So nothing for us again today. I find it odd they send wait list letters to some and have not yet notified others they are in or out. If they have a wait list would that not mean all appointments have been made? Good luck to the other stalkers today.
Still in the game
- Thread starter Prepswimmom
- Start date
Prepswimmom
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2013
- Messages
- 375
I would have him literally hound admissions every couple of days - at least 3 times per week. They like that and want to know the kids offered a space off the wait list want to go. Have him call, not just email. The more they speak to him, the better. Good luck!
Sledge
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2014
- Messages
- 755
I am not aware of "primary" nominee being an official/legal term in the nomination process, only "Principal." I think it's logical that the words, being so similar in spelling and meaning, would used interchangeably by a MOC staffer. I don't think they are denoting two different classes of nominees when saying Primary vs Principal.
Based on my (parent) experience in this process, I think there is an error on the MOC end.
Either
1) They don't understand what they are saying/writing to candidates when they confer that the candidates are principal/primary nominees;
2) There is a disconnect between the members of the screening committee, which likely makes the "Principal" determination maybe on a weekend after some interviews, and the office staffer who comes in on Monday and actually submits the slate to USNA, e.g. somebody forgot to tell someone that one of the 10 candidates was a principal nominee;
3) Operator error by the MOC office staffer when submitting the slate. For example, he/she logs into USNA system to submit slate and sees a nomination slate menu and picks "competitive" (instead of Principal and Unranked/Ranked) and then lists the ten names in ranked order thinking that placing one name at the top of a list of 10 is the same thing as actually checking a box beside a name to denote Principal.
Staffers come and go and there are 535 of them vs one USNA admissions office with all the QC that the military is known for. I bet the training at USNA's end is better than the training on the MOC end.
Hanlon's razor - never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Based on my (parent) experience in this process, I think there is an error on the MOC end.
Either
1) They don't understand what they are saying/writing to candidates when they confer that the candidates are principal/primary nominees;
2) There is a disconnect between the members of the screening committee, which likely makes the "Principal" determination maybe on a weekend after some interviews, and the office staffer who comes in on Monday and actually submits the slate to USNA, e.g. somebody forgot to tell someone that one of the 10 candidates was a principal nominee;
3) Operator error by the MOC office staffer when submitting the slate. For example, he/she logs into USNA system to submit slate and sees a nomination slate menu and picks "competitive" (instead of Principal and Unranked/Ranked) and then lists the ten names in ranked order thinking that placing one name at the top of a list of 10 is the same thing as actually checking a box beside a name to denote Principal.
Staffers come and go and there are 535 of them vs one USNA admissions office with all the QC that the military is known for. I bet the training at USNA's end is better than the training on the MOC end.
Hanlon's razor - never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Last edited:
usna1985
15-Year Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Messages
- 7,854
Congress writes the law. Whoever wrote it wanted to give MOCs the ability to "pick" the appointee, assuming he/she is qualified but not "force" the MOC to choose the appointee if the MOC thinks the SA itself should do it.
USNA (and other SAs) prefer the competitive slate approach because it gives them more flexibility.
Thanks so much usna1985 for clarifying.
I posted another pertinent question on the Reaaplicant sticky but got little response.
If you are reapplying as a college Freshman what Congressional district or Sentors do you apply to if your DS or DD goes to school in a different state? For example we are from Southern Califprnia but my DS might be going to college in Illinois or Missouri.
He is currently on the waitlist at USNA so hopefully we wont have to worry about this, but realistically we probably will have to.
I posted another pertinent question on the Reaaplicant sticky but got little response.
If you are reapplying as a college Freshman what Congressional district or Sentors do you apply to if your DS or DD goes to school in a different state? For example we are from Southern Califprnia but my DS might be going to college in Illinois or Missouri.
He is currently on the waitlist at USNA so hopefully we wont have to worry about this, but realistically we probably will have to.
TriService2017
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2013
- Messages
- 114
I was thinking the same thing about it being a staffer/intern oversight. My DS has a buddy who got a "congratulations on your appointment to USNA" letter from his freshman MOC instead of "congratulations on your nomination to USNA." That was a bummer.
But Sledge if you read the two quotes on my post both were "principle" nominees so how would your parent explain that. Doesn't Admissions receive a copy of the nomination letter sent to the candidate. I understand that mistakes can be made but there are ways to make sure those mistake are limited. To have two "principle" nominees not being appointed is a mistake on the Academy side. And why wouldn't they have called the Senator's office to make sure what he meant by using the word "primary"? I called the staffer as soon as I saw "primary" instead of "principle" and he explained to me that it was the same thing. So you are telling me that Admissions was unable to check and make sure the list sent by the Senator's office by making a simple phone call or sending a email was correctly identified. If that is true then there is a problem in the process. Yes staffers come and go but the Academy knows this also so why doesn't the Academy make sure. As my drill sergeant told me many years ago, "The effective range of an excuse is zero."
JShawshank
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2013
- Messages
- 256
I'm actually wondering who is 'designated' to input the nominations since there is a link from USNA admissions page where it looks like Congressional staffers can log-on. Since the page is titled "Congressional Nominations and Appointments" I assume that MOC staffers can have real-time information on their candidates and would be able to clear-up mistakes.
Any insights into this?
