SQTR Approval Issues

[ka8yiu]

I need to understand something about approving and disapproving qualifications in eServices.

Let's say that a member has their MRO, and now is training for UDF. Some of the tasks for MRO are part of the UDF training, such as the radio tasks and keeping a log. Now, those tasks are "GREEN" and therefore "ACTIVE" for the second qualification, in this example, UDF. If these task dates are PRIOR to the commanders approvals for the UDF, do they count, or do they have to repeat the tasks for the UDF qualification? Remember, they are showing as active on the new SQTR entry page.

Also, do the tasks have to have a mission number, or can training take place outside of an exercise?

Kevin

[Eclipse]

Tasks count for all cross-pollinated qualifications regardless of whether CC approval for it was entered.  Ultimately a member could not get a quaification completed without that CC approval, but the tasks themselves are not connected to that.

Mission numbers are not required for any specific tasks, only demonstrating the skill as per the steps indicated in the guides.

[Spaceman3750]

You should really talk to whoever is going to be doing the upstream approval. What Eclipse said is correct; however, not all approvers are going to put enough thought in it to realize that this is the case. Then again, most approvers don't check the dates anyways.

[arajca]

Once you've completed the task, you've completed it. It doesn't matter what qualification you've completed it for initially. In your example, is operating the radio different for UDF than MRO? Before saying yes, look at the task evaluation. It's the same exact task number and evaluation.

The only caveat is for requalifying. Some tasks expire and you need to complete them again.

[ka8yiu]

Thanks all.

This is happening, and just happened today, and will affect my decision to renew in July.

The example I gave was exactly what happened to a member. I did three days of UDF training, signing everyone off, only to have them disapproved because of this date issue. The members MRO training made those specific tasks active, but because they were AFTER the CC approval, they did not count.

The only option is to pencil-whip the entries, which I have a problem with. 20 years as a police officer, I never went into court, nor completed any report, pencil-whipping anything!

This is just my opinion, but I believe that the approvals are listed on the SQTR AFTER the actual requirements because the tasks are to be completed BEFORE, and then the CC signs them off as being successfully completed. This only makes sense if you apply common sense. For example, to train for CUL, I needed my CC approvals, but some of my tasks that are active were completed prior, because I was in another Wing. The only option is to pre-date the approval to before I even moved to another state. If not, then, according to these rules, I have to re-complete my MRO and ICUT just so the dates flow in order. Am I the only one that sees this as crossing the I's and dotting the T's?

Sry Moderators, I just had to vent one more time.

Kevin

[JeffDG]

You should really talk to whoever is going to be doing the upstream approval. What Eclipse said is correct; however, not all approvers are going to put enough thought in it to realize that this is the case. Then again, most approvers don't check the dates anyways.

When I used to be the Wing ES Training Officer, the main dates I would check would be:

Is the Fam/Prep approval => Prerequisites Approval?
Are the mission participation dates >= Fam/Prep Approval?

[ka8yiu]

You should really talk to whoever is going to be doing the upstream approval. What Eclipse said is correct; however, not all approvers are going to put enough thought in it to realize that this is the case. Then again, most approvers don't check the dates anyways.

When I used to be the Wing ES Training Officer, the main dates I would check would be:

Is the Fam/Prep approval => Prerequisites Approval?
Are the mission participation dates >= Fam/Prep Approval?

And those are the dates that should matter, and only those dates. As was said earlier, the tasks cross-pollinate the other quals. Disapproving the training because of this is wrong.

I am going to spend some time and see if 60-3 addresses any of this.

[ka8yiu]

I should point out another issue that the is being done wrong when it comes to SQTR's:  They are requiring the Commanders Approval dates for Prerequisites be BEFORE the dates that they complete them, as if they need approval to do the prerequisites, as opposed to signing off that they have completed them, as I think it should be. The same for the Prep Training, sign off BEFORE them, not after they have been complete.

Am I alone in seeing this as backwards?

K

[Spaceman3750]

I should point out another issue that the is being done wrong when it comes to SQTR's:  They are requiring the Commanders Approval dates for Prerequisites be BEFORE the dates that they complete them, as if they need approval to do the prerequisites, as opposed to signing off that they have completed them, as I think it should be. The same for the Prep Training, sign off BEFORE them, not after they have been complete.

Am I alone in seeing this as backwards?

