Getting a "Great Start"

[NIN]

(I've posted this same topic over at CadetStuff, BTW.  Comments here are welcome as well..)


I got this via email recently. Its a draft of a program proposed by Cadet Programs at National Headquarters called Cadet Great Start Orientation & Training.  Developed by NHQ's Cadet Team, this DRAFT (can I say it again?  DRAFT!) is circulated here for discussion and comment.

(Click the link above, or the image above, to download the 1.5mb PDF file from CadetStuff)

If you're familiar at all with the senior members' Great Start program, you'll find this one to be similar in that it involves lots of mentoring, includes detailed checklists, and (hopefully) is very user-friendly. But because the Cadet Program is more structured and formal than the senior PD program, the attached booklet is much more comprehensive than the seniors' version.

It's obvious that units want and need a structured method for welcoming new members, motivating them to join CAP, and then providing them with the training they need to meet Achievement 1 standards and pin-on C/Amn. 

Here is a brief overview, in a nutshell:

• Intended for use at squadron level, but also can be run at group or wing
     
• Includes a brief module discussing how to prepare the cadet staff, train the instructors, etc.
     
• 5-week program begins with an open house, with "Open House 101" materials included
     
• Week #1 is the orientation phase and answers the question "What's exciting about Cadet Programs?"
     
• Weeks #2-#5 comprise the training phase, introducing cadets to all 5 elements of the Cadet Program
     
• Detailed, recipe-like lesson plans provide a standard, ready-to-go curriculum (of course, units are welcome to tweak it)
     
• About 80% of the training is designed to be taught by cadet officers and NCOs, under senior guidance
     
• An introductory briefing for parents, to be lead by the unit commander, is included
     
• Whenever possible, lesson plans call for hands-on or interactive activities, versus passive lectures
     
• The course concludes with graduation, promotion to C/Amn, and orientation flight
  

Perhaps the biggest innovation about Cadet Great Start is that it calls for a cultural change in how units "indoctrinate" cadets. It advocates that units should host a couple open houses during the year, and for all prospective cadets to enter the "pipeline" at that time.

Presently, it appears that 95% of units use a "trickle-in" approach, where youth can join at any time. After careful consideration, the Cadet Team believes that "trickle-in" sets the new cadets up for failure because it does not provide them with a structured, comprehensive introduction to cadet life.  Key to this program's success is getting the squadrons to buy-in to the "pipeline" approach.  Read the preface for more information.

Please, provide input here in the forums so that the folks at NHQ can glean some "real world" input from the field. Here is your chance to have some National-level impact.  Remember, this is merely a DRAFT of the Cadet Great Start guide and not a final product.

(But for grins, my unit is field testing it)

[Major Carrales]

What I would benefit from would be a new version of the"HOW TO START a CIVIL AIR PATROL UNIT" that concentrates on CADET SQUADRONS.  Almost like a rubric...especially for civic minded people that want to start cadet programs in isolated areas.

Was quoting the entire post just above yours really necessary? - MIKE

[MIKE]

Perhaps the biggest innovation about Cadet Great Start is that it calls for a cultural change in how units "indoctrinate" cadets. It advocates that units should host a couple open houses during the year, and for all prospective cadets to enter the "pipeline" at that time.

Presently, it appears that 95% of units use a "trickle-in" approach, where youth can join at any time. After careful consideration, the Cadet Team believes that "trickle-in" sets the new cadets up for failure because it does not provide them with a structured, comprehensive introduction to cadet life.  Key to this program's success is getting the squadrons to buy-in to the "pipeline" approach.  Read the preface for more information.

I'd say it depends.  I've been on both sides of this issue and have actually seen trickle in work for a unit... Whereas, recruit two or three at a quarterly Open House has not done so well in the recent past.

[carnold1836]

I see this as being a benefit whether you use the "Trickle-in" method or you use "pipe-line" method. This gives a good frame work that a mentor (read cadet officer or senior officer) can use to get the new cadets a footing on the program. especially when it seems for national to take for ever to send out the cadet's books. I have some cadets that have been in for 3 months now and don't have their books yet.

I plan on using this to great effect with some modifications appropriate for my squadron.

