2018 AFROTC HSSP Statistics

afrotc2022

afrotc2022

Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2017
Messages
73
Here are some stats that AFROTC HQ released for this year's HSSP results. I looked around to see if anyone else had posted and they hadn't, so I hope I'm not duplicating here...o_O

High School Scholarship Program:
- 5,581 submitted applications
- 2,851 eligible applicants
- 2,789 interviews received
- 2,279 scholarships offered

The FY18 averages were: 12% Type 1, 19% Type 2, and 69% Type 7. SAT is 1350, ACT is 30 and GPA is 3.71. STEM degrees are 73%.

Hope this provides some more recent info for all of the class of 2023 people...
 
These %s seem high. Recent years never exceeded ~5% for Type 1 applicants, for example.

Are you sure the numbers are correct and final/complete?
 
I agree that seems insanely high for Type 1. Not only does that number seem high for type 1, but overall offered seems high since typically it has always hovered around 1000 scholarships.

It could be that HQ AF has decided that from an MPC aspect they expect to be waaaayyyyy short on ADAF O1s come 2022, but if you add USAFA and AFROTC entering for the 2022 class that means they could have up to 3500 cadets for the class of 2022.
~ USAFA typically offers 1350 +/- appointments, expecting 1100 on I Day. With attrition they typically commission @900.
~ AFROTC has a higher attrition rate overall, but about the same % for scholarship recipients. So for that class it would be around 1700 will commission, plus those that are walk ons, so so let's say another 800.
~~ Equaling 3500 for that FY.

Now you also need to add in OCS. At that number there would probably be no OCS boards for FY2022.
~ This has occurred in the past, but the new SECAF has stated that they wanted to double from 125 to 250 OCS rated board. Thus, this means it will also impact the numbers.
~~ OCS has always been used as a means to control numbers, short on numbers open the spigot for OCS, high and close the spigot.

