Early Action

Have any appointments been posted online yet or just through email / phone? I am considering contacting my AO.

Also, when did you apply for those who have received appointments?

I am a cyber systems major with an ACT score 33 and PFT score 240, several leadership positions including Cadet Commander of my CAP squadron. I applied the end of September and interviewed early October. Getting nervous that I haven't heard anything back yet!

We still have a little under 2 weeks until the EA announcement date, of December 23, the CGA has posted. Since it is rolling admissions, the only date I have seen so far is September 2, so unless you put your app in before September 2, I wouldn't fret about it too much. During the AIM app process, the coach called me about a week before I got the email from the Academy. I put my app in on October 14; I anticipate next week some time I will hear from one of the coaches.
 
People shouldn't be worried if they haven't received an appointment yet! My DD was an LOA recruited athlete. The way she found out was a call, not in the Bear's Den Portal. She also knows another LOA applicant that hasn't heard yet, so I'm almost positive they are just starting to send out selections.
 
People shouldn't be worried if they haven't received an appointment yet! My DD was an LOA recruited athlete. The way she found out was a call, not in the Bear's Den Portal. She also knows another LOA applicant that hasn't heard yet, so I'm almost positive they are just starting to send out selections.

Thank you, also congrats to you both!
 
Does anyone know if there are certain ratios that CGA likes to fill such as female to male ratio and minority ratios in each incoming class?
 
Does anyone know if there are certain ratios that CGA likes to fill such as female to male ratio and minority ratios in each incoming class?

Yes there are, they typically try to raise female accepted to 30-40 percent despite having fewer applicants, not sure of numbers for minorities.
 
Yes there are, they typically try to raise female accepted to 30-40 percent despite having fewer applicants, not sure of numbers for minorities.
Females are high 30's to 40ish% and rising - I am sure they would like to get it to 50%. Minorities are about 35% and stable across the last few admission cycles, but you could see them rise if there are sufficient qualified applicants. These numbers demonstrate the difficulty of obtaining an appointment to CGA. Including CGAS, of the 280 who accept appointments, approximately 140 are athletic recruits, so if you aren't an athletic recruit, you are already down to 140 available slots, which includes CGAS spots. So for the major demographic groups the available slots would be as follows:

36 white female,
20 minority female,
54 white male,
30 minority male

My simple math assumes that the percentages of female and minority appointments for recruited athletes and those coming in from CGAS is the same as it is within the general appointment pool. I have no idea whether that is actually the case, but it probably doesn't vary much. My math also assumes that appointments from CGAS are also 50% athletic recruits. I would guess the number is actually higher, but that's just a guess. If CGAS is 75% recruited athletes, and the proportion of females and minorities remains the same, available slots to non athletes would be approximately

40 white female,
22 minority female,
60 white male,
33 minority male.

Presumptions about the percentage of athletes in CGAS and gender and minority proportions within the CGAS and athlete pools aside, the data shows that each applicant is competing for only a handful of slots, as the individual candidate simply isn't eligible for a demographic they don't belong to.

I should also note that these numbers are based on the 280 accepted appointments. There are close to 400 offered appointments, including CGAS. We know that about 310 are offered a full appointment, and 220 accept, along with another 60 coming in after completing the CGAS program. Unfortunately, we don't know anything about the demographics of those who were offered an appointment, but declined. We also don't know what percentage of them were recruited athletes. Further extrapolating numbers with so much guesswork could be done, but isn't very helpful.
 
Last edited:
Females are high 30's to 40ish% and rising - I am sure they would like to get it to 50%. Minorities are about 35% and stable across the last few admission cycles, but you could see them rise if there are sufficient qualified applicants. These numbers demonstrate the difficulty of obtaining an appointment to CGA. Including CGAS, of the 280 who accept appointments, approximately 140 are athletic recruits, so if you aren't an athletic recruit, you are already down to 140 available slots, which includes CGAS spots. So for the major demographic groups the available slots would be as follows:

36 white female,
20 minority female,
54 white male,
30 minority male

My simple math assumes that the percentages of female and minority appointments for recruited athletes and those coming in from CGAS is the same as it is within the general appointment pool. I have no idea whether that is actually the case, but it probably doesn't vary much. My math also assumes that appointments from CGAS are also 50% athletic recruits. I would guess the number is actually higher, but that's just a guess. If CGAS is 75% recruited athletes, and the proportion of females and minorities remains the same, available slots to non athletes would be approximately

40 white female,
22 minority female,
60 white male,
33 minority male.

