IDP's

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Everyone knows that IDP's are required. Everyone knows that completion must be entered in the system. So, why are our completion percentages so low? Why don't the completion percentages get better? Is the problem in completing the IDP's or in entering the data?

I don't understand why its so hard to get them done and get them entered?

Anyone have thoughts?


As of 25JAN07:
Active Enlisted Complete: 52%
Active Officer Complete: 33%
Reserve Enlisted Complete: 29%
Reserve Officer Complete: 22%
Overall Complete: 48%

These stats are sad. I know it's a little more work, but come on...can't we do a better job than this?

[MSTCS Jerald P. Motyka]

Deane, do you have a different instruction than I do? Mine says that it is mandatory for only first termers, both enlisted and all officers (of both flavors) of under 4 years of commissioned service... does yours say differently?

I'm not calling you out, I just wanna know, because this wouldn't be the first time that A) I was wrong, or B) I was operating under obsolete guidance. :rolleyes:

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

I think the problem is that the IDP is only one of many items that are required to be taken care of by members of this fine service. It is a matter of time management. It's tough to get it all done pure and simply. I have guys in my shop working on them at home so they can get them finished. This is their choice not my decision. The fact is that we have a lot of work to get done and I'm not even an engineer on a 378' (God bless you guys I've been on 3). The IDP if done right, is not something that just gets thrown together and a check is placed in TMT. It takes time. Then there is an IDP "revision" and follow on counseling down the road. For me it's a matter of X amount of hours in a workday. My folks are coming along but I'm not rushing them because I want them to actually think about what they are doing. If we have to do this it should be done right.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Deane, do you have a different instruction than I do? Mine says that it is mandatory for only first termers, both enlisted and all officers (of both flavors) of under 4 years of commissioned service... does yours say differently?

I'm not calling you out, I just wanna know, because this wouldn't be the first time that A) I was wrong, or B) I was operating under obsolete guidance. :rolleyes:

Yes, it's only required for first termers. I apologize if my post is somehow misleading.

[CMC Bruce Bradley]

The main problem I see is with the data input. We in the operational world have that system down a little better than the non-operational world. When I was down at Cape May a few weeks back I asked about the IDP's for the base. They showed me that they had all the hard copies to show that they were done, but no one there had any idea about the system data input requirements. That's gona be a fun learning curve this summer.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Bruce...that's an interesting comment. I've seen the same thing. The operational units are typically in compliance and the Sectors/Districts are not. I find it amusing that the people that hold us accountable often don't hold themselves accountable.

I'm sure you'll square away the Cape May crowd. Good Luck!

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

It really makes me wonder what else isn't getting done. I agree with Pat that it isn't a matter of minutes and a check in the box. But it doesn't have to turn into a thesis either. It also shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
I think that people don't put enough importance into getting it done. When Districts generate and publish the lists of who aren't in compliance more people tend to come up to speed. Once the start holding those who don't accountable,....even more people will start finding the time.

[BMCM Bill James]

ETC Pat: "My folks are coming along but I'm not rushing them because I want them to actually think about what they are doing. If we have to do this it should be done right."

Amen, brother. The whole point is the QUALITY of the interaction/counselling. Unfortunately, the tool I have readily at hand to judge that effort is the data pull from TMT via CGBI. I understand the problems with connectivity (especially u/w) & familiarity with TMT (esp. when it is just one of the 100 collateral a person has, 99 of which they got no training for). I've been sending monthly reports to LANTAREA units for seven months now & have seen good progress. However, there's still units that haven't budged off "O", so I gotta wonder what's going on if the problem isn't the two above...

I hear ya on the time involved. Both Areas have People Plans that serve to tell you what are the most important people development programs, and IDPs are front and center in both. I'm patient with the time...again, though, I'd like to see SOME progress as the months roll along...

[AMTCM John Long]

An observation.....

I know IDP's can be time consuming. We had to work all the Airman when it started up in PACAREA. Any merit to the Districts or Area's sending a road crew to the units that are struggling with time or sys knowledge. Get those units caught up and train the unit TPO on how to work with TMT.

Again....just a thought if deemed worthy.

John

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

The operational units are typically in compliance and the Sectors/Districts are not.

Deane,

That wouldn't surprise me in the least.

I don't know if they still have the administrative compliance inspections from Area, but, I asked the lead inspector, a Captain, if Area would pass this same inspection ... and he stated "I doubt it." I was suprised they sent a Captain and a CWO(pers) and a SKCS to inspect.

My EPO commented he never seen any one so calm about an inspection like that before ... which I told him, if everyone is doing their best at the collaterals and the experts find only minor discrepancies ... I have nothing to complain about. If there were a major problem, then I failed to provide the necessary training and guidance.

Area also produced a quarterly newsletter outlying the most reported discrepancies which was helpful to provide a double check of our own proceedures to maintain compliance as some collaterals are too infrequent and can slip through the cracks of the everyday routine.

Every new program has it slow starts. I don't know how old the program is, but like starting a new unit, you have at least a year to get your PPA [Title B] up to the palace.

On a side note, if the IDP is so important, why is it just for first termers?

[MSTCS Jerald P. Motyka]

Joe, I'm pulling this from my fourth point of contact, but I think I know why.

Because after you do one full tour, you have formed an idea of where you want to go with your career and you are much more likely to continue in the Coast Guard. Your first four, I surmise, you are more of a rudderless vessel, just drifting in whatever direction the most charismatic person around you is headed. After that, you can see through the smoke and mirrors and actually go your own way.

Or at least that's my theory.

[CMC Bruce Bradley]

If I remember correctly, it is required for first termers and recommended for others. So there's nothing that says it can't be for all. I guess it just depends on the time management of the command and the demand.

And to go back to what Bill was saying. I agree that it is being done a lot more than the numbers show. Where we are failing in this process is the data input into systems so that those above can punch us up to see if we are truely doing our electronic jobs.

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

"Where we are failing in this process is the data input into systems so that those above can punch us up to see if we are truely doing our electronic jobs."

Isn't that where there was so much problem with the weight program? Improper input, I believe....

Wray... :cool:

[CMC Bruce Bradley]

Wray, unlike the weight program I believe the IDP and People Plans are being followed by the fleet. Granted there are some data issues with both. But the bigger problem with the weight program was that it wasn't being enforced/correctly used accross the fleet. A PERSRU down in D7 comes to mind where the YNs were doing the input for each other and playing with the numbers so that everyone was in compliance, until someone looked at them.

[CMC Isherwood]

In PACAREA, documented compliance rates are fairly high and mostly in the green.

Does that mean all of our First Termers are being properly counseled, heck NO and I see MANY, MANY discharge packages to prove otherwise. But I assure you that during unit visits (VADM, CMC, Program Managers etc..) an eyes on QA is sampled. I could share GREAT stories of some of the things that I have seen during these review sessions and the look on the supervisor's faces! Supervisor; "I did not know little Billy wrote that in his IDP" Me; "Chief is that your signature and yesterday’s date stating that you properly reviewed and counseled the member on their IDP?" Priceless!!

