CSA Decision Briefing Part 1 of 2

1
CSA Decision BriefingPart 1 of 2
23 Jan 01
2
Purpose
Obtain CSA decision on Army Development System
XXI Task Force recommendations.
Agenda

• ADS XXI Summary
• Recommendations
• Warrant Officer Personnel Management System
• Enlisted Personnel Management System
• Systems
• The Way Ahead

3
What The Challenge
MOS Management Challenges
Distribution by MOS and grade poses challenges
Force Structure Allowance
Operating Strength Total Strength - TTHS
Study and analysis Determine necessary
changes Design an implementation strategy

ADS XXI Mission

4
When / Where
26 initiatives
Issue
Problems
Jan01
Phase I Problem Definition
Phase III Modeling/Analysis
Manning
Phase IV Decision Making
Phase II Research
Phase V Reconciliation Phase VI Implementation
5
Why Understanding and Planning the Transformation
The Warrant Officer and NCO Corps of the
Objective Force
Tech
Career Timeline
Enl
Avn
10
8
12
13
17
21
22
27
AFS
4
3
0
2
5
6
ADS XXI Summary
ADS Definition A holistic system concept
combining officer, warrant officer, soldier and
civilian development systems. Consists of the
character development, performance evaluation,
leader development and personnel management
subsystems.
- OPMS XXI Final Report
Refine leader development and personnel
management
26 Initiatives

• Align warrant officer inventory
• and structure
• Provide agility and versatility to
• enlisted personnel management system
• Modernize personnel business practices

13 for CSA Decision
11 Approved by VCSA 20 Nov 00
2 Withdrawn
Recommendation 1. We continue reconciliation
/ implementation of VCSA-approved initiatives 2.
CSA approve 13 remaining initiatives
7
Recommendations Summary
VCSA Approved
For CSA Decision

• Rollback AC WO grade structure
• Assign AC WOs by grade
• Develop a WO tenure program
• Expand technical WO accession base
• Access technical WOs at 5 - 8 yrs of AFS
• Promote Senior WO applicants (SFC above) to
• CW2 upon graduating WOBC
• Educate officers NCOs on role of WO

• Tailor technical training to units
• and assignment
• Publish professional development
• and update other WO policies
• Provide force development
• specialty training to WOs in those
• positions

• Account for ASIs
• Refine NCOES
• Review and publish prof
• development objectives
• Civilian degree builder program
• MOS entry requirements
• ASVAB composites
• Adopt a reasonably equitable
• AGDM (AC)

• Multi-skilled soldier
• Combine MOSs with similar functions
• Quantify MOSQ
• Provide senior NCOs with experienced
• trainers/educators
• Provide leadership development feedback
• Structured self-development
• Select standbys for promotion

• Accelerate classification
• documentation process

8
WOPMS Recommendations
9
Fit Structure and Inventory
Allocate senior WO expertise to Army
requirements
Increases senior WO inventory
Requirements based by MOS
Develop a WO Tenure Program
Avn Tech
CW5 4.3 3.7
CW4 18.8 18.9
CW3 23.3 22.4
Assign AC WOs by grade
Aggregate Sustainable Structure
CW2 53.5 55.1
CW5 3.4
Documented Grade Structure
CW4 13.4
CW3 24.7
Rollback AC WO grade structure
CW2 58.5
Average Grade distribution Matrix (AGDM)
10
Rollback AC Warrant Officer Grade Structure
1
2
3
Recommendations Validate warrant officer
requirements and constrain to a sustainable grade
matrix. (1) Approve the Total Warrant Officer
Study recommended Average Grade Distribution
Matrix. (2) Validate warrant officer requirements
to standards of grade. (3) Align the active
component warrant officer requirements with the
approved AGDM.
X
X
X
X

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost Existing
• Programmed Dollars
• Start up FY01
• Sustainment FY02-05
• Lead Agency ODCSPER
• Time FY01-05

• Comments
• Sustainable structure is the right thing to do.
  
