CAP-Agency vs CAP-Club - the real issue in Iowa

[cyclone]

After much deliberation and soul searching...

The Problem in Iowa: Is it to be "CAP-Club" or "CAP-Agency". The future of CAP hangs in the balance.

Presently high intrigue and heated controversy rages on in Iowa. On the surface the question would appear to be which of two qualified people, should have been chosen as Wing Commander. It is unfortunate that the focus has been on the men as individuals. Doing so causes the real issue to be blurred. The real issue is not about the who, but about the what, what they represent. Both men are good and what they represent is good, but they are 180 degree opposite. The dispute is not limited to the Iowa Wing; it is a dispute of nationwide proportions the ramifications from which will be felt for an indeterminate time into the future and could possibly affect every wing in the country.

The dispute revolves around vision. One vision is the status quo in all Wings but Iowa. It views CAP as a group of members organized for their shared and mutual interest focusing heavily on flying and cadet activities. In this regard CAP is considered a club and has often been referred to by its detractors as a "flying club." Nonetheless it fits the classic definition of a club and this traditional view is appropriately called the CAP-Club.

An opposing philosophy regarding Civil Air Patrol exists as well. It stems from the early history of CAP as recorded by Robert E. Neprud in his book, "Flying Minute Men, The Story of Civil Air Patrol."  I've found knowledge in this book when I first joined CAP and now during our time of change.  That history revolves around the service that CAP provided to the nation during its early years. Service in this context concerned operational service to the country during a time of war and service regarding the aviation training of cadets for military service. Proponents of this philosophy focus on the relevancy of Civil Air Patrol, not only to its members but more importantly to the community and country. You are familiar with its mantra: Relevancy to our customers, Reliability in our mission and Accountability to our members. Proponents of this philosophy focus on a Wing's external relationship both with federal and state government. Based upon this relationship CAP becomes a stakeholder in providing emergency services. In this regard CAP is operating not like a club but more like an agency. Consequently this philosophy can appropriately be called CAP-Agency.

The present problem involves a clash of philosophies: CAP-Club versus CAP-Agency. Simply put, Ron Scheitzach represents the best of CAP-Club and Nick Critelli that of CAP-Agency.

The Relevancy of the Dispute to CAP Nationally:

Like the presidential primaries, sometimes what happens to Iowa is relevant to the nation. While having its roots at the beginning of CAP as CAP-Agency, as the organization evolved in the post war years up unto 2001 it had transformed to a CAP-Club model. Then the nation was attacked and we went to war. As it was in 1941 state resources were strained and government looked to the CAP to shoulder the load. Unfortunately CAP was viewed by some in Iowa government to be a flying club and not a reliable one at that (a problem with CAP-Club).

In 2003 the Iowa Wing was experiencing a marked decrease in AFRCC ELT missions. Worse yet the last state-wide emergency service of note was a decade earlier during the floods of 1993. Furthermore it had received no state funding for over several years. To some prior cadets and younger members of the Wing, the no missions, no money scenario was a sign of their Wing in crisis. To others, mainly our older senior members the status quo was acceptable. Both however recognized that funding would be a benefit. In the late summer of 2003 Nick Critelli was approached by the then Wing Commander and a members who were dissatisfied with the status quo and asked if it were possible to get funding and missions from the state. After a due diligence period of three months involving research into Civil Air Patrol's national and state history, its present capabilities, its future potential all as related to the emerging homeland security presidential directives 5 and 8 from the National Response Plan and the Incident Command System and associated federal obligations placed on the states, a strategy was formed.

