FY 22 IWC DCO Reserve Board

[number9]

For anybody wondering, if your packet is deferred to the next board, nothing actually gets deferred. It simply means your packet was not seen. You need to submit a new, complete packet again. So, I now need to do a new interview because my last one will have been expired by a single day.

That sucks, I'm really sorry to hear it. Let me know if I can help you prepare in any way.

 

[tr2190]

For anybody wondering, if your packet is deferred to the next board, nothing actually gets deferred. It simply means your packet was not seen. You need to submit a new, complete packet again. So, I now need to do a new interview because my last one will have been expired by a single day.

Does anyone know how it is determined what packages get deferred? Is it random?

 

[fieldrat]

Does anyone know how it is determined what packages get deferred? Is it random?

It ain't random....

All the DCO IWC kits go to the same board.

They then get screened for completeness (i.e. qualified to apply for an IWC designator, not missing any documents).

Assuming your kit is technically correct (qualified to apply, no missing docs), it gets racked/stacked against other kits that have the same designators listed #1 on the application. If there's a toss-up, where a candidate would fit more than one designator, then the board may try and optimize/maximize quotas by selecting someone for their #2 (or even #3) choice.

I've seen the list the past couple cycles (this most recent one excepted). It lists which kits are DOA and the reason(s) why. Sometimes is the applicant's fault. Other times, their recruiter didn't fully understand the requirements and forgot to request specific information from the applicant.

The DCO IWC program is way oversubscribed (really just 1835/INTEL). Even with 50+ quotas per cycle, someone just ain't gonna get picked. Keep in mind, these are folks who are academically/professionally qualified and likely some of the best applicant's their respective recruiters have see in a given cycle. It sucks to be told, "You're great, but I'm out of slots, try again..."

 

[tr2190]

It ain't random....

All the DCO IWC kits go to the same board.

They then get screened for completeness (i.e. qualified to apply for an IWC designator, not missing any documents).

Assuming your kit is technically correct (qualified to apply, no missing docs), it gets racked/stacked against other kits that have the same designators listed #1 on the application. If there's a toss-up, where a candidate would fit more than one designator, then the board may try and optimize/maximize quotas by selecting someone for their #2 (or even #3) choice.

I've seen the list the past couple cycles (this most recent one excepted). It lists which kits are DOA and the reason(s) why. Sometimes is the applicant's fault. Other times, their recruiter didn't fully understand the requirements and forgot to request specific information from the applicant.

The DCO IWC program is way oversubscribed (really just 1835/INTEL). Even with 50+ quotas per cycle, someone just ain't gonna get picked. Keep in mind, these are folks who are academically/professionally qualified and likely some of the best applicant's their respective recruiters have see in a given cycle. It sucks to be told, "You're great, but I'm out of slots, try again..."

I was unaware that there was a pre-screening process prior to being sent to the board. Assuming your package survives the pre-screen and gets to the board, I would imagine your chances are decent for PROY. Am I correct in my assumption? And thank you all for the great information.

 

[DiscoSpud]

It ain't random....

All the DCO IWC kits go to the same board.

They then get screened for completeness (i.e. qualified to apply for an IWC designator, not missing any documents).

Assuming your kit is technically correct (qualified to apply, no missing docs), it gets racked/stacked against other kits that have the same designators listed #1 on the application. If there's a toss-up, where a candidate would fit more than one designator, then the board may try and optimize/maximize quotas by selecting someone for their #2 (or even #3) choice.

I've seen the list the past couple cycles (this most recent one excepted). It lists which kits are DOA and the reason(s) why. Sometimes is the applicant's fault. Other times, their recruiter didn't fully understand the requirements and forgot to request specific information from the applicant.

The DCO IWC program is way oversubscribed (really just 1835/INTEL). Even with 50+ quotas per cycle, someone just ain't gonna get picked. Keep in mind, these are folks who are academically/professionally qualified and likely some of the best applicant's their respective recruiters have see in a given cycle. It sucks to be told, "You're great, but I'm out of slots, try again..."

That is very helpful, thank you. It reinforces thoughts I've just recently had, now that I'm being told about documents that need to be added for the March board.

 

[TheClyde]

In response to "does anyone know how it is determined what packages get deferred"

Based on the comments from @fieldrat and others, it doesn't seem to me that deferred is the right word for any package. My take is, you submit a package to the board. It gets an objective pre-screening before it gets "reviewed" by the board. This is to ensure the package is complete and that you meet the minimum program authorization requirements. If you don't, or the package is incomplete, it simply doesn't advance for the board review. One might say this is deferred but to me its essentially rejected on technical grounds. That particular package will never get renewed because something is missing/incorrect.

