ACA

[COL Land]

I will be unexpectedly in Sacramento this weekend, with a meeting with the California TAG on Monday morning.  I also plan to meet with some JROTC folks on Monday afternoon in the San Francisco area regarding their situation.   

If there are any adults who would like to meet to chat about ACA while I'm in the area, feel free to contact me by PM at JMLand@militarycadets.org or at 866-GO CADETS, Ext 807.   

Respectfully,

[COL Land]

We just posted several updates to our "Blog" at www.headquarters.militarycadets.org .

Respectfully,

[Major Carrales]

We just posted several updates to our "Blog" at www.headquarters.militarycadets.org .

Respectfully,

LTC Land, if I may be so bold, I must admit that your organization peaks my interests.  While I am somewhat greatly busy with CAP at the moment and would likely not have the time to join or participate actively in ACA, I should like to support its efforts if it ever comes to South Texas.

But please, could you post your best points for joining such an organization.  In other words, your best speil for ACA.  I admit I need education on the subject and I think you are the best to provide it.

I have read the information on line, however, I want a member's perspective.  If you would like, I could take said post and place it in my weekly newsletter.

[JAFO78]

LTC Land congrats on your accomplishments of your new HQ building.

[DrJbdm]

I had the chance to meet with LTC Land here in Austin a couple of days ago, we took a short tour thru Camp Mabry which is the home of the Texas National Guard Headquarters. We also sat down and talked for a few hours about the ACA. I found LTC Land to be a gentleman and a sharp officer.  he offered several bits of insight into why the ACA is really flourishing while CAP has really become pretty stagnant. I have to admit I really like what they are doing and how closely they have aligned with the Army. Their uniforms are meeting the minimum standards of USC title 10 that governs distinctiveness, however they do not go to the extreme like CAP does, that actually helps them fit in better with the AD, Res & NG troops. they also have an ID that is very close to a regular Army CAC card.

The ACA does alot of things that I wish CAP had the guts to do. it would make for a much better program for us in my opinion. He's coming back to Camp Mabry in Jan to meet with the leadership of the Texas State Guard, He and I both agreed that Camp Mabry is an ideal place for the ACA to grow in Texas. He and I have also made plans to get together when he arrives back in Austin.

It's my opinion that CAP needs to take a good hard look at how the ACA is set up as far as Officers are concerned. not everyone in the ACA is an officer, only those who have been selected to attend OCS and have graduated from the three phase program are commissioned as an officer. While there is a provision in their regulations where they could waive phase 1 & 2 in OCS for certain qualified people there is no provision to waive the 8 day in-resident phase 3 for anyone, including those selected for a direct commission. (Doctors, Nurses, chaplains ,ect)  

[RiverAux]

Flourishing is not a word I'd use to describe the ACA.  They've only got about 30 units according to their web site.  Barely hanging on would probably be a more accurate description. 

[NIN]

Flourishing is not a word I'd use to describe the ACA.  They've only got about 30 units according to their web site.  Barely hanging on would probably be a more accurate description. 

That depends on where you position yourself to see the movement..

The ACA is *growing* (albeit slowly, at the present). Is CAP? Hardly.  The ACA did have a "contraction" back in the 1970s that it barely recovered from.  Considering that for the majority of its 98 year existence the organization was primarily based in the Northeast, 30 units spread around the country is actually pretty good.

We'd prefer it was more, and that will come in due time.

[Major Carrales]

Careful there, Lt Col, Sir.

I detect here the possibility of "tension" between "US" and "THEM" as pointed out by your comment "The ACA is *growing* (albeit slowly, at the present). Is CAP? Hardly" and the thread that prompted that comment.

When I first started doing CAP cadets in Kingsville, people saw me as a threat to the Army JROTC program.  The Lt Col in charge there is a friend of mine, and it was assumed that there would be conflict.  There was not.  Simply because CAP offcers things that  Army JROTC does not and Army JROTC offers things CAP does not.

As it turned out, CAP cadets also enrolled in Army JROTC seem to get the best of both worlds.

CAP and ACA must do the same thing.  Pity everyone seems "defensive" of their programs to even consider that possibility of cooperation, OFFICIAL COOPERATON (call that yelling if you wish, but I capitalize to stress concepts.)

Now, are we going to help these people or not?

[RiverAux]

Like it or not, CAP IS in competition with JROTC, Young Marines, Naval Sea Cadets, and the ACA for those youths interested in the military, or some aspects of the military.  This isn't any different than the Armed Forces competing over potential recruits.