K

They do have to approve before starting fam/prep. Per 60-3 you are authorized to train in a specialty by your commander. That is the pre-req approval "the member has completed all pre-reqs and is authorized to begin training". Then they approve your fam/prep to put you in trainee status.

[Eclipse]

They are requiring the Commanders Approval dates for Prerequisites be BEFORE the dates that they complete them,

Who is "they"?  That's a big part of this conversation.  Also, what kinds of tasks / pre-requisites?
Pre-requisites are different from cross-pollination, which is what I thought we were talking about.

ES qualifications are a national program with national policies and guidelines, absent an approved wing supplement to that effect.

A task completed in SDWG by a member of UTWG is perfectly valid when that member gets home.  No one has the authorization
to disapprove a completed tasking unless they have reason to believe the integrity of the SET is in question, or if the member
somehow demonstrates a lack of knowledge / ability tied to that task.

When it's the former, the person making the disapproval needs to explain that to the respective member.  I know I'd have a fairly "direct"
response for a staffer or commander who disapproved a task because the the cross-pollination date(s) didn't align to a given
qualification. 

"i'm sorry, the time I spent with your member was just 'free"? 

"His time is free?"

"Or are you questioning my integrity in the tasking?"

Cross pollination has been a normal course of ES training for at least 20 years.

[ka8yiu]

They do have to approve before starting fam/prep. Per 60-3 you are authorized to train in a specialty by your commander. That is the pre-req approval "the member has completed all pre-reqs and is authorized to begin training". Then they approve your fam/prep to put you in trainee status.

Ok, let me try and clarify...The above quote makes my point. Once the tasks or any other requirements in the "Familiarization and Preparatory Training" are complete, the commander approves them to allow the trainee to proceed with "Advanced Training", which then enters them into training status. THEREFORE, the date of the Commanders Approval must be equal to or after the tasks in the Fam and Prep section, the same as in the Prerequisites section, thus saying that you have completed this, and you may proceed with the next phase, Advanced Training.

So, for example, CUL Fam and Prep is the IS 100, 200, 700 and 800 courses. So, if I have these courses from, say, 2010, the commanders approval could be dated today, if this was when I wished to start training for this. This is approving me to proceed that I have completed all of the Fam and Prep requirements, yes?

Apparently, the approving authority in the Wing (they) believe that the approval for Fam and Prep must be BEFORE any tasks, and not after. By doing this, the trainee is being approved to DO the Fam and Prep, and not signing off that it has been DONE. So, if there are tasks in the Fam and Prep, these must be dated AFTER the commanders approval.

My contention is that this is being done backwards, and to help prove this, look at the SQTR's from about 10 years ago:  "The above listed member has completed the required familiarization preparatory training requirements for the (qualification name) and is authorized to serve in that specialty while supervised on training or actual missions."

I hope this clarifies my question of what is correct.

Kevin

[Spaceman3750]

Are you sure they are not referring to the commander's approval of prerequisites? On a qual with fam/prep, there are 3 commander approvals required - prerequisite approval, which must be done before fam/prep; fam/prep approval, which must be done after f/p before advanced; and approval of the completed sqtr.

[ka8yiu]

Are you sure they are not referring to the commander's approval of prerequisites? On a qual with fam/prep, there are 3 commander approvals required - prerequisite approval, which must be done before fam/prep; fam/prep approval, which must be done after f/p before advanced; and approval of the completed sqtr.

This is EXACTLY what I am saying is the right way, but is not being done that way.

Locally (squadron, group and wing), the Fam Prep approval is being dated BEFORE the tasks in the Fam Prep section, not after. It is essentially approval to DO the prep, not approving that it has been DONE.

I just looked at another squadron members MO SQTR. There are nine tasks in the Fam Prep section. They are all dated 13 MAY 2014, but the approval for Fam Prep is dated 01 APR 2014. This is what Wing approving authority wants done, approving them to DO, not approving that they have DONE as it should be.

This, as well as the dates of cross-pollination of tasks, keeps getting members qualifications dis-approved, and is driving people away.

[Eclipse]

I have a very hard time believing that this is happening at the wing level, since the Wing level "approvals" are more a
final check and balance then any "approval, and especially given that you are in FLWG which has one of the more active ES programs.