Having worked the IDP issue for more than 3 years now, I am quite familiar with ALL of the growing pains and aversion to change experienced with implementation. In the spring of 04' ADM Collins directed, "ALL E-6 and below would have an IDP". At that time the CG did not really have anything that fit the active duty needs, there was a document that was called IDP, but it was more suited for the civilian workforce. During the summer of 04' VADM Johnson (then PACAREA) said that he wanted the PACAREA CMCs to develop an active duty useful IDP. Basically, we re-tooled the D14 First Unit Indoctrination Program and promulgated it as the IDP for PACAREA in Jan05. One year later, with lots of work COMDT adopted the PACAREA plan which is now the current CG IDP program. We all know, "that which is not measured does not get done". So, much work was done with OSC to implement means of tracking compliance rates.

Someone asked about mandating IDPs for everyone. As others have written, IDPs are encouraged for everyone, by the way the Vice COMDT has mandated IDPs for all the Flag Officers.

In my opinion, prior to the CG mandating IDPs for everyone, we should get our arms around the IDPs that are mandated now. Baby steps.

[OSC William Allen]

Not sure what the response is at other units but many of my first termer's look at it as just another book to keep track of and have no real interest in completing it. I have had to sell it to them in an effort to get them to put an honest effort into it and not just fill it with so to speak garbage. Has anyone else had this problem?

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

Not sure what the response is at other units but many of my first termer's look at it as just another book to keep track of and have no real interest in completing it. I have had to sell it to them in an effort to get them to put an honest effort into it and not just fill it with so to speak garbage. Has anyone else had this problem?

That is a pretty accurate statement. It does require more of a sales pitch to get an accurate IDP from a first termer. Seems like most of them are more interested in just learning what it means to be a Coastie and what it means to be a petty officer. I try to tell them it is more of a roadmap for them and their career. A goal setting tool is another term I have used. The biggest hurdle is time. A good IDP can't be done in a single day, in my opinion. It does require the member to think long term and short term. I let them know that the IDP, once completed is not final and can be continually updated by them but then again that clock still gets in the way.
Though I'm not a huge fan of the computer based training that we are moving towards I think it might be a good idea to get a training session developed on the e learning that we have recently become familiar with. The IDP could be filled out as the member goes through the trainaing. The recent PCA trainng I went through had bookmarks so you could pause the trainng and come back to it. Once these online trainings are complete they automatically provide that info into TMT. Then it's a matter of the one on one with the member. There could also be a second online training where the first termer updates his IDP. Hmmm wonder if this would work?

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Tie it all together.

There are alot of short-term, long-term plans.

They include business, financial, educational, life, et al.

If someone stated their short term goal ( less than one year) is to make PO1, then the roadmap for them is x, as described in their PQS and all the things that comprise the SWE Competition for everything UP to and including E-6. Of course if an E-3 is making this, their plan would be longer than one year.

If their short term goal is to be a civilian ... how much should be written? Well, they could write on all the ways to expedite the process.

The same applies to alot of plans, which could be described as living as they can change as needs change.

It's not a crime to correlate the common things between any plan.

Maybe the CPOs can share snippets so these IDPs can be compiled quickly.

[OSC William Allen]

Pat

Thanks for the information. I think the IDP program is a good idea I just dont feel much thought was put into the information the member is being asked to input. Just my thoughts.

William

[CMC Isherwood]

Sorry, I tried to leave this one alone...but I could not.

The IDP is intended to be a personal and professional developmental tool to be used by our most junior folks and maybe more importantly a standardized counseling tool used to improve constructive dialogue between supervisor and subordinate throughout the entire workforce. Ultimately, we are demonstrating to our future leaders that the Coast Guard truly cares about their PEOPLE, not just talks about caring.

The objective of these “individual” goals is to spark thought in the member and invoke guidance from the supervisor with intent to create an open dialogue, between subordinate and supervisor. As you know IDPs are not "set it and forget it". They require genuine interaction; If the member, writes down a "crap" goal, the supervisor should pull on that thread, not just accept substandard effort! "If the supervisor cares, the subordinate will care"

I have personally counseled MANY, MANY, MANY first-termers on their IDPs and a very familiar with what's involved. The first sessions usually require a solid 20-30 minutes each, follow on sessions are more of a SITREP and status update, unless the member is still off track. After discussing/debating IDPs for the past 3 years, I have yet to find a Chief or Chiefs Mess that does not buy into the value of and benefit from properly conducted and regularly held IDP counseling sessions.

Please do not think that the IDP compliance rates are simply a numbers game and "this too shall pass". I have been told recently that the COMDT and MCPOCG have both been asking about IDPs during unit visits, so it's "3 more years" ;-) The IDP, when properly administered, may be a/the key to keeping our junior folks on the road to success, which in turn translates to less administrative intervention time on your part. Quality assurance of the IDP program is everyone's responsibility. I can not emphasis enough, the positive impact that the CO, XO, or CC personally reviewing a member's IDP with them has on the overall success of the IDP program, "If you care, they will care".

Several PACAREA commands, in an effort to ensure that their units are not simply “checking the IDP box,” have implemented this practice: Once a week, the commanding officer and the command chief randomly select a couple of members within their command to visit and view that individual’s IDP. Here are the advantages and disadvantages of this practice:

Advantages

• Demonstrates a strong commitment to IDPs by the command cadre (if you care, they will care)
• Significantly improves the quality of the information contained in the IDP
• Allows the command cadre to “get to know” their folks and to better understand their personal concerns and needs
• Enables the member to realistically focus their energies in a personal and professional goal-oriented environment
• Potentially averts administrative burdens (NJP, indebtedness, alcohol concerns, etc.)

Disadvantages
• Takes time

The IDP is not an unfunded mandate, the only direct cost is time and I can confidently debate that the time spent properly and regularly counseling our junior members will save MANY hours in administrative oversight due to alcohol incidents and substance abuse, financial irresponsibility, adjustment disorders and general mischief. There is ZERO doubt that if you as a supervisor demonstrate a personal interest in our young folks those young folks are more likely to succeed than the folks that are just "left" to figure it out. Besides that, there is nothing in the IDP that the Chiefs Mess and supervisors should not already be doing. This is not rocket science, the units are just being asked to document their efforts.

