Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 22, 2018, 10:45:42 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: ICAPA - Iowa Civil Air Patrol Academy - What would you want to do?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 [All] Print
Author Topic: ICAPA - Iowa Civil Air Patrol Academy - What would you want to do?  (Read 5302 times)
CadetProgramGuy
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,355

« on: November 14, 2006, 04:26:35 PM »

If you had the chance (choice) on what tyoe of training our Airmen, NCO's and Officers get, what would you choose to include?

Please be specific, as we are in the planning processes of designing these classes.

What other things do you think would make a good Cadet Program into a Great program?

Thanks!!
Logged
arajca
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,282

« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2006, 04:49:14 PM »

Depending on how much time you have, I think running five courses make sense. They would be:
Airman Leadership School (E2-E4)
Basic NCO Academy (E4-E7)
Senior NCO Academy (E7-E9)
Basic Cadet Officer School (O1-O3)
Advanced COS (O3-O6)

With a larger group, you can get better group dynamics going to improve the learning environment. The NCOA's and COS's can easily cover a couple weekends each with some homework between each weekend.
Logged
carnold1836
Forum Regular

Posts: 156

Pegasus Composite Squadron
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2006, 05:40:05 PM »

Look at TXWG's CTEP program http://www.texascadet.org/programs/ctep/. It is really a great program and we have instituted an STEP school the same weekend for senior members...errrr...senior officers or what ever we are called now. My son attended NCOA and I attended STEP we both got alot out of the program. He is ready to go to SNCOA in the spring and I am planning on being on staff for STEP.
Logged
Chris Arnold, 1st Lt, CAP
Pegasus Composite Squadron
TDHenderson
Member

Posts: 88

« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2006, 08:07:03 PM »

We are modelling our program in Iowa using the best from all, starting with elements from the Texas Wing CTEP program.  We will be starting our first Airman Leadership School and running it for two of our Wing Training Assembly's (WTA) weekends.  By using our WTA's as a framework the logistics of running these programs is taken care of, free of charge to the Cadets.  Plus they can get their required elements (AE, ML, CPFT, Activities, and Testing) taken care of as well, all in a mini-encampment environment.

So I will echo the call from the CadetProgramGuy (who I indirectly report to in support of the Iowa CAP Academy for Cadets), let's let the ideas flow and share our best practices.  There is no reason to slave away beating your forehead bloody developing Leadership schools for our Cadets. 

To carnold1836, I will probably see you in the Spring in Texas.  I, and possibly a few others from Iowa, will be coming down to sponge up as much as we can from your awesome program.  I was going to be there this past weekend in Austin but it conflicted with our Wing Conference and visit from Maj Gen Pineda (I got to fly backseat in CAPFLIGHT 1, not to be missed).
Logged
carnold1836
Forum Regular

Posts: 156

Pegasus Composite Squadron
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2006, 08:55:07 PM »

Sorry you missed this passed weekend. We had the biggest NCOA class in our history, 57 cadets. We also had a great turnout for STEP for the senior officers at 25. We will be looking forward to you coming down, and I want to invite any and all cadets and officers to our Spring CTEP be on the lookout for more information on www.texascadet.org
Logged
Chris Arnold, 1st Lt, CAP
Pegasus Composite Squadron
NEBoom
Seasoned Member

Posts: 204

« Reply #5 on: November 14, 2006, 11:43:41 PM »

We are modelling our program in Iowa using the best from all, starting with elements from the Texas Wing CTEP program.  We will be starting our first Airman Leadership School and running it for two of our Wing Training Assembly's (WTA) weekends.  By using our WTA's as a framework the logistics of running these programs is taken care of, free of charge to the Cadets.  Plus they can get their required elements (AE, ML, CPFT, Activities, and Testing) taken care of as well, all in a mini-encampment environment.

So I will echo the call from the CadetProgramGuy (who I indirectly report to in support of the Iowa CAP Academy for Cadets), let's let the ideas flow and share our best practices.  There is no reason to slave away beating your forehead bloody developing Leadership schools for our Cadets. 

To carnold1836, I will probably see you in the Spring in Texas.  I, and possibly a few others from Iowa, will be coming down to sponge up as much as we can from your awesome program.  I was going to be there this past weekend in Austin but it conflicted with our Wing Conference and visit from Maj Gen Pineda (I got to fly backseat in CAPFLIGHT 1, not to be missed).
Lt Henderson,
We're through with our color guard comp over here, so I'll have some time available to get back on this and other Iowa related things.  No time to post right now, but I'll try to get something meaningful added here in the next few days.  Stay tuned!!
Logged
Lt Col Dan Kirwan, CAP
Nebraska Wing
TDHenderson
Member

Posts: 88

« Reply #6 on: November 14, 2006, 11:57:33 PM »

Hello Major!  Glad to hear from you again.  I look forward to what you've got up your sleeve!


