Proposal in the mix: New Restricted Application: Member Attendance

[Tim Medeiros]

I've been thinking lately, mostly sparked by Col Hodgkins comments regarding the need to determine the activeness of our membership.

One way we could do this is have a restricted application in eServices specifically for tracking the attendance of our members, cadet and senior.  I would imagine a report module that would include a report on the percentages of attendance/activeness, percentage of active members within the unit, activeness by month/grade/etc, and more that have yet to come across my mind.  I would also think there could be a section for the addition of meetings and activities (two different catagories), as well as a "bulk update" where the commander or designee could simply select a meeting or activity they are taking attendance for, click a checkbox to select all members and mark them as "present" much like a program my school uses.

I think this would be a good tool for commanders at all levels, as well it could tie in with the Cadet Training and Promotions application that is currently being tested, as well as the online testing system that is being proposed in the Cadet Programs Proving Grounds.  In regards to the latter, a friend expressed concern that a cadet could take a test for a promotion without even having attended a meeting.

I was hoping to guage the opinion of the membership of CAPTalk to see how this would be received, and perhaps flesh out any problems.

[smj58501]

You can do this in SIMS if you want now. With that said the closer we can get to one centralized site )eServices) to track all the info we need on our members the better. I am for this.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I used to have to do a DA form 1379 payroll report after every weekend drill.  It is a Royal PITA! 

Consider that we not only have our regular meetings, but special training, exercises, inspection visits, etc.

Capturing this data would be a nightmare.

But, that being said, I like the idea.  I just don't know how this could be done without placing an unreasonable burden on the already-burdened local units.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Maybe a "Monthly activity log" maintained by the member, and electronically certified by the unit CC.

Everyone enters the date, the activity, mileage, and number of hours spent on an activity.  Monthly it is submitted to the commander, who certifies it and enters it in the national DB.

This would also help keep members' records on tax deductable expenses.

[RiverAux]

That won't work.  CG Aux has members report their own time and 25-50% never bother reporting time spent at meetings.  If this were to be done, it would need to be the responsibility of the squadron commander or personnel officer. 

[Pylon]

Extra administrative work for every squadron, every week just because National wants to get a better feel for some statistics?   No thanks.

We already track all attendance in SIMS.  I'm already required to report attendance at safety briefings to Group and Wing (and 952 other routine "Safety" reporting requirements, which IMHO are ridiculous).   I don't need another superfluous administrative requirement to complete.

How many units won't bother to report at all?  And What about units with no internet access at the meeting location?  Now attendance has to be recorded in one spot, taken home by a member, and then inputted into E-Services?  Again, no thanks. 

I am way too tired of echelons-above-reality creating meaningless administrative busy work for volunteers at the squadron level.  There's way too much of it as it is.

With all of the variables that would likely happen with such a system anyway, National could get a much better (and likely more accurate) feel by using a statistician to examine the attendance records of a select cross-section of CAP units and extrapolate the data. 

[Tim Medeiros]

If you already track this in SIMS, whats the difference from putting it into an eServices application which can be even more useful to those echelons-above-reality?  As well, whos to say that safety briefings can't be tracked by this?

[RiverAux]

Personally, I have tracked squadron meeting attendence for my own interest, but it isn't anything that is of any use to anybody outside the unit.   

[Tim Medeiros]

If its of no use to anyone outside the unit why is CAP-USAF/CC saying we need to find out who is active and isnt?  If we keep saying we have 55k members but we don't say how many are active how are we actually portraying ourselves to our customers?  Kind of *in a stretch maybe* goes against our core value of integrity it seems

[RiverAux]

The AF has no need to know and doesn't care who is attending meetings.  That has no bearing on anything.  They want to know who is active enough in the ES program to maintain their qualifications, all of it is easily available. 

[Pylon]

If you already track this in SIMS, whats the difference from putting it into an eServices application which can be even more useful to those echelons-above-reality?

A.  Because, in order to track everything properly, I'll still need to enter my attendance into SIMS, too.  You're just doubling the entry work.

B.  Not every unit uses a system like SIMS anyways.  There will still be plenty of units who won't/can't use the online attendance system.

C.  Re-read my point above about National having a much better chance at getting the most accurate information through a sampling and statistical analysis.

D.  This is still administrative work for the sake of administrative work.

E.  Even if every squadron in the nation regularly entered in accurate attendance for every CAP function ever, what would be the benefit to NHQ?   Knowing how many members really show up to meetings is going to assist them with which strategic plans?

  As well, whos to say that safety briefings can't be tracked by this?

Well all know that paperless solutions rarely eliminate the paper behind them. 

For example,  We've got MIMS to track progression towards ES ratings... completion of tasks, commander approvals, and all that.   Guess what?  My group still requires that paper SQTRs are filled out, signed, and CAPF 100's are filled out signed, attached to the paper SQTR and sent up the chain of command for the rating to be approved (in MIMS, which is showing identical data) at Group level.   MIMS was supposed to reduce and/or eliminate all that paperwork.  Instead, I just have twice the work.

[MIKE]

That won't work.  CG Aux has members report their own time and 25-50% never bother reporting time spent at meetings. 

I log mine... 'cause when I hit 750 hours, I get a ribbon.   

[RiverAux]

Me too, but we're "special".

[Tim Medeiros]

If you already track this in SIMS, whats the difference from putting it into an eServices application which can be even more useful to those echelons-above-reality?