• Every warrant officer who meets the standard
  should be promoted without any constraints
  imposed by structure.
• This should be a proponent concern.
• AVN proponent advocates a trapezoid to increase
  the number of senior warrant officers in AVN
  organizations.

11
Assign AC Warrant Officers by Grade
Recommendation Assign senior warrant officers
by grade.
X
X

• Resource Requirement
• Estimated Cost Existing Programmed Dollars
• Start up FY 02
• Sustainment FY02-04
• Lead Agency ODCSPER
• Time FY02-04

• Comments
• Recommend we retain assignment and readiness
  reporting by grade band.
• ARNG nonconcurs because of state force
  structure.

12
Develop a WO Tenure Program
Original Recommendation Submit legislative
action to amend Title 10, USC, Section 580 to
exclude warrant officers in grade CW4, who have
twice failed selection for promotion, from
involuntary retirement or separation.

• Comments
• Upward mobility must be retained. Must
  identify a time frame and maintain mechanisms for
  quality checks.
• We cannot lose qualified WOs because of the
  structure pyramid.

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost Existing Programmed Dollars
• Start up FY01
• Sustainment FY02 and beyond
• Lead Agency ODCSPER
• Time FY01-FY05

• Must expand this issue to include 2XNS to CW4,
  this will provide job security for all senior
  warrant officers. AVN CTR
• Very supportive of efforts to change
  legislation for warrant officers on both
  promotions from CW3 to CW4, and CW4 to CW5.

Revised Recommendation, Change DA Policy and
Title 10, USC, to develop a WO tenure program at
CW3
13
Accession and Technical Expertise
Increases CW4 inventory
Presently accessing _at_ 10 - 11 year AFS results
in WOs retiring as CW3 (20 - 23 yrs)
Access technical WOs _at_ 5 - 8 years of AFS
Tailor technical training to unit assignment

• Distance Learning
• Industry
• Academia

Access from VOTECH schools and colleges for
shortage MOSs
Expand technical WO accession base
Expand feeder MOSs
14
Expand Technical WO Accession Base
Recommendation Recruit warrant officers for
selected technical specialties from non-feeder
enlisted MOSs, vocational schools, and community
colleges.

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost Existing Programmed Dollars
• Start up FY01, 4.2M
• Sustainment FY02, 4.2M
• Note FY03-08 4.2M
• Lead Agency TRADOC
• Time FY01- FY03

• Comments
• WOs need a dynamic recruiting effort. Look at
  the desire of an individual and balance with
  education.
• Need to take a hard look at where we need to
  create additional WO specialties.
• Look closely at VOTECH recruiting, prefer
  experienced NCOs.
• Concerned about the experience level of those
  coming from tech schools.

15
Access Technical WOs at 5 - 8 Years of Active
Federal Service
Recommendations (1) Target warrant officer
accessions to applicants with five to eight years
of AFS by requiring boards to select all fully
qualified applicants in that range before
selecting applicants with more than eight years
of AFS. (2) Streamline the accession application
to appointment process through automation.
1
2
X

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost Existing Programmed Dollars
• Start up FY01
• Sustainment FY02-15
• Lead Agency ODCSPER
• Time FY01-FY15

X
X

• Comments
• Need reserve component language that would
  equate to eight years of AFS.
• Five years does not seem to be an appropriate
  amount of time to develop the necessary
  experience level to be a proficient warrant
  officer. In addition, selections should be based
  on best-qualified period.
• Agree with earlier (5-8 years) warrant officer
  accessions as long as applicants with more than 8
  years AFS are not excluded. Concerned that we may
  not select best qualified.

16
Sustainment
OES / NCOES
Educate officers NCOs on role of WO
Include in DA PAM 600 - 3
Provide force development specialty training to
WOs in those positions
Publish professional development and update other
WO policies
Promote senior WO applicants (SFC above) to CW2
upon graduating WOBC
Increase accession base for shortage MOSs
17
Promote Senior WO Applicants (SFC Above) to CW2
Upon Graduating WOBC (Tech WO)
Recommendation Promote new accessions, who
previously held the rank of SFC and above, to CW2
after graduation from the proponent Warrant
Officer Basic Course.