Working closely with then Governor Tom Vilsack's chief of staff, Steve Gleason, who had just returned from the Clinton White House and supported by Iowa Senator Tom Harkin's positive view of Civil Air Patrol, Critelli and his working team consisting of myself and several others we were able to create a strategy where Civil Air Patrol could again become relevant to the emergency service needs of Iowa as they were developing in view of the Department of Homeland Security's emerging Presidential Directives 5 and 8. However there would be a price to pay. CAP must be a stable and reliable entity for this to happen. Mr. Gleason's due diligence on the organization was not flattering and mostly consisted of the view that CAP was a "good old boy's flying club with cub scouts that fly." This view was shared by the Chief of Staff of the Iowa National Guard. After a series of briefings Gleason changed his mind. The then Guard's Chief of Staff never did. Fortunately his replacement and the Deputy Adjutant General, BG Mark Zirkelbach were to become dedicated Iowa Wing advocates and supporters.

In an October 17, 2003 briefing to the Wing's leadership, staff and squadron leaders Critelli confirmed that a viable legislative strategy could be developed which would place CAP in a position to receive and prosecute missions and obtain adequate funding in the ballpark of $125,000, however it would come at a price to the Organization. The price would require standardized high quality training and a unified Wing organization. Iowa Wing at this time was a loose confederation of squadrons. Wing HQ consisted of a closet at the Iowa City airport and a PO Box that moved with every change of command. It had no telephone or physical address. As we learned, government does not relate to clubs, it relates to agencies. If the Wing were to go in this direction CAP in Iowa would have to become an agency; a Wing-centric organization. It was determined that Iowa Wing would adopt the CAP-Agency operating philosophy. The rest is history. Since then the Wing has become deeply embedded in state operations, a partner with the Iowa National Guard in its training operations, involved in policy-making at the highest governmental levels and has been more than adequately maintained and funded and has been the beneficiary of many favorable laws including a mandatory employment leave of absence law for CAP members who are called to missions. Many have referred to it as the "Golden years of CAP" in Iowa. But it was not without its share of costs.

The new relationships and method of operation were greatly opposed by those who held the CAP-Club philosophy. The Iowa Wing now was Wing- focused. It held a monthly, but non-mandatory Wing Training Assembly, it changed from senior member to "officer," standardized wing level training, squadrons were no longer autonomous but accountable to the Wing for performance and member satisfaction. In other words, it operated and trained as a professional agency and interacted with other governmental units at that level both in its operations and training.

A change from status quo does not come without stress, but with the passage of time almost all have grown to accept the new operating philosophy. However there remain a few who cannot make the transition. This simply was not the CAP they joined. CAP-Agency, as you would expect requires accountability. Each member is accountable to every other member for the success or failure of the mission. This makes club people uncomfortable, it gives security to the government that the job will be well done. AAR's (After Action Reviews) become the norm, not the occasional.

As planned, the transition program was a two phased eight year program. We are now in the second year of the second phase. We as a Wing have made our share of mistakes, all of which are publicly debated on various blogs, and we have learned the value of being flexible.

To those who are skeptical we simply ask that they come, see and experience this first hand. One such skeptic was CAP-USAF Commander Colonel Russ Hodgkins. He came to Iowa, he saw, he experienced and it is reported that he was extremely impressed. As word of our success and failures has spread across the country much interest and some criticism has been generated. It seems that each Wing has a core of CAP-Agency proponents. These people tend to be prior cadets and newer/and younger members most of whom are not yet in the inner circles of Wing leadership. It appears that we have empowered them and they sometimes clash with CAP-Club supporters who are in Wing authority positions.

But regardless of how one views it or labels it, the CAP-Agency philosophy is spreading across the country. Is there room for compromise? Sure.  Will the Iowa Wing structure work in all CAP Wings? Absolutely not. The issue is not structure or personalities, it's about philosophy. Are we a Club or do we return to our foundation Agency roots?

The defining decision regarding CAP-Club versus CAP-Agency philosophy for CAP will be made regarding the leadership of the Iowa Wing. Nick Critelli has withdrawn and refuses to be considered again for command and Ron Scheitzach has limited support in the Wing and in the government. The future of CAP and the direction of CAP will be judged by this decision. I urge our leadership to seriously consider their decision to allow this change of command to proceed. What you do will define your leadership and the future of our CAP.

