There's a news item today in one of the blogs (not NOTF) that asserts that an embarrassing Wing CI report from last year was never sent out to the field.
There's some political stuff in that posting which I chose to ignore (not my region; don't know him), but the core assertion appears to be true - the IG report for the wing in question was never given the same distribution as those of other wings. Isn't this "sin of omission" a serious violation of CAP policy and regulations?
Quote from: Kipper on August 10, 2010, 02:07:50 PM
There's a news item today in one of the blogs (not NOTF) that asserts that an embarrassing Wing CI report from last year was never sent out to the field.
Define "the field". CI's aren't generally distributed below wing level.
CI reports are distributed to NB members for reference. They are "privileged" documents which are not supposed to be distributed outside of CAP unless approved by the CAP/EX and CAP-USAF/CC. If a wing CI was withheld from distribution, it would be a violation of existing policies. If it was to cover up a major deficiency, it would be a violation of regulations and, possibly, a violation of our statement of work with the Air Force. The last MEWG CI report was distributed to the NB in Feb 2010. The inspection was held 1 week after the current wing commander took office. I can not give out the details of the report because I don't have the above permissions.
Quote from: FW on August 10, 2010, 03:01:08 PM
CI reports are distributed to NB members for reference. They are "confidential" documents which are not supposed to be distributed below the NB level.
How do you figure? A CI is simply the Wing-level equivalent of an SUI. At a minimum the Wing staff is given the results, how else can they
remediate the findings?
When I was the Nebraska Wing IG, the wing IGs were also sent a copy in addition to the wing commanders.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 10, 2010, 03:17:34 PM
Quote from: FW on August 10, 2010, 03:01:08 PM
CI reports are distributed to NB members for reference. They are "confidential" documents which are not supposed to be distributed below the NB level.
How do you figure? A CI is simply the Wing-level equivalent of an SUI. At a minimum the Wing staff is given the results, how else can they
remediate the findings?
Sorry I wasn't clear. CI reports from each wing go out to every NB member for educational purposes. They are not to go to "general distribution". Yes, your specific CI report is given to wing staff for corrective actions, findings, review, etc.
CI's are not quite like SUI's. They are a snapshot of specific metrics which must be evaluated for CAP to be complient with the S.O.W. and Cooerative Agreement. I know of two cases where the CI report was not sent out to "all" on the list. Once, in 2004 and once, in 2007. In both cases, the CI report was distributed to the wing involved, CAP-USAF and, the NEC. It just didn't go to the full National Board. There is a big difference between "limited distribution" which I'm sure was the case and, "full distribution" or "NOT distributed" which, I'm sure, was not the case. I do know that the reported wing's CI report was released but, not to all who were supposed to get it. I seriously doubt that NHQ would violate the S.O.W. However, I have no idea if a CI report would be held up because of poltical reasons. That, while not in violation of the regs, would be unethical, IMHO. Oh, yeah... don't we have an ethics regulation now? :o
When I was working at the wing level staff received copies, via the CC, of other wing's CI's. I assumed it was intended as a lessons learned exercise to prepare other wings for their inspections. Whether we received all or some of the CI's I couldn't say. The process may not have been an official policy at HQ, again don't know.
Kipper has phrased his original post in a most delicate and diplomatic fashion.
To put things more bluntly, the blog post in question can be found in CAP Insights, and it concerns the last MEWG CI.
I can remember my uncle saying in 1974: "I've never liked that muckraking sonofa[censored] Jack Anderson. But he was right about Nixon all along."
As of at least a couple of months ago, NHQ posted the final grade of Wing CI's for those Wings who have an upcoming CI. I see no reason why full CI results shouldn't be available to everyone in CAP. I probably wouldn't make them available to the general public though for secrets quirrel reasons...
Quote from: Turk on August 10, 2010, 07:33:32 PM
Kipper has phrased his original post in a most delicate and diplomatic fashion.
To put things more bluntly, the blog post in question can be found in CAP Insights, and it concerns the last MEWG CI.
I can remember my uncle saying in 1974: "I've never liked that muckraking sonofa[censored] Jack Anderson. But he was right about Nixon all along."
Any thing that comes from CAP Insights is suspect anyway. Hayden has an agenda he is pursuing and he has already proved he will lie or cheat to obtain his goals.
Never saw the blog in question, but the Aug 09 ME CI was distributed to all of the Wing IG's (as normal) last Feb.
Quote from: Turk on August 10, 2010, 07:33:32 PM
I can remember my uncle saying in 1974: "I've never liked that muckraking sonofa[censored] Jack Anderson. But he was right about Nixon all along."
I haven't read the rest of the replies, but comparing that guy to Jack Anderson, well, lets just say thats like comparing a steaming pile of dog poo to, I dunno, a 747?