If the package is good to go, the board will review it and in some way rank the packages to determine if you are either pro-rec Y or pro-rec N. They don't take any of those packages and say "well this person would be a pro-rec Y but we don't have the quota so we not give them either and just push them to be reviewed at the next board." Or do they?

I have no insider knowledge on this, just my best understanding from my own experience and reading comments on here.

 

[fieldrat]

I was unaware that there was a pre-screening process prior to being sent to the board. Assuming your package survives the pre-screen and gets to the board, I would imagine your chances are decent for PROY. Am I correct in my assumption? And thank you all for the great information.

There's not really a pre-screening so much as them having to follow the Program Authorization and related instructions (i.e. Only complete kits can be considerd). If anything, the OIC/Panel interviews are the pre-screen.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

It ain't random....

All the DCO IWC kits go to the same board.

They then get screened for completeness (i.e. qualified to apply for an IWC designator, not missing any documents).

Assuming your kit is technically correct (qualified to apply, no missing docs), it gets racked/stacked against other kits that have the same designators listed #1 on the application. If there's a toss-up, where a candidate would fit more than one designator, then the board may try and optimize/maximize quotas by selecting someone for their #2 (or even #3) choice.

I've seen the list the past couple cycles (this most recent one excepted). It lists which kits are DOA and the reason(s) why. Sometimes is the applicant's fault. Other times, their recruiter didn't fully understand the requirements and forgot to request specific information from the applicant.

The DCO IWC program is way oversubscribed (really just 1835/INTEL). Even with 50+ quotas per cycle, someone just ain't gonna get picked. Keep in mind, these are folks who are academically/professionally qualified and likely some of the best applicant's their respective recruiters have see in a given cycle. It sucks to be told, "You're great, but I'm out of slots, try again..."

It can be random, NRC is now limiting the number of applications that go before a board so if the "number" allowed for a specific board is 50, then the 50 that come in first that meet the requirements in the PA will be forwarded on. I don't necessarily agree with this as it hurts the "best qualified" design.

 

[bryanteagle6]

I was unaware that there was a pre-screening process prior to being sent to the board. Assuming your package survives the pre-screen and gets to the board, I would imagine your chances are decent for PROY. Am I correct in my assumption? And thank you all for the great information.

I don't know your idea of "decent" but I will say they are selecting a lot more now then they did 3-5 years ago. The percent selection is way better as well. That also might justify/prove the limit @exNavyOffRec shared. When I started the process years ago, there was only one board a year and they would select like 70 out of 200+ for INTEL. They also changed the guidelines to select a certain % of STEM degree candidates that could affect numbers and/or the way they are rack and stacked. My board was 40 out of 100 and they brought back the two boards a year program the next FY after my board.

 

[fieldrat]

It can be random, NRC is now limiting the number of applications that go before a board so if the "number" allowed for a specific board is 50, then the 50 that come in first that meet the requirements in the PA will be forwarded on. I don't necessarily agree with this as it hurts the "best qualified" design.

Wasn't aware of the shift. Thanks for the update. Agree that this is poor way to filter, unless they're going to more to a "rolling" board, similar to some other designators.

 

[fieldrat]

I don't know your idea of "decent" but I will say they are selecting a lot more now then they did 3-5 years ago. The percent selection is way better as well. That also might justify/prove the limit @exNavyOffRec shared. When I started the process years ago, there was only one board a year and they would select like 70 out of 200+ for INTEL. They also changed the guidelines to select a certain % of STEM degree candidates that could affect numbers and/or the way they are rack and stacked. My board was 40 out of 100 and they brought back the two boards a year program the next FY after my board.

I had the opposite experience. When I began building my kit (May 2015), they had just moved to the once a year board format. I was very happy to see them go back to the 2x/yr boards.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

Wasn't aware of the shift. Thanks for the update. Agree that this is poor way to filter, unless they're going to more to a "rolling" board, similar to some other designators.

To me many of the changes go against the "best qualified" process in selecting candidates and instead it shifts to "who can submit first". The majority of boards have ended the rolling board process, except nuke of course.

 

[tr2190]

Chances of results coming out before November?

 

[TheClyde]

Chances of results coming out before November?

17%

 

[tr2190]

17%

I like those odds!