[RogueLeader]

Just one question, and two comments.  If Iowa does not grant IAWG the $120,000 like the past two years, will it make a difference in who is in command?  With no money CAP Agency can't survive, even if Nick Critteli were in charge.  I hope for all the members of IAWG that the funding continues, and I hope that Col. Scheitzach sees what good it does.

[flyguy06]

Ok, you have to bring me up to speed. I thought Nick was already confirmed to be the next IAWG Commander

[NIN]

No offense, but after reading some of this, I wasn't sure whether I should be amazed at the naïveté displayed in the gross oversimplification as illustrated, or outraged at that same oversimplification.

Mind you, I'm not an IA Wing member (nah, I'm 1500-2000 miles away, in the state all the @#$% politicians ran to AFTER they got done trampling the crops in Iowa..), but I am a long time member, former cadet, and have been on the periphery of two wings HQ elements off and on over the years.  IOW, I "get" the "agency"-type concept.

I think the "Club" concept paints most of our missions/units with far too broad of a brush, and the "Agency" idea gives a substantial amount of our membership short shrift (not because it excludes them from the idea that their participation is of "agency-level activity", but rather, because I think there are far more people who participate in other aspects of Civil Air Patrol who are still participating on that level, and just because they, say, work with cadets doesn't mean they don't take what they're doing as seriously as the dude flying the plane...).

While I realize the OP has supplied what amounts to a massive simplification for the purposes of enlightening us poor hayseeds outside of Iowa to the issues at hand, it leaves me wondering if some folks from Iowa Wing are in the same organization I am.

[IACAPphotog]

That the question that need to be asked, old vs. new school.

I have friends in the NG at Camp Dodge, and they have watched us grow from "the flying boyscouts" to professional members of their day to day team.

They count on us.

They will not do that if we did not display and deliver the kind of professional results the US Military demands.

That has only happened in the last few years.

So I am very proud to be part of the "New" CAP, not the "boyscouts" of old.

[Eclipse]

While I realize the OP has supplied what amounts to a massive simplification for the purposes of enlightening us poor hayseeds outside of Iowa to the issues at hand, it leaves me wondering if some folks from Iowa Wing are in the same organization I am.

Therein is the problem.  As implemented today, IAWG is more the IANG/Aux than CAP, even to the point of pushing NCO's and receiving NG awards.

This is not a culture clash or lack of vision.  This is a small part of the organization attempting to make radical, outside-the-boundaries changes from the bottom up and then being surprised when everyone else doesn't fall in line.

Despite the rhetoric of success, it now appears that a large number of IAWG members, including unit CC's, simply refused to be a part of this "experiment", and either stood down, resigned, or continued to execute their own local programs...locally.

I myself am a vocal proponent of weeding the empty shirts and professionalizing the organization, but when you start looking at attrition rates that approach 1/2 your membership (as has been alleged), that's not streamlining, that's suicide.  Couple that with the publicly acknowledged reduction in recruiting to "rightsize" the force, and you have the seeds of real problems in a few years.

Not to mention the fact that many of us continue to contend that this is a house of cards dependant on a few motivated actors on both sides.  As we are now seeing one or two command changes from either group and things start dissolving fast.  Why?  Because the program as a whole does not support the operations.

If nothing else, I am reasonably certain that if I could be allowed to force 1-200 of the highest speed, most flexible and motivated members of my wing to do all their training and participation in one central location, move all the experienced officers out of local units to the wing, focus the resources of the entire state on those members and their activities, and ignore the needs and concerns of the rest of the membership while I'm doing it, I'd have one flap-happy bunch of guys meeting every month and playing with all the toys and doing all the cool work.

For a year or two...

[Eclipse]

Let us also not forget that the point of CAP is not to build a centrally-billeted force to augment paid professionals in lieu of properly-funded agencies.

CAP's purpose is to provide an outlet for members to serve their country, and respond to disaster, locally.