A.  Because, in order to track everything properly, I'll still need to enter my attendance into SIMS, too.  You're just doubling the entry work.

B.  Not every unit uses a system like SIMS anyways.  There will still be plenty of units who won't/can't use the online attendance system.

C.  Re-read my point above about National having a much better chance at getting the most accurate information through a sampling and statistical analysis.

D.  This is still administrative work for the sake of administrative work.

E.  Even if every squadron in the nation regularly entered in accurate attendance for every CAP function ever, what would be the benefit to NHQ?   Knowing how many members really show up to meetings is going to assist them with which strategic plans?

I'll agree those points are valid, in regards to point A, what if this can be developed like the attendance section in SIMS? 

In regards to point C, how would National gather the data in the selected units?  What if those selected units see tracking attendance as administrative work for the sake of administrative work?  Doesn't become very accurate then. 

In regards to point D, it may be administrative work for the sake of the same, however shouldn't units be taking attendance anyway so the commander can guage who exactly is active and isn't?  If a unit isn't taking attendance then how would the unit commander be able to guage trends in their members?

As for assisting NHQ with strategic plans, it would be nice to know what exactly they are in order to see how accurate attendance tracking would benefit them.  The closest thing I've seen to a strategic plan is the call for a "paperless system".

  As well, whos to say that safety briefings can't be tracked by this?

Well all know that paperless solutions rarely eliminate the paper behind them. 

For example,  We've got MIMS to track progression towards ES ratings... completion of tasks, commander approvals, and all that.   Guess what?  My group still requires that paper SQTRs are filled out, signed, and CAPF 100's are filled out signed, attached to the paper SQTR and sent up the chain of command for the rating to be approved (in MIMS, which is showing identical data) at Group level.   MIMS was supposed to reduce and/or eliminate all that paperwork.  Instead, I just have twice the work.

Frankly, to me it seems your group simply doesn't want to update their practices to current methodology.  The group in which I reside does request paper SQTRs (at least they did with the previous commander) however we didn't require 100s and the like.  From my unexperienced side of the fence (emphasis on unexperienced) it seems that most people are very reluctant to rely on computers to store information, and rightly so in most cases, however some of the time I seem to get the feeling that it is more of a fear of change than fear of loss of data.  Kind of like "we used to do it this why, so thats how we're going to do it" type of deal.


Another thing that I had a thought of in regards to this possible proposal, it may be possible to track conference attendance needed for level 3, just a random thought in the middle of dinner.

It may seem like I'm trying to create administrative work for the heck of it, but some of us here already do this sort of stuff with SIMS.  I'm of the opinion that if SIMS can do it, theres no reason why eServices can't, things that I've seen people talk about on here such as tracking of ribbons and awards, attendance, CPFT entry, test entry (according to the white paper on online cadet testing this is a very real possibility in the next year or so), tracking of past duty positions complete with dates, past levels in specialty tracks, etc.  I believe in the potential power of eServices, and feel that in order for it to reach its potential we as members need to voice our needs and desires, not just to eachother as we do on here, but to the echelons-above-reality.

Now I'll sit here and wait for the comments about youthful ignorance and such 

[RiverAux]

I think you'll probably find a lot of support for many of the other ideas that you mentioned, but not for tracking attendance. 

[RiverAux]

Now, I think a very reasonable case could be made for individual tracking of member participation in ES missions.  Right now I know that in our wing that the number of personnel and man-hours reported to the AFRCC are probably pretty inaccurate, especially on larger missions. 

Knowing exactly how much member time goes into a search (and not just flight hours) can potentially be a very valuable piece of information when asking for funding from various agencies. 

Also, if it could be linked into the training qualification system it could make it a bit easier to renew your qualifications since your mission records would already be in the system. 

[smj58501]

Whoa.... who said this application would be to solely appease NHQ? I saw it primarily as a way for lowly sqdn cdrs like myself to track participation so I have facts to base a few decisions on.

Not everything on eServices should be/ is there to keep the information monsters above us happy.... a good similar example is the mission availability tool. My members or I can go in and input availability by day.... makes it real easy to plan crews days into the future as needed. An attendance tracker would be no different.

Also, use of this tool should be voluntary, just like the mission availability one. Its there if you want it.... otherwise carry on as you were.

The nice thing about an eServices app is it would be web based and it could be accessed from any computer. With SIMS I need to do a download onto one computer and do the updates myself.

[Eclipse]

This would get my vote.

I love SIMs, but anything that moves to eServices is my preference.  Not only are the apps available
anywhere you have internet (including your phone), but they live beyond the current commander and are available to every echelon.

[RiverAux]

There are much easier ways for squadrons to track attendenance than doing data entry on a computer.  Heck, knowing the way eservices is set up, I doubt anything there would be user friendly and other computer-based options would probably be easier.  An excel spreadsheet worked great for me.  Heck, the old grease-pencil chart on the wall works pretty good too. 

[Tim Medeiros]

Heck, knowing the way eservices is set up, I doubt anything there would be user friendly

Why not provide feedback to NHQ/IT in regards to this?  We are their customers, the only way they know something isn't working or isn't user friendly is if the people who are having problems tells them.  Its like a webmaster who has a high-speed connection tries to incorporate a website with flash and tons of graphics, while their end user only has a dial-up connection.  Only way that webmaster is going to get a clue that he needs a low-speed version of the website is if that user speaks up.  I guarantee nothing will change if we keep quite, if we speak up to those that can affect change, change just may happen.