Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Combat Service Support Division
Welcome United States Army Human Resources Command 29 Jun 05
2
Briefing Purpose To provide information to and address key officer personnel issues affecting Combat Service Support officers. Provide information to assist you in mentoring junior officers and answer your questions.
3
What I Want You to Take Away!
Don’t break contact with us. If we can’t get a hold of you, we can’t communicate with you! The Army Human Resources Command (HRCOM) is changing how it does business, stay current. Must have an Officer Retention Program. Commanders and HRCOM must shape realistic expectations and preferences. Priorities are clear: GWOT Modularity “Readiness is Paramount” Personnel Assignment and Professional Development policies and programs are in a great state of flux. Importance of mentoring and counseling officers
4
Briefing Outline Mission Organization OPMS III OER/Rating Philosophy Career Management Miscellaneous
5
ASSIGN THE RIGHT OFFICER TO THE RIGHT JOB AT THE RIGHT TIME.
Mission ASSIGN THE RIGHT OFFICER TO THE RIGHT JOB AT THE RIGHT TIME. CSSD CREDIBILITY Reputation Integrity Commitment Fairness Requires TASKS Meet Army Requirements! Officer Professional Development Officer Personal Desires To Accomplish
6
OPERATING DIRECTORATES Information Technology Combat Service Support
Our Organization ARMY G1 CG HRC OPERATING DIRECTORATES DIRECTOR, OPMD IMB Ms Brown BG Hernandez EPMD TAGD Information Technology OPMD PERSINSD DEPUTY DIRECTOR COL Roncoli MSB Ms Hollander Management Support LDD FAD CAD CSAD CSSD OPS/PLANS COL Stallings Mr. Kendall COL Martin COL Robertson COL Curl COL Fix Education & Strategic Change Functional Area Assignments Combat Arms Assignments Combat Support Assignments Combat Service Support Assignments Operations and Plans (“S3 Shop”) SMD COLs DIVISION HSD WOD LTC McGarrity COL Wilson COL Allen CW5 Jenkins Medical Specialist Assignments Warrant Officer Assignments 8 Assignment Divisions 1 Operations Division 1 Officer Professional Development Division Special Units Colonel Assignments As of 10 DEC 04
7
CSSD Organization Colonel’s Division
COL Curl Colonel’s Division Division Chief QM LTC Hamilton LTC Kennedy XO TC LTC Heibel LTCMorrow LTC(P) Gardner LTC(P) O’Connor LTC Gill LTC Hagan COL Yocum FA 90 Branch Chief QM Branch Chief OD Branch Chief TC Branch Chief AG Branch Chief FI Branch Chief OD LTC Cantolina Mailing Address:: Telephone: Branch Telephone Numbers: Commander, HRCOM DSN: / QM (AHRC-OPC-Q): x8119/8123 ATTN: AHRC-OPC COMM: (703) / OD (AHRC-OPC-O): x8122/2623 200 Stovall Street FAX : DSN /8025 TC (AHRC-OPC-T): x5290/5291 Alexandria, VA FAX: COMM (703) AG (AHRC-OPC-A): x5272/8106 FI (AHRC-OPC-F): x5293/0332 FA 90 (AHRC-OPC-L): x5262/7494 As of June 2005
8
OPMS III Briefing Outline Mission / Organization
Officer Evaluation Report Career Management Miscellaneous
9
OPMS 2. “Dual-track” system. No career fields OPMS 2 to OPMS XXI/3
Driven by environmental changes Required Officer Management changes to: Increase Warfighting readiness Develop both specialists and operators Endstate - 4 career field-based officer management system Must change to better support a Joint and Expeditionary Campaign Quality Army Let me set the context for our current system. OPMS 2 was implemented in 1985, the first review since Principle outcome was a “dual-track” system—all officers if not working in their branch could work in their functional area. 1996, Gen Reimer,directed OPMS XXI Review. Several environmental dynamics drove the review--the Cold War drawdown, as well as 3 major legislations (Goldwater-Nichols 1986, Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act 1990, and Title VII and XI legislation for AC/RC ’92/’93). These acts created serious structure-inventory mismatches. Field Grades were overstructured auths and could meet only 75% of Army reqts. Skills were not aligned with requirements —MI, SC and Log were significantly understrength. Combat arms filled most branch immaterial positions and 2/3s were working outside their branch. Readiness suffered. Officers were being pulled to meet other reqts too rapidly. Majors highlight the challenge--fewer major jobs available, created a queue, and with a higher demand for majors after Bn XO/S3 time to meet legislated requirements, many received only 12 months. Average Bn Cmd selects were only getting 1 yr in key major positions—today we’re almost at 3 yrs. FA skills produced limited deeply experienced specialists; almost none were promoted (except Army Acquisition Corps). Most stayed on the command track, gained little experience, averaging 8-10 years between FA assignments. Senior Leadership recognized a need to develop increased depth in both warfighters and specialists. OPMS 21, today’s OPMS 3 is a 4 career field system for FGs where 75% of officers serve in the OP CF, their branch, and the rest in a FA --not both. While this system is generally working as intended, it’s being impacted by restructuring, rebalancing, and stabilization and needs to adjust to support a Joint and Expeditionary Campaign quality Army.
10
Strategic View Where We Are Today… Where We Are Headed???