Group and Wing consolidation of activities is a response to shrinking membership and resources.  While its incumbent upon us to take the steps necessary to remain operational, regardless of the personnel challenges, we need to start focusing our efforts on rebuilding the status, size, and abilities of the local units, so that consolidated operations are not necessary, and a small percentage of a given wing is not forced to carry the constant burden of performance.

[isuhawkeye]

How do you support your community if your agency has proven itself to be unreliable, and unprofessional.  Only by building and maintaining our relationships have wee been able to do the missions that serve our community

Eclipse, you are a club guy, and I get that.  Yu have worked with, and built an excellent organization that has found its niche.  Congratulations.  now how will your club ensure the professionalism and reliability of your group, then wing

[jersey boy]

Everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that the Wing Commander Selection Board "overwhelmingly" voted for Lt Col Scheitzach.

The issue here is not Club vs Agency, but rather rules or no rules.

Regulations are changed by the National Board, not by someone, who shows up one day and says, "I have a better idea!"  Later telling us that CAP has been "doing it wrong for 50 years".

Most of the whining is coming from people, who haven't been in CAP long enough to know anything, but the "Iowa Experiment".

While Emergency Services is a critically important mission, it is only one of three missions mandated by Congress.  

As for customers, our most important customers are the people of America. It is their tax dollars that buy our aircraft and fund many of our programs.

The relationship with the State and the National Guard is a great thing, but when we totally change, who we are and how we do business on a state by state basis, then we've stopped being the Auxiliary of the USAF and have, instead, become unpaid members of the National Guard.

[RiverAux]

Personally I have been anxiously awaiting some actual results of this experiment.  The three main achievements are state funding, a permanent Wing headquartes, and NG support for overnight training on a monthly basis.  Those are great, but funding and a hq are things that many, many other wings achieved a long time ago without having done any of the things Iowa has.  

The NG overnight support is very important and actually I think that any Wing that managed that would probably see an increase in quality without making any other changes.  

But, the thing is that no matter what you do CAP is a volunteer club and not a state agency.  Now, just because you're in a club doesn't mean that you don't take committments you make to that club seriously and that you shouldn't expect consequences if you fail to live up to them.  Will there be some members who just want to be members or don't want to spend every waking minute on CAP?  Sure, and there is little harm in that.  

Iowa has been showing a lot of internal activity and that is always good for an organization.  When you're doing something you're usually happier than you are if you aren't doing something.  

[isuhawkeye]

I joined CAP about 6 months after Lt Col Scheitzach.  I have worked for four wing commanders, and have mentored under such commanders as Col. Waldorf, and BG Glasgow.  Most recently I have been asked to stay in my current wing staff position under both Critelli, and Scheitzach.  Even with these experiences under my belt I have been involved in CAP for about half as long as Cyclone. 

The problems I see are a result of the instability of our organization.  As I build relationships with customers I keep getting barraged by the fact that CAP is not stable.  Our leadership eats itself, we have no focus, direction, and up until the past few years we have had no missions.  I joined CAP to serve my community, and under the "old" or "Club" mentality I didn't get the chance.  My first real emergency response was when a CAP aircraft went down and My CFI was killed.  Within the past few years I feel that I have truly made a difference.  Our current level of involvement would not be possible as a few isolated squadrons working individually. 

Jersey made note of the American Tax payer.  From a reality stand point is it a good or bad investment to fund an AF training budget of 30,000 for 6 AFRCC missions a year.  Not very cost effective.  Under the current model we are maximizing the impact of both the state and federal funding. 


Now lets address the rules.  we have worked incredibly hard to ensure that every activity has been conducted by the rules.  Many people have questioned that.  Iowa has undergone a SAV, a CI, a review by a national commander, and a visit from the Commander of CAP/USAF.  Non of them found anything that was questionable.

River, many wings are successful, and several receive funding, support, and facilities.  Iowa has never really been one of those wings.  In fact dollar per mission without the current relationship I have a tough time even justifying the wings existance

[ZigZag911]

This is not ES vs. CP.

