Ground Team Badge

Yeah so validation was always required, if a member used someone else's capid.
--so was SET, however SET wasn't specialty specific back then, it was just one over-arching thing once you had it (by passing the little 10 question quiz thingy), it applied universally.


Now SET is per-specialty, so you might be SET in one thing but not in another.  And you have to be current/qualified AND SET to sign someone off, which wasn't exactly the case, before.  Now the system works the way it was always intended to (as described in the regs), it has only just recently begun to be software enforced. 

Also now you will see wings implementing rules like "you must be qualified for 1 year before we will make you an SET"

Hi guys. Interesting discussion. Got a few thoughts/opinions:


On Wings implementing rules: the one you imply Coudano, is not, as Spaceman correctly states, a Wing invention. Wings must adhere to the rules as well, in not making up rules without Supplements, but this one is canon from the regs already. I see your point completely though.


On completing SET training: anyone can go into the system and take the easy Skills Evaluator Training module and pass it, no sweat. However, having completed the training does not equate to "SET designation" either generally or in any specific rating.


On SET designation: having completed the quickie SET test, and having been qualified in a given specialty for 12 months does not necessarily entitle any given person to being designated by their Squadron, Group, or Wing as a "SET qualified" evaluator/approver for tasks. In my Wing we are currently examining SET requests on a case by case basis and are approving strong candidates for SET designation (we are checking WMIRS logs to look at currency and depth of experience for example - and are no longer accepting minimal quals for SET designation). When you accept minimal quals in your gate keepers, you get minimal performance and the data escapes/errors snowball until volunteers cant handle the brokenness any more.


On when/where to use SETs: systematically, we've seen that setting the bar higher for "check ride" evals challenges members to rise to the challenge ("Excellence in All We Do" core value), but we need to keep in mind the need for high operational availability/access of SET designated members to trainees, so structuring a better system of individual-qual focused training events and task signoffs, building to team/crew skill focused local SAREX/DREX AFAMs for mission credit, building then to SAREX/DREX AFAMs focused on actually exercising a PLAN and/or MOUs (e.g. hurricanes, quakes, etc.) is a strategy which should focus on SET availability for initial quals during individual-focused events, and still allow separate exercises (FEMA calls them drills) to be focused on rehearsals. Crawl/walk/run.


I'm still seeing echoes of the old signoff system (I think Eclipse is correct about the circa 2012 time frame). For example, I just looked at one member in my Wing whose initial GTM3 SQTR quals appear to have been entered almost entirely by CAP IDs which do not exist, and which have consecutive ID numbers (e.g. 123456, 123457, 123458). That's pretty suspect. Once I started checking these CAPIDs and found the fourth one that returned "not a member", my spidey sense was in full alert. In this instance, I'd want to see paper records of the initial quals to audit her performance against real members (recall, renewals don't require recurrent training in all tasks, but designating her a SET for the specialty means she would be approved to sign people off in tasks for which we have questionable audit trails that she'd originally mastered herself). That's just not happening on my watch, and I don't feel that members should expect automatic designation as a SET evaluator without having someone at their Wing doing due diligence and examining their suitability. To do otherwise is a reg bust and invites liability via negligent appointment, IMHO.


So, I'm unsurprised to see that LTC Long and his pros are still logging individual certs (I've come to expect straight arrow, pro performance from them). Were I to see someone submit a diploma in lieu of individual task entries linked to a valid SET qual CAPID, I'd disapprove that in a heartbeat.


Finally, the next hurdle for us is to begin auditing, encouraging, and if necessary pruning SET quals: "To remain current in SET a member must complete new SET examinations within 180 days of issuance of a new examination". We need SET designated members to stay sharp and in practice, and not mumbling/waffling/skipping task/conditions/standards, or rushing people through (e.g., "completing" all GTM3 tasks in one weekend in a non field environment, as we've seen in a few posts). Since I lost my IC qual a decade ago, I've let my aircrew side ratings all expire and I maintain my SET quals for GBD-down only, to stay proficient. I frankly vastly prefer the encouraging and supporting and networking side to losing SET designated folks - securing lots of funding for more training, scheduling it when convenient, coordinating and publicizing it, etc. to make sure we keep valuable SET guys happy and involved across unit boundaries to lift up all units.


V/r
Spam

I would like to see hope that LTC Long address the following.