IOCF ISCF OSCF OPCF 4 Army Career Fields Functionally Aligned…Joint Experienced Professionally Developed Adaptable Leaders Flexible Career Paths… Increased Stability Skills Based…Breadth and Depth Deep Bench…Lifelong Learning Robust Incentives…Lifetime of Service This slide highlights where we are and where we believe we’re headed. Shift from today’s 4 CFs that are aligned principally for promotion management, to functionally aligned CFs with emphasis on increased joint experience to enhance joint warfighting skills. This would require expanding our current joint rules to increase opportunity and to identify and develop depth in special skills that serve repetitively in joint assignments—for example, strategic intell and faos. Additionally, we look to begin joint officer development as early as CPT. We would shift from a bureaucratic, prescriptive management system to a less prescriptive professionally-tailored system that would provide opportunity to serve in a wide range of assignments all important to a campaign quality army while reducing turbulence with force stabilization as the foundation. We would shift from preference driven to skills based assignments to meet army requirements while developing breadth, officers able to do many things well, and depth, a pool of specialists—experts developed in their field through repetitive assignments where the army requires these special skills. This would include shifting to flexible timelines which allow us to grow a deeper bench of strategic leaders through the opportunity for lifelong learning—education opportunities as well as 360 assessments. Additionally, this would explore the merits of moving from our current “up or out” to a ‘perform and stay” system. Finally, we must continue to recruit and retain the all-volunteer Army. The current capacity to provide officer incentives is greatly limited, and reflects little substantive change over the past three decades. We need to develop a menu of incentives to buy the Future Force now. These incentives need to be targeted to the specific interests for officers in different times in their career.
11
Summary of Recommendations
Develop Skills: Functionally align skills Career Paths Adopt a new Officer Development Model Provide less prescriptive development Synchronize Professional Military Education with Civilian Education Modify Career Field Designation (CFD) Process Recruit and Retain all Volunteer Force: Develop intrinsic and extrinsic incentives Develop skills. This construct is intended to align Army functions, possibly reduce CFs, to support modularity, and Joint Warfighting in order to increase Joint experience and to ensure we grow leaders skilled and capable of supporting combatant commanders. Detailed work is required to figure out the best CF structure given where we’re headed with the ACP and the ASPG to ensure we’re developing officers with the skills we need to provide necessary breadth and depth. We intend to synch this effort with TRADOC Futures and JFCOM. Career Paths. We’re developing 4 major areas tied to career paths. First, Adopt a new Officer Development Model different than today’s model. Designed around developing a joint and professional officer corps. This model emphasizes the importance of jiim and educational experiences up front. It reinforces our profession by establishing clear certification standards. It provides less prescriptive development--we’re looking to get beyond today’s direction of attack mentality, where paths are tightly defined, to broad boundaries. We need to highlight that in a campaign quality army, assignments in the operating and generating force are important but the focus for young company grade officers remains unchanged. We need to highlight that promotion opportunity will remain high and it’s ok to go where the army needs your skills and experience. At the same time, command will remain central to what we do and overall command opportunity will remain high. We’re conducting a cradle to grave review of education requirements to ensure we’re linking civilian education and military education requirements. We’ll conduct a gap analysis intended to produce a strategy that will synchronize officer skills from pre-commissioning to ACS to ensure we’re investing smartly in developing strategic leaders. This includes future reqts as well as addressing today’s regional/cultural/pol-mil skill requirements. We’re working with the commands, TRADOC and USMA. Modify Career Field Designation (CFD) Process – instead of the current designation upon selection to major we will start to develop operators and some limited number of specialists earlier in their career to support modularity and develop specialties that require extensive development time. And synchronize CFD with ILE which begins at the 8th year. Again, we’ll pursue a menu of incentives and work closely with the Competitive Advantage Working Group as they review incentives. We’re looking at programs that include ACS, branch of choice and posting for increased ADSOs for cadets and a different range of options for field grade officers.
