6 Mar 18 IWC Board

[kpolly22]

PROREC-Y FOR INTEL

Applied: 1) SWO 2) INTEL
Degree: BS Psychology (CUNY)
MS Neuroscience (Columbia University)
GPA: 3.7 Undergrad, 4.0 Grad
OAR: 55
LOR: 1 Biomed Engineer PhD, 1 Chief of Neuroscience PhD, 1 CEO, 1 Chiropractor/Physical Therapist, 1 Dean/Althetic Director, 1 E4 (USAF), 1 GM
No Interviews
AGE: 24

 

[GlassBanger]

PROREC-Y FOR INTEL

Applied: 1) SWO 2) INTEL
Degree: BS Psychology (CUNY)
MS Neuroscience (Columbia University)
GPA: 3.7 Undergrad, 4.0 Grad
OAR: 55
LOR: 1 Biomed Engineer PhD, 1 Chief of Neuroscience PhD, 1 CEO, 1 Chiropractor/Physical Therapist, 1 Dean/Althetic Director, 1 E4 (USAF), 1 GM
No Interviews
AGE: 24

Girlllllll yaaassss ??

 

[Hair Warrior]

PROREC-Y for Intel!!!
Second try. Only thing that changed about my kit was an O6 appraisal, a few new LORs, career shift, and motivational statement. I DID NOT retake my OAR.

Stats are in my signature but for ease:
Age: 27
Degree(s):
B.S. Criminal Justice, GPA 3.85
A.A.S Criminal Justice, GPA 4.0
OAR: 47
LORs: see signature please lol

Congrats

 

[GlassBanger]

Congrats

Thanks HW!!

 

[locote1]

PROREC-Y for Intel!!!
Second try. Only thing that changed about my kit was an O6 appraisal, a few new LORs, career shift, and motivational statement. I DID NOT retake my OAR.

Stats are in my signature but for ease:
Age: 27
Degree(s):
B.S. Criminal Justice, GPA 3.85
A.A.S Criminal Justice, GPA 4.0
OAR: 47
LORs: see signature please lol

congrats! so you did not have any lors? lol

 

[GlassBanger]

congrats! so you did not have any lors? lol

Thank you.

I was on my phone when I first posted my PROREC-Y so I didn't feel like typing them all out (they are in my signature). I had a number of LORs in my kit. From the very beginning I had ones from: my law professor, my sociology professor, the dean of my Criminal Justice program, an (at the time) supervisor, a Ret. AF Major that is a friend I met on the semi-pro scenario paintball circuit, and an AF MSgt. I knew from the same.

The LORs I believe had the most impact, that made the difference for me, were the two added ones I got right before I resubmitted for this board. One from an NFO CDR I met here on AirWarriors shortly after I joined and have kept near-constant communication with and actually met in person that offered to write me one, and a retired MCPO that is a detective I currently work alongside.

The MCPO was able to attest to my technical training and knowledge, in addition to my work ethic and my certifications by the FBI and state of Arizona. He had kind of reputation in the Navy and is well known for having hard ass standards. Many don't like him, but many also do. He warned me of this prior to writing it for me. But I told him I believed strongly that if he had such a reputation, that he thought me worthy of a LOR, combined with what was said in it, would help me quite a bit. I think it did.

 

[jRiot504]

I wanted to note here for future applicants reading through as my OR who spoke with his Operations Officer provided a little insight I was not picked up. Most of the applicants selected this round had Officer Interview Appraisals submitted with their package - mine did not. He stated they don't typically do those for 1st time applicants but for 2nd - 3rd time applicants they are used to help their package.

For those applying I do not know the difficulty of obtaining one, what they entail or basically anything regarding the topic, just adding another data point in the complexity of trying to get selected.

In the end it is still a numbers game, and I was not picked up, for one reason or another.

 

[Deleted member 67144 scul]

I wanted to note here for future applicants reading through as my OR who spoke with his Operations Officer provided a little insight I was not picked up. Most of the applicants selected this round had Officer Interview Appraisals submitted with their package - mine did not. He stated they don't typically do those for 1st time applicants but for 2nd - 3rd time applicants they are used to help their package.

For those applying I do not know the difficulty of obtaining one, what they entail or basically anything regarding the topic, just adding another data point in the complexity of trying to get selected.

In the end it is still a numbers game, and I was not picked up, for one reason or another.

This is your first time applying for IWC, right? What gives?

