Countdown to Armageddon

[Eclipse]

As we've discussed, the impact is probably most significant in areas where the ES programs are less-coherent to start.

By me, it looks like we probably lost 15%(ish) on paper (the last minute efforts by both members and staff were somewhat Herculean), but when you scan the list of those "lost", they are non-players who never respond.

Either they are too new to be an operational factor, or too disconnected. 

So ground level, the impact is negligible.

[Major Carrales]

As we've discussed, the impact is probably most significant in areas where the ES programs are less-coherent to start.

By me, it looks like we probably lost 15%(ish) on paper (the last minute efforts by both members and staff were somewhat Herculean), but when you scan the list of those "lost", they are non-players who never respond.

Either they are too new to be an operational factor, or too disconnected. 

So ground level, the impact is negligible.

Very astute observation.  There were three types of persons who did not respond: 

Those that could not, who were on business and discovered at the 11th hour that they needed 200 or 700.  They will comply as soon as they can.   Some did not have internet ability and will have to be addressed at the squadron.

Those that would not, these are the ones that stuck to the old "I've been in CAP for Nth many years and I will not do this."  These folks will have a change of heart once they show up to a SAR/SARex and find themselves DOWN and OUT.  They will either take the test then or quit.

Those that should not, these are the non-active that remain in CAP because they enjoy merely being part of it.  The one time hyper-active people who are on a "break" or other sort of thing that prevents activity.  Then there are those in CAP for more selfish reasons that were too bothered by this to do it.  These people likely should not be allowed to participate anyway due to lack of training.

These are, of course opinions, please do with them what you will.

[Nomex Maximus]

Hehehe... Got the 700 course done at 9:34 PM Dec 31st.

[RiverAux]

Looks like the system kicked out the ICs who hadn't completed 400 even though the federal compliance date isn't until September.  They might want to get that fixed quickly.

They seem to have gotten this fixed as my wing now has ICs again.  Quick work on the part of NHQ!

[ammotrucker]

Those that could not, who were on business and discovered at the 11th hour that they needed 200 or 700.  They will comply as soon as they can.   Some did not have internet ability and will have to be addressed at the squadron.

This seems a little odd to me, as Nat sent the directive out in May, 2008.  If there squadron ES folks have not talked about this, SHAME ON THEM.  I don't believe that anyone other then maybe a newbie has an excuse.

[Duke Dillio]

So I haven't been able to go get my IS-300 done.  All it did was put two little asterisks in front of my GBD rating.  I knew I should have laid off the steroids.....

[RiverAux]

Those ** mean that you are not authorized to serve in that position any longer, not even as a trainee (since it looks like they included the ICS requirements as part of the fam and prep training you need to do before going into the field as a trainee). 

[maverik]

I think that my squadron lost mainly trainees that joined in december so I'll have to check on that.
EDIT: Apparently I am a casualty as I have lost CUL trainee status as I need the 300 and 800 courses and didn't even know it! Ah well I'm still GT qualified and I will begin work for 300 and 800.

[Eclipse]

I think that my squadron lost mainly trainees that joined in december so I'll have to check on that.
EDIT: Apparently I am a casualty as I have lost CUL trainee status as I need the 300 and 800 courses and didn't even know it! Ah well I'm still GT qualified and I will begin work for 300 and 800.

OK, I'm just asking...How could you not know it?

[maverik]

that answer is very simple and makes me feel rather unresponsible: I simply have not been looking at my CUL SQTR.
I have a question though: I am taking IS-800 now and was wondering, would we be considered by FEMA a voluntary resource or a goverment resource?

[ELTHunter]

The Policy Letter from 10 April said "Most members will need to complete a few on line courses by 31 December 2008 in order to remain qualified"  I interpreted that to mean that since members in training status are not "qualified" they could still remain in a trainee status until the courses were taken.  I'm not sure this was completely understood by the membership.

I have taken NIMS courses 100,200,300,700 and 800.  I found 300 to be moderately helpful.  Other then this being PR for CAP to tell FEMA that we require these course to be taken, I fail to see the real benefit in 99% of our missions.