[NIN]

I'd say it depends.  I've been on both sides of this issue and have actually seen trickle in work for a unit... Whereas, recruit two or three at a quarterly Open House has not done so well in the recent past.

To which I say "You're probably not doing it right."

We have gotten, consistently, 12-16 cadets per twice yearly open house.   We pipeline, and have done so effectively since January of 2001.

As a matter of fact, in November of 2005, I helped run my unit inprocessing night (where we take all the pipelined cadets and run them thru a "mobilization-style" inprocessing,. including CAPF 15 creation and signing, uniform sizing, membership board, BDU issue, etc), and we had a young lady show up who was highly motivated to join and yet hadn't been to the "minimum three meetings" to turn in her paperwork. She hadn't been to the open house, nor to any of the meetings between the open house and the inprocessing night.

Her and her mom sat and did the paperwork right there, and I told the CC "Sir, I don't think this is a good idea. We have a policy, we have a set of standards, and we've just thrown those out the window if we accept this cadet's application without her having been to at least three meetings.."  He waved his hand at me and said "Nah, it'll be alright.."  So, being the good staff officer I am, I saluted, said "Yes, sir!" and processed this young lady's paperwork.  She dropped out two weeks later.

Our policy is this:

1) We have a "new member period" that starts the week before the unit open house and extends to the inprocessing night.  Potential new members may come to the unit and get an application packet that week before, the week of the open house, or the two weeks after the open house. After that, we stop handing out packets and if someone comes in, we hand them a flyer with the info for the next open house & new member period, or we get their information to send them a flyer closer to the next one, and thank them for coming by.

2) We inprocess all our new members at the same time, on the same night.   They come with a form filled out that closely mirrors the data on the CAPF 15 & CAPF 12, we enter that data into our "unit database" and then print out the CAPF 12 or CAPF 15, and we have some addtional agreements (Liberally stolen from your unit, Mike, including the uniform return agreement) that they sign along with their parents. We collect $26 from them in National dues, and $50 in a check to the squadron for "doo dads" for their uniforms. They go to the squadron membership committee and are poked and prodded for suitability and retainability.  Cadets are sized for their blues and issued a set of BDUs.  Then they go back to their cadet training group.  This sort of "cohort model" provides great support, binds the basic cadets together into a small unit within the unit, and really gives them a sense of belonging to something VERY early on in the process.

3) All these cadets go thru basic training (now we'll be using a modified version of Great Start) at the same time, and graduate at the same time.  If they have passed the tests for Curry, they get promoted. If they have not, they still graduate, and its up to their flight staff to mentor them thru the parts of the Curry they missed.

We've found that it works. It works well. Our retention is high and our basic cadets are "mutually supporting" of each other when they're in basic training.

[Monty]

What I would benefit from would be a new version of the"HOW TO START a CIVIL AIR PATROL UNIT" that concentrates on CADET SQUADRONS.  Almost like a rubric...especially for civic minded people that want to start cadet programs in isolated areas.

I swear I'm not meaning to attack you....  Dude...you're a squadron commander (don't know if you have groups) with auto-access to the man/woman that is your mentor: wing commander or group commander (as appropriate.)

You're a teacher by trade, a CAP Major with all that mentoring and training...  I'd expect a TFO to really look for "how to" pubs, but not a seasoned CAP "vet."  Surely after all the years and training you've endured, you know plenty of successful CAP comrades to supplement whatever gaps you may have, especially when such comrades are local and more adept at tackling area-specific issues that a nation-wide publication could never address.

Seriously, man!  All these pubs and CAPTalk forums are great....but the stuff that REALLY kicks butt is H-U-M-A-N mentor/protege relationships.  Get off the forums, call up your CAP boss, and work together.  Never met a wing commander or group commander that DIDN'T want to help one of his/her people....

<ring ring> "Hey boss....yeah it's Joe, how are you.....you want a new squadron, right?  First of all, what things do you NEED to have covered to make it legit...okay, what KIND of squadron do you feel the group/wing needs: cadet, composite, of senior?  Cool, what are you doing two weeks from now....want to meet some people to give us a hand?  GREAT....who do you think we should meet?  Okay, sounds good....yeah, I'll buy lunch.....see you then...okay.....hasta."  <click>

You sell your boss on what THEY need - not the fact that YOU want a cadet squadron - and once he/she is sold, the MENTOR is ready to make things happen and you learn side-by-side.  After all, it's what's best for the WING, not Joe, right?     (PS - You'll probably get a cadet squadron out of the deal anyway....kids are an easier sell - as are their folks - than us grumpy old men.)

