have asked here and on CS.  Other than a few random, dated, examples of specific situations, I have yet to have anyone articulate anything that I can build on to inspire effort, and no one is pushing on me beyond making sure I provide a name.

Like Frazier Crane, I'm listening.

[coudano]

I tried to keep it related to retaining, and meaningfully training phase 4 and older cadets.

That said, I have long advocated getting phase 4 cadets involved at the wing level.  They should almost join the wing CP team, at the time they enter phase 4.  A phase 4 cadet truly has little to no role at most squadrons, certainly not as it pertains to his own training and development.  Certainly there are opportunities to lead by example, and mentor junior cadets.  Of course that requires a shift in gear on the part of the wing CP staff, and well probably at least one person on the wing cp staff JUST to coordinate the cadets working in the office.

I want my phase 4 cadets managing "multi-squadron" activities.  Group level classes, seminars, activities.  Encampments.  I want them building and coordinating teams of MULTIPLE phase 3 cadets, each of those with an appropriate chain of command under them.

That's the "day work" of a phase 4 cadet, in my opinion.
Their personal responsibilities are the promotion requirements in the program.
And their personal fun stuff is the high calibur NCSA's like IACE.
I think that more, cooler NCSA's for phase 4 cadets only, might help keep them in.  If they have something SUPER cool that they want to do, but have to stay active to do so, it may be a motivator.

In other words, the opportunities have to be "cool enough" to outweigh the opportunity costs, for cadets who are freshmen and sophomores in college.  And right now, we don't cut that mustard.



Also i'd like to point out, that my group commander doesn't have a group /CP officer.
Infact he doesn't have any staff at all.  He's just an administrative stop.

[Eclipse]

I want my phase 4 cadets managing "multi-squadron" activities.  Group level classes, seminars, activities.  Encampments.  I want them building and coordinating teams of MULTIPLE phase 3 cadets, each of those with an appropriate chain of command under them.

I don't disagree with the sentiment, encampments, obviously, but what is an example of a "group-level class" that a
cadet would be managing?

[coudano]

I want my phase 4 cadets managing "multi-squadron" activities.  Group level classes, seminars, activities.  Encampments.  I want them building and coordinating teams of MULTIPLE phase 3 cadets, each of those with an appropriate chain of command under them.

I don't disagree with the sentiment, encampments, obviously, but what is an example of a "group-level class" that a
cadet would be managing?

Honestly, the forming and coordinating of teams of phase 3 cadets each with a full command structure under them, is hard to do.  And you don't see it happen very often.  Because we (CAP) aren't very good at that sort of thing.


When I say group level, i'm talking about "big" groups.  By that I mean a group that has 7 or maybe more squadrons with active cadet programs in it.  The group i'm in only has 3 squadrons with cadet programs in it...  Yeah, not a lot going on around here...

Missouri's group 5 has an outstanding cadet leadership academy that is staffed and instructed by cadets.
Several places have CAP working airshows (or other events), and carrying on ops sort of "NBB style"
I've seen SAR Academies and even competitive outdoor events at the multi squadron level.

But by in large, the lack of these sorts of things is one of the things that we fail to do to attract and keep our top, and older cadets.   Doing this and doing it well would be a major paradigm shift for CAP.


I put a requirement on phase 4 cadets to do 'multi squadron' activities.  And then let them use their creativity and motivation to solve the problem.  Whenever I run a wing level project I make sure I have a phase 4 cadet either flying wingman with me on it, or doing the project with my guidance and input.

[Eclipse]

Whenever I run a wing level project I make sure I have a phase 4 cadet either flying wingman with me on it, or doing the project with my guidance and input.

That is actually not a bad idea...

[davidsinn]

Whenever I run a wing level project I make sure I have a phase 4 cadet either flying wingman with me on it, or doing the project with my guidance and input.

That is actually not a bad idea...

No it's not a bad idea at all. I'm going to steal it and use it at the group level for my personal AOR.

