Civil Air Patrol Aircraft Operations & Stan/Eval Kevin Conyers Chief, Stan/Eval 23 Aug 2018 Anaheim, CA One Civil Air Patrol, excelling in service to our nation and our members!

Introductions dov@capnhq.gov Kevin Conyers, Chief of Stan/Eval Lt Col Gene Caisse, Asst Chief of Stan/Eval Col Jack Buschmann, Glider Program Manager CAP NHQ Stan/Eval Advisors Col Mike Moyer Col Carton Sumner Lt Col Josh Shields dov@capnhq.gov

Aircrew Professionalism Initiative Implementation Timeline In my previous presentation, Cross Functional Team Updates, we wrapped up with a depiction of the ACP CFT recommendations. The Gantt chart above shows the Aircrew Professionalism Initiative implementation plan that is designed to bring the CFT recommendations to fruition. In this presentation, I will be discussing some of the complete, on-going and planned activities under that effort. Details of the Glider Program Initiative will be addressed in a following brief.

Overview Aircrew Professionalism …as a model …as a guide to development Individual Development Team Development Organizational Development This slide depicts that topics that we will be discussing…

Aircrew Professionalism What is professionalism? “the conduct, aims, or qualities that characterize or mark a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation” “an aviation professional consistently exceeds minimum standards, continuously improves, and helps others to do so.” Professionalism has been defined as “the conduct, aims, or qualities that characterize or mark a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation.“ Professionalism in aviation has been defined as the pursuit of excellence through discipline, ethical behavior and continuous improvement. Tony Kern defined aircrew professionalism behaviorally by stating, “an aviation professional consistently exceeds minimum standards, continuously improves, and helps others to do so.”

Aircrew Professionalism JUDGMENT SITUATIONAL AWARENESS KNOWLEDGE ABILITIES INDIVIDUAL ORG SUPPORT AERONAUTICAL SKILLS ENVIRONMENT RISK AIRCRAFT SELF TEAM adapted from Tony Kern’s Airmanship Model In Redefining Airmanship (1997), Tony Kern proposed a model of airmanship as a tool for guiding the professional development of aviators. We have adapted that model to create the model you see here. This model will structure our approach to providing organizational support for the development of aircrew professionalism within CAP. True professionalism within aviation requires… A personal commitment to the concept of aircrew professionalism. The discipline or self-regulation needed to achieve continual compliance and improvement - driven internally by honesty & integrity and externally by other motivating factors such as incentives & consequences Professionalism also requires… Competence in the form of specialized knowledge of environment, risk, aircraft, self and team, as well as Aeronautical skills, to include proficiency in those skills; and other key abilities such as judgment and situational awareness As defined, aviation professionalism is a “tall order” requiring substantial commitment of resources. Accordingly, we are determined to identify how Civil Air Patrol can best provide organizational support to those of you who have committed yourselves to this journey. Any approach we employ must recognize that CAP members range from those just starting in aviation to seasoned pilots with decades and tens-of-thousands of hours of experience We recognize that a one-size fits all approach will be neither effective or well-received; however, we also acknowledge that we do not have the resources needed to create infinitely tailorable programs. We seek a workable middle-ground. DISCIPLINE COMMITMENT

Three Phase Approach Phase One - Individual Commitment Discipline Phase Two - Team CRM/SPRM Check Pilots & Check Rides Instructor Pilots and Instruction Phase Three - Organizational RM Policy, Processes and Training Stan/Eval Program Regulatory Structure Qualifications & Endorsements Infrastructure Borrowing from a development approach recommended by Tony Kern, interventions are seen as being designed, developed, and implemented using a three phase approach. Phase One would be focused on the individual and would consist of interventions designed to communicate vision, values, and organizational expectations. Phase One includes rollout of the CAP Code of Conduct and solicitation of a personal commitment to that ethical standard. The second phase is focused on teams. This phase includes a requirement to complete CRM/SPRM training (internally or externally), as well as needed improvements to CAP’s check pilot and instructional programs. The third and most demanding phase is focused on organizational supports. This phase begins by reestablishing the Stan/Eval program in regulation; establishing national standards for operational procedures, when needed, as well improving guidance for training. CAP Risk Management policy, procedures, and training will need further development to support risk control. This phase also requires a complete review of each qualification/endorsement for standards, guidance, training resource requirements, and supporting systems. The output will be both a revised program and a set of high-level requirements for infrastructure needed to improve the user experience.