Training is available for every aspect of the IDP process; a unit just needs to ask. CDAs, ESOs and CMCs are available to train units on counseling practices. The OSC Help Desk is available 24/7(1-877-872-4797) to assist with the nuts and bolts of data integrity. And I am ALWAYS ready, willing and able to engage directly with the unit or Chiefs Mess. Ironically, I am working with the CPO Academy to schedule time for me to take an hour or so during each class convening to train the Class on proper IDP administration. I think this will pay huge dividends, as most Chiefs are apprehensive until they see it professionally demonstrated :-)

As you can tell, I am very passionate about IDPs, if you have questions give me a call, it's much easier to discuss this than it is to write about it.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

What is the real purpose of the IDP? Why only for "first termers?"

There is no such thing as a "first term" commissioned officer.

Here was my plan. I looked at the rating and pay charts for E-1 to E-9. I then looked at the reqirements and worked toward those.

Sounds like just more managerial bullcrap to me and yet another why to relieve leaders of the responsibilitiew to their people.

If someone wants to advance okay, if not that's okay too.

[PAC Darrell Wilson (Ret)]

I did not support the IDP's. If the Chiefs are doing their job, you don't need IDP's. Just more micro management. I had a CofS that had a young JO print him color pie charts each week to see where each office was with their IDP's. That was this JO's sole purpose in life, tracking IDP's. What a great waste of manpower. You cant tell me we didn't have more important things to do. One thing that really bothered me about the IDP's was the personal goals area. I was interested in my guys professional goals but not personal. Its OK if they want to tell me about them but not my business to ask or have them write them down. When they finally filled them out one listed under personal goals, "To start eating more vegetables" That's how I turned it in. Once they were filled out, they sat on the shelf collecting dust right next to their Stress Maps they had to fill out.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Bill and Darrell,
I am going to both agree and disagree with both of you.
First, I agree that all the extra tracking and data entry involved with the IDP is a pain in the butt. I am sure that somewhere down the line, someone will pull up some statistic that they will attribute to the use of the IDP.
Second, I agree with Bill that people need to look toward the future of their career and strive for goals that will help them to achieve what they want. That is what I have tried to capture in my "Career IDP" idea that I would like to see added to the E-ADC. It does just that. It identifies key benchmarks and qualifications necessary for the enlisted career. The member would have to look at that and check boxes for each goal that they want to accomplish in their career and at their next job. This would filter the shopping list to those jobs that will enhance their career. From an assignments perspective, I would rather see jobs going to individuals that are looking to further their career, than go to individuals that are looking to plant their butt in an area. The latter does little for the future of the Coast Guard.
Third, I have had great success using the IDP. I have 3 Non-Rates that are going to college part time as a result of the goals that they have set and our conversations about achieving them. "Why wait until you get out of the Coast Guard to start persuing an education with your GI bill, when the Coast Guard will pay 100% tuition cost and there is $150.00 per year available from CGMA SEG Grant for books and fees?" I have people saving money, persuing ASE certifications... At a unit of 9, I pretty well know what everyone is up to with their lives and plans. The IDP just makes them put it on paper and talk about it which just seems to add to their incentive to actually achieve a goal. While I don't like being pestered about it, and having my data entry questioned, because that is just a pain in the @$$, I do think the program and idea is a step in the right direction for many.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Kevin,

The IDP is intended to be a personal and professional developmental tool to be used by our most junior folks and maybe more importantly a standardized counseling tool used to improve constructive dialogue between supervisor and subordinate throughout the entire workforce. Ultimately, we are demonstrating to our future leaders that the Coast Guard truly cares about their PEOPLE, not just talks about caring.

I don't think any counseling tool will ultimately lead to the juniors "feeling" like the CG truly cares about them. If you wanted to impress those thoughts on them, the supervisors need get out from behind their desks and and actually converse with them on a more frequent basis than what any scheduled counseling will do. The dynamics of the "counseling session" more than likely dictates the junior is "visiting" the supervisors office. That dynamic is typically reserved for less than congradulatory remarks flowing from the supervisors mouth. The old adage, "praise in public" comes to mind.

The IDP is not an unfunded mandate, the only direct cost is time and I can confidently debate that the time spent properly and regularly counseling our junior members will save MANY hours in administrative oversight due to alcohol incidents and substance abuse, financial irresponsibility, adjustment disorders and general mischief.

Time is what most minimum staffed, I mean the politically correct term "optimum staffed", units doesn't have in abundance. I once told MLCA when someone there didn't walk down the hall to get the unit drawings asked me to "get him the information on the receiving antenna to station building distances and access points" that if he and eleven other people assigned me a five minute job, I lost an hour of what I should be doing.

Yes, the IDPs are an unfunded mandate. Time is what you took from the unit. I'll bet you didn't consider the time constraints on the unit before declaring these IDPs as necessary.

What is the schedule for, as you put it, "regular counseling"? As needed isn't a sufficient answer as you described it as a preventative measure to "save MANY hours in administrative oversight due to alcohol incidents and substance abuse, financial irresponsibility, adjustment disorders and general mischief." Preventative measures are scheduled, corrective measures are "as needed". That holds true for equipments and humans.

Do you count the various "mandated" training as part of this "counseling", for they also save those many hours of which you speak.

There is ZERO doubt that if you as a supervisor demonstrate a personal interest in our young folks those young folks are more likely to succeed than the folks that are just "left" to figure it out.

I agree with that 100 percent. That's part of the very old MBWA [Manage By Wandering Around] philosphy.

Besides that, there is nothing in the IDP that the Chiefs Mess and supervisors should not already be doing.
This is not rocket science, the units are just being asked to document their efforts.

I agree that the LPOs and other supervisors should already be doing this. If the IDPs are, as you put it, "... intended to be a personal and professional developmental tool ...", we shouldn't be seeing complaints about the "lack of qualified individuals" or "under 15 year BM1s" type complaints.

There is the juste of the whole IDP program ... documentation. Training records, CG-3303-C?s, CG-1510-?s, CG-3307s, et al, all provide documentation, but, in an effort to collate all the information, they added a new program ... IDP.

I'm betting none of the other requirements were "cancelled" because of these IDPs ... since they are only for "first termers" and "flag officers". I wonder what the "flag officers" want to be when they grow up?

[BMCM Deane Smith]

What's so terrible about a program that's in place to help our people?

Give me the negatives to that.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

What's so terrible about a program that's in place to help our people?

Give me the negatives to that.

Does it really help? Those with inititative will suceed whether there is a "plan" nor not. The proof of this is the Coast Guard before IDPs.

This program is a MPA/MBA smoke screen if it were not it would be a constant for all in the Coast Guard (as it is in the civilan sector) not just the first termers.

This plan is a function of morale rather than a function of personal and professional improvement. The Coast Guard doesn't really care if Joe Stokes advances or goes to college (the latter is only available to those who put it in their plan to remain ashore so they may attend).

One of my plan items would be to have Coastguardsmen be sailors again.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Deane,

Everything as a cost-benefit scale. Like Bill said, those with initiative will do what it takes. Those without won't.

Is the additional effort [cost in time] benefitting more than 30% of your crew? Why did I choose more than 30%? That seems to be the magical number for items to get on your professional development plan called the PQS for each individuals rating.