>If<, and I say >if< this is a wing staffer doing it, they are WOEFULLY misinformed about the letter, spirit, and
practical reality of CAP ES qualifications and your CC needs to start making phone calls.  Obviously, whomever is
disapproving the tasks would be on the disapproval emails, so it's easy to check.

This kind of nonsense would bring most wings to a screeching halt, and I agree kill member initiative.

[Eclipse]

For those scoring at home..

CAPR 60-3 Page 31:
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R060_003_075A4369FBA8E.pdf

"2-3. Specialty Rating Requirements and Performance Standards. For each specialty rating,
SQTRs have been developed to train and qualify members in stages. The most current versions
of the task guides for all specialties are found on the NHQ CAP/DOS website.
a. First, prerequisites must be completed prior to initiating training requirements.

b. Once trainees have met the prerequisites, they will be required to complete
familiarization and preparatory training for the specialty before serving in that position on actual
or training missions under supervision. Familiarization and preparatory training is the minimum
set of tasks that the member must master prior to acting as a supervised trainee on practice or
actual missions. These tasks represent those skills that will keep the member safe and allow the
member to function under supervision without jeopardizing the mission. This requirement
avoids placing personnel not ready to perform certain jobs or those who work for them at risk.

c. Finally, after completing familiarization and preparatory training, supervised trainees
must complete advanced training and participate satisfactorily in two missions before a CAPF
101 is approved and a member is considered "Qualified." Advanced training covers the
remainder of the tasks required for specialty qualification. On actual missions, it is expected that
these tasks could be accomplished by the trainee's supervisor or other fully trained members if
they became critical. These tasks do not have to be completed in a mission setting though. It is
acceptable for these tasks to be accomplished with similar familiarization and preparatory tasks
during routine unit training or in a formal school like the National Emergency Services
Academy. Prior approval and additional risk mitigation measures will be required by the
mission approval authority in order for these personnel to participate in a mission. Because all
trainees are properly supervised at all times, trainees are allowed to learn these "on the job."
These two "missions" do not have to be on different mission numbers, be AFAMs, or be
completed after all other advanced training is complete, but personnel must have completed all
familiarization and preparatory training in order to receive credit for these sorties. These sorties
must be complete sorties and/or operating periods where the member participates in all aspects of
their assigned mission specialty. It is possible to participate in more than one specialty on a
given mission or day."

Note that there is no mention of tasks needing to be completed subsequent to FAM/Prep or Advanced CC approval dates,
only that a member cannot serve in those specialties, specifically, until those approvals are entered, respectively.

In other words:

You can't be listed on a roster as "X" until you have CC approval of Pre-requisite and FAM/Prep, nor, obviously,
can you get mission credit for same, however you can certainly "use a compass" on a meeting night and get credit for it
if your GES is done and entered (etc., etc.), and if you don't go back to a qual that needs a compass for a year, it still sticks.

You then can't be listed as an unsupervised resource of "X" until your Advanced Training has been completed and the
unit CC (or higher) approves the AT and the final qual.

You can certainly complete advanced tasks at any time, with any SET nationwide who is inclined to listen to you stumble over
orientating a map towards North.

Someone can make an issue of tasks older then 2 years, but beyond that, the order of completion, in regards to the order of
CC approvals is literally irrelevant, and anyone making an assertion otherwise needs to brew their favorite java and actually READ 60-3.

*****************************************************

And just to make some practical examples of how silly this assertion would be:

GTM3 requires first aid as advanced training, so this would be saying a first aid card from last year would be invalid because
Fam/Prep was just approved today.

MSO requires ICS 300 & 400 as advanced tasks...so...a member would need to burn another week off from work because
he took those classes last year in advance of the need?

Spin again.

[Spaceman3750]

The moment any CC or staff member considers themselves a gatekeeper, instead of a facilitator, they have failed at their job.

That doesn't mean sometimes things don't get denied, but that denial should be grounded in what is in regulation, not what you'd like to happen.

Alternatively, there could be some grand misunderstanding here that could be cleared up with a phone call.

[Eclipse]

The moment any CC or staff member considers themselves a gatekeeper, instead of a facilitator, they have failed at their job.

BAM - give that man a tactikewpie doll.



As a wing ESO, my job was not to limit the people who could respond.  The assumption should always be in the favor of the member,
barring specific information or knowledge to the contrary.

By the time a qualification has reached wing, it's been approved by at least one commander, if not two, not to mention the
evaluator - hitting the "disapproved" button calls the integrity of the whole chain into question and needs to get a direct response.