I swear it'll work....I've not done as much as I have in my CAP experience by relying on forums.  (They supplement....nothing more.)

[CAP428]

WHOA!!  This is deja vu, and it's freakin' me out!!


I was working on a publication almost IDENTICAL to this one.  If you'll look through the past threads, you'll find one by me that asks what you would want cadets to learn in a broad, introductory overview of CAP.

The purpose was to make, basically, this.



What's even weirder....I was going to superimpose a semi-transparent image of cadet insignia.


Absolutely no joke:  I'm serious.  This is quite funny, and surprising that ideas could be so nearly identical without any collaboration between the persons.


Just thought it was funny....

[arajca]

Without conscious collaboration on your part, perhaps. Reportedly, several folks from the DeathstarCAP NHQ cruise this forum. They may have seen your thread and decided to run with it.

[NIN]

*bump*

[DNall]

I'm still trying to get some time to go thru it better. From what I've seen so far about half of it covers the recruiting process. Which needs to be covered. As far as the initial training process, I think a mre military approach is ncessary up front. I like the BCT method, but you do have to follow it up in the local program. What I try to do its the same kind of BCT program spread over a quarter. I like the publication in general though & would favor some standardization on this front.

[carnold1836]

With some further study it looks like it would work well for an ALS. I was the PO this past weekend for TXWG Group III's ALS and I think this could definitely be implemented to a fair extent.

As for the pipline method and turning potential cadets away because they came to visit your squadron "to late" in your cycle is bad judgement in my opinion. I will never turn a potential member away. That being said anyone that visits my squadron has to visit at least 3 Thursday night meetings (3.5 hours each) or at least 2 Saturday all day meetings (8 hours each) before we will accept their application. This stands for both cadets and senior officers. just my opinion, ymmv.

[NIN]

As for the pipline method and turning potential cadets away because they came to visit your squadron "to late" in your cycle is bad judgement in my opinion. I will never turn a potential member away. That being said anyone that visits my squadron has to visit at least 3 Thursday night meetings (3.5 hours each) or at least 2 Saturday all day meetings (8 hours each) before we will accept their application. This stands for both cadets and senior officers. just my opinion, ymmv.

YMMV, indeed.

Speaking as a unit that has done the "pipeline" approach since 2001, I can tell you this:

1) It improves retention. Your new cadets are part of an identifiable group within your group. They become self supporting and self-encouraging in that regard. And everybody is getting the same attention (versus "You just walked in today, I have these other three cadets here who have been here for six weeks..")

2) It helps concentrate recruiting and (for lack of a better term) "induction" efforts into manageable opportunities.  Would your supply officer rather deal with 1-2 new people every couple weeks, or 15 new people twice a year?  How about your personnel officer?  Recruiting & retention?  Membership committee?  Do you really want to be convening your membership committee every couple weeks for just one new guy?  How inefficient is that?

3) Training needs are reduced and optimized: How thin do you spread your training resources when you have a new guy walking in the door every couple weeks who needs to be "indoctrinated."  Economy of scale is important here.

We have, since 2001, consistently recruited 14-16 (and sometimes as many as 18) new cadets per twice-yearly open house.  The retention rate on these cadets runs closer to 60 percent, and in any event is MUCH higher than the retention rate on cadets as admitted to by NHQ. 

We recruit, "induct" (again, for lack of a better term.. we call it "inprocessing night," but its truly an "induction."), train and graduate our cadets twice a year.  That's it.

You walk in my meeting this week, you're in luck: This week is my unit's open house and recruiting night for the spring.  I've been working for 2 months on PR, flyers, press releases, announcements, TV shows, etc, all leading up to this night.

You walk in my meeting next week, you're still in luck.  One of my officers or I will give you the dimestore tour, the abbreviated version of the "dog & pony show," and you'll still get a membership packet to take home and read and fill out.