The ONLY time the courses other than 100 will come into play for most of the members other than ICS staff is on Federal disaster missions.  Even then, CAP will most likely be a mission within the mission with the CAP folks reporting up though an all CAP ICS.  Additionally, this will wipe out a lot of cadet participation.

IMHO, CAP has really shot themselves in the foot with this for AFRCC missions, which are our primary reason for being.

[Eclipse]

I have taken NIMS courses 100,200,300,700 and 800.  I found 300 to be moderately helpful.  Other then this being PR for CAP to tell FEMA that we require these course to be taken, I fail to see the real benefit in 99% of our missions.

The ONLY time the courses other than 100 will come into play for most of the members other than ICS staff is on Federal disaster missions.  Even then, CAP will most likely be a mission within the mission with the CAP folks reporting up though an all CAP ICS.  Additionally, this will wipe out a lot of cadet participation.

IMHO, CAP has really shot themselves in the foot with this for AFRCC missions, which are our primary reason for being.

As a federalized agency, even part-time, it wasn't an option, we had to do it, just like every LEA and municipality that gets, or hopes to reach for, HLS, FEMA, or other gov'mint cheese.

As to needing it - the mentality and organization that ICS brings can be used for anything, it doesn't have to be a huge
disaster.  Airshows, encampments, even most larger general events could benefit from the consistency and scalability ICS brings to the table.

I agree that from the bunch listed, 300 had the most value, but then to those of use who took it, the rest is pretty redundant.

[RiverAux]

The Policy Letter from 10 April said "Most members will need to complete a few on line courses by 31 December 2008 in order to remain qualified"  I interpreted that to mean that since members in training status are not "qualified" they could still remain in a trainee status until the courses were taken.  I'm not sure this was completely understood by the membership.

I agree that the policy letter was not clear about which part of the SQTR the NIMS requirements would go in and should have clarified that for the benefit of those in trainee status.  That being said, anyone in trainee status should have realized that it would behoove them to take the appropriate ICS course anyway otherwise they would never have become qualified. 

IMHO, CAP has really shot themselves in the foot with this for AFRCC missions, which are our primary reason for being.

Huh?  How did we shoot ourselves in the foot by deciding to get in compliance (actually almost in compliance) with the national standards that every other SAR and DR agency is going to have to follow? 

[ELTHunter]

As a federalized agency, even part-time, it wasn't an option, we had to do it, just like every LEA and municipality that gets, or hopes to reach for, HLS, FEMA, or other gov'mint cheese.

I'll admit up front that I do not know where, if any, CAP funding comes from that doesn't come from the USAF.  Does CAP receive any FEMA $$?  As I understand it, the requirement was that in order to receive FEMA $$ or work a FEMA mission, the organizations had to be NIMS compliant.

Is the USAF, National Guard or Reserves compliant?

As to needing it - the mentality and organization that ICS brings can be used for anything, it doesn't have to be a huge
disaster.  Airshows, encampments, even most larger general events could benefit from the consistency and scalability ICS brings to the table.

I don't disagree that there isn't a benefit to using ICS in a lot of the things we do, including the ones you cite....I have seen many events that could have used the structure that ICS provides in order to run more smoothly.  However, I am saying that most ground team members, MO's, MS's, people out in the field, only care about who their immediate supervisor is.  They really don't care or need to know all the various ICS positions, who's a chief, who's a director, etc., etc.  Especially Cadets....who, from the way things are going, won't be able to work FEMA missions any way.

Obviously I support the edict enough to have invested the time in taking the classes, and I plan to take 400 even though it is only "recommended" for my level of qualification.  I'm just saying that I think we have cut a resource that was really too thin in the first place to back up the salesmanship for any extended length of time.

[RiverAux]

This is just one of those things that is entirely out of CAP's hands, so there isn't much use complaining about it.  Sure, a GT member may not need to know some of that stuff, but the fact is that DHS wants people at that level to know it, so we've got to do it. 

Does CAP get money from FEMA?  Not regular grants or anything, but we do missions for them all the time for which we are reimbursed. 

Regarding military compliance -- there are some exceptions that they can fall under in regards to the presidential directives that started all this so the issue is a bit murkier with them and also irrelevant to us. 