[A.Member]

If Wing and Region Commanders allow a significant part of their program to wither and die because they don't attend to it as they should, then shame on them.

This is indeed the reality of the world we live in. 

[coudano]

That is actually not a bad idea...

roight!!!!

[Ron1319]

The last thing I did at the meeting tonight was to hand off the training at the group training academy for a course I am  responsible for to a cadet.  I'll supervise and be sure the schedule makes sense and that they're doing a good job, but he'll do better than I would.  He is in the group of cadets who are promoting on schedule, now.  He is a c/1Lt and I believe he won't slow down until he finishes the program.

[Ron1319]

That said, I have long advocated getting phase 4 cadets involved at the wing level.  They should almost join the wing CP team, at the time they enter phase 4.  A phase 4 cadet truly has little to no role at most squadrons, certainly not as it pertains to his own training and development.  Certainly there are opportunities to lead by example, and mentor junior cadets.  Of course that requires a shift in gear on the part of the wing CP staff, and well probably at least one person on the wing cp staff JUST to coordinate the cadets working in the office.

I want my phase 4 cadets managing "multi-squadron" activities.  Group level classes, seminars, activities.  Encampments.  I want them building and coordinating teams of MULTIPLE phase 3 cadets, each of those with an appropriate chain of command under them.

That's the "day work" of a phase 4 cadet, in my opinion.
Their personal responsibilities are the promotion requirements in the program.
And their personal fun stuff is the high calibur NCSA's like IACE.
I think that more, cooler NCSA's for phase 4 cadets only, might help keep them in.  If they have something SUPER cool that they want to do, but have to stay active to do so, it may be a motivator.

In other words, the opportunities have to be "cool enough" to outweigh the opportunity costs, for cadets who are freshmen and sophomores in college.  And right now, we don't cut that mustard.

But if there were 4-5 Phase IV cadets at the squadron, wouldn't they be able to build a unit that wasn't "most squadrons" and create the environment where they did have the opportunity for personal growth at their unit?  We have three flights right now and developing a training plan is really complicated.  We have some areas where I rate us as "failing" such as getting new cadets to attend activities and if I had a couple of c/Col's to task with fixing that, I think it'd get fixed a lot faster than me trying to make it happen.

Because this comes up every time I say something like this, I'm not talking about just pinning grade on untrained, inexperienced cadets.  I mean ones who are active and pursuing their own growth.  The other thought that I keep trying to wrap my head around is that every cadet isn't going to be perfect at everything.  I feel like some of the seniors I know expect a cadet at a certain grade to have certain skills and they look at something that they're not great at rather than what they are great at.  In the world where we had 6 Spaatz cadets (and 2-3 future Spaatz cadets) on our NCC team, we all had our strengths and weaknesses.  I wonder how many times a cadet has been either been held back or discouraged because of a senior's bias towards that cadet without a very clear picture of the cadet's strengths and how he would benefit the unit with more grade and more responsibility in the areas where he can excel.

That is to say that I personally SUCK at bookkeeping.  I'm terrible at it.  Somehow I managed to take my business's slush fund (where we keep our change, basically) and lose $30 last week.  I don't know where it went.  I don't remember where it went.  It probably went into a cash box or register that needed more change.  I didn't write it down, I didn't send our bookkeeper a text message saying where it went.  At least I'm the owner and I can say, "Well, that's what I get for taking the slush fund that week when I should have been sure it got to the person who's responsible for it."  That doesn't mean that I'm not good at a lot of other things and that I haven't managed to staff a very large group of part time people who are excited about helping grow my business, including putting three managers in charge of what I'll call "functional areas."

It's well worth giving more thought to.  I've been thinking about it a lot the last few days and I figured I'd share.

[J.American]

1) What do you consider to be an appropriate rate of promotion for cadets?
At least 4 in a year.

2) Does that rate change depending on whether a cadet joins CAP at 12 years old or 14 years old?  16?
Nope.  Cadets can be mentored to promote that fast if they need help.

