Below is what amounts to an announcement of CAP's new strategic plan from BG Courter's column in the May-June Volunteer (available online now):
QuoteCivil Air Patrol's mission of "supporting America's communities with
emergency response, diverse aviation and ground service, youth development
and promotion of air and space power" is the driving force behind CAP's new long-range strategic plan.
The plan, developed by CAP's volunteer management team, National
Headquarters' senior leadership and CAP-USAF leaders, identifies nine long-range
goals designed to ensure CAP's success over the next five to seven years.
Success in any endeavor requires careful preparation and planning. By clarifying
and communicating our plans, it ensures the CAP leadership has a common vision
regarding critical priorities ... what needs to be done now and in the not too distant
future, and how.
CAP's vision — "the nation's finest citizens serving our communities as volunteers
with integrity, service, excellence and respect" — expresses the values and guiding beliefs that motivate our volunteers' service-before-self commitment. This, coupled with an understanding of our constituent audiences, from the U.S. Air Force and members of Congress to ROTC and parents, helped shape objectives that are clear, concise and value-driven.
The objectives are:
• Provide quality training;
• Build public trust;
• Brand CAP as a resource of choice;
• Promote the value and significance of CAP's Cadet Program;
• Promote the talent and opportunities of our adult membership;
• Brand CAP as a national aerospace education leader;
• Establish public awareness of CAP's missions;
• Communicate CAP's financial needs and benefits; and
• Brand CAP as a volunteer organization of choice.
As goals and strategies to support these objectives are identified and implemented, CAP will begin to assume its rightful place in the national spotlight as a premier volunteer organization widely known and respected for the missions it performs in service to communities across America. And, in the process, the name of Civil Air Patrol will readily conjure up the images associated with our mission — emergency response, aviation and ground service, youth development and aerospace education — that our organization and its members so richly deserve.
And don't forget that there are requirements for wings and even lower to develop plans at their levels for various specialties (ES training plan, PAO, etc.).
The one planning weakness that I think we still have is for region-scale disaster missions. We've made some movements on that front, but I don't think they're adequate.
I'm sure the whole plan will be released at some point.
^ Quote of above snipped. - MIKE
None of these task any regions to be able to do anything - It's all pie-in-the-sky-feel-good stuff. Nothing that says (for example) "Each region will, on order, conduct homeland security aerial reconnaissance; be prepared to deploy one GA8/ARCHER TF within 24 hours of notice." If you're going to come up with a national plan, you're going to have to give the mission, the condition that it will be accomplished in, and the standard expected for the accomplishment.
But saying "Brand CAP as a resource of choice" doesn't say anything. It doesn't give the subordinate units any guidance, doesn't say by when we have to have it done. This plan doesn't give the priority of effort, either. We can't do them all at the same time. If these are goals that build on one another, what is the order to accomplish them.
Once again, the NEC leadership by committee (vice leadership by commander) has given us pablum instead of meat.
GC
STRATEGIC plan my friend. We already have at least a draft of a National Emergency Operations Plan (which I have some issues with). An organization's strategic plan should not get down into the details of operations.
QuoteBut saying "Brand CAP as a resource of choice" doesn't say anything. It doesn't give the subordinate units any guidance, doesn't say by when we have to have it done
What I posted isn't the actual plan, you know. Probably just the headings for the major sections.
Quote from: RiverAux on May 24, 2008, 08:42:02 PM
STRATEGIC plan my friend. We already have at least a draft of a National Emergency Operations Plan (which I have some issues with). An organization's strategic plan should not get down into the details of operations.
QuoteBut saying "Brand CAP as a resource of choice" doesn't say anything. It doesn't give the subordinate units any guidance, doesn't say by when we have to have it done
What I posted isn't the actual plan, you know. Probably just the headings for the major sections.
We'll see if these things actually are attached to any plan at all. I'm not hopeful. Besides, I'm not talking about details of operations - I'm talking about strategic capabilities. The wings (perhaps regions) would do the tactical stuff.
Quote from: RiverAux on May 24, 2008, 08:42:02 PM
STRATEGIC plan my friend. We already have at least a draft of a National Emergency Operations Plan (which I have some issues with). An organization's strategic plan should not get down into the details of operations.
QuoteBut saying "Brand CAP as a resource of choice" doesn't say anything. It doesn't give the subordinate units any guidance, doesn't say by when we have to have it done
What I posted isn't the actual plan, you know. Probably just the headings for the major sections.
