Got this from my CCC today. There are some very useful tips and information for future STA-21 applicants:
Recently, an 0-5 on my staff participated on the Seaman to Admiral 21 Board. Based on his recent experience, the following lessons learned are provided:
1. The single most important part of the application package is the forwarding endorsement from the sailor's commanding officer. A clear, forceful recommendation from the commanding officer carried great weight with the board. Specifically:
- Ensure the recommendation is consistent with the rest of the package. Statements such as "the number one second class onboard" for a sailor who has no evaluation above an MP send a mixed message and dilute the CO's credibility. Board members look to evaluations to see if the sailor has been recommended for STA-21 or officer programs. If a sailor has experienced significant professional growth since his last evaluation or has not received an evaluation yet from his current CO, the CO should explain the gap between his recommendation and the sailor's professional record in the endorsement.
- Comments such as "would seek Petty Officer Jones to serve in my wardroom," "the top candidate I've seen," or "an absolute must select" were highlighted and strengthened a candidate's record. Conversely, endorsements that were obviously "boiler plate", even if they started with "forwarded with my strongest recommendation" tended to detract.
- Commanding Officers should comment on the sailor's leadership experience and potential as explicitly as possible. It can be difficult to extract information about junior sailors' leadership potential from evaluations since frequently they do not have either the time or the opportunity onboard to build a track record. Given the age limitations for the program, a significant number of candidates in the "crunch zone" are third or junior second class petty officers. Positive observations on leadership in the CO's endorsement gives them a chance to break out even they only had a few months at the command and all previous evaluations were from the training pipeline.
2. Each package is supposed to contain interviews from a board conducted within the command and from an external command. Ships on deployment or commands located in remote locations often did not refer the candidate to an external board for logistical reasons. While the board does not reject packages for this reason, it puts the candidate at a competitive disadvantage when he or she is compared to another candidate who has a strong recommendation from another CO and board. If at all possible, a command should attempt to send the candidate to an external board even if it is only an interview by a second commanding officer. Also:
- Interview boards consisting of senior members of the wardroom (XO, department heads) carry more weight than those composed primarily of junior officers.
- If the sailor is applying for a specific community, that community should be represented on at least one of the boards.
3. In addition to the topics covered by the instruction governing the program, the sailor's personal statement should explain any weaknesses in the package and highlight any leadership experiences she has had. This is especially true of the sailor's academic track record. If a sailor went to one or two years of college and then dropped out the board wants to know why it should risk the government's money to send the sailor back. Even a simple admission that "I wasn't mature enough to handle college then, but I've grown as my record in the Navy shows . . ." helps immensely. As mentioned in the CO endorsement section above, junior sailors often don't have a lot leadership experience documented in their Navy records. Personal statements that relate leadership lessons and experiences gained elsewhere help the sailor to break out of the pack. Commands should review the personal statements for format, spelling and grammar. The content has to come from the sailor, but if you have a candidate you believe should be an officer, getting someone to proof the statement is good mentoring.
4. Sailors can really improve their competitive position by gaining as much educational experience as possible before applying. The program requires a sailor to finish his or her degree in three years. Transferable college credit demonstrates a sailor's ability to meet that challenge, especially older sailors who may be forced by age limitations to complete the degree in less time. It also shows the sailor's desire to obtain a degree and the importance he places on advancing his education. For sailors who were poor students in high school or failed out of college on the first try, recent, successful college experience goes a long way to offset the earlier shortcomings in a transcript. The instruction and NAVADMIN are very explicit about the desire for technical degrees and that calculus and physics are required regardless of major (nurse option excepted) and the board looks favorably on those whose existing college credits included A or B performance in math and science courses. Deployed sailors who may have difficulty attending college courses should do as much online or through CLEP as possible.
5. Sailors should be encouraged to solicit and submit letters of recommendation from people not already included in their package who can comment positively about the sailor's potential to be an officer. Letters from prior COs, command master chiefs, or even a high school coach give the board a fuller picture of the candidate. While not required, a well written letter of recommendation can help break a candidate out from the pack.
6. Sailors who did not get selected should reapply next year. A strong majority of the packages reviewed by the board were very competitive and could have been selected had enough slots been available. Sailors who reapply should mention that fact in their personal statement and include what they've done in the last year to make themselves more competitive. This fact is especially true is someone was selected as an alternate, but did not get called up for a regular slot.