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost Existing
• Programmed Dollars
• Start up FY01, 0.8M
• Sustainment FY02, 0.8M
• Note FY03-08, 4.8M
• Lead Agency ODCSPER
• Time FY01-FY03

• Comment
• Real issue is WO pay table.
• Nonconcur with promotion to CW2 for newly
  appointed E7-E9 in tech MOS.

18
Educate Officers and NCOs on Role of Warrant
Officer
Recommendations (1) Expand the current common
core courses for the OBC and CCC to include
information on the warrant officer recruiting
program. (2) Develop training support packages to
educate PLDC and BNCOC students on WO accessions
and opportunities, and ANCOC / USASMA students on
WO roles and responsibilities. (3) Include
identified warrant officer subjects into
respective OES/NCOES institutional courses.
X
X
X

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost 30K
• Start up FY01, 30K for class development
• Sustainment FY02, NA
• Lead Agency TRADOC
• Time FY01-03

• Comments
• Not at PLDC. Use in BNCOC as an
  awareness/recruiting tool. ANCOC and SMC should
  address roles and responsibilities of the WO
  program.
• No, warrant officers are recruited by senior
  leaders, not LTs and CPTs. junior officers are
  more concerned with small unit leadership rather
  than encouraging good soldiers to leave their
  units. PCC is the right place for this type of
  informational awareness.
• (PLDC/BNCOC) absolutely not. PLDC is for making
  soldiers into the best SGTs possible. We dont
  need to be encouraging them at this stage to
  aspire to be warrant officers.
• Disagree with cramming warrant officer stuff
  into OES/NCOES.

19
EPMS Recommendations
20
Adapting with Army Transformation
The Warrant Officer and NCO Corps of the
Objective Force
Legacy Force
Sustain Recapitalize
Transform
Objective Force
Objective Force
RD
ST
Procurement
and
Tech Solutions
Transform
Interim Force
Interim
Initial BCT
First Interim BCT
First Unit Equipped Objective
2000
2003
Tech

• Combine MOSs with similar functions
• Larger / fewer MOSs
• Predictability
• Ability to optimize
• Leader prerogative in utilization
• Army flexibility in distribution

Career Timeline
Avn
AFS
3
10
8
12
13
17
21
22
27
0
2
4
5

• Multi-skilled soldier
• Focus on function performed
• Competency based
• Specialization focused to unit
• equipment
• Evolves with transformation

• Modular course design
• Use of ASIs
• Augment with self- development

21
Multi-Skilled Soldier
2
3
1
Recommendations (1) Develop a competency-based
military occupational specialty (MOS) system. (2)
Incorporate MOS optimization in development of
multi-skilled concept. (3) Use multi-skilled
soldier concept as basis for long-term force
structure design decisions.

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost
• Start up FY01, 1.2M
• Sustainment FY02, 1.2M
• Note FY03-08, 6.1M
• Lead Agency TRADOC
• Time FY02-08

• Comments
• Broader options good for recruiting and
  retention.
• Do not put too many skills into one MOS.
• End result of the effort should be to produce
  best mix of skill sets required, not on reducing
  the number of MOS.
• Dont make soldier do multi, unrelated, complex
  tasks.
• Multi-skilled soldier should not reduce mission
  requirements or number of soldiers in unit.
• Ensure MOSQ enablers are in place for RC.

22
Combine MOSs with Similar Functions
1
2
Recommendations (1) Task TRADOC to study cross
proponent MOS mergers. (2) Establish a database
of MOS knowledge to facilitate future studies.
Proponent action reduced MOS 241 191
X
Proponent action reduced MOS 241 192
X

• Comments
• Should remain proponent decision.
• 18X and 46R must be retained.
• It is critical for me to maintain the
  management control over the assets to which I
  have been held accountable.