From Spam

...unsurprised to see that LTC Long and his pros are still logging individual certs (I've come to expect straight arrow, pro performance from them). Were I to see someone submit a diploma in lieu of individual task entries linked to a valid SET qual CAPID, I'd disapprove that in a heartbeat.

From what I understood from LTC Long's message is not that his staff is logging individual certificates for NESA. His staff is logging skills and task achievements. His graduates still have to upload the certifications, or bring back to the squadron.

This was the case with the cadet that transferred to my squadron. She alleged she attended NESA and was GTM3 qualified. However no certificate had been uploaded but eServices OPS QUAL stated she was GTM3. I asked for her certificate, and looked for task completion. So I accepted what she said, and uploaded said certificate into the system.

Spam, are you saying this is not good? That the certificates from NESA are not / should not be accepted in lieu of the SQTRs if brought by a cadet?

I would like to see hope that LTC Long address the following.

From Spam

...unsurprised to see that LTC Long and his pros are still logging individual certs (I've come to expect straight arrow, pro performance from them). Were I to see someone submit a diploma in lieu of individual task entries linked to a valid SET qual CAPID, I'd disapprove that in a heartbeat.

From what I understood from LTC Long's message is not that his staff is logging individual certificates for NESA. His staff is logging skills and task achievements. His graduates still have to upload the certifications, or bring back to the squadron.

This was the case with the cadet that transferred to my squadron. She alleged she attended NESA and was GTM3 qualified. However no certificate had been uploaded but eServices OPS QUAL stated she was GTM3. I asked for her certificate, and looked for task completion. So I accepted what she said, and uploaded said certificate into the system.

Spam, are you saying this is not good? That the certificates from NESA are not / should not be accepted in lieu of the SQTRs if brought by a cadet?

I am not Herr Long but I will attempt to address this nonetheless. All students who attend NESA GSAR have the tasks and sorties which they completed uploaded into ops quals following graduation each week. No further upload or SQTR updates should be required for those members who qualified on-site. Those who arrive with all pre-requisites (NIMS/ICS), successfully demonstrate all tasks, and successfully demonstrate understanding of the material (talking "put the pieces together" here, not individual tasks) and personal maturity befitting exercise credit, will return home with a lit GT qualification (whichever one(s) apply to that course). Those who do not return home with a lit GT qualification tend to fall into one of two categories:

1. They did not arrive with the stated NIMS pre-requisites and must complete them then run their qual through channels locally.
2. Something was left incomplete at the school. This could be tasks which were not successfully demonstrated; or it could be that they did not display the maturity or total comprehension that GSAR looks for, and therefore had one or more sortie completions withheld. In either case, the student is individually informed of this.
2a. Every year a few individuals usually have mission credit withheld. This is most often due to the desire by GSAR staff to have them go home and gain a little more supervised experience prior to full qualification. The GSAR program is an immersion program and it can be difficult to grasp all concepts in one week.

All tasks, sortie completions, and commander's approvals are entered directly into ops quals by the academy. The authority to grant commander's approval is IAW CAPR 60-3 2-2d(2) and makes sense given that their respective chain must approve attendance. There was a time where these tasks were tracked on paper. It has not been this way in quite a few years.
 
As of the 2016 activity, BADGES were not being entered automatically (QUALIFICATIONS are, but BADGES were not) - the respective commander or ESO had to go validate that separately. I will note as a squadron commander and group ESO that this should be a purely administrative process and takes about one second to do.

If you are seeing students that are returning with a certificate but no tasks, I would encourage you to contact the staff at nesa-admin@nesa.cap.gov to clarify the status of that student and verify that a data entry error did not occur.

Note that this information is specific to GSAR. I am unfamiliar with the processes used by the Mission Aircrew School (MAS) or Incident Command System School (ICSS), however I can tell you as a squadron commander that I had a member attend MAS and I did not have to do anything with him after the fact - his qualification was already active. I just had to turn on the badge.

Checking back - looks like you saved me a bit of typing! 

Yep, that's what I meant. Plus, its certainly a great idea to publicly recognize and praise someone who attends an activity and walks with a certificate alone without full quals for some reason.