And until they actually release a Strategic Plan and Vision paper (that is longer than one page), they DO NOT HAVE a Strategic Plan and Vision.
All that crap is recruiting propaganda.
It's a start. It's better than no strategic outlook at all. I agree they are extremely vague, intangible and unmeasurable in any sense.
I won't be impressed until we start seeing action to clean up the vast areas in which CAP falls way, way behind the rest of the world.
I've seen only one or two things crossed off my list (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=3948.0) so far. A start? Yes. But no where nears making CAP anything like that "strategic" document describes.
What was published was a slightly watered down version of our 9 "long term objectives" compiled at a national commanders call in Jan 08.
The forming of intermediate and short term goals and objectives are not as easy as the formulation of the above. As I said in a previous post, we have about 6 working groups figuring out how to get these steps together. It's going to take some time. It would be nice however, if the membership got behind this and started taking action. Take your ideas up the chain. They will get due attention.
One of the groups deals with grade structure vs. PD/training. Where did we get that idea? ;)
Quote from: mikeylikey on May 24, 2008, 10:06:10 PM
And until they actually release a Strategic Plan and Vision paper (that is longer than one page), they DO NOT HAVE a Strategic Plan and Vision.
All that crap is recruiting propaganda.
Somehow I get the impression that nothing that CAP does will satisfy some people.
Quote from: FW on May 24, 2008, 11:53:05 PM
Take your ideas up the chain. They will get due attention.
One of the groups deals with grade structure vs. PD/training. Where did we get that idea? ;)
All due respect to the hard work you do Sir, you are very mistaken if you think anything a member submitts up the chain will get due attention, unless it is something that a board member wants.
Reference the "formed uniform committee" of a few months ago.......what did the membership get, NOTHING. Oh but wait, we can now wear white pistol belts, and ascots on our Ranger Uniforms if we so desire.
Mikey, don't be so glum. I listen to you. ;D
BTW, the NEC did not allow pistol belts and ascots; only orange baseball caps and "tabs".
Anyway, it's great CAPTALK is around. IF a NB/NEC member reads it, they will get a pretty decent idea of what the general membership/interested individuals feel about the state of CAP. With about 1600 contributors and thousands of readers, it has become a pretty sizable force of influence.
From what I know of the senior leadership, I have no doubt these ideas are taken seriously. Understand there is a filtering process. Your "great inspiration" may be "been there done that" for someone who's been around for awhile.
One thing I've found about CAP leadership. It's easier to change things working with the current instead of fighting against it. Don't get too upset about the current matters of CAP and just complain about it. If you really want to change things, start moving up. Become a squadron/cc, then group/cc then onward. Really become part of the solution. Make the commitment to the whole team and help improve it by making positive contributions.
My current trek started as a SMWOG in a local squadron where I used to be a cadet. I continued to contribute and improve my part of the universe until I found myself in my current "predicament". I'm not saying you will end up where I did, but I have no regrets at any level I've been in.
OK, I'm off the soap box. :-*
Quote from: FW on May 25, 2008, 12:01:02 PM
It's easier to change things working with the current instead of fighting against it.
That's better for a fish floating belly-up. ;D
That's marginally at very best a vision statement, not actually a vision, and certainly not a strategic plan. A strategic plan would have enormous detail on exactly what she means by each of those items, including: individual programs; priorities of work within each section at each echelon; objectives/goals, time lines, targets, suspense dates, reporting requirements, metrics, etc. It would tell us in great detail what we as an organization are doing over the next 1, 2, 5, 10, & beyond years. It would sell members on that, motivating them to take ownership of the plan. It would explain how we intend to accomplish each part. It would detail how they intend to support. It would say how we can help. And, it would be both reasonable, but also bold, decisive, and aggressive.
That's not what you posted, or anything I've seen from NHQ in my time in CAP. However, that's what does need to be put out by them.
I don't think this should be considered a strategic plan or vision statement either. Just "9 Long Term Objectives".
The last "Strategic Plan" was formed when we had a "Strategic Plan" committee chaired by Brig Gen Rich Anderson. It was very detailed and did have all the bells and whistles with timelines, intermediate goals, etc.
We also had a "Corporate Business Plan" formed by the staff at NHQ. This plan had all the bells and whistles too.
These plans, though complete, some times conflicted with each other. So, Brig Gen Courter and Mr. Rowland decided it would be a better idea to have 1 "Strategic Business Plan" for Civil Air Patrol. A working group was formed last November. We should have something to report at the Summer NB meeting in Orlando.