Not all additional taskings are bad, just as not all current taskings are good.

How much duplication of effort is being done? From Kevin's opening paragraph as the IDPs being used for personal and professional development, how many PQS items make it into the IDP as part of the IDP's action plan?

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Joe and Bill -

Neither of you answered my question. You told me reasons why you don't like it...but, neither of you answered my question.

So, I'll ask again. What's so terrible about a program that's in place to help our people?



Here's a link to visit if you would like to become educated on what an IDP is: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-w/g-wt/g-wtl/idp/

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Deane,

Why must there be an "official counseling" to, as Kevin states "improve constructive dialogue between supervisor and subordinate throughout the entire workforce."?

Your telling me that supervisors don't "talk" to their subordinates?

I don't understand that philosphy any more than I understand the duplicity of work for the sake of "showing" documentation.

Any program good for the sailors is ok by me, but there needs to be a cost benefit analysis. Some think the college programs is good for all, but you don't see everyone getting a check for 50,000 so they can get their college education? It's meted out a semester at a time till the funds run out. A first come, first served situation.

I'll have to break out the instruction authorizing this and see what it program entails rather than relying on what I'm reading here.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Some think the college programs is good for all, but you don't see everyone getting a check for 50,000 so they can get their college education? It's meted out a semester at a time till the funds run out. A first come, first served situation.

I'll have to break out the instruction authorizing this and see what it program entails rather than relying on what I'm reading here.

Not sure what you're referring to with the college remark. Everyone is authorized up to $4500/year for tuition assistance. There are also multiple grants available each year for other associated costs. How the hell is this a bad thing? Are you saying that's not enough and when you reach the cap, the money runs out? Maybe I just don't understand the comment?

As far as the IDP, I've attached the link in my previous post.

[BMCS Burt Ford]

Deane,

Your telling me that supervisors don't "talk" to their subordinates?

If you consider this talking Joe. The sad truth is that there are Chiefs and Officers out there that only talk with the same method we do, a computer. IDPs force a face-to-face. I know, you should not have too, again, sad truths.

[PAC Darrell Wilson (Ret)]

Deane, the negative side is its a waste of time for all involved. It wastes your time, the member's time, the training officers time and everyone involved with the IDP. How much money was wasted creating it? Any good Chief or supervisor should have been doing something like this anyways. One more managerial item added to our workload but nothing was taken away. Weren't we already mentoring and counseling? Now you have even more paperwork. I think there is an agenda behind these IDP's. Not sure what it is but I am sure it will involve officers trying to assume a portion of the Chief's role. What will happen to someone who has no goals? What if you have a stellar performer but he/she has no goals in life other than doing the best job possible? Is that bad? Are the higher ups going to start flagging people who have no education goals? What if you have a member who just wants to make a career out of the Coast Guard but has no interest in furthering their education outside of the Coast Guard. What will you do when a member says his/her goals are private and they don't want to share them?

[PAC Darrell Wilson (Ret)]

Burt, sad but true, I knew a Chief who only communicated via email and this was from desk to desk about 15 feet away.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

FYI, it is NOT, repeat NOT a waste of time at my unit with 4 first termers. The first introduction to the IDP was to give them the goal sheets to look at, think about and fill out. A week later we sat down and talked about career goals be it 4 years in the Coast Guard or 30. Educational goals if any. Other personal goals that they may wish to share. When this is explained to them at the first meeting and they understand that "a goal not written is only a wish", then it makes a little more sense to them. This opens up conversation to all kinds of plans for the future and ways that the Coast Guard can give them a boost along the way for education. If they want to go to an "A" school, I would likely already know that, but we talk about how that fits into life goals. This simply gets leaders into conversations that may go deeper then the day to day stuff that many talk about. Also, consider this at larger units where the non-rates and first termers seldom talk to the Chief, because there are many layers of E-5's and E-6's in between. Remember when we were non-rates and it was scary to talk to the Chief?

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Darrell -

It's not a waste of my time...spending time with my crew is never a waste of time. I don't know where everyone is getting that it takes so much time to complete...it doesn't. It takes a few strokes of the pen and a few strokes of the keypad. If someone says that something is private then we move on. Honestly, I can't imagine that anyone would say that but if they did we would move on to the next thing. For every good Chief that was doing this anyway, there were 3 that weren't. You're right about the agenda...we want to ensure that our people are being taken care of...that's the only agenda.

When I do my IDP's on the OSAGE, I don't pressure anyone to discuss anything. If they have no goals, then we talk about football or whatever. It's up to them. I haven't run into anyone who has resisted talking about the stuff in the IDP's, maybe I'm just lucky? And, I've actually learned some stuff along the way...imagine that!

Your right...it's probably just a big waste of everyone's time...

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Deane, I would imagine you got out and talked to your people before the advent of IDP. Alot of CPOs did. Has the IDPs taken away from what you considered your normal routine conversations with your charges?

On my college comment ... I meant the 50 k as the whole tuition et al in one shot, not meted out at 4500 per fiscal year. Is everyone guranteed the max of $4500 when they apply? Has anyone been denied because of budget constraints?

[I had some questions but CI 5270.2 answered them.]

Burt, you can bet if we were within a walking distance, I wouldn't be engaged in an email conversation. Distance is the driving factor for communicating in this fashion.

Darrell, that is a sad state of affairs [only communicating via email]. Setting that precedence certainly would force the upper echlons to create a program that directs you to have a conversation.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Deane, I would imagine you got out and talked to your people before the advent of IDP. Alot of CPOs did. Has the IDPs taken away from what you considered your normal routine conversations with your charges?

Joe...of course I talked to my people before we had IDP's. That's why when I do sit down with them, it goes pretty quick because I already know a lot of what we're going to talk about. But, I always learn something and I hope (think) that they do too.

The IDP hasn't taken away from anything that I did/do on a daily basis...it's enhanced it. How could that be a negative???

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Deane,

The only negatives would have been if it subtracted from the time you normally spent with your charges, but you've expressed it enhanced it. I'm not sure the whole CG shares your experience.

As Einstein observed, it's all relative from the position of the observer. I doubt I would have had much difficulty or considered it a waste of time [other than performing duplicate tasks] with IDPs. I wouldn't care if the duplicity only took 1 minute, it's still a minute wasted and if there were 60 of those, it would be an hour wasted. I will agree it's much better than my time when the duplicity was labor intensive with paper forms et al.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Joe, you could also look at it as IDPs were put in place to make sure those supervisors are doing what they should have been doing all along.
We didn't have them when we came in, but wouldn't our careers have been different if we did? How often did your supervisor talk to you about your long range goals when you were a first termer? My long range goals were the 15th and the last day of the month back in those days, and I never saw past those.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Joe, you could also look at it as IDPs were put in place to make sure those supervisors are doing what they should have been doing all along.