12
OPMS TF Structure Director OPMD Log Corps Team NG/RC/WO Team Grad Ed
for Service Tiger Tm Career Field Team Education Team Log Corps Team NG/RC/WO Team Incentives Team 600-3 Tiger Tm WEB PAGE LDD - Task Force HQ REP REP REP G-1 REP OPMD ORSA ORSA FA90 WOD ORSA Rep TRADOC Rep Rep Rep Contract RAND RAND RAND ? JFCOM USMA ARSTAF NGB USARC HRC St. L ARSTAF USMA Other Agencies ARSTAF OEMA OSD Joint Staff OEMA CDT CMD AMC ARSTAF Access CMD
13
Current DA Pam 600-3 Career Development Model
(left side) This slide shows the current career path model which reflects a prescriptive career path ‘Yellow Brick Road “ Branch qualification is command time which leads to a rite of passage Prescriptive path at each grade level Does not emphasize joint skills and experience Narrow OES windows of opportunity We are moving away from this and will include the new model in DA Pam The proponents and TRADOC have heard your guidance and are moving in a direction consistent with the new model. Prescriptive Time Line Driven Command Centric
14
LDR Development Timeline Current OPMS III
FAD PZ MAJ/CFD PZ LTC PZ COL C C F D S C BDE CMD BR QUAL C S BN XO/S3 BRANCH QUAL JOINT/ OFCR GEN BN CMD BR UTIL JOINT/ OFCR GEN Highlights: 2LTs pin 1LT at 18 months and by law, must be a 1LT for 24 months, thus pin on to CPT is 40 months. We are targeting to send officers to CPTs Logistics Career Course as promotable LTs and graduate as CPTs. CAS3 is now incorporated at CLC3. Officers will still select a Functional Area at their 5th year of service. Currently, At tenth year, just after the majors board, officers will select their Career Field. After this point, officers will target for the cmd track in the Opns field and the other CF will become specialized in their new CF. However, under OPMS III Review, Eleminate FAD Process, Create 2 CFD, and Consolidate Career Field into TWO: OPS and ISCF In the Transporation World however, our functional requirements still outweigh our ability to support filling all the FAD requirements. OPS O B C BR TOE ASGMT/ DETAIL 3Rs/ FUNCT AREA TNG& ASGMT CMD NON OPS C S S S C FUNCT AREA QUAL FA/ JOINT/ OFCR GEN FA/JOINT/ OFCR GEN JOINT/ OFCR GEN FUNCT AREA DA Pam 600-3
15
Recommended Developmental Model (JIIM-E)
COMPANY GRADE FIELD GRADE Joint and Expeditionary Mindset CCC/WOAC ILE/WOSC SSC/WOSSC Operational Assignment OPERATING FORCE OPS GENERATING FORCE Joint, Inter-agency, Inter-governmental, Multi-national and Education (JIIM-E) Developmental Zone WOBC / BOLC Joint and Expeditionary Mindset Generalists Specialists GENERATING FORCE CFD The new Officer Developmental Model is designed to portray a much less prescriptive model designed around developing a Joint and Expeditionary professional officer corps. Inherent in the Army Officer Professional Developmental Model is a campaign quality that clearly indicates the linkage of the generating and operating force. Flexible timelines will enable officers to serve longer in developmental assignments ensuring officers have adequate time to gain skills and experience and also support unit readiness and cohesion. The centerpiece of the Officer Professional Developmental Model is the Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental, Multinational and Educational Developmental (JIIM-E) Zone. The JIIM-E Zone builds multifunctionality in field grade officers and directly supports developing Joint officers. JIIM-E assignments will become even more crucial in developing Joint force Commanders and staff officers. The focus for young company grade officers remains unchanged: to gain the requisite branch technical and tactical skills, to develop a warrior ethos, and to gain important leadership experience in company grade developmental assignments. Earlier career field designation points will enable the Army to start developing the skills and experience for officers to serve in other than operations career fields. OPERATING FORCE JOINT EXPEDITIONARY MINDSET 16 8 Developing Warriors for a Lifetime of Service Emphasizes “JIIM-E” experience Less prescriptive Synchronizes with Army Battle Rhythm Highlights importance of “Campaign-Quality” Army Promotes concept of “decathlete”
16
The operational environment is producing, in the near term, greater opportunities, broader assignments and less-prescriptive career paths. Promotions Transformation will increase promotion board selection rates for CPT – LTC… record highs for the next several years. Board guidance has been adjusted and values performance. Command Provide career paths to develop officers in branches with fewer company command opportunities. Overall BN and BDE CMD opportunity decreases slightly. Assignments Deployment experience is producing an officer corps capable of serving in positions of greater responsibility than OPMS 3 envisioned. Assignment priorities remain – Army requirements first, professional development next, and then officer preference … OPMS will reflect and support these priorities.
17
Contact Information
18
Qualification Data by FA
What is the CFD Process? 1 - SMITH 2 - FLANDERS 3 - HRIMPTON 4 - JENKINS 5 - LARSON + + Major’s Promotion List Officer Preference Commanders Input Abilities/ Experience A process that matches officer’s preference and capabilities with Army requirements. + Preference and requirement driven. OER- include operational and career field comments. = + CFD Board Designates Career Field Qualification Data by FA to CFD Board Army Requirements
19
Career Fields Operations Operational Support (OS)
Goal % Information Operations (IO) FA 24 Information Systems Engineering FA 30 Information Operations FA 34 Strategic Intelligence FA 40 Space Operations FA 46 Public Affairs FA 53 Information Systems Management FA 57 Simulation Operations Operations Basic Branches FA 39 PSYOP and Civil Affairs FA 90 Multifunctional Logistician Operational Support (OS) FA 48 Foreign Area Officer FA 51 Army Acquisition Corps Institutional Support (IS) FA 43 Human Resource Management FA 45 Comptroller FA 47 USMA Permanent Instructor FA 49 Operations Research/Systems Analysis FA 50 Force Management FA 52 Nuclear Research and Operations FA 59 Strategic Plans and Policy 69% 7% 9% 14 % These are the Functional areas that are in CF. Note that FA 90 remains part of the Opns CF. The percentages indicate across the force, what percentage of the Army will be in each CF. You can anticipate that the CSS branch participation in CF other than operations will not be quite as high due to the high demand of log reqts in the Opns CF. Green - reflects new career fields
20
Early CFD 4 Year CFD to fill MTOE CPTs authorizations
7 Year CFD to fill MAJs authorizations
21
Officer Evaluation Report
Briefing Outline Mission / Organization OPMS III Officer Evaluation Report Career Management Miscellaneous
22
Bottom Line Up Front System is working
COM Report is not a killer (COM report vs COM file) You need to understand “How the system works” Counseling is the key
23
OERs Center of Mass Report is different from a Center of Mass File (many ACOM officers have COM reports). However, having all COM reports places an officer at risk.. Most officers have received at least one COM (Over 86% of all CPTs; 93% of all MAJs; 90% of all LTCs, 86% of all COLs). Most of those who are successful will have a mix of ACOM and COM OERs, but some ACOMs in key jobs (BQ) are a must. Spikes in file are essential. Board results indicate officers with a mix of ACOMs and COMs are competitive to LTC. Enthusiastic, but not overexaggerated, narrative often differentiates among COM reports. As of: Dec 2003
24
“Vast Majority of OERs arriving at DA are Center of Mass” (May 05)
OER Trends (DA Form 67-9) “Vast Majority of OERs arriving at DA are Center of Mass” (May 05)
25
Board Feedback Selection boards strongly endorse current OER.