Any insights into this?
Sledge
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2014
- Messages
- 755
One of the BGO's need to chime in to verify, but I think, based on what I have seen on my DS's portal at USMA, is that the MOC's office have a portal too. I think that's how they submit their slates. And I think that's where the errors are being made. Either in that step, or the one before it where the screening committee hands off their decisions to the MOC staffer.
When the MOC office logs in, their candidate options might even be pre-populated with their district's candidates on file with the academy. There might be a menu of how they want to submit slate, e.g. A) Competitive B) Prinicpal and Ranked; C) Principal and Unranked. Mess up at this step and you might not get the secondary menu option(s) to denote the Principal. Once the names are entered (or clicked if pre-populated), it might be as simple as click "submit." Not sure what backwards verification there would be, if any, from USNA to MOC once "submit" is clicked.
If this is a systemic training problem (maybe new software for MOC's? dunno), then, yes, USNA needs to make sure everyone in MOC office knows what to do.
I'm just a parent with one successful go-round under my belt. I have had, in the past, a very intimate relationship with the federal government so I like to think I have a good idea of where things can go wrong in that environment. I'm not pretending to have definitive knowledge, just somewhat-educated guesses.
Last edited:
usna1985
15-Year Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Messages
- 7,854
Most college freshmen are still dependents of their parents, so their state/district of legal residence remains where their parents live.
As I understand the situation, it really comes down to whether you claim your child as a dependent on your taxes, which most parents do for college freshmen. If you do not claim your child as a dependent, he/she must still be able to establish residency in the new state (owning/renting property, voting, driver's licence, car license). Based on my experience, virtually all reapplicants retain their same residency (unless their parents move).
I would note that you can request a BGO to be assigned in the area of the student's school, as that makes an in-person meeting much more practical.
trey0189
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2012
- Messages
- 18
Well.... another day of waiting.. 8 more days here in Norfolk, VA. Does anyone recommend me calling them and seeing where things are with my package? I know it's good to just check up to show them how much you want it, but I don't want to seem annoying I suppose. Thanks and God bless all. 
Here's the response we received from admissions today:
Due to the overwhelming number of vacancies submitted (due to redistricting, the overwhelming number of Principals nominated, and the decreasing Class Size) the Admissions Department is doing our best to accommodate each candidate.
During the nomination process we never know how many nominations/types we will receive until we are mid-way in the admissions cycle and after the nomination deadline (31 January). We also need to evaluate our acceptance rate after the 1 May Accept/Decline deadline and conclusion of the NAPS school year to see how many from Prep are included in the Class of 2018.
The bottom line is that a Principal nomination is not a guaranteed offer of appointment.
HappyinKC, I am struggling to understand the text of that response. What does "overwhelming number of Principals" mean? Isn't 535 the maximum number they could ever receive (well, ok, if a few MOCs have an extra slate, maybe a few more...), that is assuming every single Rep and Senator chose to use that type of slate?
I really don't get it. Would love to have a BGO or someone jump in here & explain - it matters to those of us who might have re-applies or future applies...
ps - it matters even more to people like you, WithYou2018, and 808Dad! Didn't mean anything less - I am frustrated for YOU!!!
I would also be interested in some insight from a BGO or someone. That seems like a discouraging response. And pretty much goes against what was thought about principal nominees. I mean, if each slate had an opening for one person on that slate and it goes to the principal (if there is one) then what should be the problem? LOAs?
Wow - sounds to me like USNA admissions is in disarray.
Also sounds like they didn't plan well, if they reached this point and cannot honor an MOCs Principal nomination.WithYou2018
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2014
- Messages
- 36
INSULTING!
The problem for USNA is that US Code Title X mandates that in event of too few available slots, congressional positions must be filled first. There are no included exceptions.
So, what we have is an admissions office/board that has created it own problem by ignoring the mandate of Principal Nominations as codified in law. They may have their reasons, but to attempt to deflect their problem by making such statements is insulting.
Whether or not any individual congressman or Congress as a whole has the fortitude to defend their Principal Nominees and and their authority under law, well, that is another matter. I know at least one in another state who has these past weeks done so successfully. Mine, my DS's? We will see.
What I see developing is another Washington Post headline and bashing of the Academy by people who would love to see it weakened. Well, I don't and I am livid that professors, staff members, and naval officers sitting on the board would place the academy and candidates in this untenable position.
Now, the final question is what, if, anything the Superintendent will do. It's his command, his responsibility.
The problem for USNA is that US Code Title X mandates that in event of too few available slots, congressional positions must be filled first. There are no included exceptions.
So, what we have is an admissions office/board that has created it own problem by ignoring the mandate of Principal Nominations as codified in law. They may have their reasons, but to attempt to deflect their problem by making such statements is insulting.
Whether or not any individual congressman or Congress as a whole has the fortitude to defend their Principal Nominees and and their authority under law, well, that is another matter. I know at least one in another state who has these past weeks done so successfully. Mine, my DS's? We will see.
What I see developing is another Washington Post headline and bashing of the Academy by people who would love to see it weakened. Well, I don't and I am livid that professors, staff members, and naval officers sitting on the board would place the academy and candidates in this untenable position.
Now, the final question is what, if, anything the Superintendent will do. It's his command, his responsibility.