[ka8yiu]

Thank you to everyone!!!   :clap:  I feel exonerated!

Now, how to see that it gets done right...

[ka8yiu]

"By the time a qualification has reached wing, it's been approved by at least one commander, if not two, not to mention the
evaluator - hitting the "disapproved" button calls the integrity of the whole chain into question and needs to get a direct response."


We had a retired attorney in our squadron, who was VERY knowledgeable in the ES arena of CAP. His AOBD was questioned, partially involving the dates issue, and he up and quit with little notice.

About a month later, my UDF re-qual was disapproved, and I got up and walked out. I was talked down, and came back to teach UDF a month later.

It was one of the trainees in my UDF training that had the dates again be used as an excuse to say no, and here we go again.

Questioning someones integrity is exactly what I felt, as our former member did, and what sent me out the door once, and almost again this weekend.

Again, thanks for letting me vent and pose this dilemma to the group. I do feel better now that at least I try the right way, regardless if someone else is misinterpreting their way as the correct way.

[JeffDG]

Are you sure they are not referring to the commander's approval of prerequisites? On a qual with fam/prep, there are 3 commander approvals required - prerequisite approval, which must be done before fam/prep; fam/prep approval, which must be done after f/p before advanced; and approval of the completed sqtr.

This is EXACTLY what I am saying is the right way, but is not being done that way.

Locally (squadron, group and wing), the Fam Prep approval is being dated BEFORE the tasks in the Fam Prep section, not after. It is essentially approval to DO the prep, not approving that it has been DONE.

I just looked at another squadron members MO SQTR. There are nine tasks in the Fam Prep section. They are all dated 13 MAY 2014, but the approval for Fam Prep is dated 01 APR 2014. This is what Wing approving authority wants done, approving them to DO, not approving that they have DONE as it should be.

This, as well as the dates of cross-pollination of tasks, keeps getting members qualifications dis-approved, and is driving people away.

Just as a note, Prerequisite and Fam/Prep approvals do not go to wing for approval.  The Unit is wholly in control of these.  Only final qualification goes the Unit->Group->Wing approval path.

[Storm Chaser]

"By the time a qualification has reached wing, it's been approved by at least one commander, if not two, not to mention the
evaluator - hitting the "disapproved" button calls the integrity of the whole chain into question and needs to get a direct response."


We had a retired attorney in our squadron, who was VERY knowledgeable in the ES arena of CAP. His AOBD was questioned, partially involving the dates issue, and he up and quit with little notice.

About a month later, my UDF re-qual was disapproved, and I got up and walked out. I was talked down, and came back to teach UDF a month later.

It was one of the trainees in my UDF training that had the dates again be used as an excuse to say no, and here we go again.

Questioning someones integrity is exactly what I felt, as our former member did, and what sent me out the door once, and almost again this weekend.

Again, thanks for letting me vent and pose this dilemma to the group. I do feel better now that at least I try the right way, regardless if someone else is misinterpreting their way as the correct way.

I've seen members first hand (granted, a small minority) trying to purposely cheat the system. I've also seen lots of well intentioned members validating tasks or approving qualifications incorrectly. That's why the current system is in place. It's not to question a member's integrity, but to ensure the qualification and approval process is followed correctly. If a qualification is denied in error, there are also mechanisms in place to correct that.

[Eclipse]

I've seen members first hand (granted, a small minority) trying to purposely cheat the system. I've also seen lots of well intentioned members validating tasks or approving qualifications incorrectly.

I have as well, shenanigans do occur but the current system is a lot harder to game.  BITD a CC or ESO could pretty much punch through anything they wanted with
few checks or balances, especially when / if the majority of the sign offs were done on paper and then caught up at a later date.

In this case someone is just making things up as they go along - there is supposed to be a reason given when anything is disapproved. 

If things really occurred as indicated here, the "reason" isn't a "reason", and it's unfortunate the member is the one who has to follow up.
As a commander, anytime I saw things like this, it was me or the respective staffer tracking down the fix.

[Storm Chaser]

I need to understand something about approving and disapproving qualifications in eServices.

Let's say that a member has their MRO, and now is training for UDF. Some of the tasks for MRO are part of the UDF training, such as the radio tasks and keeping a log. Now, those tasks are "GREEN" and therefore "ACTIVE" for the second qualification, in this example, UDF. If these task dates are PRIOR to the commanders approvals for the UDF, do they count, or do they have to repeat the tasks for the UDF qualification? Remember, they are showing as active on the new SQTR entry page.

