IWC Board Nov 20

[notacoverband]

Good morning all! Game time seems to be quickly approaching so again best of luck to everyone. I've looked a bunch of times but can't seem to find the " " "exact" " " day of the board or at least the projected one. Does anyone know? Thank you!

 

[zarevich]

Good morning all! Game time seems to be quickly approaching so again best of luck to everyone. I've looked a bunch of times but can't seem to find the " " "exact" " " day of the board or at least the projected one. Does anyone know? Thank you!

according to board schedule, it is supposed to convene 30NOV20

 

[PhillipC]

I’m a civilian applying so someone can correct me, but when I spoke with my OR she said that when you apply for multiple designators your application will be sent to those respective boards. Ideally, whenever those boards meet the one that convened first will notify your OR first. However, these boards from what I’m reading are quite arbitrary about when they release results so that may or may not always be the case. I’m also a civilian so it may be different for active duty. But basically I doubt that two boards of different designators will release results to your OR at the same time. That would be really nice though lol

You will most likely not get results at the same time.

 

[BasketballisLife]

I saw someone post this on the OCT 2020 CEC thread. Has anyone on here heard this too? Can anyone confirm this is happening?

"There is chatter on the SNA, SWO, and Intel boards are effectively closed until FY22. I wonder if CEC is being affected in a similar manner as well.

According to the other boards, the training pipelines are pretty backed up so they aren't accepting applications. OCS is the valve they can shut off for candidates while USNA and ROTC will keep going. That being said, CEC is much more niche so I wonder the CECOS pipeline ever gets impacted."

 

[jetphiltx]

Thank y'all for the responses. This upcoming board for me is at the forefront of my mind every single day, especially when at work. My OR informed me today that we got my package in at the perfect time b/c they just closed out quotas for the next year. Having no prior military experience whatsoever, that kinda seems a little bit weird considering the part that read 'they just closed out quotas for the next year' part. On the other hand, he claimed it was 'the perfect time,' so it made me think positively - still confused, though. He hasn't messaged me back yet, so I don't want to pester him too much. Does anybody have some clarification on what he possibly meant?

 

[CWO_change]

I saw someone post this on the OCT 2020 CEC thread. Has anyone on here heard this too? Can anyone confirm this is happening?

"There is chatter on the SNA, SWO, and Intel boards are effectively closed until FY22. I wonder if CEC is being affected in a similar manner as well.

According to the other boards, the training pipelines are pretty backed up so they aren't accepting applications. OCS is the valve they can shut off for candidates while USNA and ROTC will keep going. That being said, CEC is much more niche so I wonder the CECOS pipeline ever gets impacted."

I'd find the bolded hard to believe from a numbers perspective, but then again, Covid would have led to crazier happenings.

 

[buffsnavy89]

Hey, current 1830 here! There may be multiple reasons for non-select. Our community is small and therefore able to be more selective with applicants. Having both your bachelors and masters is a plus, but things like LOR's weigh heavily with Millington. You have stated that you have some LOR's from an NSA/ NGA Analyst and some college professors, but is the 05 LOR from an 1830? I would reach out to additional 1830's to beef those up. Quality over quantity. Additionally, if you are still active duty, have you talked to your command about a possible no-cost TAD to an Intel heavy command? This may be harder in Covid times but could really beef up your packet and prove to the CM how serious you are. Let me know if you have any specific 1830 questions.

Hello Sir, Thanks for the input. My appraisals are from two O6's and two O4's, all 1830 and all tens across the board. I will definitely talk to my command about going TAD. I also know that the OAR is a big one. The only reason I did not redo it was due to my graduate degree consuming my off time and I was really pushing for a perfect GPA on that. Both Captains and Commanders told me that my application is amazing and there is no reason for a non-select. Just need a little luck I suppose. Thanks again.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

Hello Sir, Thanks for the input. My appraisals are from two O6's and two O4's, all 1830 and all tens across the board. I will definitely talk to my command about going TAD. I also know that the OAR is a big one. The only reason I did not redo it was due to my graduate degree consuming my off time and I was really pushing for a perfect GPA on that. Both Captains and Commanders told me that my application is amazing and there is no reason for a non-select. Just need a little luck I suppose. Thanks again.

OAR is just a check point to get to the board it carries little if any weight at all.

 

[AULANI]

I think everyone that applies to IWC has pretty competitive stats and so it comes down to splitting hairs. What those hairs are is anyone's guess; what school you went to, prior criminal record, favorite food, who knows...