"A goal without a date is just a wish."
Gunner's Rules of Life and Combat #9
Gunner, you are sooo deep. I'm in awe. :D (That's slightly south of New York ;D)
Quote from: Gunner C on May 26, 2008, 11:16:33 AM
"A goal without a date is just a wish."
Gunner's Rules of Life and Combat #9
<wink>
Quote from: FW on May 26, 2008, 11:07:44 AM
I don't think this should be considered a strategic plan or vision statement either. Just "9 Long Term Objectives".
The last "Strategic Plan" was formed when we had a "Strategic Plan" committee chaired by Brig Gen Rich Anderson. It was very detailed and did have all the bells and whistles with timelines, intermediate goals, etc.
We also had a "Corporate Business Plan" formed by the staff at NHQ. This plan had all the bells and whistles too.
These plans, though complete, some times conflicted with each other. So, Brig Gen Courter and Mr. Rowland decided it would be a better idea to have 1 "Strategic Business Plan" for Civil Air Patrol. A working group was formed last November. We should have something to report at the Summer NB meeting in Orlando.
FW having you here is a great resource.
I have a suggestion, relative to the Decision making process at National HQ.
Put SQUADRON COMMANDERS on the Board!
Let's hear from the Grassroots, and lets get back to basics, there appears to be people in the Chain that just don't understand the situation in the field.
And I nominate LCOL GERRY LEVESQUE, the Commander of the Largest CAP SQUADRON to the Board.
Gerry is a great guy and a wonderful asset for CAP.
I think your idea has merit. It has been argued many times at NB meetings. In every instance, it has been said that the Wing/CC represents the members in their respective wings. However, if just one Sq/CC was selected to serve as a "voice". it may bring a different perspective to the board.
I'll knock this idea around some more.. Thank you.
Quote from: FW on May 27, 2008, 01:43:44 AM
Gerry is a great guy and a wonderful asset for CAP.
I think your idea has merit. It has been argued many times at NB meetings. In every instance, it has been said that the Wing/CC represents the members in their respective wings. However, if just one Sq/CC was selected to serve as a "voice". it may bring a different perspective to the board.
I'll knock this idea around some more.. Thank you.
But don't tell Gerry it was my idea, it's better if you take the hit, LOL, I mean credit.
Quote from: FW on May 27, 2008, 01:43:44 AM
Gerry is a great guy and a wonderful asset for CAP.
I think your idea has merit. It has been argued many times at NB meetings. In every instance, it has been said that the Wing/CC represents the members in their respective wings. However, if just one Sq/CC was selected to serve as a "voice". it may bring a different perspective to the board.
I'll knock this idea around some more.. Thank you.
All, kidding aside, we need a Squadron Commanders perspective, and yeah, Gerry would be a good guy for the persepective. I have plans to be there in August, and take the long 30 min drive from my house to the event, (Sarc back on) It will be hardship, but anything for CAP!
Quote from: Earhart1971 on May 27, 2008, 12:54:21 AM
And I nominate LCOL GERRY LEVESQUE, the Commander of the Largest CAP SQUADRON to the Board.
Largest does not necessarily equate BEST. Many factors go into making a great SQD, not just numbers.
Im just going to say that this piece that NHQ leaves something to be desired.
I DO however believe that it is a sure step in the right direction.
Colgan for President
Quote from: mikeylikey on May 27, 2008, 03:11:59 AM
Quote from: Earhart1971 on May 27, 2008, 12:54:21 AM
And I nominate LCOL GERRY LEVESQUE, the Commander of the Largest CAP SQUADRON to the Board.
Largest does not necessarily equate BEST. Many factors go into making a great SQD, not just numbers.
In this case, this Squadron is one of the Best and I know a little about what he is doing, and Gerry has been at National, and he is well respected there.
And if what I have heard is true, Gerry does have the best Squadron for what he does.
Quote from: Earhart1971 on May 27, 2008, 04:00:23 AM
Quote from: mikeylikey on May 27, 2008, 03:11:59 AM
Quote from: Earhart1971 on May 27, 2008, 12:54:21 AM
And I nominate LCOL GERRY LEVESQUE, the Commander of the Largest CAP SQUADRON to the Board.
Largest does not necessarily equate BEST. Many factors go into making a great SQD, not just numbers.
In this case, this Squadron is one of the Best and I know a little about what he is doing, and Gerry has been at National, and he is well respected there.