Also, do the tasks have to have a mission number, or can training take place outside of an exercise?

Kevin

Any overlapping tasks completed as part of another qualification will reflect in other initial quals, regardless of commander approval dates. That's the way the Ops Quals SQTR system was designed, and it's valid and acceptable. A skills evaluator may still choose to have you demonstrate those skills again, especially if the tasks were completed a while back.

CAPR 60-3 does state that training tasks are good for two years. Unfortunately, because of the way Ops Quals works, tasks that are part of an active qualification show green on other initial quals even if the tasks are older than two years. As a skills evaluator, I like those re-accomplished prior to submitting a qualification for approval.

Tasks can be accomplished outside of a mission IAW CAPR 60-3. That said, some tasks are better accomplished in a mission setting.

If you feel your qualification was disapproved in error, I strongly encourage you to address it through your chain of command.

[Eclipse]

CAPR 60-3 does state that training tasks are good for two years. Unfortunately, because of the way Ops Quals works, tasks that are part of an active qualification show green on other initial quals even if the tasks are older than two years. As a skills evaluator, I like those re-accomplished prior to submitting a qualification for approval.

I'd say there is a lot in that sentence and while some of it is gray, that's not generally an SET's call absent other factors.

For starters, are we talking about initial or requal?

If a member comes to you for a sign off on "move point to point in a vehicle", it's not your call to look through his SQTR and
decide his "Keep a log" task is too old, so redo that as well. (etc).

Likewise, if he's on your team for a sortie, you're not there to review his history (nor would you generally even be aware of it),
your job is to evaluate his performance over the course of the sortie, and if he's successful, "click, quote, print".

Now if you hand him a compass and he tries to make a phone call on it, there would be some validity to redo-ing the
navigation tasks, but an SET, absent related staff or command appointments, isn't going to be able to undo an old task,
only enter the redo. Beyond that all he can do is recommend the qual be suspended or related tasks unchecked.

This goes double on a requal, which only requires the tasks eServices puts forth in gray.

Beyond that, if it's green, it's green.  I have a lot of other details to worry about beyond fixing NHQ's math.

I'm guessing, though, that like a lot of SETs, you're the end-to-end guy, not to mention ES staff, so
anything broke, anywhere is your to fix, that colors the situation somewhat.

I never want to see people in the field walking into trees, or sitting in the right seat trying to radio misison base using the
seat belt, but as a CC who is trying to rebnuild Es capability after years of the unit's members being left to their own
devices, I also don't have time for nuances that NHQ doesn't even care about, especially for members who are otherwise
clearly capable.

[Luis R. Ramos]

I also saw what I think the thread posting has turned into.

I went to a bivouac to get some familiarization and prep training. Think it was for UDF. However the trainer did not want to acknowledge it because he said my CC had not signed the "Commander Approval for Fam and Prep Training."

He insisted the CC should have signed the "Commander Approval for Fam and Prep Training" first as an indication he was giving me approval to take any training at all to include the familiarization tasks.

The way I see it, and is supported by the appropriate regs:

Since it is in order of "1234" or from top on down:

Member completes the prerequisites.

Then CC approves the member as taking the prerequisites.

Then member completes the fam and prep training.

Then CC signs for the fam and prep training.

Then member starts the advanced training.

However the OP writes about what others describe as cross-pollination. This is difficult to avoid, and as a squadron ESO I do not look at the dates only to make sure they are current.

For example, a member goes for UDF. Some of those tasks cross-pollinate to GTL, GTM3, GTM1, GTM2, and MRO. Can / should we not accept those cross-pollinated tasks? Why not?

The member may decide they only wanted one ES specialty at the time. Or maybe they had difficulty getting the other tasks required to finish other qualifications.

And while we are at it, IS-100, IS-700, IS-300 and the others are listed as "advanced tasks." However for members waiting to take them after they take the fam and prep tasks only makes it more difficult for a member to be trained. You have an excellent member, interested in ES. Should we not tell him to take IS-100 or 700 because he has not been able to get Curry or CAPT 116?

What about the new member who had to take IS-100 or IS-700 because he was a member of an EMT crew so was required to take it, then joined CAP? Should we make him re-take IS-100?