It's unfortunate that some have been remiss in their duties and it takes such a program to say ... Do me a favor, your %^C&ing job.

I must have been blessed during my first term [72-76]because the CPOs did the wandering around thing and stopped and talked to you. There always were more positive role models then negatives. You'd have to ask those who worked for me what type of role model I became. I don't recall them talking to me about personal or professional development as it was left to the individual to put forth the effort to advance professionally. They were there to guide, not become the answer person. They inquiried, tested, and observed us.

[ETC Brian Strattard]

I like the idea of IDPs but not the time put into them. Goals are good to have, both short term and long term, but goals can change. To have a set IDP that isn't constantly updated does our junior people no good. The majority of our first termers are right in the middle of their first excursion into the world on their own, everything is new and they learn new things and change thier minds on a daily basis. What they may want one day is not what they want the next. And to fill out an IDP without a "career workshop" that explains all options available to them in detail does not make much sense...they should know about college/career/personal opportunities prior to completing an IDP otherwise when they get to the counseling and learn what they can expand upon their goals, their current IDP is already obsolete. Then what...revamp their IDP, learn about more ways to expand upon their written goals and repeat...Unless our first termers are near the end of their first elnistment, those filling out IDPs are at their most rudimentary knowledge base of their CG career...and this is what we want them to set their career goals by? I almost think that counseling prior to filling out the IDP but after a career workshop would be more beneficial...

And what happens if our people don't meet thier goals anyway...

[PAC Darrell Wilson (Ret)]

"And what happens if our people don't meet thier goals anyway..."

Bingo! You win the prize. Nothing happens. They can list any freaking thing they want as a goal, it means nothing. In that sense, its a waste of time. If you take the time to fill out something that isnt worth anything, you have wasted your time. I would think most of you were talking to your people and helping them long before IDP. I told you one of my guys listed a goal as eating more vegetables, some of his other goals were private. Yea, thats a good use of my time, the members time, the CMC's time and the training officer who entered all this data. No one answered any of these questions.
What will happen to someone who has no goals?
What if you have a stellar performer but he/she has no goals in life other than doing the best job possible? Is that bad?
Are the higher ups going to start flagging people who have no education goals?
What if you have a member who just wants to make a career out of the Coast Guard but has no interest in furthering their education outside of the Coast Guard?

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Brian, those IDPs are updated every six months. They change as the goals change. Some goals will never be reached because people stop trying. This is just a tool used to get people thinking about their own future, and to ensure that their command is aware what their people are looking for.

Joe, I came into the Coast Guard 86-90. Everything around me was self paced. And anytime you wanted an answer someone was there to direct you to the book cabinet that held all the manuals. My first two units were Stations. They were also the last two Stations I've ever been too. Life at the Station never had the same feel as life on a ship.

Go back to what people are saying when they get out of the Coast Guard. Most will tell you they couldn't find what they were looking for or didn't like what they were doing. Most would tell you that no one ever sat down and showed them something else was available or worked to retain them. Think of your own units........ did you try to sell re-enlisting to the last person who left your unit? Did you get involved in their life at all?

How many of you have heard someone knocking Sea-Duty to our junior members,..when they have very little seatime themselves? How about command cadre that knock certain rates in front of the people that might have wanted to go that route?

Joe, back during your first tour people might have been doing the right things and providing those positive influences, I have no reason to doubt you............... but believe me, something was lost between then and when I joined. The first positive example of an actual Chief I saw wasn't until my third unit. I saw some guys who were nice people and all.......but positive role models or respected leaders they were not. And not all of the ones I worked for or with have met that mark either. We have some people who should embrace every aid the Coast Guard provides. IDPs can be those tools. It's a outline for sitting down with your people and finding out what they want to get out of their time in the Coast Guard. Big shock, but I'm with Deane. I don't see how it is a negative thing.

[BMCS R. Scott Pugh]

I like the idea of the IDP, but to be honest, I like the original two page form. In my opinion, the updated form involves a little too much spoon-feeding. I am all for getting involved in our folks career and personal goals and helping them achieve them but I can do that without the 10-part binder.

I sat down with my folks when I first got reported in and had everyone (not just first termers) fill one out; six to seven months later I spoke with everyone and asked what they had done over the last six months regarding their goals and a lot of people had not moved in any direction. But, there were a few that had made progress towards one or more goals.

FYI - the data entry part is a just 'checking a box' saying that the counselling was done, there is no tool in place for people to review goals other than looking at the paper IDP.

Scott

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Stuart,

I've talked to my charges very frequently. When the talk moved towards leaving the CG, I reminded the POs of where they are now, their advancement and leadership opportunities in the next couple of years juxtaposed against their advancement and leadership opportunities when they start over in a different line of work.

No topic was off limits, even politics. I tried not to state where my vote was going ... even when I voted for that crazy lil' Texan Ross Perot ... vice my usual vote for the lesser of the two evils. When the District asked if my charges voted, I told them it was none of their business nor mine. I did tell them that everyone registered to vote, but I have no knowledge of them actually voting and I won't ask them.

I'm guilty of sending people to the manuals ... because I wanted them to refer to the source material, not my interpetation of it. How in the world would I know if someone comprehended what is written if they don't RYDM ... Read Your Damm Manual. I've even had my charges read the Constitution of the United States ... after all, they swore to support and defend that document.

The lack of people comprehending is evident. One only needs to review the last few posts of the Uniform board thread.

As far as self-paced stuff, that was a Senior Leadership decision to save money. Everything comes back to money.

I personally think the IDPs are a good thing, so no one has to convience me they are. I didn't get to that position by reading opines, but by RYDM.

[BMCS Dave Considine]

I have to say something here, against my better judgment. The IDPs work, we are following them, and I agree with them. The CG is every changing and evolving, which is why it has enjoyed many successes through the years.

A mentor and close friend retired this week (28 years of Active, Reserve, and Civilian work with the CG). In his departing e-mail he wrote the following:

"As I look behind at those who remain, it is clearly an exciting time to be a part of the Coast Guard. Although a period of dynamic demands, evolving change and increasing challenge, there is tremendous opportunity woven throughout the road ahead. The question is, can you see it? Do you have the vision to see what the future holds, the fortitude to stay vigilant and the commitment to the direction the leadership is taking you?

As illustrated in the Commandant's focus on leadership, on our people, and on our planning for the future, tomorrow's Coast Guard will be different than the one you signed up for. It is up to you to take it there with those three elements."

Good advice, especially the "tomorrow's Coast Guard will be different than the one you signed up for." This is so true, if you had asked me 15 years ago if I would see an M240 hanging out the window of a CG Helo I would have said you were nuts.