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost
• Start up FY01, 1M
• Lead Agency TRADOC
• Time FY01-08

23
MOS Optimization
Number of MOSs reduced from 241 to 191
Merged into Existing MOSs
Merged into new MOSs
Added MOSs 13H
Old - Merged MOS
Old - Merged MOS
Old MOS - New MOS
Old MOS - New MOS
Approved MOS additions 13W, 27D, 56M, 68S, 79V,
91G, 91H, 91J, 91W, 91Z, 92S
02B 02C 02D 02E 02F 02G 02H 02J 02K 02L 02M 02N 02
T 02U 02Z
63E - 63A 63H - 63Y
63J - 52C 63S -
63B 63W -63B 67N - 67T 68H - 68G
13P
13D
68F 68N
68E
44B - 44E 45B -
45K 45D - 63D
45E - 63A
Deleted MOSs 45N, 63N, 82C
73C 73D 73Z
02A
73E
71L75F 75H
75B
Approved MOS deletions 13C, 13E, 14D,14L,16X,
23R, 24K, 35B, 35C, 42E,43M, 57E, 71D, 71G, 71M,
74G, 76J, 91B, 91C, 93F
45T 63T
63M
88X - 88Z
35J 35N
35F
52X 63G
52D
24
MOS Merger Possibilities

• Task TRADOC to study cross proponent MOS mergers
  
• Align specialties to Objective Force
  Requirements and TRADOC Transformation
• Role of Branches vs BOS vs Warrior
  Development Centers vs OPMS Career Fields
• Warfighting vs Institutional Requirements

Fix Responsibility and Eliminate
Redundancy Mounted vs Dismounted 19D / 11M /
11B Anti-Armor 19K / 11H Indirect Fire
11C Information Operations PAO (46) / SC (25)
PSYOP /
CA (39)
Delineate Footprint vs Sanctuary Function
(Crusader?)
Hospital Cook vs Unit Cook Hospital Supply vs
Unit Supply Patient Admin vs Unit Admin Pwr Gen
Repr vs Fuel Elec Sys Repr EW Sys Maint Repr vs
Elec Maint Repr
Services vs Supply vs Transportation
25
Quantify MOSQ
Recommendations (1) Establish a method to
monitor, evaluate, prioritize training output and
manage resource allocation. (2) Establish
quantitative minimum standard guidelines for
MOSQ. (3) Institute a risk base assessment
linking dollars to training proficiency by
linking Training PEG to MOS competency. (4)
Proponents electronically publish tasks, location
of training, and required level of proficiency.
1
2
3
4
X
X
X

• Updated Recommendation,
• HQDA Define MOSQ
• TRADOC develop common soldier standards
• and standards by MOS and grade

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost
• Start up FY01, 241K
• Sustainment FY02, 92K
• Note FY03-08, 0.5M
• Lead Agency
• MOSQ, ODCSOPS
• Standards, TRADOC
• Time FY02-07

• Comments
• HQDA needs to define MOSQ. Core of issue is
  the need for a standards based Army.
• TGOSC does allocate funding, but current
  funding level is not enough.
• Cant decrease tasks trained or constrain flow
  to units.

26
NCO Development
We will continue to develop those leaders
through study in the institutional schoolhouse,
through field experiences gained in operational
assignments, and through personal study. (The
Army Vision)
Institutional
Operational
Self-Development

• Account for ASIs
• Discipline assignments
• Proper accounting
• Refine NCOES
• Appropriate level
• of education
• Facilitate attendance
• to PLDC
• Bench for SGM/CSM

• Provide leadership development
• feedback
• Structured self- development
• Civilian degree
• builder program

Review publish professional development
objectives
Provide senior NCOs with experienced
trainers/ educators
Nonresident certification (Distance Learning /
Civilian Schools / Industry)
27
Provide Senior NCOs with Experienced
Trainers/Educators
Original Staffing Results
Original Recommendation Modify the policy to
assign CSMs to designated positions in NTC, JRTC,
CMTC, USASMA, and other leadership positions
(ROTC, AC/RC)
X
X