If these stats are correct than there are other aspects to think about.
1. AFROTC scholarship is not a true 4 yr scholarship. It is a 2 + 2 scholarship.
~ Cadet must be accepted for SFT as a soph. If not selected they will most likely be dis-enrolled from the program. Thus, the last 2 yrs on their own dime.
~~ Currently, SFT can only handle about 2100 cadets. It has been around 90% selection rate. The selection board is "blind" or aka "masked" regarding if the cadet is on scholarship.
~~~ If you do the math where in previous yrs they only have about 1000 on scholarships, and offer 2100 slots, than you will be able to see that when you add in the walk ons, that rate is going to have to drop big time to stay at the 2100 number. For example, it will probably be @60%, see above about it being a 2+2.
2. If this is correct than chances are there will be no ICSP
~ HQ AFROTC has a limited pot of gold to offer for each FY group. If they exceed that number, than there will be no ICSP for the AS 200s.
~~ This has happened in the past.
3. Rated slots.
~ Yes, there is a pilot shortage, but there is nothing in the news stating that the AF plans to open a new UPT, UNT or RPA training base. All of these options are running at 110%. They are backed up for start dates for at least 6-9 months, to get more in the pipeline they will need more of everything. More T1/T6/T38. More sims. More IPs. This is not only for UPT, UNT or RPA, but than later on at the airframe school houses (IE SJAFB for F15E, Little Rock for C130s, San Antonio for IPs, etc. etc. etc.) Currently, sims are running at school houses 6 days a week 24hrs. and on the 7th they run 12 hrs. That is how backed up they are currently. It was not uncommon for my DS to have a sim at 2:00 a.m. on a Sat. while he was at C130 schoolhouse.
~ IOWS in my personal opinion it will mean 1 of 2 things.
~~ 1 They will select less rated or 2 the wait time to start their UPT/UNT/RPA class to double which equates to a long wait time on casual status.
4. ADAF has a formula when it comes to rank and grades. I do not know the exact break down, but typically it is 20% officer and 80% enlisted. From there they than break it down within the ranks. x% will be Flag compared to Field. X% Field compared to Company. It breaks down even more. X% of O1 compared to O2. X% of O2 compared to O3. So on and so forth.
~ What does that mean to you if these numbers are correct? It means that they can turn to you a few months prior to commissioning and say, Sorry, but there is no room for you do to your AFSC and we will not be commissioning you.
~~ This happened when my DS was a POC in AFROTC. A senior had their AFSC and EAD in hand, but 6 weeks prior they turned and released him.(non-rated)
~ It also means that they may do what I call a surgical RIF (reduction in forces) as an O1 or an O2. They can say to you take this severance package and walk or we will send you to a RIF board and may cut you.

Sorry for the long novella, but I think that the more you understand about the long game regarding how numbers work, the better off you will be prepared for the WHAT IF situation. If these numbers are correct, than I truly believe there will be some major WHAT IFs. Remember the only thing HQ AFROTC has control over for 2022 is the amount of scholarships offered. They know the following, but can't predict the rest to an exact number, just can predict from historical data.
~ Many kids will apply ROTC as plan B (SA is plan A).
~ Many kids will apply multiple ROTC scholarships
~ Many kids will not get waivers for DoDMERB
~ Many kids that were not offered will walk on as an AS100
~ Many kids will walk on as AS250s (sophomores that did not walk on as freshmen)

Great example. DS attended one of the largest AFROTC dets., and won the best biggest AFROTC unit in the nation 2x within 5 yrs. The yr he entered and all 4 there the incoming class was @120, with 20% on scholarship. The yr after he commissioned the AS100 class was close to 190. They still remained with only about 25 on scholarship, but the rest were all walk ons. HQ AFROTC could not expect the class size to increase by 60%, not including in that number the 250s.

Just saying beware if this number is true because it could be a double edge sword.

Thank you for wanting to serve this great nation. Sorry for being Debbie Downer.
 
To be clear, the difference, between these numbers and the historical pattern, is NOT huge in absolute numbers, only in percentage terms.

It is very plausible that the total # of Type 1 winners went from ca. 60-90 per year to ca.270 last year. Certainly the organization can handle that magnitude of change.

But it does seem a bit counterintuituve that the overall win rate went up to 82%. That indicates a change in either policy, or quality / awareness among high quality applicants.
 
Yeah, the numbers seemed pretty high to me as well. The info is all from an official email that I got from AFROTC HQ. The completed application number is so close to the offered number that my guess is it only lists the people who pushed through and FULLY completed the app, as opposed to people who just submitted the initial questionnaire. Because only a few years ago I thought it was something like 10,000 applications submitted/begun (not necessarily completed).

I guess we can hypothesize about it all day long...but it looks like USAF wants more people! Which is good news for a lot of people, come what may down the road.
 
My DS was one of the 18% that interviewed and wasn’t offered a scholarship. He was extremely disappointed but still plans to join the AFROTC program at Western Michigan University. He’s starting their aviation program early this summer and plans to graduate in 2022 with a BS in Flight Science and commission as 2nd Lt., hopefully with a pilot rating.

I think not getting the scholarship was a wake up call for him. He seems much more determined not to let anything stop him from attaining his goals.
 
Old thread, I know, but the above numbers hold up with my recent discussions with AFROTC detachment cadre. From the detachments I have spoken to so far, the actual breakdown in tech vs. non-tech degrees for 2018 was reported to be around 50% awarded to tech, 50% to non-tech. I assume some of the STEM colleges are pushing that overall tech number up to 73%.

The feeling is that the numbers this year will be similar-- high number of applicants washed out at the application level, high number of offers for those that make it to the interview, and a high proportion of non-technical degree awardees.

AF OTS was also reporting record numbers of cadets a few years ago, and that seems to have held up since then. The initial TFOT curriculum was reported to have changed to have a higher focus on weeding out the potential washouts at the application stage rather than during the program itself. Meaning higher numbers of higher-quality candidates actually making it to Maxwell, and a general presumption of a 90% graduation rate.

It could very well be that ROTC is following that same model, which would predictably produce much higher scholarship award rates for interviewees, but much lower rates of actual interview invitations.

I do not think this is necessarily a bad idea. It certainly will save a ton of work and headache in dealing with the historic attrition rates for AFROTC cadets, but am curious to see how both the Field Training numbers and the follow-on technical training school spots adapt accordingly. It seems counter-intuitive to allow higher numbers through HSSP only to drop FT acceptance to 30 or 40%. Also, I wonder if tech schools will add more classes (as they have had to do for the increase in OTS graduates), or if we will see more ROTC graduates getting stuck on leisure status for longer periods of time, waiting on a tech school seat.