Logged
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2006, 06:52:28 PM »

Just to say my one and only very minor complaint about the Texas CTEP, which I love by the way.... The ALS (offered at Gp level) is really more of cadet basic training program than what ALS means in the AF, even with a set modificaiton for offering the curry at the end of the wknd. NCOA up (offered twice a year at the Wg level) are great & have a top notch team to keep them up to date. The toughest thing I have at Sq & the gap between those two is the pre-NCO & individual leadership content that is exactly what ALS is all about in the AF. I'd prefer to rename ALS something like Cadet Orientation Training & keep the curriculum exactly like it is. Then design a new ALS curriculum to be run concurrently, including use of students to help staff the ALS. Junior NCO development is one of the biggest keys to getting cadets over the hump & committed to the program for the long term.

Other than that, I'd steal & implement CTEP exactly as it is here. You might need to take a look at the STEP program. It is beyond outstanding for most of CAP, but might be something you could just integrate with your OTS.
Logged
TDHenderson
Member

Posts: 88

« Reply #8 on: November 15, 2006, 06:55:29 PM »

Great idea.  I had been thinking the same thing as well.

Any and all materials on the Texas Wing CTEP schools would be greatly appreciated.  At least enough to start up an NCO school prior to my visit to Texas in the Spring.
Logged
carnold1836
Forum Regular

Posts: 156

Pegasus Composite Squadron
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2006, 09:38:23 PM »

I'll check with my son to see if he has anything from his NCOA class. I will look at what was given to us in STEP to pass along also.
Logged
Chris Arnold, 1st Lt, CAP
Pegasus Composite Squadron
TDHenderson
Member

Posts: 88

« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2006, 12:00:08 AM »

Thanks Lt! 

Do you happen to know when and where the Spring CTEP will be held?
Logged
carnold1836
Forum Regular

Posts: 156

Pegasus Composite Squadron
« Reply #11 on: November 16, 2006, 12:11:50 AM »

It will be at Lackland AFB, West Point of the Air Force, some time in April if I'm not mistaken. As a side note this will be the last time CTEP will be held at Lackland because the Air Force is tearing down the billets we use. After that they will be at either Camp Mabry here in Austin or Camp Swift just east of Austin Bergstrom Int'l Airport by about 40 miles.
Logged
Chris Arnold, 1st Lt, CAP
Pegasus Composite Squadron
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #12 on: November 16, 2006, 05:32:24 PM »

yeah I hadn't looked at my STEP CD yet either. The kid I brought back form NCOA just had some rough notes, but one of the cadet instructors is in my Sq here when he's not too busy w/ college. Give me a day & I'll get his email over to you. Of course you can also talk to Maj Sutton & LtCol Cima for top of the line expertise.
Logged
carnold1836
Forum Regular

Posts: 156

Pegasus Composite Squadron
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2006, 05:54:22 PM »

Absolutely you want to talk to LTC Cima and MAJ Sutton. LTC Cima really brought the program to life over the last few years and when she turned it over to MAJ Sutton she took it by reins and is continuing the excellent work. If you need to talk to someone that has experience as the PO for the program you can get a hold of LTC King from Pegasus Sqdn here in Austin. She really has the in with the Guard here at Camp Mabry and should have some great knowledge to share with you as well.
Logged
Chris Arnold, 1st Lt, CAP
Pegasus Composite Squadron
CadetProgramGuy
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,355

« Reply #14 on: November 17, 2006, 10:21:11 AM »

I wanted to take the time and thank each and every one of you for yout input on how to make our Civil Air Patrol better.  I REALLY like the CTEP approach, and I know that Lt. Henderson and crew are using it as a model for the ICAPA program.

I would like to extend the open invitation to anyone that wishes to see ICAPA, anytime you are welcome.

James McLaughlin, Capt, CAP
Director of Cadet Programs
Iowa Wing
cp@iawg.cap.gov
Logged
Pylon
Administrator

Posts: 5,165
Unit: NER-NH-038

Michael Kieloch, Marketing Communications & PR Leadership
« Reply #15 on: November 17, 2006, 12:35:11 PM »

Great idea.  I had been thinking the same thing as well.