I don't know what resources OR's exactly have available, but here's my experience with finding officers to interview with. Yes it can be a bit difficult, especially if you're not prior enlisted or in general don't know people. At first my OR basically told me to find people, so I found a bunch on LinkedIn (only avenue I had really) and gave her names since she can look up everyone's contact information. I also know an officer who knows some higher-ups so he got me in touch with a very great guy willing to spend some time to talk with me.

At the same time, there wasn't a whole lot of luck with the list of people I found on LinkedIn, so my OR apparently proved she did have necessary resources, did some magic, and found a couple officers willing to conduct interviews with me. I've interviewed with one of them so far, and am setting up the second one.

 

[jRiot504]

This is my first time.

Your results in finding officers to conduct an interview is what I expect. I spoke with a active CAPT Intel officer regarding the field and such, but that took 2 months from reaching out to actually speaking with him.

The point that seems confusing is if the interviews aren't required or important unless this is your 2nd or more time applying, why have them at all? I originally asked my OR if they were required considering I saw people on here with them, but he stated that needed and only certain designators require them. Either add it to the checklist or don't accept them. I don't fault the OR, he was going off his instructions as well.

Considering the process takes so long, 8 months minimum, why not require an interview the first go around that wasting time. The next board doesn't mean until Sept/Oct making it a year from first OR contact to board meeting, with an extra of months tacked on before leaving. While I am sure the Navy or any military branch isn't hurting to find qualified officers, do they really anticipate people waiting a year or more to leave for OCS? I suspect this is why 18 - 26 is prime age to [re]-join the military (enlisted or officer).

In the end can't do anything about it but reapply.

 

[FormerRecruitingGuru]

why not require an interview the first go around that wasting time

Because it’s not required for OCS applicants. If you look at previous IWC threads, there were people who didn’t get an interview end up getting selected.

The boards want the most qualified... not someone who has the best interviews. It wouldn’t be fair for someone with a great application but doesn’t have an interview because he doesn’t know anyone - not get selected. Vice versa for those who are marginal but happen to have connections and throw a few CAPT/CDR interviews in there.

Once again... you are applying to a board with a ~10% selection rate, not 80% like aviation. There are some good applicants that are going to get passed up on here... it’s just how it is.

 

[strickladln]

This is my first time.

Your results in finding officers to conduct an interview is what I expect. I spoke with a active CAPT Intel officer regarding the field and such, but that took 2 months from reaching out to actually speaking with him.

The point that seems confusing is if the interviews aren't required or important unless this is your 2nd or more time applying, why have them at all? I originally asked my OR if they were required considering I saw people on here with them, but he stated that needed and only certain designators require them. Either add it to the checklist or don't accept them. I don't fault the OR, he was going off his instructions as well.

Considering the process takes so long, 8 months minimum, why not require an interview the first go around that wasting time. The next board doesn't mean until Sept/Oct making it a year from first OR contact to board meeting, with an extra of months tacked on before leaving. While I am sure the Navy or any military branch isn't hurting to find qualified officers, do they really anticipate people waiting a year or more to leave for OCS? I suspect this is why 18 - 26 is prime age to [re]-join the military (enlisted or officer).

In the end can't do anything about it but reapply.

The schedule shows a June 2018 IWC board. Did something change?

 

[GlassBanger]

The schedule shows a June 2018 IWC board. Did something change?

I don't think so, if anything had changed, Chop, RUFiO, or NavyOffRec would have been quick to inform everyone on the FY18 Board Schedule thread. There's a board convening on 12JUN18 with a deadline of 04MAY18.

 

[FormerRecruitingGuru]

The schedule shows a June 2018 IWC board. Did something change?

No there is. But because he will be reapplying, he will need to wait 6 months unless he makes MAJOR improvements.

 

[E5toOLand]

Thread revival! Has anyone with PROREC-Y from this board received a FINSEL yet, or at least a verbal OCS date confirmation from their OR? I'm starting to think my OR purposely doesn't pick up his phone sometimes when he sees my number calling.

 

[koreanknope]

Thread revival! Has anyone with PROREC-Y from this board received a FINSEL yet, or at least a verbal OCS date confirmation from their OR? I'm starting to think my OR purposely doesn't pick up his phone sometimes when he sees my number calling.

Not from this board (from Dec.), but heard from my OR that they’re not shipping intel out very fast and that Intel spots are full for FY18 classes. Hang in there!