Are there still places out there not served by any military cadet program?  Sure, but I'd bet that a high percentage of cities over 10,000 has at least one of these programs active and I'm sure every major metropolitan area does. 

Competition for recruits, publicity, etc. doesn't have to be nasty.  In any case you can't assume that a youth who joins ACA would have joined CAP if JROTC wasn't there, so it is not a zero-sum game. 

So, to answer you question, no we should not be helping ACA.  We don't need to try to destroy them, but it isn't our job to aid them. 

[jb512]

I was snooping around the ACA website and found their application/commissioning process.  I really like the way they set their standards and have people apply: http://www.acacadets.org/resinst.htm

Doesn't look like a whole lot of rubber stamping goes on, and they have a strong emphasis on prior military.

[ddelaney103]

What we should be concerned about is if potential Cadets are getting to the right organization.

We're better off telling them, "we might not be the best fit based on your interests - have you considered talking to X?" where X=some other org, then ending up with Cadets who attrit 2 months down the road.

[jb512]

Like it or not, CAP IS in competition with JROTC, Young Marines, Naval Sea Cadets, and the ACA for those youths interested in the military, or some aspects of the military.  This isn't any different than the Armed Forces competing over potential recruits.

Very true.  When I was a kid I was very involved in CAP until we moved.  I found a different unit, but the AFJROTC program at my new high school had much more to offer at the time and I lost interest in CAP.

[Major Lord]

In many ways, ACA offers a Cadet Program that is superior to CAP. We are constantly arguing for our limitations, while ACA is looking for growth and dynamism. Being an advocate of free market forces, I think that ACA may shame CAP into becoming a better program!

Major Lord

[mikeylikey]

I have a funny feeling that we are going to see ACA expand exponentially the next few years. 

This is a program the Army would most likely pick up in an instant.  They have (J)ROTC already, but investing in another youth program would be hugely beneficial for them. 

[RiverAux]

If they actually start getting a lot of strong Army support in the form of money, they do have a large potential to expand.  We saw the same thing with the Young Marines in recent times.  I'm not denying that there is a "market" out there for an Army-based program. 

But, the advantage CAP has over the other ones and most likely the ACA is our capability to use cadets as part of ES missions.  Unless they start doing that, we still have a major potential edge over all the others.  Granted, not all units use their cadets in ES, but where they do, and where there are a lot of ES missions for them, we will continue to remain in a strong position. 

[COL Land]

In response to the above:

ACA'S SHORCOMINGS:


Note:  Most of these items are well known within our program and are being addressed.

     *  Size.   Contrary to the above, we are not "barely hanging on."  In fact, we've been very conservative about our growth, in preparation for a full-scale roll-out.   We want to be sure that we're ready for the growth that will occur upon dissemination of the AR which outlines support.  In 1993, the Young Marines received Marine Corps Order 5000.20 which provided formal Marine Corps recognition and support to the program which had been in operation for 35+ years. The Young Marines have experienced a significant growth since that point in their history.  Of note, however, is that the initial growth in the first two years subsequent to the release of MCO 5000.20 only showed a net increase of less than 20 units. This was reportedly due to a constant gain and loss of units due to the program's inability to accommodate rapid growth. In response, ACA National Headquarters has spent the past five years developing the proper infrastructure to accommodate a steady growth of the program. 

     *  Lack of Full-time Staff.   This is both a "Pro" and a "Con."  Everyone at ACA NHQ is certainly working with the program because of a personal belief in what we do, and a desire to have a positive impact on young people.  No one is in this for the money!  We anticipate full-time staff online within 24 months.

     *  Rigid Standards.   For us, this is a Pro; however, others find that we are too focused on standardization and quality.   Further, our regulations are in place to regulate, not serve as a "guideline" as I've heard so many times.   

     *  Limited Training Sites.   We conduct one Annual Training program, with all personnel coming "to the mountain" (wherever that may be from year to year).   This is challenging and will be eventually resolved as we have sufficient manpower across the country to justify additional AT locations.       

     *  No Operational Mission.   For some, this is a major con.   For others, it prevents us from getting into "mission creep."  Our mission is:

"To instill in young Americans, through a multi-faceted Cadet program which is physically and mentally challenging and rewarding, the importance of national pride, service to others, and maintaining a drug-free and gang-free lifestyle."

     *  No "insta-Lts".  We see this is a major Pro.   Our OCS program is well received within the Army, and sends a strong message that we won't have ACA officers serving in the program who are untrained or unqualified.   As a result, we have been very well received by Army leadership at all levels.  Contrary to what I've read here a couple of times, we do give credit for military, Cadetting and other professional experience.