Any and all materials on the Texas Wing CTEP schools would be greatly appreciated.  At least enough to start up an NCO school prior to my visit to Texas in the Spring.

I agree.  If somebody could post to this thread the CTEP curriculum materials that TXWG would be willing to share, that would be great!  I know many other CAP personnel could benefit from this program.  Anybody can attach the materials to a reply here, by clicking "Additional Options..." when posting.

Thanks in advance!   ;)
Logged
Michael F. Kieloch, Maj, CAP
Concord Composite Squadron, NH       
sjtrupp
Recruit

Posts: 36

« Reply #16 on: November 17, 2006, 04:43:49 PM »

We need to have national take a look over the programs already out there and come up with a standard set of curricula.  That way, instead of everyone focusing their energy on creating these classes, they could simply download it and get to work.  These programs get started in each Wing, and then they tend to fall apart, and finally, go away entirely.  Fast-forward a couple of years, and someone starts all over again, creating a new set of classes… 

The programs are out there, TX, CA, and others; we just need to get the information out to everyone for general use.  I’m not saying that everyone would have to use the standardized classes, but it would be a great starting point.
Logged
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #17 on: November 17, 2006, 04:44:32 PM »

http://www.texascadet.org/programs/ctep/
ALS has complete information because they intend that to be run at Gp or even multi-Sq level, but info on the other schools is limited to an overview. That is intentional because they want those programs run in a centralized way for standardization purposes. The programs at Sq are supposed to be complimentary, but not repetitive. You can click Maj Sutton's name (top left) & she can provide detailed curriculum on each of the schools listed in the right margin, including direct contact with: recet graduates, phase IV cadet cadre, senior member officers involved with oversight & direction of the program... anything you could possibly need & more.

I've been to a few sessions & commanded a couple ALS's. A couple others here have some experience with the program. Feel free to ask anything you want & I'll do my best, or at very least will know where to refer you.
Logged
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #18 on: November 17, 2006, 05:10:48 PM »

We need to have national take a look over the programs already out there and come up with a standard set of curricula.  That way, instead of everyone focusing their energy on creating these classes, they could simply download it and get to work.  These programs get started in each Wing, and then they tend to fall apart, and finally, go away entirely.  Fast-forward a couple of years, and someone starts all over again, creating a new set of classes… 

The programs are out there, TX, CA, and others; we just need to get the information out to everyone for general use.  I’m not saying that everyone would have to use the standardized classes, but it would be a great starting point.

The key programs of this nature are in about four states & share a lot of common elements, even using each other for initial development & updates. Texas has been in use since around 99 I think, and sprung from both those outside programs juxtaposed with some experimentation at the Sq level a couple years before that.

I do agree that NHQ needs to get involved & standardize a system that feeds from the Sq to Gp to Wing to region/national, and be interoperable between wings. And, that's not just on cadet programs either. I don't like wings running off in their own direction, but they have to do it when their ideas can't get up the chain & there being a leadership vacume above that level.
Logged
NEBoom
Seasoned Member

Posts: 204

« Reply #19 on: November 17, 2006, 05:16:51 PM »

Hello Major!  Glad to hear from you again.  I look forward to what you've got up your sleeve!


Well, I don't have anything special up my sleeve, but I wanted to share with you some thoughts on how to go about implementing (and by extension developing) your wing-level cadet training.

One of the issues we grappled with over here was in what order should we introduce the training.  Either a "bottom-up" approach (introducing training for newer cadets first), or a "top-down" approach (introducing training for the cadet leaders first).  IMHO, it's easy to say you should go with "bottom-up" approach, because usually you will have a majority of cadets who are in Phase I or II.  But I felt that this approach neglects the cadet leadership (perhaps "neglects" too strong of a word, but you get my point). 

One of the main goals, if not THE main goal of a wing-level CP training program is leadership development.  So I decided to take the "top-down" approach.  My thought process was, if we develop the cadet leaders first, they will be better prepared to grow the program at their home units, plus we also will develop a cadre of instructors for the Phase I and II schools we'll be introducing later.

This looks good on paper, but reality turned out a bit different.  We are facing a significant shortage of Phase III and IV cadets in our wing, so there was virtually no audience for my intended Cadet Officer's course.  Our compromise solution was to open the first course we offered to all cadets holding a staff position in their units, regardless of rank or phase.  We call it the Cadet Command and Staff School (CCSS), and I think it will morph into the Cadet Officer's course I originally intended eventually.  Our system is still very much in it's infancy.