[Eclipse]

As a federalized agency, even part-time, it wasn't an option, we had to do it, just like every LEA and municipality that gets, or hopes to reach for, HLS, FEMA, or other gov'mint cheese.

I'll admit up front that I do not know where, if any, CAP funding comes from that doesn't come from the USAF.  Does CAP receive any FEMA $$?  As I understand it, the requirement was that in order to receive FEMA $$ or work a FEMA mission, the organizations had to be NIMS compliant.

Is the USAF, National Guard or Reserves compliant?

The 2003 presidential directive required all federal agencies to adopt the NIMS and to use it in their individual domestic incident management and emergency prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation programs and activities. The directive also required Federal departments to make adoption of NIMS by State, tribal, and local organizations a condition for Federal preparedness assistance beginning in Fiscal Year 2005. In addition, all State, tribal, and local emergency personnel with a direct role in emergency preparedness, incident management or response were to have completed NIMS training by October 1, 2005. After the directive was adopted, all State, tribal and local personnel with any role in emergency response were given until October 1, 2006 to complete training for NIMS compliance.

You will note that we, along with most of the rest of the known ES universe, are well behind the original requirement.

Working with FEMA, etc., is actually irrelevant to the requirement.  We're an instrumentality of a federal agency, therefore required to comply.

However some of this becomes a little circular - since NIMS requires state agencies and direct responders to be compliant, we get it on the corporate side as well, since the majority of what we do outside AFRCC falls under state or local MOUs, etc.

[ELTHunter]

As a federalized agency, even part-time, it wasn't an option, we had to do it, just like every LEA and municipality that gets, or hopes to reach for, HLS, FEMA, or other gov'mint cheese.

I'll admit up front that I do not know where, if any, CAP funding comes from that doesn't come from the USAF.  Does CAP receive any FEMA $$?  As I understand it, the requirement was that in order to receive FEMA $$ or work a FEMA mission, the organizations had to be NIMS compliant.

Is the USAF, National Guard or Reserves compliant?

The 2003 presidential directive required all federal agencies to adopt the NIMS and to use it in their individual domestic incident management and emergency prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation programs and activities. The directive also required Federal departments to make adoption of NIMS by State, tribal, and local organizations a condition for Federal preparedness assistance beginning in Fiscal Year 2005. In addition, all State, tribal, and local emergency personnel with a direct role in emergency preparedness, incident management or response were to have completed NIMS training by October 1, 2005. After the directive was adopted, all State, tribal and local personnel with any role in emergency response were given until October 1, 2006 to complete training for NIMS compliance.

You will note that we, along with most of the rest of the known ES universe, are well behind the original requirement.

Working with FEMA, etc., is actually irrelevant to the requirement.  We're an instrumentality of a federal agency, therefore required to comply.

However some of this becomes a little circular - since NIMS requires state agencies and direct responders to be compliant, we get it on the corporate side as well, since the majority of what we do outside AFRCC falls under state or local MOUs, etc.

I know I'm beating the crap out of this dead horse, and this wasn't the topic of this particular thread, but I'd still argue that CAP members should be able to participate in AFRCC missions as the USAF Aux (not a federal agency like FEMA), just like the Guard and Reserve do, and not subject some of the membership to having to wade through this.  Most Cadets who could otherwise come out and train as Ground Team Member 3's will not complete the courses and thus won't even be able to train on practice missions.  Another blow to the cadet program if that happens.

[EMT-83]

Most Cadets who could otherwise come out and train as Ground Team Member 3's will not complete the courses and thus won't even be able to train on practice missions.  Another blow to the cadet program if that happens.

I received an email last week from a cadet who's been a member all of six weeks. It contained PDF copies of certificates for his GES and NIMS tests, and he wanted to know if there was anything else he need to do. It was no big deal to him, just something that he knew he was expected to complete.

Now if only the adults could be as responsible as a 13 year old...

[Short Field]

The only new requirement for GTM3 is IC 700.  IC 100 simply replaced CAPT 116 pt 2.   IC 700 can be completed in under an hour so it should not be a big deal.  

[SJFedor]

Someone just confirm my sanity here...

The ICS courses are validated only at the unit level, correct? As in, they do not need to go racing up through Group and Wing like SQTR quals.

Correct?