3) Do you have examples of high ranking phase IV cadets at your unit?  In your group?  In other words, do you or the cadets in your unit have Phase IV leaders to look up to?
Not really.  We have one C/Lt Col, but she doesn't come anymore due to college.  And no groups in AL.

4) Are there fewer high ranking cadets now than there were in your past?
Actually, when I joined, our entire squadron was run by NCOs.  And actually, the squadron was run better back then.  Now we have... 4 C/2d Lt's I believe.   About to be 6.

5) Are cadets sticking with CAP less often after 18 years old now than they were in the past?
You would have to ask the past people.  But from my experience, we have no one older than 18.  They go to college and leave us.

6) Do you believe after answering these questions whether we need to make fundamental changes either in our approach to CAP or the program to improve these situations?
I have always thought that CAP needs to enforce progression through the cadet program more aggressively.  Whether it be through the grades, Leadership camps, etc.

[titanII]

I am only going to answer the second question:
I really don't think the rate should change, because, as has already been raised,  an older cadet will, theoretically, be more able to advance quicker to reach a certain point (Mitchell, Spaatz, etc.) because of their higher level of maturity, experience in studying/tests/working hard. Also, the question of motivation is a good one. If a cadet (like myself) who joins at 16 really wants to get to some achievment, then they will presumably work harder to reach that point. And as for younger cadets, I think that the achievment rate of 2/year is slow enough for even a twelve year old- at first, the tests, etc. aren't that difficult, so they may start at a somewhat slow rate. But I think that as they mature, and the tests/requirements become more difficult, then their personal rate of promotion may increase. And if not, then they can always ask their commander or a senior member for some help or mentoring. Just some ideas...

[Ron1319]

Paraphrased quotes from the CAWG Conference yesterday:

Senior member who had been an IACE escort:  "There's not really much training or opportunity left once a cadet gets their Earhart award.  There aren't really any activities for them to do and they shouldn't be a cadet commander because they would be taking opportunities away from other cadets."

Wing CAC representative, C/2Lt:  "I don't see why anyone would want to promote base C/Capt.  Once you get C/Capt, you can go on IACE, but why would you want to promote past that?"

I'm proud to report that we now have three Phase IV cadets in our unit, and they are now both very active in Group, Wing and Region CAC.  I'm still astonished by this attitude. 

[coudano]

If IACE is the /only/ reason you're staying in up to the earhart, you're doing it wrong.

(that said I agree that there should be additional things for cadets to do as they progress further)

[Ron1319]

I feel that 80% of what I got out of the cadet program came after C/Col.  I had an opportunity to be a cadet commander again at a brand new unit.  I went to NCC as a team commander.  I served on executive staff at encampment.  I envisioned and help implement a 250-attendee SAR-Ex with over 100 cadets receiving training.  There is a laundry list of national special activities for high ranked cadets to choose from.  They have the ability to create units, create leadership opportunities, run events, and take on as large scale of endeavors as they could possibly dream up. 

The incredible misunderstanding of the cadet program of those being partially quoted, or paraphrased, has me astonished.  I do not know how much a broken opinion gets developed, and the only path I can see to undoing the nightmare is to grow our own Phase IV cadets to go off into the wing and set the example.  If I felt like the cadets that get to C/2Lt were continuing to grow as leaders, I wouldn't feel as horror struck by the lack of vision into Phase IV as I am.

[lordmonar]

If IACE is the /only/ reason you're staying in up to the earhart, you're doing it wrong.

(that said I agree that there should be additional things for cadets to do as they progress further)

No.....the CP offiers are doing it wrong.....not the cadet.

Having said that......I think we make it too hard IMHO.

[Ron1319]

Which part do you think is too hard?  I believe my cadet officers would agree that they can complete all of the cadet officer achievement requirements in about 5 hours.  I can take a survey if you would like.  That's about 45 minutes/week over the 8 weeks.  We could call it 8 hours and stretch it to an hour a week and I still wouldn't think it would be too much of a time commitment. 