And if what I have heard is true, Gerry does have the best Squadron for what he does.
Is this the guy with like 260 Cadets in a School SQD in Texas??
If so, School Initiative is a different beast than commanding a regular SQD.
yes it is, but he's real Army Reserve Col & very squared away individual. He was previously on NHQ staff, and had some trouble if I recall correctly with the way the DDR money was being accounted for. That pretty much stitched up his career & he reverted to the Sq level, where we all appreciate his excellent leadership, even if we never see him around anymore.
Quote from: DNall on May 27, 2008, 11:38:27 PM
yes it is, but he's real Army Reserve Col & very squared away individual. He was previously on NHQ staff, and had some trouble if I recall correctly with the way the DDR money was being accounted for. That pretty much stitched up his career & he reverted to the Sq level, where we all appreciate his excellent leadership, even if we never see him around anymore.
Squadron Level is were everybody should stay.
It'd be a pretty jacked up organization (moreso than now anyway) with no leadership/chain of command above Sq.
Quote from: Earhart1971 on May 29, 2008, 07:18:53 AM
Squadron Level is were everybody should stay.
And it is because so many people share this opinion, that (some) wings/groups don't have enough staff to help the squadrons and perform the duties required for their area at wing. Therefore squadrons complain that wing doesn't help them. And we get into this vicious spiral where "wing doesn't do anything, so why would I want to be at wing". I would like to see a squadron organize wing-level activities, but then we run into a bigger issue of favoritism, because commander's know the cadets from their own area better. The bigger squadrons would eat the smaller ones.
That, and who would disburse o-flight money?
That's the primary reason I was offered Director of Cadet Programs a couple months
before I turned senior,
because everyone should stay at the squadron. If we didn't have someone in my position, there would have been no wing cadet competition, no cadet activities at wing conference, region cadet comp would have been elsewhere, we wouldn't have an encampment, let alone the region one, and I wouldn't be working to develop a curriculum for airman/nco to add to our wing level training weekend.
If squadrons would get over themselves and see that wings have responsbilities too that require people to work
and can help the squadrons, then this job would be a lot easier. If you don't think levels above squadrons do anything, read here: http://level2.cap.gov/documents/CI_Guide.pdf <--This is what wings get inspected on every 3 years.
Finally, if there was no one above the squadron level, who would help out the squadrons that are 3 hours away from the nearest squadron, and 6 hours from a squadron with more than 3 active seniors? Squadrons are competitive entities for the most part.
[/end rant]
Quote from: kpetersen on May 29, 2008, 05:58:57 PM
Quote from: Earhart1971 on May 29, 2008, 07:18:53 AM
Squadron Level is were everybody should stay.
And it is because so many people share this opinion, that (some) wings/groups don't have enough staff to help the squadrons and perform the duties required for their area at wing. Therefore squadrons complain that wing doesn't help them. And we get into this vicious spiral where "wing doesn't do anything, so why would I want to be at wing". I would like to see a squadron organize wing-level activities, but then we run into a bigger issue of favoritism, because commander's know the cadets from their own area better. The bigger squadrons would eat the smaller ones.
That, and who would disburse o-flight money?
That's the primary reason I was offered Director of Cadet Programs a couple months before I turned senior, because everyone should stay at the squadron. If we didn't have someone in my position, there would have been no wing cadet competition, no cadet activities at wing conference, region cadet comp would have been elsewhere, we wouldn't have an encampment, let alone the region one, and I wouldn't be working to develop a curriculum for airman/nco to add to our wing level training weekend.
If squadrons would get over themselves and see that wings have responsbilities too that require people to work and can help the squadrons, then this job would be a lot easier. If you don't think levels above squadrons do anything, read here: http://level2.cap.gov/documents/CI_Guide.pdf <--This is what wings get inspected on every 3 years.
Finally, if there was no one above the squadron level, who would help out the squadrons that are 3 hours away from the nearest squadron, and 6 hours from a squadron with more than 3 active seniors? Squadrons are competitive entities for the most part.
[/end rant]
VERY well said.
Quote from: kpetersen on May 29, 2008, 05:58:57 PM
That's the primary reason I was offered Director of Cadet Programs a couple months before I turned senior, because everyone should stay at the squadron. If we didn't have someone in my position, there would have been no wing cadet competition, no cadet activities at wing conference, region cadet comp would have been elsewhere, we wouldn't have an encampment, let alone the region one, and I wouldn't be working to develop a curriculum for airman/nco to add to our wing level training weekend.