One other thing I should mention at this point is that I took the idea of "leadership development first" to include to include the Senior... Ahem... officers too.  In fact, the first course I developed was what we call the Cadet Program Officer's Course (CPOC).  Basically it serves the same function as National's TLC (I got CPOC done about 6 months before they rolled out TLC... :().  Because CPOC coveres an almost completely different set of subjects, I've retained it and will continue to offer both it and TLC in the future.  Developing the cadre for the future is key, and IMHO the first order of business.

OK, so now having said all that, I'll seem to contradict myself by explaining our next step.  We found the Cadet Orientation Course National has to be inadequate for what we needed at our units.  So, librally borrowing from materials posted on the internet (I never formally thanked California Wing for their contributions to this.... sorry  ;D) we developed the Basic Cadet Orientation (BCO).  So why did we go from helping the Phase III and IV cadets directly to helping Phase I newbies, and skip the NCOs?  Because I felt it was important for the leadership to have a tool they could use for training their new cadets right away.  I looked at it as an immediate way to address cadet retention.

The BCO is implemented at the unit level, ideally by the cadet leadership themselves (though it can be run by Senor...ahem...officers if need be).  The advantages of it are:
1)  It's a standardized introduction to CAP and the cadet program for new cadet members.
2)  It removes the need for the redundant effort of each unit writing their own orientation.
3)  It gives the cadet leaders a program to run and a responsibility to take on as their own
4)  It gives the brand new cadets an organized program to jump in to right away
5)  It makes CAP look better organized to both the new cadets and their parents!

As far as developing your courses, there are tons of ideas and ready-made materials out there, as you've already discovered with CTEP.  So there's no need for me to go into all that.

Hope this helps a bit.
Logged
Lt Col Dan Kirwan, CAP
Nebraska Wing
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #20 on: November 18, 2006, 12:19:52 AM »

With CTEP we took a middle of the road approach on that issue. We started experimentally w/ the ALS curriculum run in a few Sqs while CAC & CP staff were wrestling with resources from out of state. The first move was our CCSC for phase IV cadets. That set the foundation. Then we hit NCOA for widest exposure fastest impact, and progressed up the ladder from there. ALL instructors for ALL the cadet courses are phase IV cadet officers who must first graduate from CCSC. Adults do the logistics & support, but these very capable cadets run the show w/ very little supervision, and frankly there are very few SMs who could provide supervision at that level.

You can run a CTEP-ALS like course w/ adult instructors while you spin up a CCSC-type course for your top C/officers. As I said before, that really is an orientation/basic training type course & we need a real ALS/indiv ldrshp/pre-NCO course between there & NCOA. I can also see running an NCOA at that point too, if you use your prior-service resources to make a class of good junior NCOs who can then support the orientation/basic trng both centrally on staff & back at Sq where it needs to be rienforced so thse standards are maintained. The important thing is to lay down a good foundation first before you try to get to a sustainable program.
Logged
TDHenderson
Member

Posts: 88

« Reply #21 on: November 18, 2006, 10:23:48 AM »

Great ideas!

We in Iowa are at the point where we have the infrastructure in place to support the activities (basically eight of our WTA's if you take out four for our ES Academies) and are now in need of the curriculum. 

Our Cadet cadre is bottom-heavy at the moment so that is why we are starting with the ALS and work our way up.  Along the way we are involving the precious few Cadet Officers and SNCO's we have to support, evaluate, and tweak the curriculum to best fit the WTA framework.  This will also allow us to help them develop by letting them perform in a mini-encampment environment each month. 

Also, starting at the November WTA and Wing Conference, we started having our Cadet Officers work along side the WTA Orderly Room staff.  This group of Officers runs the show for the weekend providing the Officer of the Day, CQ, Medical, Comms, Transportation, and Safety functions that bring order from chaos.  The Cadets are now learning valuable skills in assisting in these positions.


Logged
CadetProgramGuy
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,355

« Reply #22 on: November 19, 2006, 08:32:34 AM »

We need to have national take a look over the programs already out there and come up with a standard set of curricula.  That way, instead of everyone focusing their energy on creating these classes, they could simply download it and get to work.  These programs get started in each Wing, and then they tend to fall apart, and finally, go away entirely.  Fast-forward a couple of years, and someone starts all over again, creating a new set of classes… 

The programs are out there, TX, CA, and others; we just need to get the information out to everyone for general use.  I’m not saying that everyone would have to use the standardized classes, but it would be a great starting point.