Presumptions about the percentage of athletes in CGAS and gender and minority proportions within the CGAS and athlete pools aside, the data shows that each applicant is competing for only a handful of slots, as the individual candidate simply isn't eligible for a demographic they don't belong to.

I should also note that these numbers are based on the 280 accepted appointments. There are close to 400 offered appointments, including CGAS. We know that about 310 are offered a full appointment, and 220 accept, along with another 60 coming in after completing the CGAS program. Unfortunately, we don't know anything about the demographics of those who were offered an appointment, but declined. We also don't know what percentage of them were recruited athletes. Further extrapolating numbers with so much guesswork could be done, but isn't very helpful.

It doesn't seem right that 50 percent are recruited athletes, where did you get this data? It wouldn't make sense for such a small school who's goal is to create real-world leaders for the Coast Guard to have half of their cadets be recruited athletes.
 
I would actually expect it to be higher. As a DIII school with college athletics, they have a need to field teams and thus a built-in reason to favor recruits to maximize competitiveness. The number of players on the field is the same as a D1 school like USAFA, but with a class size less than 1/3 of USAFA, the athlete ratio would be much higher at USCGA.

“On the fields of friendly strife are sown the seeds that on other days, on other fields will bear the fruits of victory.” -General Douglas MacArthur
 
To add a source to the idea that the percentage is actually this high, look no further than the Athletics webpage:

"The United States Coast Guard Academy swore in 279 cadets plus five international cadets, this afternoon into the Class of 2023 and 160 of those are athletes"

Were they all "recruited" - that is to be determined, but clearly there is a large faction of the incoming class that could look to participate in intercollegiate athletics on some level.
 
It doesn't seem right that 50 percent are recruited athletes, where did you get this data? It wouldn't make sense for such a small school who's goal is to create real-world leaders for the Coast Guard to have half of their cadets be recruited athletes.

Here’s the data for 2018. Don’t underestimate the ability of athletes to be leaders in the classroom, the fleet, and on the field. Your presumptions about their abilities to do so are sadly mistaken.
 

Here’s the data for 2018. Don’t underestimate the ability of athletes to be leaders in the classroom, the fleet, and on the field. Your presumptions about their abilities to do so are sadly mistaken.
Agree I have watched my son compete in his HS varsity football team for 3 years. I have seen him lead, I have seen him challenge those around him to the be the best they can be and I have seen him cope with adversity. IMO great preparation to be a future officer in the Coast Guard.
 
Using the data from the Class of 2022 and 2023, there were 92 male and 47 female recruited athletes in the Class of 2022 and 99 male and 61 female recruited athletes in the Class of 2023, so just a touch more male heavy than the general population (due mostly to football). My numbers may be off 1 or 2 either way due to androgenous names in co-ed sports. To address @shiner's point of whether they are all "recruited" or not I will give the single data point that for my Coastie's sport, there were a couple kids who were what are often considered "preferred walk ons" - not invited to the coach's events pre-swearing in for his recruited players, not supported with admissions, basically told get in and you can come out for the team - who are not included on the list of recruits. So for that sport anyway, all the kids listed are recruits.
 
Just wondering if the CGA tries to fill out the recruited athletes before filling the remaining slots. Any ideas?
I can't provide anything concrete, my son was NOT a recruited athlete (he's a boxer) and was one of the first on this forum to be admitted on 12/10. He did go to AIM...other than that, I don't know why he would have been amongst the first to be contacted???

Oh, and our last name is NOT Aalbers or Aaronson, and he's NOT under-represented...go figure???
 
When did your DS submit his app? If for no other reason, he must've submitted his application toward early Septemberish, no?

It's gettin' stressful for us close to the deadline submitters that's for sure :eek3:
 
Back
Top