[Spaceman3750]

IS and ICS are tracked as separate qualifications and should be completed as early in training as possible.

[Storm Chaser]

CAPR 60-3 does state that training tasks are good for two years. Unfortunately, because of the way Ops Quals works, tasks that are part of an active qualification show green on other initial quals even if the tasks are older than two years. As a skills evaluator, I like those re-accomplished prior to submitting a qualification for approval.

I'd say there is a lot in that sentence and while some of it is gray, that's not generally an SET's call absent other factors.

For starters, are we talking about initial or requal?

If a member comes to you for a sign off on "move point to point in a vehicle", it's not your call to look through his SQTR and
decide his "Keep a log" task is too old, so redo that as well. (etc).

Likewise, if he's on your team for a sortie, you're not there to review his history (nor would you generally even be aware of it),
your job is to evaluate his performance over the course of the sortie, and if he's successful, "click, quote, print".

Now if you hand him a compass and he tries to make a phone call on it, there would be some validity to redo-ing the
navigation tasks, but an SET, absent related staff or command appointments, isn't going to be able to undo an old task,
only enter the redo. Beyond that all he can do is recommend the qual be suspended or related tasks unchecked.

This goes double on a requal, which only requires the tasks eServices puts forth in gray.

Beyond that, if it's green, it's green.  I have a lot of other details to worry about beyond fixing NHQ's math.

I'm guessing, though, that like a lot of SETs, you're the end-to-end guy, not to mention ES staff, so
anything broke, anywhere is your to fix, that colors the situation somewhat.

I never want to see people in the field walking into trees, or sitting in the right seat trying to radio misison base using the
seat belt, but as a CC who is trying to rebnuild Es capability after years of the unit's members being left to their own
devices, I also don't have time for nuances that NHQ doesn't even care about, especially for members who are otherwise
clearly capable.

CAPR 60-3, Para. 2-2.a, states:

Training to qualify in a specialty is expected to be completed within 2 years from the time the member is authorized to begin familiarization and preparatory training in Operations Qualification on a Specialty Qualification Training Record (SQTR). Members not completing training requirements within two years should expect to re-demonstrate expired portions of their training.

If a member has a task, green or otherwise, that is over two years old, they have to re-accomplish it before they can complete their initial qualification.

But you're right, while I have some authority and discretion as a commander within the constraints of the regulation, as a skills evaluator I have no authority to make a trainee complete a task. I can, however, withhold the exercise participation sign off if I don't feel they performed to the level expected. That includes demonstrating different skills, even if those skills have previously been signed off. Now, as a rule of thumb, I don't reevaluate tasks that have already been signed off unless the member seems unable to perform. In that case, I will do instruction and have them redo the task to demonstrate their understanding.

[Eclipse]

If a member has a task, green or otherwise, that is over two years old, they have to re-accomplish it before they can complete their initial qualification.

But you're right, while I have some authority and discretion as a commander within the constraints of the regulation, as a skills evaluator I have no authority to make a trainee complete a task. I can, however, withhold the exercise participation sign off if I don't feel they performed to the level expected. That includes demonstrating different skills, even if those skills have previously been signed off. Now, as a rule of thumb, I don't reevaluate tasks that have already been signed off unless the member seems unable to perform. In that case, I will do instruction and have them redo the task to demonstrate their understanding.

Agree all the way around, just wish the system complied with the regs, but I realize math is hard, and
computers aren't very good at doing date comparisons or if/then so whadda goin' do?

[Storm Chaser]

I went to a bivouac to get some familiarization and prep training. Think it was for UDF. However the trainer did not want to acknowledge it because he said my CC had not signed the "Commander Approval for Fam and Prep Training."

He insisted the CC should have signed the "Commander Approval for Fam and Prep Training" first as an indication he was giving me approval to take any training at all to include the familiarization tasks.

The way I see it, and is supported by the appropriate regs:

Since it is in order of "1234" or from top on down:

Member completes the prerequisites.

Then CC approves the member as taking the prerequisites.

Then member completes the fam and prep training.

Then CC signs for the fam and prep training.

Then member starts the advanced training.

You are correct. The commander approval for prerequisites is there to certify the prerequisites were met and the member is authorized to start fam & prep training. Once fam & prep is completed, the commander approval authorizes the member to start advanced training. It goes in that order.