[coudano]

If IACE is the /only/ reason you're staying in up to the earhart, you're doing it wrong.

(that said I agree that there should be additional things for cadets to do as they progress further)

No.....the CP offiers are doing it wrong.....not the cadet.

Having said that......I think we make it too hard IMHO.

really?
in terms of box checking there is nothing to it.
i've got cadet officers that are (almost) checking the boxes too fast, and are in danger of rank cranking.

[Ron1319]

The achievements without grade increase space the cadet officer achievements out enough that I think they naturally grow from one promotion to the next. I'm actually extremely impressed with the growth I'm seeing in the cadet officers so far as they've advanced from C/2Lt to C/Capt.  It's extremely encouraging. 

[lordmonar]

Really??

Then where are all the thousand and thousand of Spaatz cadets?

The statics don't support you.

Cadets see no incentive to move up.  They see it as to hard.  They see it as too complicated.

The would rather do other things instead of CAP.

Personally.......I would eliminate the "sustained" acheivements.  I would change the SDAs to be a done a "group at a time"...that is all the admin ones together, all the operations one and then all support positions.  I would change to performance part of the SDA to be more objective and have real operational requirments.

I would eliminate all TIG requirments through SSGT and would reduce TSGT through CMSGT to only one month.  I would keep 2d and 1st Lt at two month and make Capt, Maj and Lt Col three months.

I would make encampment staff a requirment for Maj.   I would make a NSCA a requirment for Lt Col.

[Extremepredjudice]

Be careful they are learning WHAT and it means, not memorizing stuff, and passing a test.

Most people seem to be saying 3-4 per year, it really depends on the phase. Phase I should be moving up quickly. I (hopefully, unless the c/cc decides to haze us) will be a SSgt by monday, less than 8 months in...
If you cadets want to get everything done before the 2 months are up; let 'em.

Phase III and IV should be moving slow and steady. I can't say much, just make sure they stay motivated. My squadron has a 1st LT who has been in for 5 years.... he stalled as soon as he got his mitchell.

[Ron1319]

Then where are all the thousand and thousand of Spaatz cadets?

We had six on my NCC team when I was team commander in '97.  I don't believe the requirements are significantly harder, now.

The statics don't support you.

Clearly, but I don't think it's because it's too hard.

Cadets see no incentive to move up.  They see it as to hard.  They see it as too complicated.

I don't connect those things.  I could possibly be wrong.  When you have a senior officer in a leadership position over Phase IV cadets who is of the opinion that there is nothing for Phase IV cadets to do in the program, there is something severely broken.  I'm having a hard time believing that it's fundamental to the existing program, and mostly a lack of leadership on the part of the cadet programs officers and a lack of Phase IV cadet leadership.  It would be a catch 22 if you can't find those able to inspire the promotion and growth in the new cadets.

The would rather do other things instead of CAP.

Maybe, although one of my C/Capt's who has been incredibly into debate on a national competition level for the last several years just quit to focus on CAP, CAC's and squadron meetings with intent of applying to be the next cadet commander.

I would change the SDAs to be a done a "group at a time"...that is all the admin ones together, all the operations one and then all support positions.  I would change to performance part of the SDA to be more objective and have real operational requirments.

The performance items are fairly specific.  The order is: Flight Commander, Admin, PAO, Leadership, Aerospace Ed, Ops, Logistics, Cadet Commander.  It seems fairly logical to me.  Multiple CACs are looking at SDA requirement revision, and the CAWG CAC is going to seek specific feedback on exactly what the requests for changes are.  However, perhaps except for cadet programs officers who can answer questions about the SDA requirements and understand the document, I don't see the problem.

I would eliminate all TIG requirments through SSGT and would reduce TSGT through CMSGT to only one month.  I would keep 2d and 1st Lt at two month and make Capt, Maj and Lt Col three months.