Everyone who gets an appraisal it's always "All 10s" otherwise why use that appraisal? The people who are giving those things are trying to help as much as they can. I'm not sure how much weight those things carry anymore.

@RobertPeel Come TAD to CTF-72 and work for me doing a specific intel job. We usually get sent pilots lol but it would be nice to get someone who is interested in doing intel work.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

Everyone who gets an appraisal it's always "All 10s" otherwise why use that appraisal? The people who are giving those things are trying to help as much as they can. I'm not sure how much weight those things carry anymore.

BINGO!!

 

[BasketballisLife]

Everyone who gets an appraisal it's always "All 10s" otherwise why use that appraisal? The people who are giving those things are trying to help as much as they can. I'm not sure how much weight those things carry anymore.

@

I literally was thinking the same thing. I assumed the GPA, degree, school, and LOR's held the most weight from what I've read on this site the past year. For prior enlisted, I'd imagine evals and certain awards would be weighted heavily as well. I figured that literally every enlisted person applying received all 10's on their appraisals, thus the board probably wouldn't put too much "value" in them. Then again, this is just all my speculation.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

I literally was thinking the same thing. I assumed the GPA, degree, school, and LOR's held the most weight from what I've read on this site the past year. For prior enlisted, I'd imagine evals and certain awards would be weighted heavily as well. I figured that literally every enlisted person applying received all 10's on their appraisals, thus the board probably wouldn't put too much "value" in them. Then again, this is just all my speculation.

There was a time that being current or prior IWC was pretty much a golden ticket and most civilians were a remote chance, then it flipped, and now it is balanced.

The best way to compare civilians to AD is degree and GPA, if the LOR isn't from a person that has seen you perform over time, then it is best to replace it with someone that has.

 

[buffsnavy89]

I think everyone that applies to IWC has pretty competitive stats and so it comes down to splitting hairs. What those hairs are is anyone's guess; what school you went to, prior criminal record, favorite food, who knows...

Everyone who gets an appraisal it's always "All 10s" otherwise why use that appraisal? The people who are giving those things are trying to help as much as they can. I'm not sure how much weight those things carry anymore.

@RobertPeel Come TAD to CTF-72 and work for me doing a specific intel job. We usually get sent pilots lol but it would be nice to get someone who is interested in doing intel work.

Well hopefully I have what they are looking for come the 30th. I would gladly come TAD unfortunately I am stationed in Norfolk and I don't think my command would sign off on going TAD to Japan. Are most commands like yours accepting TAD personnel for Intel work? I would do whatever it takes to work in the field but I just don't have the contacts around here. I have sent emails to the few O6's i know but have not heard anything yet. The 1830 we have just got out of OCS so I doubt she will be of much assistance. But yeah if there is anything I can do to better my chances, like going TAD, please point me in the right direction.

 

[CWO_change]

The IWC community used to put out pretty good stats after every board, not that the stats really changed in 10 years but it was nice to continue to see how things were going.

Yep. The most recent board stats I found were were from the SEP 2016 board, though I've attended briefings on board statistics for more recent boards. From the SEP 2016 board, here are the average GPAs per IWC designator who were professionally recommended:

-1800: 3.39
-1810: 3.25
-1820: 3.33
-1830: 3.56
-1840: 3.57

Note, there were 190 IWC applicants for that board. Only 31 were professionally recommended, for an overall IWC board PR rate of just over 16%.

Here is the breakdown of degree types for those professionally recommended from that board (STEM vs. non-STEM):

-1800: STEM (2), Chemistry and Marine Sciences
-1810: STEM (5), Computer Science/Biochemistry, Engineering, Mathematics (2), Mechanical Engineering; Non-STEM (2), Political Science/Homeland Security, Quantitative Economics
-1820: STEM (3), Biology, Computer Information Systems, Cyber Security; Non-STEM (2), History, Political Science
-1830: STEM (1), Information Systems; Non-STEM (12), which ran the range from Business Administration to Political Science
-1840: STEM (1), Computer Engineering

The final three IWC professionally recommended applicants were for designators that I'm not familiar with and am too lazy to look up: 11603 and 11604 (all STEM).

Among the applicants, everyone had a Bachelor's Degree, with the exception of 3 MAs among the 1830 applicants and 1 MS for the 1820 applicants.

