-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
17 Sept 2018 IWC DCO Board
- Thread starter FormerRecruitingGuru
- Start date
D
Deleted member 67144 scul
Guest
The board date on paper is anticipated but not always absolute, especially since this particular September board seemingly came up almost out of the blue (for lack of a better phrase). What your recruiter said matches my experience with the EDO board. I waited ~6 weeks for results, and more than two months later I'm still waiting for my FINSEL. Patience is the name of the game. Just standby to standby. Especially given your enthusiasm, I hope for a positive result for you.
Last edited by a moderator:
Markymark
Member
My recruiter told me that the board did meet last week, and that he was going to follow up tomorrow to see if the results were available yet.
FormerRecruitingGuru
Making Recruiting Great Again
Results are out! Give your Or 1-2 days to get and deliver the news.
FormerRecruitingGuru
Making Recruiting Great Again
9. General professional review board observations/commissioning instructions:
a. The Professional Review board noted a number of applications did not meet minimum requirements as delineated in IWC Program Authorizations and other governing documents. Some applications were inconsistent in community preference between Application Processing and Summary Record (APSR), motivational statement and interviews. Additionally, numerous preferred civilian IT certifications (e.g. CompTIA Security+) and language proficiencies were noted in parts of the applicant’s package (APSR or resume); however, documentation was not included. This resulted in the Head Recorder sending multiple requests to verify qualifications.
b. Applicants should be informed on community missions and candidate preference should be consistent throughout their application. Recruiters must ensure community preferences are in order of candidate’s desired designator and carefully scrutinize applicant packages for accuracy, completeness, consistency and compliance.
c. The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare has recommended a 60-40% hard science versus social science targeted accession mix of all new IWC accessions. Recruiters shall make every reasonable attempt to submit future candidates with preferred major fields of study associated with the achievement of information warfare to include, but not limited to, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).
d. An emphasis should be placed on the candidate’s education, professional experience/certifications, leadership experience/ potential (commensurate with years of experience), personal character, and strong motivational statement. The most effective motivational statement should clearly articulate why the candidate desires a commission in the U.S. Navy Reserve, the IWC and the primary designator (i.e., first designator request in APSR). The applicant should address career aspirations, personal strengths, skills, leadership philosophy, and how they will contribute throughout their Naval career. The motivational statement should not merely rehash the resume, but should articulate applicability of the candidate’s skillset to the primary designator choice.
e. Candidates should clearly explain any adverse areas in their application. In such a competitive review process, any unexplained or ambiguous issues were generally not favorably considered for “best fit” within the “whole person” concept.
f. All candidates must meet the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Intelligence Community Directive (ICD) 704 eligibility standards for access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) and other controlled access program information. Being a U.S. citizen and a citizen of another country is not necessarily disqualifying. Associated risks to national security will be determined on a case-by- case basis. Refer to Intelligence Community Policy Guidance Number 704.2.
1. Applicants who have immediate family members or other persons who are dual/non-U.S. citizens to whom the subject is bound by affection or obligation with low, medium, and high tier country associations require strict adherence to Navy ICD 704 implementing policy for the processing for SCI Access Eligibility.
2. Due to the heightened risk related to national security, the Community Manager shall determine commissioning policy exception guidance for applicants with medium and high tier country associations based on Statement of SCI Requirements (SOSR) need and Intelligence Risk Assessment (IRA), established manning and mission needs.
h. Although enlisted professionals are a rich resource from which to develop future officers, candidates whose rates are not permanent or are completing their community’s initial training requirements should not apply until initial training requirements are completed. Candidates, particularly IWC rates, should note any warfare qualifications or status of attainment. Performance, as documented in enlisted evaluations, was given strong consideration.
i. IWC applications should be tailored to designators within the IWC for which the candidate is best suited based on their education, skill set and occupational experience. Candidates should be educated on their preferred designator with the IWC Program Authorizations and Community Information Sheets. These resources are available to recruiters from the Information Warfare Reserve OCMs.
10. Specifics regarding candidates’ scores or board deliberations will not be disclosed outside of the professional review membership. Candidates and recruiters are encouraged to consult with the local IWC Region OIC referencing appropriate paragraphs of this document to determine how to proceed/improve candidates’ packages. Recruiters are further encouraged to consult with local IWC Unit leadership and INTEL/OCEANO/CW/IP RC community leads for additional information. The guiding documents for this PR were Program Authorizations 108A, 108B, 108C, and 108D. Candidates are discouraged from contacting the IWC (Active/Reserve) OCMs or professional review voting members and should request any information regarding the professional review process via their NRDs.