Individual Development Commitment ACP Memo CAP Codes of Conduct Setting organizational expectations Commitment CAP Codes of Conduct published National Commander’s Rouge Pilot Video and Discussion Solicitation of commitment (787 commitments, 3 defers out of 2842 opened emails)

Individual Development Discipline Self Peers Organization

Team Development Crew Resource Management Threat & Error Management CRM Skills Decision Making Assertiveness Mission Analysis Communication Leadership Adaptability / Flexibility Situational Awareness Case Studies

Team Development Check Pilots and Check Rides 2018 NCPSC Check Ride Guidance Plan of Action (template) Incomplete, failed, expired G1000, KAP140/GFC700 Standards (CAPF 91) Flight Clinics/Meetings Risk Management 2018 National Check Pilot Standardization Course has been published on the LMS Upcoming guidance POC: Gene Caisse, DOVA dov@capnhq.gov

Team Development Instructors & Instruction National Instructor Pilot Standardization Course? Syllabus guidance Flight Clinics Methods for deploying issue-focused training (Short-/Soft-field) Upcoming POC: Gene Caisse, DOVA dov@capnhq.gov

Organizational Development RM Policy, Processes & Training ID Hazards SIRS data Mishap Analysis Tool SQA Tools Assess Risk Risk tolerance Risk categories Risk acceptance Develop Controls Regulatory Procedural RAW Training Organizational 70-1 Low Med SOP High Central to the CFT effort Risk policy, processes undergoing further development and being applied to emerging risks by SE, DO, and LG (nosegear bracket)

Organizational Development The Stan/Eval Program From an organizational design perspective CAP’s Standardization and Evaluation program requires further development. Looking at CAPR 20-1, it is apparent where the Stan/Eval Officer sits within the organization. However, the Senior Member position description for a Standardization and Evaluation Officer has a singular focus on the evaluation of aircrew. What is lacking is a description of what the Stan/Eval Officer’s role should be in developing and implementing standards. Unsurprisingly, the Stan/Eval Specialty Track does not support competency development in that area either. CAPR 70-1 and 60-3 identify a number of activities that a Stan/Eval Officer must perform, to include submission of trend analysis reporting. However, the “Standardization and Evaluation Program” itself is not defined. With the exception of general flying rules contained within the CAPR 70-1, flying operational procedures are left largely unstandardized. Some national-level standardization of these procedures will be required to address high risk hazards and interoperability concerns. If local standardization of other procedures is required to address unique operational environments, this task is not supported programmatically or developmentally.

Organizational Development Regulatory Structure CAPR 70-1 General Flying Rules CAPR 70-2 Aircrew Training CAPR 70-3 Standardization & Evaluation CAPR 70-4 Operations Procedures We anticipate strengthening the Stan/Eval program using a series of regulations that roughly parallel the USAF Volumes 1, 2, and 3, as shown here. CAPR 70-2 Aircrew Training   Concepts Initial training Upgrade training Continuation training Specialized training Proficiency, currency and recent flight experience CRM/SPRM Flight Clinics Powered Glider Combined CAPR 70-3 Stan/Eval Program structure Organization Levels Evaluation of CPEs No notice evaluations Evaluation Requirements Flight Evaluation Criteria Judgment Emergency Procedures Evaluation Criteria Performance Analysis Corrective Action CAPR 70-4 Operational Procedures Mission Planning Takeoff and Landing Data Briefing/Debriefing Checklists Pilot Job Aids Normal Operating Procedures Preflight Checklist usage Ground/taxi Change of A/C control Soft field takeoff Touch-and-Go Post-flight Abnormal Procedures Notional Only

Organization Development Qualifications & Endorsements CAP Level 1 & WMIRS Access Prep for F5 exam, a/c questionnaire Schedule F5 Complete F5 Load docs in OpsQual Approved, then Appointed by Wing CC Document current state Identify disconnects/gaps Align policy, regulation, standards and evaluation Plan for development of required organizational support Planned

Organizational Development Infrastructure Workflow Delivery Planned Will support Knowledge across self, team, environment, aircraft, and risk Content

Kevin Conyers Chief, Stan/Eval kconyers2@capnhq.gov dov@capnhq.gov Questions? Kevin Conyers Chief, Stan/Eval kconyers2@capnhq.gov dov@capnhq.gov One Civil Air Patrol, excelling in service to our nation and our members!