And have a program that could be completed in 15 months?  Have you really thought that one through?  The generally CAP Talk trend is to complain every time anyone mentions a cadet promoting at minimum time in grade about how they couldn't possibly be experienced enough or ready for the promotion.  There seems to be constant irrational fear of cadets having too much grade when the fundamental problem, I believe, is a lack of Phase IV cadet leadership to encourage growth, set the example, and ensure that their subordinates are promoting.

I would make encampment staff a requirment for Maj.   I would make a NSCA a requirement for Lt Col.

COS is a requirement, so you would eliminate that, or just the RCLS option?  We can consider the cost and logistics of that if you'd like.

[Ron1319]

Phase III and IV should be moving slow and steady. I can't say much, just make sure they stay motivated. My squadron has a 1st LT who has been in for 5 years.... he stalled as soon as he got his mitchell.

And how long has that cadet been a cadet officer?  Will you let the same thing happen to you?  Do you see the benefits of continuing to promote and grow as a cadet after you become a cadet officer?  Do you have any other cadet officers in your unit?

[Майор Хаткевич]

My promotion history:

Join: May 2003
C/Amn: May-Jun 2003
C/SSgt: Nov 2003
C/MSgt: May 2004
C/CMSgt: May 2005
C/2d Lt: Mar 2006
C/Capt: Mar 2007

Given the chance, I would have blasted through the program on minimum times. Then PT would have killed me. I barely passed the requirements with a new age for C/Capt, and by then I was pretty much out of the active program due to work come August 2007. I wanted to be a Spaatz cadet when I was an airman. Somewhere along the road I decided it didn't matter as much as the overall opportunities. I also realized I'm not going to cut in on the PT side. I planned on hitting C/Maj, since a lot of the people I looked up to made it to that point. Life got in the way.

BUT, while tracking down these dates, I found an old blog post, which I find amusing now, but seems like a common perception.

29 June 2005:

Next CAP meeting I am going to go to is the last week of July, because of vacation this next week and Honor Guard Academy the 2 weeks after! Well also because of this I will not become a Lieutenant until early September. For my Armstrong I just need to do my Speech, which I get to do the first week of august and then I need to mentor AeroSpace  (AE) and I can take my Mitchell and get my PT in and I will become a Lousy, good for nothing, junior officer. All the cool NCO status that you build up over a period of 2 some years is gone...you become an unexpirienced officer instead of a professional NCO. Big change. I mean right now I do as much as some Majors do, but once I get Lieutenant all I have know to be good is...BAD!. If you read leadership 8 then all you get out of it is that you have to become a talking person, instead of a DOing person. It is so badly written that some good Chiefs, become horrible officers because they take it overboard. The only Position that I think, that as an Officer i would like would be Flight Commander, because I get to work with actual people. Flight Sergeant, Element Leaders, the occasional element member. I guess that I am one of those Die-hard NCO's that would stay as such if they had a chance.

Give me some slack, I was 15, but I think it's a good view into the mind of a mid-teenager, and a mid-program cadet. Note also that I planned to have my Mitchell by September 2005. I had everything but the PT done for it by mid-August, including the Mitchell exam. For better or worse, I delayed and stalled and ended up being the First Sergeant at the encampment, where I was awarded my Mitchell.

[Ron1319]

It's interesting that you had the perspective to know that C/2Lt was a junior cadet officer as I believe that many California Wing cadets believe that there is no greater achievement than C/2Lt.

[Майор Хаткевич]

It's interesting that you had the perspective to know that C/2Lt was a junior cadet officer as I believe that many California Wing cadets believe that there is no greater achievement than C/2Lt.

There are two types of "bad" endings in CAP. C/CMSgt 4life and C/2d Lt 4life. A lot of the time, it is the one and the same. The lifer Chief gets pushed into his Mitchell, and doesn't progress from there. Some strive for the Mitchell, for its military benefits. Some probably think a salute to a 2d Lt is no different than a Captain or a Colonel.

Lots of reasons, most are quite bad.

At the time it seems I understood that in the book, the C/Officer has different duties, and is technically the new guy.