Cheers
Spam

Spaceman's detailed explanation is all correct.  In addition, the MAS school is handled in an identical manner as GSAR.  ICSS tasks are manually entered, as there are a number of different ratings that may be attained, and the student load is different.   His post also reminded me that he and I had a conversation (sometime last year) about additionally uploading the badge for members who actually rate.  I dropped the ball on that at some point.  However,  I did get the wheels in motion tonight to make the program changes in place for this year. 

I would like to see hope that LTC Long address the following.

From what I understood from LTC Long's message is not that his staff is logging individual certificates for NESA. His staff is logging skills and task achievements. His graduates still have to upload the certifications, or bring back to the squadron.

This was the case with the cadet that transferred to my squadron. She alleged she attended NESA and was GTM3 qualified. However no certificate had been uploaded but eServices OPS QUAL stated she was GTM3. I asked for her certificate, and looked for task completion. So I accepted what she said, and uploaded said certificate into the system.

I am a little confused on this.  What certificate did you upload?  A NESA graduation certificate?  If so, you are correct, we do not upload any graduation certificates, as they are not necessary to actually rate.  If you are referring to the badge, we should be able to upload that automatically this year with the tasks.

Also, my email is below - if anyone has any issues or questions with ratings at NESA, please feel free to email either myself or the NESA admin email.   We want to help.

The NESA graduation certificate.

As of the 2016 activity, BADGES were not being entered automatically (QUALIFICATIONS are, but BADGES were not) - the respective commander or ESO had to go validate that separately. I will note as a squadron commander and group ESO that this should be a purely administrative process and takes about one second to do.

I'm not sure why the Approved Activity can't directly award the badge.

First, the Regs give Approved activity directors (Staffs) to issue the 101 Card indicating the completed specialty

Approved directors of wing, region, or national emergency services schools can
issue CAPFs 101 for all specialties except IC, CISM, ARCHER or NOC Augmentees. Tasks
may be entered when training is provided by an authorized instructor. Approved directors may
issue CAPFs 101 for IC, CISM or ARCHER Operator when granted authority by the appropriate
wing or region commander, their designees, or NHQ CAP/DO in advance. NHQ CAP/DO will
coordinate approval of these school directors receiving appropriate access to Ops Quals to enter
qualification data.

Meaning that they are qualified IAW CAPR 60-3 and

CAP wing or region commanders (or their designees) and school/activity directors, as
appropriate, are the approval authority for the award of aeronautical ratings, ES qualification,
ground team, or incident commander badges, and ES patches to members within their
organization.

As of the 2016 activity, BADGES were not being entered automatically (QUALIFICATIONS are, but BADGES were not) - the respective commander or ESO had to go validate that separately. I will note as a squadron commander and group ESO that this should be a purely administrative process and takes about one second to do.

I'm not sure why the Approved Activity can't directly award the badge.

First, the Regs give Approved activity directors (Staffs) to issue the 101 Card indicating the completed specialty

Approved directors of wing, region, or national emergency services schools can
issue CAPFs 101 for all specialties except IC, CISM, ARCHER or NOC Augmentees. Tasks
may be entered when training is provided by an authorized instructor. Approved directors may
issue CAPFs 101 for IC, CISM or ARCHER Operator when granted authority by the appropriate
wing or region commander, their designees, or NHQ CAP/DO in advance. NHQ CAP/DO will
coordinate approval of these school directors receiving appropriate access to Ops Quals to enter
qualification data.

Meaning that they are qualified IAW CAPR 60-3 and

CAP wing or region commanders (or their designees) and school/activity directors, as
appropriate, are the approval authority for the award of aeronautical ratings, ES qualification,
ground team, or incident commander badges, and ES patches to members within their
organization.

Maybe there were some unit commanders who want the last say if their people get the Ground Team Badge and they complained.

Is there a report that shows who has the ground team badge? I think a found one some time back but can't find it today). It isn't in the cadets individual record.

Try: Ops Quals - CAPR 35-6 Ratings, Awards & Badges

Type in a CAPID, hit Tab, and scroll down to see all the current items.

The report you're looking for is "specific qualification listing" I believe.  It's the the "Operations" Reports.  You can select Basic Ground team Badge and see who is authorized that badge in the squadron. 

I have been able to locate both of these reports. However, neither is the one I am looking for which listed both ES qualifications and badges.

The one I listed does.    You can select the gtm's, udf, ground team badges, es patch.   All in one report. 
The badges and patch are proceeded with "CAP" so they're not necessarily in the spot in the list you might think they should be alphabetically.