Come in the week after that, and this particular go-around you'd be out of luck (we normally give a little more time, we had some schedule issues this spring that couldn't be helped, so we're going to see how the shorter period works out...).  We'll hand you a flyer for the next open house in October, or we'll get your name and address and send you a flyer a few weeks before the next event.  Show you around, let you ask questions, but you're not joining that night. Nope. That's "inprocessing night" where we're inputting everybody's info into the database, printing out the forms, getting mom or dad to sign, running people thru the membership board, issuing BDUs, taking checks, measuring for blues, etc, etc, etc.

Now, and here is one of the PRIME reasons that it seems that pipelining REALLY works:  Interest and buy-in. 

When we first started doing it, my friend Lt Col Matt Johnson (then Capt Matt Johnson) of the San Francisco Cadet Squadron, called me crazy.

"You turn people away?! Are you nuts?"

I didn't have any empiracle evidence or data to back up my hunch that this would work. I just had a hunch.  remember, this is the spring of 2001.

"We can't afford to turn people away!"

He had about the same number of cadets and seniors active in his unit that I did when I took over my squadron in November of 1999 (about a dozen-ish cadets, and about a small handful of seniors).

After 3 years of "pipelining" we had 60+ cadets and between 14 and 18 active seniors.  And we were retaining just fine.

The crystalization of this concept finally hit when I made a startling realization:: "If you turn someone away on the 29th of March, and tell them they have to come back on the 11th of October, and they don't ever come back, exactly what kind of a 'quality' member were they going to be anyway? Conversely, if you turn someone away on the 29th of March and they DO come back on 11 October, don't you think that particular person is one highly motivated individual?"

I'm serious here: We've proven that Civil Air Patrol has a retention problem.  The "easy go" part of "easy come, easy go" has come true!  So why continue to make it so easy to become a member that "not" becoming a member is just as easy? 

I will tell you this as plain as the nose on my face: this process works.

And don't tell me "We're too small to turn people away." That's BS.  If you're that small, can't afford NOT to turn people away and pipeline.   If you're that small of a unit, you don't have the training resources, time, energy and effort to deal with onesie-twosie members wandering in and out.  Part of the reason they're wandering out is that its TOO EASY or they're not made to feel like a member first off.  Whoops. Big red flag there.

But if you say to them "Hey, sorry, can't take you right now. Its June, we're doing a whole new member thing in October, with training and everything. Can you come back then?  Here, here's a flyer..." and they DO come back, you're just that much further ahead. You've just unknowingly inculcated the concepts of "good things come to those who wait" and "we care enough about our members to want to put the absolute best training forth for them so they have the best opportunity to succeed" into them from the very beginning of their association with our fine organization.

I'm serious as a myocardial infarction: It works.

[carnold1836]

I'm not saying that we are to small to turn someone away, we have about 25 cadets regularly attending meetings right now. That is up from 9 a year ago. As for senior officers we have 15 coming on a regular basis as well up from 4 a year ago.

As for all the logistics, we must be doing something right. Our Logistics Officer was not only Group logistics officer of the year but Wing logistician of the year as well. We have a good suply of both blues and BDUs of most sizes and we can get someone fully uniformed the night/day they turn in their paper work.

I'm truly glad your program works but I don't think it will work for everyone everywhere. Would it work at my squadron, maybe. But it seems our program is working well also.

[RiverAux]

I think both ways can work, the question is which takes the least effort?  Unfortunately, you would need a much bigger sample size than we can get from folks on this board.  We've got well over a thousand squadrons, so it should be possible to find a good number of "pipeline" units that could be compared against "individual recruitment" units in cities of similar size in terms of recruitment and retention. 

[NIN]

I think both ways can work, the question is which takes the least effort?  Unfortunately, you would need a much bigger sample size than we can get from folks on this board.  We've got well over a thousand squadrons, so it should be possible to find a good number of "pipeline" units that could be compared against "individual recruitment" units in cities of similar size in terms of recruitment and retention. 

While I don't disagree,  I will say this:

I've been in (counts in his head) five squadrons in the 26 years I've been in CAP.  Four cadet squadrons and a composite squadron (well, two, since I moved my cadet squadron to a composite squadron in 1997 when we absorbed a senior squadron).  And I've been to and visited countless other units both as a group cadet programs officer and a Wing Director of Cadet Programs. 