This is the common mosconception of all programs.  We have to stop looking for national to change a program.  If Iowa Wing had waited for National to change how the Civil Air Patrol works with the National Guard, we would still be where we were 3 years ago.

It is up to us, the thinkers and the brainstormers to change what we do not like.  I believe it is up to us to develop a program that National can take and use.
Logged
NEBoom
Seasoned Member

Posts: 204

« Reply #23 on: November 19, 2006, 05:26:06 PM »

We need to have national take a look over the programs already out there and come up with a standard set of curricula.  That way, instead of everyone focusing their energy on creating these classes, they could simply download it and get to work.  These programs get started in each Wing, and then they tend to fall apart, and finally, go away entirely.  Fast-forward a couple of years, and someone starts all over again, creating a new set of classes… 

The programs are out there, TX, CA, and others; we just need to get the information out to everyone for general use.  I’m not saying that everyone would have to use the standardized classes, but it would be a great starting point.

This is the common mosconception of all programs.  We have to stop looking for national to change a program.  If Iowa Wing had waited for National to change how the Civil Air Patrol works with the National Guard, we would still be where we were 3 years ago.

It is up to us, the thinkers and the brainstormers to change what we do not like.  I believe it is up to us to develop a program that National can take and use.

And besides, if we work together and are willing to share and borrow from one another, we'll end up with a "standard."  Plus it will be a standard that has been field tested and refined by the very people who are supposed to be using it.  It'll be harder on all of us to accomplish, but the end product will be better, IMHO.

Edit:  Had my reply inside CadetProgramGuy's quote.  Fixed.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2006, 09:32:38 PM by NEBoom » Logged
Lt Col Dan Kirwan, CAP
Nebraska Wing
sjtrupp
Recruit

Posts: 36

« Reply #24 on: November 19, 2006, 06:07:47 PM »

We need to have national take a look over the programs already out there and come up with a standard set of curricula.  That way, instead of everyone focusing their energy on creating these classes, they could simply download it and get to work.  These programs get started in each Wing, and then they tend to fall apart, and finally, go away entirely.  Fast-forward a couple of years, and someone starts all over again, creating a new set of classes… 

The programs are out there, TX, CA, and others; we just need to get the information out to everyone for general use.  I’m not saying that everyone would have to use the standardized classes, but it would be a great starting point.


This is the common mosconception of all programs.  We have to stop looking for national to change a program.  If Iowa Wing had waited for National to change how the Civil Air Patrol works with the National Guard, we would still be where we were 3 years ago.

It is up to us, the thinkers and the brainstormers to change what we do not like.  I believe it is up to us to develop a program that National can take and use.

I didn’t say that national needed to “change” the program and Kirwan’s idea of sharing would be great if we could get everyone to agree to it.  Currently, though, most wings are a little possessive of their programs, CA Wing has even “copywrited” their material.  Part of this is due to the fact that they have put so much effort into their programs and wouldn’t want it diluted by someone using their material, but coming up with a sub-par program that is attributed to them. 

National would be able to provide a cover with a standard program that takes the good things from the programs out there.  I’m also not saying that Rob or Curt would have to do the work, just be the face and get behind this idea.  Someone would have to ask for all the material out there, and it would be difficult for any one person to get it without assistance from National.  Now, if a Wing like CA or TX would be willing for National to put their program out on the web as part of the “Best Practices”, then none of this work would be necessary.  But to date, none of these programs have been so gracious.

The programs have been developed and national just needs to distribute them out to everyone so that we could get to work, rather than working on the work.  We spend so must of our time re-inventing the wheel, creating these classes over and over again.
Logged
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #25 on: November 19, 2006, 06:10:45 PM »

With due respect... I agree we have to make it happen in lieu of National not doing their job, but that's not the right way & makes for 50 seperate little CAPs that all do things their own way - oh sorry, tailored to their unique environment. It's BS & you know it, it just happens to be necessary BS until national decides to actually take charge, take up these good ideas at work on the ground, and take a reorganized CAP into the right way of doing things.
Logged
NEBoom
Seasoned Member

Posts: 204

« Reply #26 on: November 20, 2006, 09:43:05 PM »

With due respect... I agree we have to make it happen in lieu of National not doing their job, but that's not the right way & makes for 50 seperate little CAPs that all do things their own way - oh sorry, tailored to their unique environment. It's BS & you know it, it just happens to be necessary BS until national decides to actually take charge, take up these good ideas at work on the ground, and take a reorganized CAP into the right way of doing things.