Overwhelming majority believe OER provides necessary information to select future leaders. Boards can distinguish between a COM report and a COM File. Over 18,000 Officers selected by all boards with COM OERs
26
OER Enhancements As of 1 Oct 2004 Senior Raters are no longer required to force distribute their rated company grade officer populations, to include 2LT, 1LT, CPT, WO1 and CW2. The renaming and expansion of the Developmental Support Form to include the rank of CW2 and CPT compliments this change. These enhancements foster an environment conducive to growth by providing structure to the critical tasks of teaching, coaching, mentoring, and educating. The enhancements optimize leader’s abilities to maintain esprit and provide flexibility by focusing the Army’s Warrior Force on individual development and progressive expectations is intended to eliminate the current peer to peer competition and distractions caused by our current system and methods. Ultimately, these changes allow us to better teach, coach, mentor, and educate our officers during a critical developmental period in their careers. Officers should visit the HRC website for more information on the process for implementing these enhancements: ie timelines for all officers in these grade plates to receive their first non-block checked OER by 31 Dec 04
27
Career Management Briefing Outline Mission / Organization OPMS III
Officer Evaluation Report Career Management Miscellaneous
28
Needs of the Army Priorities Skills and Experience
Skills & Experience Why Do We Move Officers ? Needs of the Army Priorities Skills and Experience
29
Non-Discretionary Officer Move Criteria “RISK”
Release - Retirement/REFRAD Imbalance – Skills or grades not aligned with organization requirements or Army manning guidance e.g. officer “promoted-out” of a location School – To and from CCC, CSC/ILE, SSC, ACS, CF training Known losses DEROS Joint tour complete Sequential assignments Command selects Needs of the Army Priorities Skills & Experience R Account manager input required I S K # of moves Before we order a move – do “R.I.S.K” analysis
30
Discretionary Officer Move Criteria “CSI”
Career Next opportunity only exists elsewhere Need new skill set (Joint, ARSTAF) Skills Skills and/or experience desired/required elsewhere (e.g. BNRs) CSL prepo Individual EFMP Compassionate Joint Domicile Individual preference HS Stab Needs of the Army Priorities Skills & Experience C S I # of moves
31
Officer Personnel Dynamic Distribution Model (DDM)
This process may be done daily, weekly, or monthly; it is dynamic Non-discretionary Moves Discretionary Moves Projection Projection (Account manager input required) (Assignment officer input required) R I S K Grade Skill Unit Unit S C I Skill Grade Approved by Director OPMD Filled to AUTHs Filled in excess of AUTHs Not filled to AUTHs center of gravity Validated Requirements - a position opened for fill to achieve manning guidance or another skill/grade demand Model to achieve manning guidance Donor Units Unit Determine tradeoff between # of moves and achieving manning guidance Skill Metrics for success Manning guidance met Acceptable skill & grade match in units Monthly assignment quotas Recipient Units Unit skills and experience Grade Some donor units may also be recipient units. Ideally the donor list is larger than the recipient list to account for uncertainty. Multiple solutions possible Skill Plan Unit Grade Updated regularly based on events Some units will still be below AUTHs at certain skills/grades Skill Assignment division execution backbrief to Director Plan adjustment made as required. Grade
32
Proposed OPMD Manning Priorities
58% of authorizations 98-100% fill (If deployed: 105%) 27% of authorizations 95% fill 15% of authorizations 85% fill 1 2 3 80% MCRUs EUSA AAMDCs ARCENT DA Special Roster GWOT DMO USCENTCOM MNF-I* MNC-I* MNSTC-I* PCO-I* CFC-A* USSOCOM USASOC INSCOM(5 Bdes) CBRN* JTF-GMO* Expeditionary Forces HQDA OSD JOINT STAFF USA Contracting Agcy Acq Spt Center USMA DAIG TRADOC(-)** CTC SGL IET Schools RTB USAREC Futures Ctr CDT CMD PMS TWA DMO USNORTHCOM* Old Guard By Law/Policy UNIFIED CMDs (-) USEUCOM USJFCOM USPACOM USSOUTHCOM USSTRATCOM USTRANSCOM USANATO RRC NETCOM HRC DMO(-) Staff/FOA MACOMs EAD/EAC TROOPS FORSCOM HQ USAREUR HQ USARPAC HQ COSCOMs Corps CS & CSS TRADOC(-)** ACC CAC AWC CDT CMD(-) TRAC TRADOC HQ SATMO MEPCOM Other TRADOC Staff/FOA AC/RC Title X Non-titled DOD AGENCIES USANATO (-) NGB IMA ATEC OTHER FOAs Others Not Listed This is a graphical representation of how Fill Priority 1 and Fill Priority 2 align by the major categories we track in OPMD along with the portion of the authorizations they cover. Circled units represent the non-negotiable units that must be filled to FP1 standard MACOMs INSCOM (-) CID CMD USACE MDW(-) SDDC MEDCOM SMDC AMC * - New organization since JUL 2000 ** - TRADOC aggregate 97%
33
Stabilizing the Force The concept of Force Stabilization and the manning strategies involved are primarily designed to improve combat readiness and provide stability and predictability for Soldiers and their families. The goal of the new manning guidance is to provide fully manned, ready, capable, and deployable units for combatant commanders. This is a fundamental change to the way the Army assigns it’s officers, warrant officer and enlisted. Due to ongoing Army initiatives and transformation efforts, there will be a significant amount of Force structure turbulence over the next several years. Some of the changes have been documented while other changes, that are expected to affect units as early as the current fiscal year, are still being developed and are not completely visible. In the near-term this may result in challenges to stability and predictability but in the long term we will experience the benefits of these changes.