But the new guy still outranks 50% of the structure, and STILL retains that knowledge, just has to apply it differently. THIS I didn't seem to grasp at the time.

[coudano]

The statics don't support you.

For the most part they don't support you either, nevertheless...

Cadets see no incentive to move up.

This is the core of the situation.
Generally speaking, being a higher ranking cadet officer is not viewed by cadets in general as 'cool' enough to work hard for, on a variety of fronts.

If i've said it once, i've said it a thousand times.
Cadets don't quit CAP because it's hard.  They quit CAP because it's irrelevant.

They see it as to hard.  They see it as too complicated.

The only thing they have to do that they didn't have to do in phase 1 and 2 is
a) staff duty analysis
b) now attend a residence rcls or cos

How hard or complicated can that be?
That's bull.

I'll give you that a lot of new cadet officers are confused and intimidated by the SDA.  However, the SDA is neither difficult nor complicated.  As I explain to my new officers at our OBC, were you able to do an about face on your first try?  Answer is no.  it's a foreign skill/procedure.  You had to learn it.  After you practice a few times, you learn it and it becomes easy and eventually even mindless.

Once my cadet officers "get it" (about the end of achievement 10 or so) they start knocking out SDA's in a couple hours, no big deal.

The would rather do other things instead of CAP.

This is probably the biggest single reason out there.  But it roots above, there is no incentive to move up.
CAP fails miserably to compete with jobs, cars, girlfriends, school, and sports.
CAP needs to fix that.


**Furthermore, they are simply unmotivated to continue to progress.
Combination of lack of carrots, and lack of sticks, I suppose.
As well as that many cadets, from the moment they join, see the Mitchell as the finish line.
That's setting yourself up for failure before you even start.

Personally.......I would eliminate the "sustained" acheivements.

What does that do to the time in phase?
I think we already discussed that phase 3 and 4 are backwards...
Phase 3 right now is 6 months, and phase 4 is a year (plus any time they spend as cadets past C/Lt Col --for some this is YEARS).

That should be the other way around.  Phase 3 should be a year (just like phase 2)
And Phase 4 should be 6 months plus extra time after C/Lt Col.

A cadet should be a "CGO" (phase 3) all the way until they pin Major.

I see below that you reduced the number of achievements but increased the time in grade at each rank.
I can get on board with that (but maybe with different timeframes)

I would change the SDAs to be a done a "group at a time"...that is all the admin ones together, all the operations one and then all support positions.

Yah I can go with that.  A1, A4, A5/7, etc.
Of course you know that if I ran the world i'd just kill the SDA entirely, and make cadet officers plan and execute squadron, group, and wing activities instead.  Of course that's not easier or less complicated...
But they get a heck of a lot more out of it.  And so does everyone else, too.

I would change to performance part of the SDA to be more objective and have real operational requirments.

Like I said (see above)

I would eliminate all TIG requirments through SSGT and would reduce TSGT through CMSGT to only one month.  I would keep 2d and 1st Lt at two month and make Capt, Maj and Lt Col three months.

If and only if you had a way to improve the quality check,
Bottom line, for pretty much every cadet I've had, they have NEEDED that full year (going at full speed) in phase 2, to really and truly master directive leadership.  I can think of 2 exceptions in my life, and they were both prior cadets in other organizations.  Everyone else needs the time.  So cut the minimum time if you want, but better up the quality expectations to go along with it.

The end result, i'm afraid, you're going to wind up with a lot more people cranking rank, and a lower standard that we even have now.

As we are right now, with 40 months start to finish at top speed, we ALREADY see cadets going too fast, and having their rank drastically outpace their capability and maturity.  It's important to produce quality leaders, not just TSA award numbers.  If award numbers is all we care about, then we can make the program REALLY easy, and get that done real quick.

I would make encampment staff a requirment for Maj.   I would make a NSCA a requirment for Lt Col.

COS/RCLS already there, no?
What about 1st Lt and Capt?

[Ned]

CAP fails miserably to compete with jobs, cars, girlfriends, school, and sports.
CAP needs to fix that.

