Yep they do. Kids who go to the Academy prep schools are by definition 'sub-standard'. Most of the kids who get a Foundation or AOG scholarship are not. Generally they need to be qualified - but do not receive an appointment for another reason. Feel free to pm me on this.... this is information with which you should be familiar as a FFR.
Oh, JAM...
The Civil Prep program is utilized by admissions for students who are not qualified but do not receive offers of admission to USMAPS. USMAPS is for students who are, and I quote the Admissions Regional Commander, "athletes, prior service soldiers, or outstanding leadership candidates who are academically unqualified." The civil prep program is an ALTERNATIVE to USMAPS, as the majority of USMAPS cadet candidates are athletes, soldiers, and demographic minorities.
The Civil Prep program is either AOG funded (with 50% buy-in from the hosting institution). Additionally, a candidate can go to a MJC if not selected for Civil Prep, though that is fully funded by the student candidate. Civil Prep is used for those students who are not offered one of the few slots at USMAPS who are seeking admission and need an avenue to boost their profile, with
particular emphasis on those students who are academically weak and need that year of MJC to indicate better academic potential to admissions.
Those candidates are, by definition, "sub-standard." AOG and Admissions work together to review their files and select those who, despite not meeting the standard for admission, show excellent potential to "grow" into a candidate with a high-quality following a year of Civil Prep.
That is why the OFFICIAL admissions stance is "don't ask us to do Civil Prep, we'll ask you." They do the choosing based on the profiles. I can put you in contact via email with the RC who briefed the AFF on that if you have any doubts.
But, you knew all that, based on your previous post...
The Alumni Assn at USNA and USAFA and the Assn of Gradutate at USMA sponsor a program and award scholarhip dollars to candidates recommended by the Admissions office.
These are candidates "who missed the cut", usually for an academic reason, who have excellent athletic and leadership portions of their packet. If they "missed the cut" it may be because they come from a highly competitive district, or a little bit weak in English or Math.
And you know this because you have spent how much time in the civilian world?
Only about 12 hours a day. I am married to a civilian, one who deals with far more intense honesty on a daily basis than any of us here do. I was not born in ACUs, and thus spent a day or two in the civilian world, which includes normal parents, siblings, a public high school, etc. I go home every night to a house in a nice neighborhood far away from post, where people don't even know what my uniform is half the time. I deal with candidates, teachers, and guidance counselors on a regular basis. The lack of candor in evaluations is appalling, where it be the evaluations teachers give students or professionals give one another. But I digress. The point is that the military is far more given to blunt criticism than the civilian sector. "Politeness" is not a military core value. It's nice in daily life, but sometimes we prefer terms that are more exact and less pretty.
Now, I might not have phrased it that way in general conversation, but AF6872's terminology is not wrong...just very military in nature. But that's a matter of personal preference. Clearly, he feels strongly about the issue.