34
Modularity: TODAY FY 03 BCT (UA)s 36 Heavy 18 Stryker 3 Light 7
SBCT 1 SBCT 2 SBCT 4 Fort Lewis 1 2 3 Fort Drum 1 3 3 1 2 3 4 Fort Carson Fort Riley 1 2 3 Fort Campbell Fort Bragg 3 1 2 1 2 4 Fort Benning 1 2 3 4 Fort Stewart Fort Bliss Fort Hood Fort Polk ITALY 2 3 173d SBCT 3 Fort Wainwright FY 03 BCT (UA)s 36 Heavy 18 Stryker 3 Light 7 Airborne/AASLT 8 Schofield Bks Fort Richardson
35
BCT Units of Action : Oct 06
SBCT 1 SBCT 2 SBCT 4 Fort Lewis 1 2 3 Fort Drum 2 1 3 6 3 1 2 3 4 Fort Carson Fort Riley 1 2 3 4 Fort Campbell Fort Bragg 4 5 1 2 3 4 1 2 4 4 Fort Benning 1 2 3 Fort Stewart Fort Bliss Fort Hood Fort Polk ITALY 3 173d SBCT 3 SBCT 5 Fort Wainwright Schofield Bks 4 Fort Richardson
36
Modularity Status FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 6 4 5 1 1
Annex E (Modularity-UEx & UA) to OPMD WARNO FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 TBD Corps/ Divisions (UEx) SEP04 SEP04 DEC04 APR05 OCT05 JUL04 NOV05 MAR07 JUN06 JUL07 SEP09 PROVISIONAL New Brigades (UAs) JAN 07 3 SEP09 PROVISIONAL APR 07 4 4 MAR 07 4 AUG 07 JUL04 4 SEP04 4 SEP04 3 AUG 07 IN UA DEC04 4 4 JAN05 MAY-NOV05 4 OCT05 4 6 JAN06 MAR06 JUN06 APR06 4 5 SEP06 JUL04 1 DEC04 1 APR05 1 SEP05 2 OCT05 1 NOV05 3 JUN06 JAN06 3 JUN06 JUL06 SEP04 1 MAR07 1 JUL07 1 SEP04 1 Converting Brigades (UAs) JUL04 2 OCT05 2 SEP04 2 DEC04 2 NOV05 2 2 MAR07 JUL07 2 JUN06 2 AUG06 SBCT1 JUL04 3 3 SEP04 DEC04 3 OCT05 3 JUN06 OCT06 1 3 MAR07 SBCT2 1 OCT-DEC05 SBCT5 2 OCT06 SBCT7 3 APR-JUN05 SBCT4 Stryker SBCT3 As of: 27 Apr 05 Decision to implement final 5 BCTs(UAs) subject to operational necessity and OSD approval - 5 final UAs
37
The deployment schedule renders the current COA
Problem Current COA FY07 FY08 FY09 The deployment schedule renders the current COA infeasible 12 12 11 2 SBCT3 2 3 4 4 4 SBCT5 2 Three Heavy UA builds in one quarter 1 3 4 2 6 3 2 2 3 SBCT7 2 1 SBCT4 1 1 4 3 3 Five builds in one quarter 3 4 1 SBCT1 4 2 5 Not scheduled 1 2 1 3ACR Three Infantry UA builds in one quarter 3 Three Infantry UA builds in one quarter Undue friction is created in the current LM schedule by not considering the number of like UAs being built in the same quarter, total number of UAs being built per quarter and individual installation supportability
38
Recommended COA Based on E-Date
FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 1st Q T R 2nd 3rd 4th Total 3 9 17 27 35 40 SBCT3 SBCT5 2 4 SBCT1 SBCT5 2 3ACR 4 Oct Nov Dec 2 3 SBCT3 3 4 4 4 SBCT1 3 6 1 4 3 6 Jan Feb Mar 3 2 2 2 2 1 SBCT4 2 3 SBCT7 3 3 SBCT4 2 Apr May Jun 4 2 2 4 1 2 4 1 3 3 1 Jul Aug Sep 3 1 1 3 4 4 5 4 1 4 1 5 Changes from current COA Color patches = first lifecycle of a unit Greyscale patches = subsequent lifecycles SBCT2 1 1 173rd 4 Non-Lifecycle Manned Awaiting Decision 3 4 4 IN UA
39
Life Cycle Manning FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 1st QTR 2nd QTR
Appendix 1 (Lifecycle Manning) to Annex D (Modularity) to OPMD OPORD 05-01 Life Cycle Manning FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 (plus FY04 units) FY08 (plus FY05 units) FY09 (plus FY06 units) 1st QTR 2nd QTR 3rd QTR 4th QTR 3 4 4 SBCT3 4 SBCT5 2 2 2 2 4 4 SBCT1 1 2 3 3 1 2 6 3 4 SBCT4 4 3 2 4 1 1 1 3 4 3 4 1 4 1 3ACR 5 3 1 2 3 173rd 1 1 2 2 Non-LCM 3 As of: 27 Apr 05 3d Bde 1 Cav no LCM, 4th Bde move life cycle to Jan 06