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost
• Start up 500K
• Sustainment 500K
• Lead Agency ODCSPER Lead, TRADOC assist
• Time FY01-02

X
Revised Recommendations 1. Assign SGM with
operational experience to CTC O/C and USASMA
faculty advisor duties. 2. Leverage retired
CSM/SGM as contracted USASMA faculty advisors
and CTC mentors. 3. Allow successful CSMs to
volunteer for SGM training positions(i.e. CTC
O/C, USASMA faculty advisor) and permit them to
request follow-on assignment as CSM.
900K annually
28
Structured Self-Development
1
2
Recommendations (1) Adopt a program to
complement NCOES. (2) Proponents electronically
publish tasks, conditions, standards and training
support packages.
X

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost
• Start up FY01, 84K
• Sustainment FY02, 92K
• Note FY03-08, 0.5M
• Lead Agency TRADOC
• Time FY01-07

• Comments
• Dont make structured self-development required
  or mandatory.
• Should not be mandatory.
• Resources must be closely monitored.

29
Sustainment
Flexibility - Keep inventory shaped to
requirements

• Structure pyramid
• by MOS

Select standbys for promotion (SFC-SGM)
Keep pace with MOS evolution
Adopt a reasonably equitable AGDM (AC)
ASVAB composites
MOS entry requirements
30
System Changes
8 Life Cycle Functions
31
System Changes
Standardized MOS codes
Accelerate classification documentation process
MOCS Process
Training Development
SMDR
Automation
Combined Support for Integrated Total Army
Personnel Data Base (ITAPDB)
FYOO
FYO4
FYO5
FYO1
FYO2
FYO3
32
Standardize MOS Codes
Recommendation Standardize MOS codes to
include - Skill Identifiers (Branch / MOS)
- Skill Qualification Identifiers (SQIs)
- Additional Skill Identifiers (ASIs) . . . to
eliminate duplication, gain greater efficiency,
and provide accurate identification of
qualifications and position requirements 15 O3
D 5P , 15 W3 D 5P, 15 E6 D 5P

• Resource Requirements
• Estimated Cost
• Start up FY01, 75K
• Lead Agency ODCSPER
• Time 4 Years

Comments None
33
The Way Ahead

• WOPMS / EPMS XXI Implementation Team remains
  dedicated to WOPMS and EPMS XXI through end FY02
  (VCSA Memo, 1 Dec 00)
• Transforms concepts to plans
• Transition execution routinely to functionals
• Support NCO and WO Blue Ribbon Panel
• Publicity Campaign

34
ADS XXI Overall Findings

• No requirement for change
• Character development core values and warrior
  ethos
• Performance evaluation
• OERs and NCOERs
• Up or out quality management
• Leader development
• We are about leadership it is our stock in
  trade
• Institutional (education), Self-development,
  Operational (training)
• Personnel management requirements based by
  MOS
• Do not address
• Pay Compensation
• Inventory Shortfall
• Organization for Combat

peculiar tribal culture of its regimental
system, in which each regiment (branch) was a law
unto itself. A War to be Won
35
Recap

• Conduct a comprehensive study of the Warrant
  Officer and Enlisted Personnel Management System
  and recommend changes to ensure continued
  readiness into the 21st Century.
  (CSA Charter, 19 Nov 99)

• Following CSA decisionset in motion policy
  changes required
• (VCSA Extension, 1 Dec 00)

• Resource Summary
• FY01 FY02 FY03-07
• System 0.7M 0.0 0.0
• WOPMS 8.0M 6.9M 20.4M
• EPMS 6.0M 2.3M 10.0M
• TF Total 14.7M 9.2M 30.4M

• Initiatives are unresourced

Study and analysis Determine necessary
changes Design an implementation strategy

ADS XXI Mission