The average OAR score for professionally recommended IWC applicants was 58 and the high was 75. The low for professionally recommended applicants was a 46, which was for an 1830. Note, the low for 1800 was 54, 52 for 1810, 48 for 1820, 49 for 11603, and 68 for the 1x 11604 applicant.

By designator, average OAR scores broke down as follows:

-1800: 57
-1810: 62
-1820: 53
-1830: 57
-1840: Not Listed
-11603: 54
-11604: 68

Note, there are other stats on race, gender, ethnicity, age, etc.

Edit: below are basic stats for the JUN 2016 IWC OSC Board (I can break them down further late if someone wants), which also explain what the 11603 and 11604 designators are:

Information Warfare Community (IWC)
Professional Recommendation Board
281 Applications
38 Professional Recommendations (PR)
1800 – Oceanography Officer : 1 PR
1810 – Cryptologic Warfare Officer : 10 PRs
1820 – Information Professional Officer : 8 PRs
1830 – Intelligence Officer : 14 PRs
– Cyber Warfare Engineer : 2 PRs
11603 – Surface Warfare Officer (Information Professional Option) : 1 PR
11604 – Surface Warfare Officer (Oceanography Option) : 1 PR
11605 – Surface Warfare Officer (Cryptologic Warfare Option) : 1 PR

Of note, the JUN 2016 board had higher GPAs, higher OAR scores, etc., than the SEP 2016 board among professionally recommended applicants.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

Yep. The most recent board stats I found were were from the SEP 2016 board, though I've attended briefings on board statistics for more recent boards. From the SEP 2016 board, here are the average GPAs per IWC designator who were professionally recommended:

-1800: 3.39
-1810: 3.25
-1820: 3.33
-1830: 3.56
-1840: 3.57

Note, there were 190 IWC applicants for that board. Only 31 were professionally recommended, for an overall IWC board PR rate of just over 16%.

Here is the breakdown of degree types for those professionally recommended from that board (STEM vs. non-STEM):

-1800: STEM (2), Chemistry and Marine Sciences
-1810: STEM (5), Computer Science/Biochemistry, Engineering, Mathematics (2), Mechanical Engineering; Non-STEM (2), Political Science/Homeland Security, Quantitative Economics
-1820: STEM (3), Biology, Computer Information Systems, Cyber Security; Non-STEM (2), History, Political Science
-1830: STEM (1), Information Systems; Non-STEM (12), which ran the range from Business Administration to Political Science
-1840: STEM (1), Computer Engineering

The final three IWC professionally recommended applicants were for designators that I'm not familiar with and am too lazy to look up: 11603 and 11604 (all STEM).

Among the applicants, everyone had a Bachelor's Degree, with the exception of 3 MAs among the 1830 applicants and 1 MS for the 1820 applicants.

The average OAR score for professionally recommended IWC applicants was 58 and the high was 75. The low for professionally recommended applicants was a 46, which was for an 1830. Note, the low for 1800 was 54, 52 for 1810, 48 for 1820, 49 for 11603, and 68 for the 1x 11604 applicant.

By designator, average OAR scores broke down as follows:

-1800: 57
-1810: 62
-1820: 53
-1830: 57
-1840: Not Listed
-11603: 54
-11604: 68

Note, there are other stats on race, gender, ethnicity, age, etc.

Edit: below are basic stats for the JUN 2016 IWC OSC Board (I can break them down further late if someone wants), which also explain what the 11603 and 11604 designators are:

Information Warfare Community (IWC)
Professional Recommendation Board
281 Applications
38 Professional Recommendations (PR)
1800 – Oceanography Officer : 1 PR
1810 – Cryptologic Warfare Officer : 10 PRs
1820 – Information Professional Officer : 8 PRs
1830 – Intelligence Officer : 14 PRs
– Cyber Warfare Engineer : 2 PRs
11603 – Surface Warfare Officer (Information Professional Option) : 1 PR
11604 – Surface Warfare Officer (Oceanography Option) : 1 PR
11605 – Surface Warfare Officer (Cryptologic Warfare Option) : 1 PR

Of note, the JUN 2016 board had higher GPAs, higher OAR scores, etc., than the SEP 2016 board among professionally recommended applicants.

A note is that OAR tends to follow GPA, so a person that has a good GPA will often have a good OAR, I rarely had a candidate for any designator that was under 3.0 most were 3.2-3.6 range and most all had OAR scores in the high 50's to low 60's.