It isn't CAP vs IANGAux.

Everything Iowa Wing did is within CAP regulations; much of it responded actively to mandates by the NB for training, professional development, quality control, outreach to state & local communities.

As for the selection board "vote", that was merely a recommendation....the decision was the region commander's, as the CAP reg on region/wing commander selection makes clear.

It is a poor regulation, worded to concentrate total authority in a single individual's hands, with sparse avenue of appeal, oversight, or accountability....but it is the existing regulation.

Even Col. Fagan's reversal of his own decision is entirely within regulations.

The issue here is not who did what to whom (which is important, but under discussion on a different thread) but an issue of philosophy: are we going to bring CAP into the 21st century or not?

If we're going to survive as a national organization, let alone have any relevance, we must choose the agency model.

This does not mean the marginalization of cadet programs, the glorification of ES, or the radicalization of CAP.

It means an organization whose members actively contribute to their units & wings (in their own specific field of interest), who train continually for their participation, and who work together with other members and with the community as a whole.

If we don't we can forget funding, military or legislative support, or indeed interest outside our own little tribe.

[NIN]

That the question that need to be asked, old vs. new school.

I have friends in the NG at Camp Dodge, and they have watched us grow from "the flying boyscouts" to professional members of their day to day team.

They count on us.

They will not do that if we did not display and deliver the kind of professional results the US Military demands.

That has only happened in the last few years.

So I am very proud to be part of the "New" CAP, not the "boyscouts" of old.

Now, whoa, hold on a minute there, Sparky. (with apologies to "Sparky" Carrrales for hijacking his nickname)

My wing does not have an NG supplied wing HQ, mucho funding from the state (we do have a bit) nor NG-subsidized overnight training events at a centralized location.

Yet we still get and respond to NG taskings as needed.

Example: Our wing chaplain is HEAVILY involved in the homecoming process for National Guard soldiers at the state HQ. Not as "some chaplain they found in the gutter" but rather as a full-fledged member of the chaplaincy working side-by-side, cheek-to-jowl with his NG and active duty counterparts. Hell, he's so involved, AND COUNTED UPON, that they.. (wait for it.... steady.... wait for it...) actually have him doing the same things that the military chaplains are doing, right down to being able to  be the "chaplain of record" for one of these reintegration or homecoming events.  As far as they're concerned, he's a "one of theirs."

Another Example:  My unit has helped out with some of the *other* homecoming and reintegration ceremonies at a couple of the armories in our area.    We're to the point where the folks from the NG call up and we have a pre-set process we follow to schedule, communicate, plan and execute one of these events.  The National Guard as been pretty effusive in their praise of us for helping out with these activities. (Most are actually "family" activities for the "pre-re-deployment")  The bulk of our support thus far has been of the "crowd control/traffic control" variety (with some extra manpower to help carry stuff into / out of the places they hold these events), but the Guard still says "Thanks, CAP, we couldn't have done that without your support.."

We've delivered professional results without reorganizing our wing and (from what I've read here) alienating 50% of our membership.

And I bristle at your generalization that those who are not down with the "Iowa Experiment" are just "flying boyscouts" and not "members of the team."

I don't know your experience, Lieutenant, but I am immediately distrustful of a 2Lt who says "So I am very proud to be part of the 'New' CAP, not the 'boyscouts' of old."   Unless you're a former member who rejoined after a break in service or a cadet who transferred to senior status, there is a good chance I have flight suits that have more time in CAP that you do, and have seen more "real CAP' than you. (I'm not trying to be a condescending prick, BTW. I'm just saying, attempting to seemingly lecture some of us about 'the boyscouts of old' is mighty presumptuous from what seems to be a newbie 2Lt.  I'm 41 years old, been in CAP 26 years in 2 wings in 2 different regions. I know things can be different between wings, but don't paint me with your "boyscout" brush just because I'm a composite squadron commander in with 60+ cadets and 30+ seniors on my books..)