Until 2001, every unit I had ever seen was of the "trickle-in" variety, and the common problem always seemed that you could never devote enough time, personnel, resources or effort to *properly* indoctrinate your cadets into CAP and then get them into a flight where they can get that hands on direct leadership to move them forward.   It seemed you were always dealing with several cadets, none of whom were at the same point in the training. 

Using my unit as an example: In 2000, we were trickling in, and we had a cadet who had joined in August or September.  We had an open house in October, recruited a bunch of cadets, kicked off a basic training class, and went forward. Well, the August cadet sort of fell thru the cracks (inconsistent showing up, etc) and then we had a boatload of newbies show up over the course of several weeks.

So we started with 3 or 4 cadets the week after the open house, then 4 or 5 more showed up over the next couple three weeks, and by the end of November we had 12 or so cadets "in training," but nearly none of them were "at the same level" as the next.   Between starting at different times and missed meetings, everybody was doing a "tail chase" with their training. And our August cadet was still floating around, half-trained, while other cadets were taking their Curry test after having been to only 3 or 4 meetings. It was all over the map.  Cadets were getting frustrated having to sit thru a class that they sat thru two weeks before because half the cadets hadn't been thru it, etc.

(To be fair, my DCC at the time was not doing a good job of managing this, either. That wasn't helping matters much, and I was pretty busy trying to keep the "whole squadron" working, so CBT and new cadets were not high on my radar screen as long as the DCC was on top of it, which I soon discovered he was not..)

So here we were, 5-6 cadets taking the Curry in December's testing night, the August cadet is in tears because he can't figure out what he's supposed to be doing and nobody to help him get thru his drill test or something, I have cadets pinning on Airman right at the 30 day mark and cadets who should be A1C still looking at dual cutouts.  It was CRAZY.  And we STILL had people trickling in the door from the October recruiting, and we were already planning our January recruiting night (we were doing three a year at that point).  We wound up with 14 cadets from that recruiting event, so you can imagine that they were flying at us pretty continuously.

Finally about the 2nd week in December I put my foot down. "Anybody comes in the door this week, we give them a flyer and tell them to come back next month. Period."

My DCC thought I was nuts.  "Turn someone away? Are you crazy?"

"Look, its only for a couple weeks.  We give them a flyer and send them packing. If they come back, great. If they don't, no harm, no foul."

He thought I was nuts, but saluted, said "yes, sir!" and did what I asked. So we handed out flyers for to new people instead of paperwork, and our experiment with "pipelining" was born.

We held two more open houses that year (April or May, and then October, again, which is detailed in this article on CadetStuff), recruiting about 55 new members that year (9/11 didn't hurt us).

It was in 2002 that we went to our designated "inprocessing night" where we do the paperwork, membership board, uniform sizing and issue, etc.  You get a membership packet on Open House night or, if you can't make open house, the week after (at the latest! Remember, three meetings and all that)  and then about 3 weeks later we have "inprocessing night" where we input your info into the database, print out the CAPF 12 or CAPF 15, sit you in front of the membership board, if you're a cadet we size you for your blues, fill out your uniform voucher, issue you BDUs, and send you back to basic training (new seniors get to come hang out at the coffee bar with the rest of us.. Never underestimate the value of early training and proper breaking in..).  its a "big effort" on that night, but we only do it once (occasionally, we do some "pickup inprocessing" if we know in advance)

In theory (and there are always exceptions), new cadet memberships all go downrange to Maxwell within a few days of each other. 

Another side benefit:  All of our cadet's membership come due in either April/May or October/November.  Retention interviews and chasing people for uniform parts & squadron equipment just got compacted into a couple periods versus having to do it all the time.

YMMV, but we find that it is FAR better to concentrate your resources into these short bursts of time (personnel, logicstics, finance, recruiting, etc) rather than spread out over the course of a whole year where you're having to divide your time between the "regular" parts of your job and the "new member" parts.

[carnold1836]

Is any of this being handled by your cadet staff or is it all being done by the senior officers?

