Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 21, 2018, 03:35:49 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: Squadron of Merit report in E-Services
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Squadron of Merit report in E-Services  (Read 2146 times)
Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,059
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« on: January 22, 2015, 03:00:18 PM »

I'm trying to make heads or tails of this report...having some trouble.


Based on the January 2015 report for our unit, this is the info:


Start Cadets: 30
End Cadets: 29
New Cadets: 12
Total Renewal: 20
Mitchell: 3
Earhart: 1
Eaker: 0
Spaatz: 0
WBA: 5
1st Encampment: 8
O-Flights: Yes
Flight 99%: 76


How does one read this?


If I look at start and end cadets, we lost 1 cadet on the books. We had 12 new cadets, which means we lost 13 cadets to non-renewal. But it shows 20 renewals, which should be 17, based on the 30 number initially? O-Flights - Yes is just mind boggling. I assume these are front seat flights, but why is there not a number there, like the backseat flights?


P.S. this completely explains to me why some units "clean out" their membership on the cadet side in January. Heh.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2015, 03:07:36 PM by Capt Hatkevich » Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,270

« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2015, 03:35:52 PM »

And to NHQ, that's a net loss of only 1, so no big deal, right?
Logged


Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,059
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2015, 03:43:22 PM »

And to NHQ, that's a net loss of only 1, so no big deal, right?


Wouldn't know.


But we all know CAP isn't for everyone, as much as it would be awesome to be at 42 as opposed to "flat".
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,270

« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2015, 04:09:20 PM »

My point being that NHQ is not paying attention to the ~40% churn your unit had last year,
only looking at the top line numbers and ignoring the real state of the situation.
Logged


Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,059
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2015, 04:56:16 PM »

My point being that NHQ is not paying attention to the ~40% churn your unit had last year,
only looking at the top line numbers and ignoring the real state of the situation.

But again, part of that churn is people who joined, and quit with the same month, at least on the "mental" level.

30 on the books right now, 13 less than a year in. One joined in September, and had already requested to leave due to "work/school/college prep". Another moved half way across country, not interested in NJWG.

Is what it is. We also lost a few to college (7 left, 4 off our roster).

Speaking of that...I bet transfers count as " non-renewal" .
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,270

« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2015, 05:08:23 PM »

Speaking of that...I bet transfers count as " non-renewal" .

Hmmm...does anyone actually know?  A transfer simply isn't on the previous unit's books, but
that member is still on the roster.

What do they do with those?
Logged


Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,059
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2015, 05:26:18 PM »

Speaking of that...I bet transfers count as " non-renewal" .

Hmmm...does anyone actually know?  A transfer simply isn't on the previous unit's books, but
that member is still on the roster.

What do they do with those?


It makes sense to count as "non-renewal". Otherwise how long to do you "keep" them for the "stats"? 1 year? Their whole membership?




That said, if they reported non-renewals as opposed to renewals, that would solve the issue.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2015, 05:30:12 PM by Capt Hatkevich » Logged
Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,059
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2015, 08:59:38 PM »

Got my hands on more unit data...20 start, 20 end, 6 new, 9 renewed? How does that work?
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,270

« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2015, 10:00:20 PM »

Got my hands on more unit data...20 start, 20 end, 6 new, 9 renewed? How does that work?
Apparently not very well.
Logged


Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,059
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2015, 10:31:16 PM »

Got my hands on more unit data...20 start, 20 end, 6 new, 9 renewed? How does that work?
Apparently not very well.


But this is the data each wing looks at for SoM...I doubt they do the math on these...
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,270

« Reply #10 on: January 22, 2015, 10:34:16 PM »

Got my hands on more unit data...20 start, 20 end, 6 new, 9 renewed? How does that work?
Apparently not very well.


But this is the data each wing looks at for SoM...I doubt they do the math on these...

Having seen behind the curtain, I would say you are correct, not to mention the award is not
objective based on the numbers, it's a subjective award based on the approver, including not
being a roll-up award to Region and NHQ..
Logged


Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,059
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #11 on: January 22, 2015, 10:42:19 PM »

Got my hands on more unit data...20 start, 20 end, 6 new, 9 renewed? How does that work?
Apparently not very well.


But this is the data each wing looks at for SoM...I doubt they do the math on these...

Having seen behind the curtain, I would say you are correct, not to mention the award is not
objective based on the numbers, it's a subjective award based on the approver, including not
being a roll-up award to Region and NHQ..


Yea...always wondered about that. 39-3 is quite vague on the subject, besides the criteria they want used...and then tossing out the "ultimately, the commander decides" bit:





I always thought that at least our wing had a published (or not so much) standard that is used, but it seems to be anecdotal in its application.


What I don't get is if the SoM leads to the SoD and Nat.SoD, why ISN'T it an objective standard with SOME Command discretion? If we're all doing the math differently, how does that pan out at Region? National?



Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,270

« Reply #12 on: January 22, 2015, 11:09:08 PM »

If we're all doing the math differently, how does that pan out at Region? National?

The award is presented based on the whim of the approver, who may, or may not use or discount the SOM numbers at his discretion.

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2015, 11:12:44 PM by Eclipse » Logged


Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,059
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #13 on: January 22, 2015, 11:43:28 PM »

Which is just another reason why, once I actually knew how this worked, I stopped caring about the SoM.

Just about the only use I have for SoM and QCUA is the stats it keeps.




Yea..I can't make heads or tails of this data:

Start   End   New   Renew   WBA   Mitchell   Earhart   Eaker   Spaatz   Encampment   O-Flights   99s
12   10   4   9   2   1   0   0   0   4   YES   60
30   29   12   20   5   3   1   0   0   8   YES   76
14   18   9   9   2   0   0   0   0   1   YES   35
20   20   6   9   3   2   1   0   0   7   YES   26
44   42   17   23   2   5   2   1   0   8   YES   15
13   13   5   7   1   2   0   0   0   3   YES   17
« Last Edit: January 22, 2015, 11:56:24 PM by Capt Hatkevich » Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: Squadron of Merit report in E-Services
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.18 seconds with 25 queries.
click here to email me