It may have been "boyscouts" in your neck of the woods, but it sure ain't in mine.

[isuhawkeye]

Im a Decade veteran of CAP who has served in multiple squadrons, as staff under multiple wing commanders, and at activities across the country.   i am proud to be a part of "The New CAP" 

[Eclipse]

The other thing that keeps coming up is the visibility to the customer of the organizations instability.

None of that should be visible.

They call, we come.  That's it.

If its the same guys, great...nice to see you...if not, and the new guys execute, no one will care or notice.

At the customer level we are just another service organization, and no one complains about all the new "cable guys" until the most recent one who loses your HBO.

[IACAPphotog]

Didn't mean to raise your BP NIN, but notice the quotation marks. Those are the words of soldiers we work around every day, not mine. They have noticed a great change (for the better) in the IAWG and the are very vocal about it.

You are not wrong, I am new CAP (14 months) and my flight suit is brand new. But my boots are old, from my time on active duty in the Army. And I am proud to hear fellow soldiers tell me that we are meeting up to their expectations.

My grandfather was in the CAP of "old", a pilot in the late 40's. And thats what brought me to CAP, not the promise of a mini-National Guard, or the "new" CAP. Just wanted to serve my country again and follow in my grandfathers footsteps.

But now I am here, and see first hand what we are doing, and compare it to the stories of old (both CAP and NG), I do not want what we have started to reverse itself.

[Eclipse]

It may have been "boyscouts" in your neck of the woods, but it sure ain't in mine.

Ditto.

In the last calendar year we have done real-world, agency requested missions for the NTSB, ARC, CPD, and NOAA, not to mention the umpteen ELTs, and at least one missing a/c that included a fatality.

No reorg, local training, people deployed from their active home units.

[IACAPphotog]

In my short time in (post 6 months OTS), I have been on 2 missing person searches, 1 NOAA, and  2 IA DNR missions.

One of our missions, I had to use the Mandatory Leave Act (part of our association with the NG) so I could do the mission I made a commitment to do with out the fear of losing my job.

I am sure that what the CAP does outside the borders of Iowa works, but the "Iowa Experiment" is what is working here.

Change is a difficult, sometimes a violent act, but change is necessary to keep up and evolve with the times we live in.

[Eclipse]

We do have to give you guys props on the Leave Act - that's sweet...

[NIN]

Didn't mean to raise your BP NIN, but notice the quotation marks. Those are the words of soldiers we work around every day, not mine. They have noticed a great change (for the better) in the IAWG and the are very vocal about it.

Nah, blood pressure remained *mostly* in the "normal" range. 



Believe me, I seriously don't have a beef with you guys. I have been sitting here, hearing about the "Iowa Experiment" and hoping, PRAYING, that it works in a way to bring us closer to our parent service and give us tighter/better/more fluid integration with our other "hometown military," the National Guard.

I mean, crikey, I've been trying for SEVEN YEARS to get my cadets on the UH-60s over here at the AASF, and darn it, even though they're flying CrashBlackhawks, I'd give my eyeteeth to get my cadets all hooah'd up and on 'em.  After seven years of trying, thru official channels, using my Army Aviation secret handshake and decoder ring, smooching serious butt at the Armory, it took this recent help with the reintegration programs to get the Army NG to say "oh, you want to fly on the UH-60s? Oh, we can totally do that. Why didn't you ask?"  *Sigh* 

But when I hear references to "boyscouts" in terms of the way IA Wing used to do things (and by extension, the way the rest of us still do things, since we're all still doing them the same way we did it before the "Iowa Experiment"), I tend to get my hackles up a little.  Again, its not you (as in you personally) but that general attitude. I don't think you guys are even consciously aware of how that kind of terminology plays across the river in Illinois or over in Nebraska... or out here in the N-E-R...

I hope this plays out well for IA Wing. I really do.