I have it set up so that as a new cadet comes in he is assigned to a cadet mentor, someone who has been in long enough to have C/A1C and it the responsibility of that mentor to get the new cadet prepared for the Curry. The mentor does this with the support of the cadet officer staff in charge of phase one cadets. All of my new cadets have their Curry by their 4th or 5th Thursday meeting or 2nd or 3rd Saturday meeting. I even have a recruiting/retention Sgt/officer that is in charge of calling cadets that have "fallen through the cracks" and is the one who assigns the mentor to the new cadet.

This is beneficial to our squadron in multiple ways. First it gives the cadets with a little bit of time in the opportunity to see what it is like to have some responsibility, second it gives my staff a goal to achieve. And lastly I don't have my senior staff's resources spread out all over the place since it is the cadet staff doing the work, since there are more of them than there are of us.

Again I'm not arguing that my system is better than yours, just different and want people to be able to see how two different programs are successful.

[NIN]

Is any of this being handled by your cadet staff or is it all being done by the senior officers?

I have it set up so that as a new cadet comes in he is assigned to a cadet mentor, someone who has been in long enough to have C/A1C and it the responsibility of that mentor to get the new cadet prepared for the Curry. The mentor does this with the support of the cadet officer staff in charge of phase one cadets. All of my new cadets have their Curry by their 4th or 5th Thursday meeting or 2nd or 3rd Saturday meeting. I even have a recruiting/retention Sgt/officer that is in charge of calling cadets that have "fallen through the cracks" and is the one who assigns the mentor to the new cadet.

This is beneficial to our squadron in multiple ways. First it gives the cadets with a little bit of time in the opportunity to see what it is like to have some responsibility, second it gives my staff a goal to achieve. And lastly I don't have my senior staff's resources spread out all over the place since it is the cadet staff doing the work, since there are more of them than there are of us.

Again I'm not arguing that my system is better than yours, just different and want people to be able to see how two different programs are successful.

Inprocessing itself is handled by the seniors.  (Personnel, Logistics, Finance, and the membership board, which is 2 seniors and a senior cadet for cadets) The CBT flight commander and flight sergeant send them one-by-one to the data entry stations to get them "into the line" and are ready to receive them when they're done.

We have some cadets helping out (ie. logistics), but for the most part, inprocessing is all run by staff officers.

CBT is run strictly by the cadets with supervision.

[DNall]

Chris you can ask LtCol French about this, but we used to do the "pipeline" method when I was there before & it worked exceptionally well.... This was before CTEP, and we ran in-house CBT, ALS, rotating specialty schools (drill team/color guard, GT, comm, etc), NCOA, & OTS; each on a quarterly basis. People could visit & observe at any time, but participation was limited. They were told the next class would be starting in a month & they could observe if they want or come back then. The big difference is we would take their money & paperwork (charged a higher amount that covered dues plus a package deal for uniform items & a couple dollars for printing of local training materials). When they showed up for their first formal meeting with the CBT class they were sworn in (cadet oath) just like they were enlisting, and that first hour was really about getting them to switch gears & understand the gravity of what they are doing now.

Nin, what are you guys running for CBT? The stuff above seems well intentioned, but not very strong, just on first glance. I don't think we need cadet or adult TIs, but I do think we need a highly structured & diciplined percision professional program.

[desert rat]

If we are doing this great start thing, why are we requiring the encampment?   The encampment is the part of CAP that I don't understand.  Cadets go to it 6 months to a year after joining (depends when they join).  They already know most if not all the stuff there.  Been on O flights etc.   

Why can't CAP let a national encampment count as an encampment for a cadet to promote to cadet lt.

[carnold1836]

To some extent I suppose we still do that we just handle it more frequently, i.e. once a month. And we get them prepared either for ALS or CTEP/NCOA (depending on what quarter they start in).

I had Col. Brown (CAP/USAF TXWG LO) and Maj. Perkins (Group III Director Cadet Programs) observe the ALS this past weekend. Both seemed impressed with the school and want to start seeing more ALSs implemented through out the wing at a group level as the first stage of CTEP. I think if we can get more of these going through out the state we could see more pipelining instead of trickle in. It allows more cadets to get a good start with out over-burdening any single unit to bring a large number up to speed at one time.