11. The next IWC DCO Professional Review is tentatively scheduled for 18-22 March 2019. Interim guidance will be promulgated through CNRC PRODOCs checklist, COMNAVIFORESINST 1120.1A series (DCO Recruiting SOP) and FY19 IWC DCO PR Precept.
a. The Professional Review board noted a number of applications did not meet minimum requirements as delineated in IWC Program Authorizations and other governing documents. Some applications were inconsistent in community preference between Application Processing and Summary Record (APSR), motivational statement and interviews. Additionally, numerous preferred civilian IT certifications (e.g. CompTIA Security+) and language proficiencies were noted in parts of the applicant’s package (APSR or resume); however, documentation was not included. This resulted in the Head Recorder sending multiple requests to verify qualifications.
b. Applicants should be informed on community missions and candidate preference should be consistent throughout their application. Recruiters must ensure community preferences are in order of candidate’s desired designator and carefully scrutinize applicant packages for accuracy, completeness, consistency and compliance.
c. The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare has recommended a 60-40% hard science versus social science targeted accession mix of all new IWC accessions. Recruiters shall make every reasonable attempt to submit future candidates with preferred major fields of study associated with the achievement of information warfare to include, but not limited to, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).
d. An emphasis should be placed on the candidate’s education, professional experience/certifications, leadership experience/ potential (commensurate with years of experience), personal character, and strong motivational statement. The most effective motivational statement should clearly articulate why the candidate desires a commission in the U.S. Navy Reserve, the IWC and the primary designator (i.e., first designator request in APSR). The applicant should address career aspirations, personal strengths, skills, leadership philosophy, and how they will contribute throughout their Naval career. The motivational statement should not merely rehash the resume, but should articulate applicability of the candidate’s skillset to the primary designator choice.
e. Candidates should clearly explain any adverse areas in their application. In such a competitive review process, any unexplained or ambiguous issues were generally not favorably considered for “best fit” within the “whole person” concept.
f. All candidates must meet the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Intelligence Community Directive (ICD) 704 eligibility standards for access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) and other controlled access program information. Being a U.S. citizen and a citizen of another country is not necessarily disqualifying. Associated risks to national security will be determined on a case-by- case basis. Refer to Intelligence Community Policy Guidance Number 704.2.
1. Applicants who have immediate family members or other persons who are dual/non-U.S. citizens to whom the subject is bound by affection or obligation with low, medium, and high tier country associations require strict adherence to Navy ICD 704 implementing policy for the processing for SCI Access Eligibility.
2. Due to the heightened risk related to national security, the Community Manager shall determine commissioning policy exception guidance for applicants with medium and high tier country associations based on Statement of SCI Requirements (SOSR) need and Intelligence Risk Assessment (IRA), established manning and mission needs.
h. Although enlisted professionals are a rich resource from which to develop future officers, candidates whose rates are not permanent or are completing their community’s initial training requirements should not apply until initial training requirements are completed. Candidates, particularly IWC rates, should note any warfare qualifications or status of attainment. Performance, as documented in enlisted evaluations, was given strong consideration.
i. IWC applications should be tailored to designators within the IWC for which the candidate is best suited based on their education, skill set and occupational experience. Candidates should be educated on their preferred designator with the IWC Program Authorizations and Community Information Sheets. These resources are available to recruiters from the Information Warfare Reserve OCMs.
10. Specifics regarding candidates’ scores or board deliberations will not be disclosed outside of the professional review membership. Candidates and recruiters are encouraged to consult with the local IWC Region OIC referencing appropriate paragraphs of this document to determine how to proceed/improve candidates’ packages. Recruiters are further encouraged to consult with local IWC Unit leadership and INTEL/OCEANO/CW/IP RC community leads for additional information. The guiding documents for this PR were Program Authorizations 108A, 108B, 108C, and 108D. Candidates are discouraged from contacting the IWC (Active/Reserve) OCMs or professional review voting members and should request any information regarding the professional review process via their NRDs.
11. The next IWC DCO Professional Review is tentatively scheduled for 18-22 March 2019. Interim guidance will be promulgated through CNRC PRODOCs checklist, COMNAVIFORESINST 1120.1A series (DCO Recruiting SOP) and FY19 IWC DCO PR Precept.
Is this new info?
bryanteagle6
Well-Known Member
of course - my OR started LEAVE today! ha. good luck to all.
KHE - tough news. Best of luck to you regardless. Any numbers on total packages and number of selectees in the the other fields?
KHE - tough news. Best of luck to you regardless. Any numbers on total packages and number of selectees in the the other fields?
D
Deleted member 67144 scul
Guest
Your OR was incorrect about results at the end of November, too! They came out two months early, apparently.
And is it me, or is a third of this forum from Ohio?
bryanteagle6
Well-Known Member
I thought i was the only one
D
Deleted member 67144 scul
Guest
Well what do you know? You guys are practically neighbors 
! Hopefully you can both get selected and drill together.
Rufio said wait a day or two for your OR to get results, but otherwise they're apparently released. Still, 11 days after the board and results are out? That is fast!
! Hopefully you can both get selected and drill together. Rufio said wait a day or two for your OR to get results, but otherwise they're apparently released. Still, 11 days after the board and results are out? That is fast!
bryanteagle6
Well-Known Member
The funny think is, my OR is out of Cleveland and i live closer to columbus (west of columbus)
Ill still find out after Oct. 15 when my OR returns from leave.
Ill still find out after Oct. 15 when my OR returns from leave.
Last edited:
Alright dudes... results are out... who’s got the selection letter with the names?
FormerRecruitingGuru
Making Recruiting Great Again
Sounds like your wife should contact her OR for that - just like everyone else.