Alternatively, similar to what has been seen on the enlisted side of recruiting for the past few years, I wonder if it could be getting harder to find eligible ROTC candidates that also express interest in military service.

Thoughts?
 
Typically you will see that with the military it has an inverse relationship to the economy. When the economy is roaring you will see that the military has recruitment and retention problems. When the economy is in the tanks than the numbers go up for both retention and recruitment.
 
I have to think that there is also pressure on recruitment from a shrinking pool overall due to these long-term health, cultural and demographic trends that are unrelated to the economy:

1. the obesity epidemic, along with generally low levels of physical activity on the part of kids raised to sit and stare at screens most of their waking hours

2. a school and entertainment/media culture that increasingly values virtue signaling defined as "resistance" to "toxic masculinity"

3. demographic shifts ie decreasing share of the young population that is drawn from the more traditionally pro-military segments of US society

Add these up, and, at the margin, there could well be a significant shrinkage of the eligible pool from which officer candidates would ultimately be drawn.
 
It's a few years old, but this speaks to your point #3, @thibaud . Some of the impacts of BRAC have been pretty strange.

I don't know if I can get behind point #2 just yet, but I would add the following to point #1: medications/treatments/diagnoses that prevent service entry, illegal prescription drug usage, and criminal history (due to stricter enforcement of laws on minors, harsher penalties, mandatory minimums, and zero tolerance policies).

So yeah, less eligible candidates, and of those eligible, less interest in joining.

Interestingly, the USAF just (as in a little over a month ago) raised the maximum age to commission to 40 (without a waiver) and now deducts service years from that age. This means a TSgt. with 12 years in, who is age 42 would only be considered 30 years old for commissioning purposes.
 
The first is a good point, especially as respects medication usage. Also, we don't let kids go out and have free play or ride bikes around (and our suburbs aren't designed for that either).

As for #2, criticism of toxic masculinity is not directed at people defending their country or others, it's more toward people behaving like the president of the frat at Baylor who gets off of a rape charge with no jail time. And I don't see the cultural trend, kind of like I don't see the supposed liberal indoctrination of college kids.

But as respects #3, I know it anecdotal, but I don't see those families pushing military service. I rarely hear from military friends news of their kids going into ROTC. I'm also on an FB page for military parents of college-bound kids and it always strikes me how few ever bring up ROTC, especially when discussing ways to pay for college. Too, I also live in a very conservative area that openly supports the military, but it seems like nobody has kids going to ROTC or the military - of course, the people they follow like Trump and Hannity aren't exactly role models as respects children who join the service, as opposed to the people they despise like McCain and Biden :)
 
Fair points, unknown. A bit hard to separate noise from signal these days in our culture wars.

The medical and health trends OTOH are hard data, easily measured. Not a pretty trend.
 
unkown1961 said:
As for #2, criticism of toxic masculinity is not directed at people defending their country or others, it's more toward people behaving like the president of the frat at Baylor who gets off of a rape charge with no jail time. And I don't see the cultural trend, kind of like I don't see the supposed liberal indoctrination of college kids.
Click to expand...

It must vary on where you are in the country. I certainly have seen both issues present where I live. Not so much liberal indoctrination, but definitely a heavy bias towards progressive politics in the university and open attempts to sway students' opinions towards those positions.

unkown1961 said:
...aren't exactly role models as respects children who join the service, as opposed to the people they despise like McCain and Biden :)
Click to expand...

FWIW, Joe Biden (I assume that's who you're referring to) never served. Like the current President, he got draft deferments during Vietnam. But I certainly agree-- the current role models are not encouraging kids to serve. They will thank you for your service, though, and salute the troops :).
 
Tbpxece said:
unkown1961 said:
As for #2, criticism of toxic masculinity is not directed at people defending their country or others, it's more toward people behaving like the president of the frat at Baylor who gets off of a rape charge with no jail time. And I don't see the cultural trend, kind of like I don't see the supposed liberal indoctrination of college kids.
Click to expand...

It must vary on where you are in the country. I certainly have seen both issues present where I live. Not so much liberal indoctrination, but definitely a heavy bias towards progressive politics in the university and open attempts to sway students' opinions towards those positions.

unkown1961 said:
...aren't exactly role models as respects children who join the service, as opposed to the people they despise like McCain and Biden :)
Click to expand...

FWIW, Joe Biden (I assume that's who you're referring to) never served. Like the current President, he got draft deferments during Vietnam. But I certainly agree-- the current role models are not encouraging kids to serve. They will thank you for your service, though, and salute the troops :).
Click to expand...
I knew that about Biden, I was referring to his kids. :)
 
unkown1961 said:
I rarely hear from military friends news of their kids going into ROTC. I'm also on an FB page for military parents of college-bound kids and it always strikes me how few ever bring up ROTC, especially when discussing ways to pay for college.
Click to expand...

Actually, out of my close group of friends that I have known for decades via the AF, probably 50% of them have at least 1 child in their family that elected to go military. Only 1 elected to enlist, the rest either went USAFA, USNA, ROTC and OCS.

I still stand by the economy's impact on recruitment and retention more than societal changes or even medical issues.
1. Look back at 2008-2012. The economy was in the tanks, parents 401Ks were diminished, their mtgs were underwater and could not get a home equity line to pay for college. Thus, kids were applying for ROTC and SAs at a much higher rate in a way to pay that 40K a yr college. RECRUITMENT UP
2. Look at the pilot world right now. Airlines are now hiring hand over fist. Thus, there is a RETENTION DOWN issue since the economy ticked up.
3. Add in that many states offer the go CC for 2 yrs., carry a 3.0 and you get automatic acceptance to in state public schools. In a state like VA, where you have strong colleges like, VT, UVA, VCU and GMU, the idea of living at home for 2 yrs, paying under 10K a yr, and the higher 40K(tuition, R &B) for the last 2 yrs., cost wise some find that is a better deal than joining ROTC and owing 4 yrs....because the economy is stronger now than in 2012. RECRUITMENT DOWN
4. They are giving age waivers, and medical waivers. Why? RECRUITMENT DOWN because see numbers 2 and 3.
 
@Pima , check out that LA Times article I linked. A lot of what you're saying is in there. Especially that there is a wide disparity between military and non-military families in terms of whether or not they have close family members with military service.

I'll be interested to see the 2019 HSSP stats...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top