OR Maybe someone thought that a SPAATZ Cadet would be capable of taking on the responsibility of running a Cadet Program Wing wide?? You know the program, you were there, you've done it, and actually enjoy serving CAP for reasons other than personal needs (i.e get access to military bases etc). Plus, you were willing to make the leap over to the Office side of the house. WE need more members like you! We need more Cadets like you as well.
^ I made many assumptions about you. All for the positive though!! :)
As Kat's Chief of Staff I'll second everything she said above, plus add that every section of CAP is in the same boat as CP. Without good people at Wing HQ in Operations, Professional Development, Logistics, Admin/Personnel (plus any others I've forgotten) the units suffer for it.
The problem is compounded by a couple of other issues. Higher HQ sets up the organization as though we have dozens of highly qualified and frequently available officers at all levels to run things. In a smaller Wing such as ours, we are constantly and critically short of help. When all but a couple of the Squadrons are staffed by a precious few people who wear multiple hats at that Squadron (the case with most/all of our more rural units), it makes it very hard for me to recruit folks to come up to wing. I'm forced to go back to the well staffed units again and again, which understandably causes resentment.
To get this post back on the topic of the thread, I'll say that all the flowery "Strategic Plan(s) and Vision(s)" you want to dream up are pretty much worthless if you have nobody to step up and do the hard work it takes to make "Visions" even begin to meet reality. Making the "vision" is actually the easy part (anyone can daydream about what the Utopia Composite Squadron would be like). Executing is where it counts, and where we frequently fall down.
Quote from: DNall on May 29, 2008, 04:20:34 PM
It'd be a pretty jacked up organization (moreso than now anyway) with no leadership/chain of command above Sq.
Chain of Command is fine, but think about it, does a Wing Commander really have a Command? Or is the Wing Commander attempting to steer a ship with no rudder?
Or is a Wing Commander trying to heard cats?
Cannot explain the background of why, but Wing and National have not been very attentive to his Unit, wonder why? (Levesques Squadron).
I have been a Squadron Commander twice, other than doing reports and getting them in on time to the Pwrs that be, there is not much support for a Unit.
His squadron is self supporting, and its an island in the sea of CAP.
Quote from: Earhart1971 on May 31, 2008, 05:02:18 AM
His squadron is self supporting, and its an island in the sea of CAP.
EVERY squadron is self-supporting... unless of course you're in a CAP I'm not familiar with.
Quote from: M.S. on May 31, 2008, 06:21:11 AM
Quote from: Earhart1971 on May 31, 2008, 05:02:18 AM
His squadron is self supporting, and its an island in the sea of CAP.
EVERY squadron is self-supporting... unless of course you're in a CAP I'm not familiar with.
It must be different than yours. In my CAP, I'm supporting the ES program in two squadrons, and supporting the professional development in two other squadrons (one of which is not in my wing). If a squadron doesn't have the resources to do it themselves, they have to go for outside help.
This video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kamupm9rjuI of the National Chief of Staff speaking at the NCR conference discusses this issue and the presentation has slightly different wording from what was given in the Volunteer.
So has a copy of this STARTPLAN actually been published/ posted (even a draft)? It would be helpful to crosswalk it against those of subordinate units (if yours has one) to determine alignment
Quote from: RiverAux on May 19, 2008, 08:48:14 PM
I'm sure the whole plan will be released at some point.
Perhaps I was way over-optimistic as to my knowledge, our "strategic plan" has yet to be released, unless the column in the Volunteer represented the plan. I note that in the last BoG meeting MG Courter cited the strategic plan, so it must be around somewhere.
Anyone seen it?
It appears there is nothing but objectives. Back to the orignal objectives stated by the BOG or the NB:
• Provide quality training;
• Build public trust;
• Brand CAP as a resource of choice;
• Promote the value and significance of CAP's Cadet Program;
• Promote the talent and opportunities of our adult membership;
• Brand CAP as a national aerospace education leader;
• Establish public awareness of CAP's missions;
• Communicate CAP's financial needs and benefits; and
• Brand CAP as a volunteer organization of choice.
I think all above would be driven by MONEY and Budget, last time I checked we were fighting for the status quo on money and budget.
So somebody needs to come up with the sales pitch to Congress to get us were we want to go.
Quote from: Gunner C on May 26, 2008, 11:16:33 AM
"A goal without a date is just a wish."
Gunner's Rules of Life and Combat #9
As I said two years ago, it's just a wish. All smoke, no mirrors.