Yet another personal failure of our senior leadership.  I take full responsibility.

It is so simple!  All we need to do is to tweak the CP a bit and make it so attractive that cadets would prefer to forgo money, cars, any sort of education, sports, and especially the distractions of dating, flirting, and romantic relationships of any kind in order to focus their training to become Dynamic Americans and Aerospace Leaders.

CP will grow by leaps and bounds.  We will finally achieve the 100% retention we have been aiming for.

I should have thought of it myself.  I am so ashamed.


Now that we have a clear vision of our future, we need to work out a few of the tactical details. 

Hmmmm.  We could . . . . ..  No, that won't work.  Maybe we could, ah . . . . ..


This could be trickier than I thought.

[BillB]

Ned....I'm glad to see you realized you screwed up the cadet program   LOL
Seriously, the fault if any lies not with National but rather the Wing, or more so the Squadron level. Rarely do we find that Squadrons have activities on a regular basis or that cadets are interested in. Except for Encampments and Cadet Competition, Wing level activities on weekends are even less often found. Oh sure ther may be a Model Rocketry Competition or Color Guard Academy, but whatever happened to the so called Survival Schools? Wings with Groups may have a weekend Bivouac, but training varies from just BCUT to UDF training. The UDF training is useless when cadets are noit allowed to take part in actual searches.

[a2capt]

Not sure about cadets not being allowed outright to participate in ES missions, however I will say that between school, and .. school, cadet ES participation surely isn't like what it used to be.

Where they would drop off a ground team comprised of cadets at a mountain with machetes to go hacking to a crash site ..after having plucked them from school to do it.

But also, there's a set bunch of ICs that seem to be anti-cadet, and when you have some sarex planners who use cadets for not much more than trash emptiers and coffee couriers, they seem to find interest elsewhere.

The best cadets in ES tend to be the ones who's parents are involved, as they become team members and then a household can launch a UDF team, or in some cases, a ground team at a moments notice.  But mix in a sarcastic IC who acts as if no one is as good as them, practically belittling participants on the radio, and you have quite an anti-motivational factor that is second to none.

[Ron1319]

It is so simple!  All we need to do is to tweak the CP a bit and make it so attractive that cadets would prefer to forgo money, cars, any sort of education, sports, and especially the distractions of dating, flirting, and romantic relationships of any kind in order to focus their training to become Dynamic Americans and Aerospace Leaders.

Sometimes I feel like I must have been superhuman having been able to do all of those things at once.

On ES and activities.. (cadet activities only listed)

6-7 Aug - Squadron Bivouac (14 cadets from the squadron attended, first one in years, super safe, tents near a remote airport)
19-21 Aug - PCAM Air Show (in wine country), typically cadet flight line duties and fun at an air show (2 full van loads plus a cadet's parent had to drive, we were supporting their event)
26-28 Aug - CAWG Conference/CAC (only really affected 3 cadets, but still important)
3-4 Sept - Group Sar-ex that the cadets are finding out how to get involved in.  We'll see how many can attend.  Many, many of them are UDF Trainee status and should be able to go out.
4-5 Sept - "Labor Day Bizarre" Big fund raiser.  This one isn't AS fun, but we're making it somewhat fun by staying overnight beforehand and having social time that evening.  We'll make $1000 for the unit that day.
10-11 Sept - Capital Air Show -- big, big event that the cadets all love.
17 Sept - Fundraiser parking cars for a car show at the hall that we have our meetings at.  Again, not inherently super fun but a great fund raiser.

There was actually something planned for the one weekend that wasn't booked but it was a group activity and there were not enough cadets signed up so it was cancelled.  There is another group "training academy" on the 24th of September where I'm instructing at a TLC course.  It was supposed to include a cadet command course, but that was the one that was cancelled in early August.

[Extremepredjudice]

Phase III and IV should be moving slow and steady. I can't say much, just make sure they stay motivated. My squadron has a 1st LT who has been in for 5 years.... he stalled as soon as he got his mitchell.

