New CPP Codified - Updated 52-10

[a2capt]

On the Ground Handling video, is this somewhere that it has to be recorded in eServices prior to the flight?

.. or could it be made available at the flight location, and logged by signature/CAPID until someone enters them later in the day, like the CAPF 99 is handled?

[Eclipse]

Its recorded on the training tab upon completion.

Presumably you could not release the flight without it
if the cadets are on the WMIRS sortie.

[FW]

What seems to be being ignored is having coed staff in no way helps mitigate either harm or liability. Adherence to existing policies and procedures is what accomplishes this task.

+1 x10.

Dad, who is also the Unit CC, can't chaperon Cadet Isagirl overnight, but some random CSM who never comes to meetings can.

There are plenty of female predators, and also a misguided idea that men can't deal with "lady problems", but females can.

There are plenty of people, male and female, who make life difficult for the rest of us, however we (as members of CAP) are supposed to abide by our "Core Values".  Our core value of "Respect" demands we treat our cadets with the highest regard to their status.  Our core value of "Excellence" in all we do demands we treat our cadets the best way possible in encouraging their developement and potential without subjecting them to harm. Maybe something changed?

What brought on the change.  Is there a major litigation dealing with the absence of coed supervision at an overnight activity? Were there problems with some cadets attending because of a perceived/real lack of personal safety? Did the BoG decide we need to change things? Are our Core Values meaningless?

I find it difficult to think this was just an arbitrary decision.  Something must have occured to bring it on.  In the mean time, I would suggest finding ways to recruit and retain members to handle this new requirement. CSM's seem to be the easiest way, but YMMV. 

[Al Sayre]

On the Ground Handling video, is this somewhere that it has to be recorded in eServices prior to the flight?

.. or could it be made available at the flight location, and logged by signature/CAPID until someone enters them later in the day, like the CAPF 99 is handled?

And don't count on it being there a hour after the training is done.  I've seen some stuff take a full day to work its way through the software from e-Services to WIMRS...

[Fubar]

Why was the effective date of October rescinded, especially if none of the training materials are ready?

The changes to online testing and a new curriculum seemed to go pretty well, but the encampment changes and CPPT has been horrendous.

[SarDragon]

"Ask the Commander"?

[Panache]

I find it difficult to think this was just an arbitrary decision. 

In my experience in the corporate world, I can very easily think this was an arbitrary decision.  Executives love to change things simply for the sake of change, so they can point back to it and say "See! I'm worth something! My input is valid and useful!"

Unfortunately, I've seen this happen before, many times.  I'll help write a policy or procedure, which will be edited and reviewed many, many times. Then it'll be sent to the policy committee and probably sent back for revision.  Eventually they'll approve it.  And when I see it next, it'll have a couple of things added that weren't there before, and I certainly didn't write.  If I ask around enough, I'll find out that some Manager or Director stuck something in at the last second after "final" approval and nobody thought it was a big deal, so why should I or the line employees?  Just deal and make it work, or (more likely) circumvent it in a way that you can't get jammed up.

Huh.  Seems a lot of like what happened here.

[SunDog]

It's probably close enough in management's eyes; it'll either work out or they'll revisit it, if the howling/pain gets intense enough.  Management by dartboard, with a few subjective "good ideas" thrown in.

Will cadets be better protected? Might be; maybe not. It'll look like they are, so if/when a bad actor crosses the line, it'll appear CAP had taken the risk seriously. Maybe NHQ (and/or the lawyers) figure the impact is worth the protection it provides the organization.  A few cancelled or early dismissal events won't keep them up worrying at night.

So, not as bad as a train wreck, not as good as an organization with a future.

[Storm Chaser]

Interesting; I just clicked on the link for CAPR 52-10 in capmembers.com and got the regulation from 26 Dec 2012. Hmm...

[Storm Chaser]

So, the new CAPR 52-10 states the following:

     d. Two Deep Leadership. CAP's general policy is that every cadet activity must be supervised by at least two adult leaders who are in "Approved" status in eServices (see CAPR 39-2, Civil Air Patrol Membership). CPP training materials explain how that principle is put into practice. There are two exceptions to the "two deep leadership" rule:
          (1) Cadet Flying, explained in 2-6a, and
          (2) Real-World Operational Missions (not training) conducted under CAPR 60-3, CAP Emergency Services Training and Operational Missions.

How is this policy going to affect ground team training? Do we need to have "two adult leaders who are in "Approved" status" on every ground team training sortie, especially during field training or exercises?

[a2capt]

Interesting; I just clicked on the link for CAPR 52-10 in capmembers.com and got the regulation from 26 Dec 2012. Hmm...