     *  Not everyone will become an officer.   Again, we see this is a pro.  Not to be elitist, but to ensure that there is consistency in the qualifications of all applicants.   Do some "nut jobs" get in?   Sure, only so much can be accomplished during interviews.   However, the requirement for OCS - frankly - screens out alot of the folks who just want to play dress up.   BTW - much of our program is very closely patterned after the officer requirements for the UK and Canada.   

     *  No formal U.S. Army regulations supporting the program.  Obviously, that is well in the works; however, the U. S. Army Cadet Corps Authorization Act must be passed before this occurs.   In the meantime, we get most of the training support that we need as a Community-based Organization.

ACA'S STRENGTHS:


   *  Clear focus on "career exploration" training for Cadets, meaning a realistic, challenging and exciting program which gives young people a first-hand view of military life.   This is what Cadets want when they come to our program.   They want to know "what's it like to be in the Army?"  We show them, without crossing the line into combat skills, both the good and the bad of military life.  Also, for clarification, if a young person clearly plans to join the Air Force, we point them towards the CAP.

   *  High standards for the ACA Officers' Corps.   We have patterned our OCS after the Army National Guard's, even awarding college credit upon completion.

   *  Standardization through the Corps.   One Corps, one standard....nationwide.   National Headquarters is driven to provide the tools to take the "pain" off the local unit.   We are creating standardized lesson plans, PowerPoint slides, etc., so that the units don't have to recreate the wheel.  We are ensuring that the tools are fully in place to support the units, but it's difficult doing so without full-time support.   There is relief on the horizon, though, based on some meetings held this past week.

   *  Experienced NHQ leadership.   All of my NHQ staffers, from my boss to the newest member, has a strong background in Cadetting, along with solid professional, academic and military experience.   We've formed and/or commanded very successful units, either within ACA or one of the other programs.

   *  Positioning for great things in the world of Cadetting.   We have gained the interest of a great deal of senior-level Army leadership.  For a small program, we have become very well known in the past three years.   Because we have strategically planned almost every interaction, our reputation is solid.  We are mindful of the value and importance of JROTC within the Army community, while communicating the differences between the two programs.

    *  Everyone has value.   As small as we are, we must tap into the collective talents and motivators of all of our officers and Civilian Instructors.  As a result, regardless of your rank, you can have a positive impact on the future of the program.  For many of our younger officers, this is refreshing, as they feel that their "voice is heard." 

    *  We're willing to try new things and change those policies which don't pass "stupid-check."   The chain of command is short, and we're open to new ideas.   With that said, like any other youth development program, we're constantly mindful of Risk Management.   

    *  We've learned from the past experiences of other organizations.   I have about 350 years of experience within the ACA NHQ ranks.   We're doing everything possible to "do the job right."

    *   Everyone has a place...but, not all as uniformed officers.   I've been told that there are two DoD civilians for every uniformed military member.  Today, civilians serve in a multitude of positions which have historically been filled by uniformed warfighters.   We've adopted the practice of making positive use of Civilian Instructors whenever we can, except in command positions.   We don't force "mom" into becoming a Lieutenant, especially if she's best suited to fill the job as a civilian.   Our Civilian Instructors are valued and serve in many key positions in the organization.

    *  There are no "volunteers" in ACA.   We use the term "non-paid professionals."   Our attitude is that we should be as professional at our mission as our active duty, reserve and guard colleagues are at their missions.  We are not warriors; however, we must be professionals in the area of career development.   

    *  "When senior, you are in charge."  Officer rank is a clear representation of responsibility and authority.   Again, for some outside of ACA, this is disturbing, for others it's refreshing. 

    *  "Hard Core or Out the Door!"   Our people are all "gung-ho."   If they aren't, they really won't fit in.   During AT especially, I literally have to "order" folks to get some sleep...otherwise, they'd work 24/7!   That "fire in the gut" is conveyed to the Cadets and is seen throughout the program. 

    *  It's fun!  The greatest thing about this program is that we still have fun, yet work like dogs.  Our high standards have resulted in a bond among the officers' corps which is unlike anything I've seen in my 30+ years Cadetting.   

That's my pitch.   With that said, I want to make it clear that I post on these various sites in response to inquiries, not to attract others away from CAP to us.   I think you'll find that we do our best to "work and play well together" with just about any organization, and are actually somewhat protective of the other organizations.   In fact, when a CAP officer asks about coming into ACA, one of our first questions is "How would this affect your current command?"  If it looks like their departure would be harmful to their current unit, we won't accept them into our program until they have found a qualified relief.  We don't want to be accused of building our program at the expense of others.   It's not that we're a better mousetrap, just a different one...for some, that's good, for others, it's bad.  YMMV.