And how long has that cadet been a cadet officer?  Will you let the same thing happen to you?  Do you see the benefits of continuing to promote and grow as a cadet after you become a cadet officer?  Do you have any other cadet officers in your unit?

He has been an officer for about a year and a half.
We have a c/capt and a c/lt.col. That just left for college.

[Ron1319]

I'm much more interested in the answer to my other two questions.  One more, have you ever been briefed on the SDA process so that you know that it's not scary and fairly straight foward once you get to C/2Lt? 

[NCRblues]

One of the larger reasons for lack of promotion i have run across is slotting for activities.

In my local area, lets say for encampment, cadets are slotted for staff. We always seem to end up with C/Capt. Snuffy in command of encampment squadron 1 and C/Lt. Col Jim Bob as flight commander.

I have spoke to several cadet officers who have stopped at C/2nd Lt. or C/Capt. and they all say them same thing. To them, they see no reason to go on up the chain. They have as much of a chance to be cadet commander at an encampment at C/Capt, as they do at C/Lt. Col. I am in the process of trying to change this where possible, but it is an uphill battle....

[Ron1319]

Perhaps start by doing away with "cadet commander" titles for anyone at the unit who isn't in Phase IV.  We don't refer to NCO's acting in flight commander roles as flight commanders, but instead of flight sergeants with assistant flight sergeants.  In many cases, they're flight commanders instead of cadet commanders anyway, so don't have a cadet chain of command with a position higher than flt sgt if there are no cadet officers.  Then extend it to flight commander once you have cadet officers, and once you have phase IV cadets, then you can have a cadet commander.  Functionally it's a bit different, but you preserve the titles at least.

As far as encampments, we had C/Col's for all three executive staff positions the year I was on executive staff as a cadet.  We had another C/Col who applied only for the role of flight commander and made it clear that he was not attending unless he was allowed to do the job he applied.  He did a fine job in the position, of course.  I can imagine the possible flames regarding it either being arrogant of him to insist on his position of choice, or taking opportunities away from someone else.  Whatever.  He earned it, and it's what he wanted to do.

[lordmonar]

One of the larger reasons for lack of promotion i have run across is slotting for activities.

In my local area, lets say for encampment, cadets are slotted for staff. We always seem to end up with C/Capt. Snuffy in command of encampment squadron 1 and C/Lt. Col Jim Bob as flight commander.

I have spoke to several cadet officers who have stopped at C/2nd Lt. or C/Capt. and they all say them same thing. To them, they see no reason to go on up the chain. They have as much of a chance to be cadet commander at an encampment at C/Capt, as they do at C/Lt. Col. I am in the process of trying to change this where possible, but it is an uphill battle....

I see this also for C/SNCOs. 

I would solve this little problem by making it a requirment to be a C/2d Lt to be on staff at all.....eliminate the eternal chief syndrom. 

[Ron1319]

And implement requirements limiting participation for more than 2 years (seasons?) of color guard competitions.

[coudano]

Yet another personal failure of our senior leadership.  I take full responsibility.

Not necessarily a failure of senior leadership, and there are many legitimate reasons and limitations that we don't let our cadets "go fast and blow stuff up" (which is basically what it would take to keep them)

nevertheless it doesn't make it any less true.

Personally I consider it to be a /good thing/ that cadets outgrow the cadet program.
In my experience, cadets to whom this happens go on and have exceptional, productive, and great lives.
In many cases (basically universally in my squadron), they reach that escape velocity before they reach that third diamond.  (or in my case that third circle, much to my chagrin)

Bottom line, cadets don't join CAP to become DAAL's,
they join CAP to do cool stuff and hang out with their friends (and occasionally to chase career goals)
when CAP stops being relevant to that, the cadets go away

so telling them "hey stay here and you'll become more of a DAAL" isn't much working, since that's not the reason they are here in the first place

[Ron1319]

Daal.. Indian food?  I'm hungry.