It's obvious they are short handed, with premature releases, more than one version of a file available at a time, etc.

Their choice of content management system isn't helping their mission. That thing is a mess.

[FW]

I don't think NHQ is short handed. I think things are in transition to the "one staff" concept. It may be the staff still doesn't understand what their roles are, or the staff is in transition with the coming of the new commander. We can only guess.

[Eclipse]

I don't think NHQ is short handed. I think things are in transition to the "one staff" concept. It may be the staff still doesn't understand what their roles are, or the staff is in transition with the coming of the new commander. We can only guess.

We have 30k some adult members, many with specific skills who are dying to help for free.

There is no need or excuse for any department to be understaffed.

[Storm Chaser]

Is no one able to answer my previous question about the (potential) requirement for two "approved" adults during ground team training sorties?

Eclipse, where are you?

[Eclipse]

So, the new CAPR 52-10 states the following:

     d. Two Deep Leadership. CAP's general policy is that every cadet activity must be supervised by at least two adult leaders who are in "Approved" status in eServices (see CAPR 39-2, Civil Air Patrol Membership). CPP training materials explain how that principle is put into practice. There are two exceptions to the "two deep leadership" rule:
          (1) Cadet Flying, explained in 2-6a, and
          (2) Real-World Operational Missions (not training) conducted under CAPR 60-3, CAP Emergency Services Training and Operational Missions.

How is this policy going to affect ground team training? Do we need to have "two adult leaders who are in "Approved" status" on every ground team training sortie, especially during field training or exercises?

I would say, as written, "yes", and in my opinion they both have to be at least GTM3-Ts, and if one is a "T" then
there has to be at least one GTM3 SET.

[coudano]

and if one is a "T" then
there has to be at least one GTM3 SET.

...which could be a cadet




I have no crystal ball or special insight into the cogs,
but I (imagine) that when this rule was written, overnight bivouacs and sarexes were in mind, probably moreso than an individual sortie  from mission base on saturday afternoon.

However I agree, as written, 2 deep on every training sortie.

[Eclipse]

Yup.

[Storm Chaser]

So, the new CAPR 52-10 states the following:

     d. Two Deep Leadership. CAP's general policy is that every cadet activity must be supervised by at least two adult leaders who are in "Approved" status in eServices (see CAPR 39-2, Civil Air Patrol Membership). CPP training materials explain how that principle is put into practice. There are two exceptions to the "two deep leadership" rule:
          (1) Cadet Flying, explained in 2-6a, and
          (2) Real-World Operational Missions (not training) conducted under CAPR 60-3, CAP Emergency Services Training and Operational Missions.

How is this policy going to affect ground team training? Do we need to have "two adult leaders who are in "Approved" status" on every ground team training sortie, especially during field training or exercises?

I would say, as written, "yes"...

That's going to cause additional pains.

...and in my opinion they both have to be at least GTM3-Ts...

Agree.

...and if one is a "T" then
there has to be at least one GTM3 SET.

Actually, no; there only has to be a qualified GTM3 supervisor (Ref. CAPR 60-3, 2-2.b.). But without a skills evaluator, the trainee can't get any sign-offs.

[Eclipse]

Yup and yup.

[Tim Day]

So, the new CAPR 52-10 states the following:

     d. Two Deep Leadership. CAP’s general policy is that every cadet activity must be supervised by at least two adult leaders who are in “Approved” status in eServices (see CAPR 39-2, Civil Air Patrol Membership). CPP training materials explain how that principle is put into practice. There are two exceptions to the “two deep leadership” rule:
          (1) Cadet Flying, explained in 2-6a, and
          (2) Real-World Operational Missions (not training) conducted under CAPR 60-3, CAP Emergency Services Training and Operational Missions.

How is this policy going to affect ground team training? Do we need to have "two adult leaders who are in “Approved” status" on every ground team training sortie, especially during field training or exercises?

The cadet activity has to be supervised by at least two leaders. This doesn't mean that two adult leaders have to be within line of sight of every cadet at all times. See the proximity rule:

2-3.e. e. Proximity of Supervisor. Because each physical environment, mixture of cadets’ grades and ages, and nature of activity is different, CAP does not set a firm rule regarding the proximity between a group of cadets and their adult leader supervisor. If supervisors do not have direct line of sight contact with cadets, they must nevertheless be aware of where the cadets are and what they are doing, and check up on them periodically.

So while it will affect activities, I'd say the impact of the two-deep leadership rule on ground team training will be minimal. Even an all-adult ground team needs to be checked on periodically.

Of course, my understanding may change whenever the new training materials come out.