The CG has changed, evolved and the people serving every day are a new generation - vastly different from the one they are replacing. I have said numerous times in the UT, these new charges need the guidance and direction. This new generation will continue the awesome accomplishments of the Coast Guard - I know it will! The IDP's are the roadmap to their personal and professional success. Did we need the written direction when we were coming up - probably not but it wouldn't have hurt!

I hope and pray I retain an open-minded perception after I am gone, and resist the pessimistic, soured and stained view I feel many have taken once they have left.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Dave,

One of my earlier thoughts and it's still a valid one, if IDPs are such a good thing, why are they required only for those with less than 48 months time in the CG? Those without IDPs could be grandfathered.

I understand the "theory" is that the individual can choose to keep their IDP up as their continuing guide to success, but for them to continue to establish their usage, it must be demonstrated that their plan had more successes than failures.

Those success stories will lead to the implementation by others who's plan wasn't as successful. Sir Francis Bacon's Latin maxim Scientia potentia est certainly applies.

[BMCS Dave Considine]

As far as I know the IDP's in the First District are required for everyone E7 and below no matter if they are first term or not (and JO's 03 and below). All hands here at the Station have one, and are counseled at the required intervals. Not sure why the other Districts haven't followed suit.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Dave,

All I know is what the promulgated Commandant Instruction requires ... hence the inquiry.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Joe...the current requirement is for the target audience. Exit interviews were showing that people were getting out because they didn't know about programs/opportunities that were available. So, the IDP came about to ensure that ALL first termers have the information to make good decisions and know what's available for them to be successful...and maybe stay in.

Again...I can't see the negative in that.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Exit interviews were showing that people were getting out because they didn't know about programs/opportunities that were available.

You must remember that exit interviews, six months prior to relad, was once was a requirement for everyone then became a female only requirement sometime in the 90s or earlier in this century, as they were the target audience of the palace at the time.

I never said the IDPs were bad. I stated I didn't like duplicating work even for a minute. I did state if the IDPs were so useful, why the requirement for those with time in CG of less than 48 months. D1 has extended it to CPO and O-3. Does that mean that SCPO's and MCPO's won't or can't benefit from a IDP? CWOs? O-4 and up? The IDPs are either a useful tool or they're not. Like many other plans ... business, financial, et al, IDPs will change with time ... things get added and deleted, objectives lowered, objectives raised, etc. There's not a big leap of faith to correlate the various types of plans and the usefullness of such plans.

Don't think for a minute that my disagreement is with the IDP. I'd disagree with anything that involves time ... especially on an optimially staffed unit and that additional time hasn't been worked into a time-motion study for staffing. In that context, the IDP is an unfunded mandate. To some, someone else's time is immaterial because it doesn't affect their libo, their work-life, or their morale.

What use to tick me off ... and the offenders usually got a phone call ... was when someone asked for information knowing they had access to the database. The units work hard to make sure the database is accurate and still, some would ask the unit for something they could access themselves. I certainly hope that is not the case anymore.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Joe, don't want to be the bearer of the bad news.......but yes, that still goes on to this day. We also occasionally get the call where someone just wants us to verify that the information we just loaded into one of those data bases is accurate.
I like limiting the required IDPs to first termers. Require the people who haven't been in long enough to re-enlist that six month interview. Those who have already been around for awhile could continue on their own.....or not. But at least they knew what was available.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Stuart,

I'm sure it does. It got so bad I adopted the Nancy Reagan slogan ... Just say no. That typically was the first word after confirming the questioner has access to the information. I also inquired as to why they didn't trust the information in the database.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Good advice, especially the "tomorrow's Coast Guard will be different than the one you signed up for." This is so true, if you had asked me 15 years ago if I would see an M240 hanging out the window of a CG Helo I would have said you were nuts.


I'm not sure there is a "window" to hang one out of, but in the past, especailly in the "Lifesaver" era that followed Vietnam in the Coast Guard, it was the airdales who did not want them. We did look at putting M60s on the HH-52s in the early 1980s but the airdales complained about the weapon and ammo taking up too much space and weight as well as too many important hours to fly out and train and so on. They ultimately said they were lifesavers and not warriors and didn't want them. I suppose at some point macho took over.

[BMCS Burt Ford]

Not to change the subject, but macho did not take over, Homeland Security did.

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

Not to change the subject, but macho did not take over, Homeland Security did.


Common sense took over. A 378 can't catch a go fast and what is a Dolphin going to do, spit on them. Now they can stop the boats. I would hope that an aircrew never has to slug it out against another armed opponent but if it ever happens at least they can return fire.

[CMC Isherwood]

In my post on April 9th I explained the history of the current IDP. No officers were involved in the creation phase, they had the “happys to glads” detail. The IDP was a grassroots initiative that cost the CG next to nothing to create.

There is much talk on here about, Chiefs should already be doing this IDP stuff and I agree. A couple of you have said, “some Chiefs aren’t doing it” and I agree. Some have said, “writing this stuff down will in itself not make a member successful” and I agree. Those that are properly administering the program have said, “the IDP is a good tool and I have learned about my members from it” and I agree.

A quick story, 25 years ago when I reported to MUNRO as a brand new E-2, the Chief met with me, handed me this big qualification package and said, “boot camp, you’ve got 30 days to get qualified or your ass will be on Port and STBD". I had no idea what he was talking about but left the Mess to figure it out. When do you think the first time that ANYONE in that ship asked me about my qualification process? You guessed it, day 31!!! That was not the best way to set someone up for success. Unfortunately, at some CG units this story still rings true in today’s CG and that is a shame. My point is, there is NO substitute for early and often face to face supervisor/sailor interaction. The IDP is an effective program to script some of those interactions.

There is a perception that the IDP is a twice a year, “Set it and forget it” process, nothing is further from the truth. The IDP is a living document that that should be reviewed and updated as situations change. At a minimum, IDP counseling is required to be documented in TMT twice a year at the mid marking periods. A good rule of thumb would be to go over your member’s IDP with them after they have experienced a stumbling block (you name it) or have achieved a career milestone (qualified, advanced, reached their goals etc..). These sessions are not required to be documented in TMT, but can be. Again, the objective is to open up a mentoring dialogue with the member to get them back on their stated course or to reevaluate and readjust their road map to success.

It is much easier for me to verbally explain the benefits of the IDP vice writing about it. There is too much room for misinterpretation by the reader or to little time for effective description by the writer. I would be happy to discuss the IDP in person or via land line with anyone that is interested. Heck, I’ll even call you to save you the dime, just send me your number.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

The IDP was a grassroots initiative that cost the CG next to nothing to create.



A philosopher may say those things that cost nothing are worthless. If anything is to be considered worthwhile then there must be some cost to it whether in effort or blood. It must be earned to be meaningful.


It is much easier for me to verbally explain the benefits of the IDP vice writing about it.

Should not the benefits be well explained in the instruction outlining it? If further, and verbal, explanation is required then should not the instruction be rewritten? After all, you cannot hold someone to a program of verbal explanation.