[flyguy06]

Like it or not, CAP IS in competition with JROTC, Young Marines, Naval Sea Cadets, and the ACA for those youths interested in the military, or some aspects of the military.  This isn't any different than the Armed Forces competing over potential recruits.

When I was a teenager, I was in JROTC, CAP, and the Boy Scouts all at the same time

[NIN]

Careful there, Lt Col, Sir.

I detect here the possibility of "tension" between "US" and "THEM" as pointed out by your comment "The ACA is *growing* (albeit slowly, at the present). Is CAP? Hardly" and the thread that prompted that comment.

When I first started doing CAP cadets in Kingsville, people saw me as a threat to the Army JROTC program.  The Lt Col in charge there is a friend of mine, and it was assumed that there would be conflict.  There was not.  Simply because CAP offcers things that  Army JROTC does not and Army JROTC offers things CAP does not.

As it turned out, CAP cadets also enrolled in Army JROTC seem to get the best of both worlds.

CAP and ACA must do the same thing.  Pity everyone seems "defensive" of their programs to even consider that possibility of cooperation, OFFICIAL COOPERATON (call that yelling if you wish, but I capitalize to stress concepts.)

Now, are we going to help these people or not?

Well, there, Major, that sounds a might bit defensive, even.

Surely, there are things the ACA does that CAP does not.  I'm here to tell you that is the case.  And vice-versa.

However, and I was not trying to say that the ACA would "outstrip" or "surpass" or "steal people" from CAP, but rather I stated a pair of facts: the ACA is (slowly) growing. CAP has not been.  Anybody who has been around CAP for awhile will likely concur: while CAP's numbers may be holding steady at the moment, we're down considerably from where we were 10 years ago, still.

I'm not suggesting that the ACA is a replacement for CAP.

But remember: a little competition is a good thing. It puts EVERYBODY on top of their game.  And that's not something to sneeze at.

[Cecil DP]

I find it strange that the ACA is proselytizing on the CAP Talk. Is LTC Land a member of CAP??

[Major Carrales]

Careful there, Lt Col, Sir.

I detect here the possibility of "tension" between "US" and "THEM" as pointed out by your comment "The ACA is *growing* (albeit slowly, at the present). Is CAP? Hardly" and the thread that prompted that comment.

When I first started doing CAP cadets in Kingsville, people saw me as a threat to the Army JROTC program.  The Lt Col in charge there is a friend of mine, and it was assumed that there would be conflict.  There was not.  Simply because CAP offcers things that  Army JROTC does not and Army JROTC offers things CAP does not.

As it turned out, CAP cadets also enrolled in Army JROTC seem to get the best of both worlds.

CAP and ACA must do the same thing.  Pity everyone seems "defensive" of their programs to even consider that possibility of cooperation, OFFICIAL COOPERATON (call that yelling if you wish, but I capitalize to stress concepts.)

Now, are we going to help these people or not?

Well, there, Major, that sounds a might bit defensive, even.

Surely, there are things the ACA does that CAP does not.  I'm here to tell you that is the case.  And vice-versa.

However, and I was not trying to say that the ACA would "outstrip" or "surpass" or "steal people" from CAP, but rather I stated a pair of facts: the ACA is (slowly) growing. CAP has not been.  Anybody who has been around CAP for awhile will likely concur: while CAP's numbers may be holding steady at the moment, we're down considerably from where we were 10 years ago, still.

I'm not suggesting that the ACA is a replacement for CAP.

But remember: a little competition is a good thing. It puts EVERYBODY on top of their game.  And that's not something to sneeze at.

My Dear Lt Col, I have no dog in this fight.  All I have seen in this post is a person from ACA coming here for help or to spread information on the success in a program he finds worthy.  The resulting commentary has been one of general "uneasy feeling."  I have read in this post people predicting, basically, the FALL of CAP juxaposed against the growth of the ACA.  Now, that makes me UNEASY.

Look, I'm a squadron commander in a part of the Nation that most people never fail to forget.  We have worked to produce a CAP program in our area, a WHOLE CAP program, despite the odds.

I believe in CAP.  I also tend to believe that the ACA is of value to the people of my area.

I asked if we were going to help these people, Riveraux told me we should not.

Now, am I being defensive?  No, I would say I was merely reacting to the worst sorts of discussions that these forums tend to promote.

Now, you have my attention...convince me of what you think I should believe.