40
HQs, BCTs and Support Brigades Over Time
Appendix 2 (Total Modularity) to Annex E (Modularity-UEx & UA) to OPMD WARNO HQs, BCTs and Support Brigades Over Time * An additional 7 Bdes (total of 35) represent surrogate units for Theater-level requirements
41
Sustainment Brigade Timeline
42
Modularity Status FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 F S S S S S S S S (UEy) Fires
Annex D (Modularity) to OPMD OPORD 05-01 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 (UEy) Fires UAs (6+) MAR06 75 FA JUL06 BLISS 214 FA OCT06 212 FA MAR07 BRAGG 18 FA MAY07 17 FA DEC04 HOOD F 7 TCG EUSTIS Sustain UAs (16) JUL04 S SEP04 S SEP04 S DEC04 S OCT05 BLISS S S JAN06 JUN06 S S 501CSG KOREA RILEY
43
Operational Chart: Jun 05
Annex F (Operational Chart) to OPMD WARNO Operational Chart: Jun 05 Deployed Reset Train Ready Pre-Stab Deployed Ready Reman Post-Stab 3 4 1 1 2 Deployed Ready Reman Stab E+90 EDATE MOD - UFS MOD - IRS AOE - IRS 3 2 2 1 3 2 3 1 1 2 3 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 3 2 1 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 UA48 6 5 4 3 3 3 4 4
44
- AC DCP / SUS BDE LOCATIONS - RC CSS DCP LOCATIONS
AC/RC TSC LOCATIONS - AC DCP / SUS BDE LOCATIONS - RC CSS DCP LOCATIONS 593 TD Ft Lewis Ft Drum 10 518 DCP 466 DCP Germany Ft Carson 16 Ft Riley FT LEE 3 DCP 43 1 7 Ft Knox TO 21 DCP FL-W Ft Campbell Ft Eustis 29 311 DCP TO 101 Ft Irwin 1 TSC TD 507 Ft Bragg 167 TSC 82 TD Ft Benning Ft Wainwright 13 DCP 4 135 DCP 184 DCP 64 Ft Bliss Ft Richardson 15 Ft Hood Ft Stewart 3 8 TSC 45 377 TSC Schofield Bks 143 DCP 1 1 1 1 DCP LEGEND TSC Deployable CP (Compo Pure) - Theater Distribution Det - Theater Opening Det TD - Sustain BDE (AC) - TSC Main (Multi-Compo) TSC TO - Army Reserve - Army National Guard Japan Korea 501 10 DCP 19 DCP (Okinawa)
45
MODULAR CSS FORMATION LOCATIONS
ARNG AND USAR MODULAR CSS FORMATION LOCATIONS Ft Lewis TBD TBD 34 Bloomington Ft Drum 518 DCP TBD TD 336 TO TBD TD 67 Ft Sheridan 300 369 Des Moines Chicago Lincoln Butler Bronx 33 371 466 DCP 287 274 TD Germany 350 TD Kettering Sacramento 38 55 Ft Riley Topeka Indianapolis Ft Carson 311 DCP Ft Knox Ft Belvoir Witchita 3rd DCP Ft Campbell Ft Eustis 21 DCP 230 Columbia 304 Los Angeles Long Beach Ft Bragg 164 145 TO 403 TO 1 TSC 40 184 DCP Mesa 167 TSC 158 Birmingham Ft Benning Ft Wainwright Laurel 375 TD Ft Bliss 13 DCP TBD Abbe Baton Rouge Ft Hood Mobile Ft Stewart Ft Richardson 321 Ft Polk 135 DCP Austin Schofield Bks 49 TBD TO Tampa New Orleans Orlando 8 TSC 377 TSC 32 TO 1 1 143 DCP LEGEND TSC - TSC Main (Multi-Compo) - Sustain BDE (AC/AR/NG) Japan DCP TSC Deployable CP (Compo Pure) DCP DCP - Army Reserve Korea TO - Theater Opening Det - Army National Guard 19 DCP 10 DCP TD - Theater Distribution Det (Okinawa)
46
Assignment Officers… Meet validated Army requirements--they do not create them Adjust to quickly changing Army requirements throughout the world **Readiness Top Priority** Assist in professionally developing officers to meet future requirements Assign to MACOMs--normally not to duty positions-- but changing Consider tour (overseas) equity, but not primary factor Must adhere to changing policies Do NOT communicate with promotion or selection boards Care for each officer, but NOT at the expense of others Are HUMAN!