Since IDP cost nothing from where was it copied?

[BMCS Dave Considine]

I'm not sure there is a "window" to hang one out of

Can you hear yourself? It's a figure of speech, apologize if that's not the Vietnam Era phrase your used to.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Kevin,

It may have cost next to nothing to create if your time is considered worthless.

Your time must be worth something because you would rather have the oral presentation vice the written presentation, since the oral is fluid with the target audience and the written will require much more time to articulate your message.

Someone said Time is money, and that holds true. Your time is worth something, [annual salary / 2080(hours)] is the simplest measure for a per hour rate. Everyone's time is worth something. Costs are measured in man-hours, dollars, time to execute a detail, productivity, etc.

If you think the oral presentation is better, then tape your speech, include the FAQs and your response to them, and convert it to a web based presentation. The feedback to you, especially the inquiries, can be included in the updated version of the taped presentation. I'm sure a skilled editor could include the new inquiries without you having to redo the complete presentation.

[MKC Craig Thorngren (Ret)]

Joe,
While I agree with you "time is money", I think if everyone looked at an IDP they'll see that their are only two things that are being done differently with the current IDP and the way things use to be done. The first is it's being documented in TMT (Training Mangagement Tool). I can get in, document it and get out of TMT in about a minute. The second is that the member writes down their goals (short term, long term, career, financial etc...). To me this accomplishes two things. The first is that when you write goals down, your already taking a step to achieving them. More importantly it gives me an opening to start a dialogue with the member and get more than a "Yes Chief" as an answer. With the generational differences it can be quite a daunting task to have a conversation and really understand what the member is saying.

Craig

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Craig,

Can I assume everything, including the individual PQS checkoffs is done in the TMT? If not, there is a duplication of effort ... so your one minute becomes two ... one of which becomes wasted and doubled your costs for that tasking. If you have five charges, that's normally 10 minutes annually, 20 if your duplicating your efforts [assuming both documentations take only a minute ... discounting the ancillary tasks it takes to have the paperwork [or program] in front of you]. I'm not saying it's wasting time, but added to everything else your doing, it might mean your spread too thing for all the taskings. I know, choose your rate, choose your fate.

Before the brown shoes step in, I know there is a different data capture programs for somethings for airdales, as well as using TMT for some portions. Why aren't the brown shoes using the same program for all training and qualifications? Are they not in the same Coast Guard? That infers the TMT isn't a CG Wide program.

More importantly it gives me an opening to start a dialogue with the member and get more than a "Yes Chief" as an answer. With the generational differences it can be quite a daunting task to have a conversation and really understand what the member is saying.

I hate to break the news to you, but the same happened in every generation and will continue to do so. Nothing, except maybe you, prevented you from starting a dialog with your charges prior to IDP.

[MKC Craig Thorngren (Ret)]

Joe,
With TMT somethings are more comprehensive than others. Normally it's the complete qualification or training program, not the individual PQS items (i.e. when you complete the training program not all of the individual tasks during the training are captured, just that you completed the syllabus).

As far as the aviation tracking, I'm sure they do have a different system for tracking the aviation specific training (Boat Forces uses AOPS). What TMT tracks is all of the items that we all are required regardless of rating (like IDP's or sexual harrassment prevention...).

Craig

[BMCS Burt Ford]

You all have got to be kidding me. Kevin said it cost next to nothing. Figuratively speaking it does. Now if we want to nit pick that the paper in .01 binder 1.25 ink form the pirnter 2.00 ink form the pin .001......Give it a rest. IDPs are here to stay and worth while. If you guys that are retired dont think they benefit our jr memebers, thats fine since you have nothing invested in the process.

Change is a good thing. This changed our E-Coast Guard to require more time wiht those that will be relieving us. It is not going away. Remember if Christopher Columbus had not set out wiht a new idea, we would all still be living in a flat world.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

You all have got to be kidding me. Kevin said it cost next to nothing.

I'm not nit picking Kevin's statement, other than his misunderstanding of COSTS. I'll bet his next to nothing value has a true that exceeds his comment.

I'm glad you have all the time necessary to perform every taskings as per every damm instruction your required to have, and you do it in such a fashion to have something similiar to a life.

I'm also glad that your staffing is sufficient so that all your charges can also have a life.

Give it a rest. IDPs are here to stay and worth while.

They can be removed tomorrow if the right person didn't want them. And for the record, I never said they weren't worthwhile.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Can you hear yourself? It's a figure of speech, apologize if that's not the Vietnam Era phrase your used to.

It isn't a phrase I've heard from that era. They were hung out the door as in the door gunner position. However, there is a "window" on the CH-47, 46, H-53. The latter also hung one at the rear ramp.

You were speaking of Coast Guard helicopters. I still think it very funny that a machine gun is hung out of doors that keep falling off.

Actually I cannot hear myself as well as I used too. All that machine gun firing in real situations you know.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

With the generational differences it can be quite a daunting task to have a conversation and really understand what the member is saying. Craig

Yeah, I know.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Joe,
What TMT tracks is all of the items that we all are required regardless of rating (like IDP's or sexual harrassment prevention...).

Craig

If the plan is individual then why is required training included? Do people actually put sexual harrassment training as a goal?

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Change is a good thing. This changed our E-Coast Guard to require more time wiht those that will be relieving us. It is not going away. Remember if Christopher Columbus had not set out wiht a new idea, we would all still be living in a flat world.

To change for change sake isn't change. It is an OER bullet. Ole Chris didn't know where he was going or how to get there except a general direction. It was not his stated goal to prove the world was not flat. That had been proved more than a 100 years previously. No, ole Christo and the boys were out on a mission of greed.

The same sort of greed that we are celebrating with the founding of Jamestown in 1607.

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

Lies my teacher told me. Good book. I'm 1/4 through it. I'm giving it two thumbs up so far. I knew Columbus was in it for money but there was more to it than that. No hijacking intended.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Lies my teacher told me. Good book. I'm 1/4 through it. I'm giving it two thumbs up so far. I knew Columbus was in it for money but there was more to it than that. No hijacking intended.

There was also the spread of Roman Catholicism. This is why Chris had to take a few priests with him. Also, they kept an eye on him and what ever treasure he may find.

Here's another good book for you,"

Dr. Harry G. Frankfurt "On Bull Shit." It is only 67 pages. The first paragraph lays it out real well.

"One of the most salient features of our culture is that there is so much [bull]. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted. Most people are rather confident of their ability to recognize [bull] and to avoid being taken in by it. So the phenomenon has not aroused much deliberate concern, nor attracted much sustained inquiry."

This book should be on the Commandant's reading list. Most of what I read on these type forums is just more bull.

[MKC Craig Thorngren (Ret)]

If the plan is individual then why is required training included? Do people actually put sexual harrassment training as a goal?