Just trying to be realistic out here in "fly over country."  Yeah, it'd be great if National stepped up and did like you and Steve are suggesting.  It would save a lot of work to be sure.  But waiting for that is a little like leaving the runway lights on for Amelia Earhart.  We can't just leave our programs bound up for that long waiting for National to quit messing with uniform issues and all the other BS they occupy themselves with.
Logged
Lt Col Dan Kirwan, CAP
Nebraska Wing
DNall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,721

« Reply #27 on: November 21, 2006, 06:05:51 PM »

With due respect... I agree we have to make it happen in lieu of National not doing their job, but that's not the right way & makes for 50 seperate little CAPs that all do things their own way - oh sorry, tailored to their unique environment. It's BS & you know it, it just happens to be necessary BS until national decides to actually take charge, take up these good ideas at work on the ground, and take a reorganized CAP into the right way of doing things.

Just trying to be realistic out here in "fly over country."  Yeah, it'd be great if National stepped up and did like you and Steve are suggesting.  It would save a lot of work to be sure.  But waiting for that is a little like leaving the runway lights on for Amelia Earhart.  We can't just leave our programs bound up for that long waiting for National to quit messing with uniform issues and all the other BS they occupy themselves with.

Not suggesting you stand around with your... uh, book... in your hand. For sure get to work hard charge away. Absolutely, beg borrow & steal everything you can get your hands on from other wings - rather than reinvent the wheel. And, do your best with what you can actually control or influence.

However, from a military perspective, that's a bunch of idiots running off in their own varrious directions in an uncoordinated effort leaving the command element no opportunity to lead. Now sure that presuposes the command element is competent & capable of leading, even if they're wrong, and that's generally NOT the case in CAP, but still it all makes us look like reckless immature fools if we aren't VERY VERY careful about how we let people see those efforts to make things right in spite of our command.

Ultimately though, command has to grow a set & make things right. The probability of smart/strong enough people rising to those positions to do that, AND that those individuals would be selfless & headed in the right direction for the org rather than just personal power grabbing... well it just ain't that high. And that is why I favor the AF temporarily stepping in to reset the structure & rebuild the foundation over a couple years before handing back the reigns with better oversight & accountability. The probability of that is not as hard, but still not something you should leave the landing lights on for. Something has to give though or it's gonna be bad for CAP in the long run.
Logged
NEBoom
Seasoned Member

Posts: 204

« Reply #28 on: November 21, 2006, 10:42:16 PM »

With due respect... I agree we have to make it happen in lieu of National not doing their job, but that's not the right way & makes for 50 seperate little CAPs that all do things their own way - oh sorry, tailored to their unique environment. It's BS & you know it, it just happens to be necessary BS until national decides to actually take charge, take up these good ideas at work on the ground, and take a reorganized CAP into the right way of doing things.

Just trying to be realistic out here in "fly over country."  Yeah, it'd be great if National stepped up and did like you and Steve are suggesting.  It would save a lot of work to be sure.  But waiting for that is a little like leaving the runway lights on for Amelia Earhart.  We can't just leave our programs bound up for that long waiting for National to quit messing with uniform issues and all the other BS they occupy themselves with.

Not suggesting you stand around with your... uh, book... in your hand. For sure get to work hard charge away. Absolutely, beg borrow & steal everything you can get your hands on from other wings - rather than reinvent the wheel. And, do your best with what you can actually control or influence.

However, from a military perspective, that's a bunch of idiots running off in their own varrious directions in an uncoordinated effort leaving the command element no opportunity to lead. Now sure that presuposes the command element is competent & capable of leading, even if they're wrong, and that's generally NOT the case in CAP, but still it all makes us look like reckless immature fools if we aren't VERY VERY careful about how we let people see those efforts to make things right in spite of our command.

Ultimately though, command has to grow a set & make things right. The probability of smart/strong enough people rising to those positions to do that, AND that those individuals would be selfless & headed in the right direction for the org rather than just personal power grabbing... well it just ain't that high. And that is why I favor the AF temporarily stepping in to reset the structure & rebuild the foundation over a couple years before handing back the reigns with better oversight & accountability. The probability of that is not as hard, but still not something you should leave the landing lights on for. Something has to give though or it's gonna be bad for CAP in the long run.

I fully agree.
Logged
Lt Col Dan Kirwan, CAP
Nebraska Wing
Pages: 1 2 [All] Print 
CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: ICAPA - Iowa Civil Air Patrol Academy - What would you want to do?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.096 seconds with 25 queries.