47
Logistics Officer Population vs All Requirements
COL LTC FY03 01A REQ = 50 OES = 32 FY03 01A REQ = 74 AWC = 33 MAJ CPT FY03 01A REQ = 112 FY03 01A REQ = 58 OES = 274 CGSC =125 Includes TTHS, 01A, etc Source: TAADS 04-11
48
Officers working in Functional Area 90 positions by Branch
Use public query in HAZASE; “FA90 PARTICIPATION” Total Officers working FA90 positions = 1,328 As of : 4 Apr 2005
49
FA 90 Certification Panel
OPMD convened the FA90 Certification Panel following the release of the FY04 LTC Promotion Board (Next Panel o/a Jul 05) The intent of the panel is to ensure that only those officers that complete FA90 branch qualification IAW DA PAM retain the FA90 designation. The panel is conducted annually following the ACC LTC Promotion List release The certification criteria is the same as the MAJ/O-4 BQ requirements in DA Pam 600-3 The Director, OPMD will approve the results of the panel Each officer reviewed by the panel will receive written notification of their FA90 status prior to the Battalion Command Board Officers that do not retain FA90 certification will not be able to compete for command in the multifunctional categories of 6S and 6SM. Officers that do not retain their FA90 designator will still be eligible to compete in their basic branch functional categories and 6SR/6ST
50
Certification Criteria
The panel used the new draft of DA Pam because it expanded and more clearly defined the requirements for branch qualification as a MAJ. Excerpt from DA PAM 600-3, chapter 28 (Multifunctional Logistician) must serve a cumulative of 12 months minimum in one or more of the 04/05, 90A coded BQ positions from the following list: (a) Executive Officer, S3 or Support Operations Officer of a multifunctional logistics battalion*, squadron, group, DISCOM or equivalent or corps materiel management center. (*) Multifunctional Battalion includes but not limited to FSB, MSB, CSB, BSB, Striker Support Bn, Regimental Support Bn, , or equivalents). (b) Chief of a division, brigade, or regimental materiel management center (c) Deputy G4/G4 plans officer (d) Logistics operations officer of a corps materiel management center or distribution management section (e) CSS observer controller (major-level) at a combat training center (f) Major-level multifunctional logistics command position (g) All TOE Brigade/Group S4, 04 positions (h) DMMO (i) FA90 Joint Staff Officer (JSO) or serving in a CSS JSO position different from the officer’s basic branch. (j) XO or S3 of a CSS functional TOE battalion, group or equivalent different from the officer’s basic branch, (k) Major-level functional command position different from the officer’s basic branch
51
FA 90 Certification Panel
For questions regarding the FA90 Certification Panel review the MILPER message FA90 Certification Panel dated 5 August and visit the FA90 Website at: Or contact your assignment officer or the FA90 Branch Chief, LTC Vic Hagan DSN: COM:
52
PROMOTION TO CAPTAIN FY04 (NOV) SELECTION RATE ARMY TC QM OD
PZ % 92.7% 93.4% 87.7% AZ % 40.0% 0.0% 33.3% Primary Reason for Nonselection: BCOM reports NOs on front/GOLOR “Off Block” checks Referred Reports FYI Upon promotion to Captain, all LT Officer Evaluation Reports are moved to the officer’s restricted fiche End of Branch Detail FY04 CPTs board was a Best Qualified Selection Board versus the Fully Qualified Selection Boards of recent years. The change caused the selection rate to be lower than the past few years. The reason the selection process changed from fully qualified to best qualified was because the shortage of CPT problem has stabilized and there is no longer a need to promote as many LTs to CPTs as possible like we had been doing in recent years. Branch Detail Program: CSS Branches donate to IN, AR, FA, AD, and CM Branch detail program is 24 months Cdrs can help by working with G1s to identify Branch Detail officers and program good CSS positions after BREX detail. Maintain comms with cbt arms cdrs to ensure our branch detail officers are not disadvantaged by participating in the BREX program. IET XOs Program: Targets 1LTs with at least 12 months platoon leader time. Officers serve as basic training and AIT company XOs at TRADOC posts.
53
Keys to preparing for the CPTs Board
The FY04 CPTs board was the first best qualified CPT selection board conducted in the past 7 years; we expect next year’s board will be conducted as fully qualified. Officer Tips Prepare your file by submitting a signed ORB and current Photo Review your OMPF (fiche) to ensure your AERs, OERs and any awards are present Do this with enough time to get it fixed by your branch or PSB Talk to your branch if you can not do these checks Chain of Command Tips Ensure, if possible, that every LT going before the board has an OER (do a complete the record if necessary) Know that off block checks will hurt a LT’s chances of getting promoted significantly Ensure someone in the chain of command reviews a LT’s file in preparation for the board FY04 CPTs board was a Best Qualified Selection Board versus the Fully Qualified Selection Boards of recent years. The change caused the selection rate to be lower than the past few years. The reason the selection process changed from fully qualified to best qualified was because the shortage of CPT problem has stabilized and there is no longer a need to promote as many LTs to CPTs as possible like we had been doing in recent years.