Bill,
I may have "muddied the waters" a little with my example:rolleyes: TMT is a tool that tracks training. Its great for me as a Chief to decide who needs to attend any particular training. Lets use Sexual Harrassment Prevention as an example.
If the training is required once every two years (I'm not sure how often it's actually required, but for the sake of this discussion lets say it's every two years) and I know next month the ISC Worklife staff is putting on the training, I can go into TMT, and see who is overdue, who is coming up on needing it and who is good for another year. I can then make sure that the personnel that need to be at the training attend rather than sending the whole unit. Even better, since the tracking is now web/computer based, I don't have to go through everyones training record and try to find out who needs it and who doesn't. I've also been at units where training was tracked on a huge white board. The names were down the left side and across the top were all the trainging subjects (coxn, crew, eng, bo/btm, and all general military training.). It also allows new commands to get an idea of what training a new member will need upon reporting.

IDP counseling and sexual harrasment prevention training just happen to be tracked in TMT. To me it just makes sense to track it there rather than developing a whole new tracking system.

And no, I have never had anyone or heard of anyone put sexual harrasment training down as a goal.

Craig

[BMCS Dave Considine]

Most of what I read on these type forums is just more bull.

Interesting comment, making more friends I see.

[MKC Craig Thorngren (Ret)]

... Most of what I read on these type forums is just more bull...

So with almost three times as many post's as me does that mean your a more liberal spreader of bull or that I'm conservative in spreading bull?:D

Sorry, I just couldn't pass it up... :rolleyes:

Craig

[MKC Art Bailly (ret)]

Question, when we sit down with our member and go over their IDP’s there is a section for financial counseling. Does anyone know were we can go to get training to be a financial counselor? Just another example of here’s a new program we want you to start doing without any training. Something I thought the CPOA would have covered instead of listening to BOB for a week.

[BMCS Burt Ford]

Art
you can get the training from ISC Ketch work-life. Both for the member and you if you want to become a unit counselor.

Burt

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Question, when we sit down with our member and go over their IDP’s there is a section for financial counseling.

Would that be more of a function for work-life then something from the CPOACAD?

Last time I gave that training, I discussed the ramifications as outlined in CIM 1000.6 (series) and then discussed budgeting, short-term and long-term financial goals and achieving them with CASH vice credit cards.

Naturally, some big ticket items couldn't be purchased with CASH, and maybe some training examples in Credit Card Interest and other Interest Calculations would be helpful.

One thing to stress it your not interested in telling them how they spend their money, your only interest is keeping them on the good side of the regulations. I had invited their spouses to the training also ... since they are a team and the spouses actions could place them on the wrong side of the regulations as easily as the members actions.

This could be handled at an all hands training vice the individual development plan sessions ... to keep the discussion very generic. This doesn't prevent you from offering any specific assistance when it's time for the IDP session or anytime your charges deem it necessary.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

So with almost three times as many post's as me does that mean your a more liberal spreader of bull or that I'm conservative in spreading bull?:D

Sorry, I just couldn't pass it up... :rolleyes:

Craig

I know. I do the same. Perhaps you will explain your premise of liberal and conservative speaders. You may use Dubya as a conservative spreader which does not equate to limiting what is being spread. WMDs, terrorists, democracy in Iraq, mission accomplished? That's far more conservative than I would go.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

. Something I thought the CPOA would have covered instead of listening to BOB for a week.

Who is (or what is) BOB? What is covered in the week?

[HSC Chris Fly]

Art,
Check with the nearest Navy base for thier Command Fincancial Specialist course, it lasts a week.
Chris

Question, when we sit down with our member and go over their IDP’s there is a section for financial counseling. Does anyone know were we can go to get training to be a financial counselor? Just another example of here’s a new program we want you to start doing without any training. Something I thought the CPOA would have covered instead of listening to BOB for a week.

[CMC Isherwood]

The objective of the initial financial counseling is at the basic, make that very the basic level. Did you do your travel claim, more checks does not mean you have more money? etc.. In addition to the resources already mentioned, here are two other places, the E-PME Study Guide, Ch 11- Personnel Issues (Reg. 11-4.01 K)- every Chief should be able to speak to that level of financial awareness and the other one is enclosure 3 of the People Plan.

[YNCM Doug Squires (Ret)]

Guardian Federal Credit Union - the old Fifth District Credit Union hs just become the Credit Union for Atlantic Area.

they have many exportable trainings they have made specifically for Coast Guard Units to use to meet the needs of the Atlantic Area People Plan as wll as other GMT items in the world of financial management from basic budgeting to checkbook management, etc. Tell them what you need - they probably alerady have a presentation for you.

Need help or advice, call them, they'll listen. Visit their web site for lots of free web-based tools and coaches. Send them an e-mail for anything you can't find.

Guardian's board is almost all active duty, retired or civilian employees of the Coast Guard. They are truely committed to helping where they can. They have even gone the extra steps to be certified by CGHQ to train at All Hands and GMTs.

Visit them at:
www.GuardianFCU.Org or (757) 397-1234 ask for extension 135.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

In a recent "All Hands" message by ADM Allen, he said that the goal was to have all 0-4 and below and all E-6 and below complete IDP's.

What do you think? Good idea?

Thoughts on E-6 and below being required to do IDP's?

[ETC Ben DiGuilio]

When I was in D11 it was required for E6 and below. (I was one)

I don't feel that it was useful for me personally but I was also at a very small unit (5 man LORSTA). I think that they could be good at large commands where some people go to be left alone.

[ETC John D Zidek]

At Yorktown IDPs are required for everyone, not just the junior folks.

"Z"

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

In a recent "All Hands" message by ADM Allen, he said that the goal was to have all 0-4 and below and all E-6 and below complete IDP's.

What do you think? Good idea?

I think this means the only ones not required to complete them CDR's and above.... ;)

John, glad I never had to do one at Yorktown.. :p

Wray... :cool:

[ETC John D Zidek]

I dont think it is a bad thing. I have been told by people alot smarter than me, that the first step to achieving your goals is to write them down.

Does it eat up some time, Yes. But it does let you see what your people want and if that alllows us to help them get there than I can give up some of my time to stay a little late and make that connection.

I found that when I show that interest in them, they realize that they can come to me for help when they need it and for the most part the folks that I have had in my shops work as hard for me as I work for them.

Is it a bad thing for us to do our own IDPs, No. It gives us a better understanding of what the package is looking for from the junior folks and it just might make us look at our futures a little closer. Maybe have a plan for PG (Post Guard) Life. No One is going to pay us to sit on the porch and count cars.

"Z"

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

No One is going to pay us to sit on the porch and count cars

John, the CG pays me to sit around my pool & drink beer or Captain Morgan if I want to.... They are my employeer of choice ;)

You will see.. Retirement is WONDERFUL.

Wray... :cool: