1. 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!

2. 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

3. 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.

4. 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…

5. 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.”

6. 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

7. 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.

8. 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 s)

9. Individual Development Discipline
Self
Peers
Organization

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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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)

14. 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.

15. 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

16. 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

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

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