54
MAJ pin on migrating to 10 year mark.
Promotion to Major Next MAJ Board 06 September 2005 FY04 SELECTION RATE Zone ARMY TC QM OD PZ % 95.7% 91.8% 96.6% AZ % 21.4% 45.5% 42.1% BZ % 4.1% 5.2% 2.0% Primary Reasons for Nonselection: Straight COM file Below Center of Mass OERs No company command time Referred Reports MAJ pin on migrating to 10 year mark. USAREC is a high priority and HRCOM will send even more quality officers to recruiting. SELCON - recently approved for two time non selects. Non-selects had good quality across the board and most were selected for SELCON. Non-RA officers do not receive sep pay if offered SELCON. SELCON is for 3 years if under 14 years. Possible that it could be offered again to get an officer to retirement.
55
Selective Continuation
Captains: Has been conducted for the last four years SELCON for a 3 year period, will be considered by the following year’s promotion board Majors: USC. Title 10 directs that SELCON be conducted for Majors Used for the two-time non-select List will be published with ACC LTC promotion list
56
Intermediate Level Education (ILE)
ILE for Operations CF Officers will be 10 months at Leavenworth Two courses per year July start – 2/3 officers January start – 1/3 officers Beginning in summer 05 officers in YGs 93 (CGSC selects only), 94 (selected for MAJ), 95 and 96 may attend ILE
57
Promotion to LTC FY04 SELECTION RATE Zone Army TC QM OD
PZ % 84.9% 72.0% 81.7% AZ % 21.2% 3.4% 10.0% BZ % 4.3% 8.8% 6.6% Primary Reasons for Nonselection: No CGSC (40%) No branch qualifying job as a MAJ or all COM Reports Referred reports (poor judgement, integrity, communication, leadership) Board results reaffirm that consistent COM files are at risk. *
58
FY 06 LTC Command Selection Rates
FY06 Battalion Command list 96 CSS officers selected 18 officers selected in 2d look or above 9% Non-resident MEL-4 (10% FY05) 25% had BZ promotions (25% FY05) 30% Joint qualified before taking command Overall CSSD selection rate: 85.5% of eligibles asked to be considered 17.6% Overall selection rate Females: 81.8% of eligibles asked to be considered 16.7% Selected (15) Minorities: 88.6% of eligibles asked to be considered 17.3% Selected (31) ONLY FA90 NOW COMPETE FOR 6S AND 6SM FY05 BN CMD List Numbers Army FY05 Selection Rate 16.1% Branch # Selected # Considered % Selected AG % FI % OD % QM % TC % Total % +100 CSS Officers selected; 1 3rd look and 1 4th look +10% Non-Resident MEL-4 (17% in FY04) +24% had at least one BZ Promotion (21% in FY04) +13% will be Joint Qualified at PCOCD (31% in FY04) +Overall CSSD Selection Rate: 84.3% of eligibles asked to be considered (83.5% in FY04) 18.1% overall selection rate (16.5% in FY04) +Females: 70.4% of eligibles asked to be considered (80.5% in FY04) 17.3% Selected (14) [12% (11) in FY04] +Minorities: 81.9% of eligibles asked to be considered 10.7% Selected (16) [12.5% (19) in FY04]
59
Briefing Outline Mission Organization OPMS III OER/Rating Philosophy Career Management Miscellaneous
60
Promotion Board Comments
Digital photo!* ORB understandable* (Fwd Spt Bn v. FSB) Manner of performance - OERs * Weight / Appearance Branch qualification Letters to the President Duty descriptions Senior Rater promotion potential Words match profile (large population) Will talk more on the photo - but have a color photo! Don’t allow weight to grow on the OER along with the height - bad perception. Take time to fix ORBs - spell out units as much as possible, FWD SPT BN vs. FSB. Ensure sufficient BQ time prior to the board. MOP will drive the train Duty descriptions - if you don’t have the people, expound on the geographic region and fiscal responsibility. Have read some where you didn’t realize there were less than 20 soldiers in the Bn. Review comments for school, command, and promotion. Avoid an exclusive narrative for a COM report or SR’s vote is discounted. * Key items in a board file!!
61
Current Environment SL/SM Effects
Must fill MCRU units to 100% aggregate strength Attrition numbers are increasing Moving quickly towards Force Stabilization and Unit Life Cycle Management UA modular organization increases requirements and opportunities
62
Your Career Manager Notes
See Your Career Manager Notes See your photo See your record See all jobs! Allows officers to access their own ORB Secure via AKO Can view, print, save and send Now With Photos on your ORB
63
What I Want You to Take Away!
Don’t break contact with us. If we can’t get a hold of you, we can’t communicate with you! The Army Human Resources Command (HRCOM) is changing how it does business, stay current. Must have an Officer Retention Program. Commanders and HRCOM must shape realistic expectations and preferences. Priorities are clear: GWOT Modularity “Readiness is Paramount” Personnel Assignment and Professional Development policies and programs are in a great state of flux. Importance of mentoring and counseling officers
64
COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT DIVISION
Questions????
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com Inc.
All rights reserved.