I was taking a look at previous class profiles noticed that a significant amount of candidates aren't fully qualified each year. What exactly does fully qualified mean. Does it mean that your DoDMERB is checked off, you passed the CFA, got a nomination, etc?
Fully Qualified Question
- Thread starter mb06189
- Start date
smokey%
Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2023
- Messages
- 256
Yes
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2008
- Messages
- 19,894
Fully qualified usually means: athletic (CFA), medical (DoDMERB), academic/scholastic (generally all the other graded stuff). Some may refer to this as “triple qualified” or 3Q.
A nom is an administrative requirement, but not at USCGA. USCGA has their own athletic qual (PFE).
The only caveat I'd add is that with USAFA, I have never been able to find what "academically qualified" means. It's not defined anywhere, and they don't inform a candidate that he/she is "3Q." So, if a candidate gets a nomination, is DoDMERB qualified, and passes the CFA, but doesn't receive an appointment, it's theoretically possible that he/she was not found "academically qualified," and they don't tell you either way.
You can be 3Q and not receive an appointment - usually because for some reason(s) you don't rank high enough relative to those you are competing with for the appointment.
Being 3Q is no guarantee of an appointment
Last edited:
This. There are plenty of "3Q" that don't receive nominations.
I know that, and I didn't write otherwise. What I was attempting to explain was that a candidate who has a nomination, is DoDMERB qualified, and passes the CFA, but doesn't get an appointment, may or may not be 3Q (i.e. also academically qualified), and USAFA won't tell the candidate either way. If not appointed, but otherwise nominated and qualified medically/physically, then the candidate could either be 1) not academically qualified, or 2) academically qualified but beaten out by another candidate. IOW, the only way to know for sure whether a candidate was academically qualified is to be appointed.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2008
- Messages
- 19,894
An excellent data point.
Candidates should not read this as they, as an individual, have a straight one-in-three chance at an appointment.
Much depends on:
- what nom categories you are competing in often drives the competition stats
- if you have a principal nom
- any LOAs in play
- other factors
Some examples:
- Principal nom on a slate, fully qualified (academic, CFA, DoDMERB), 99.99% chance of appointment offer.
- Presidential nom, fully qualified. No other noms. Only 100 appointments can be charged to that nom source. Let’s say 600 candidates have that nom and are fully qualified. Not one-in-three. Similarly, there are caps on how appointments can be charged to the ROTC/JROTC nom source.
- Service prep school or scholarship prep school successfully completed, fully qualified, have obtained a nom or have been given a service secretary nom for enlisted status at service prep school, 99.99%.
- Fully qualified, have a nom on an unranked slate. Depends on how many are fully qualified out of those 10 fellow nominees, as to who gets the appointment that will be charged to the Sen or Rep. If 7 are fully qualified, that’s not one-in-three. But - the SA can still go back to that slate and offer appointments to fully qualified nominees, and those appointments are charged to a nom source the SA controls, not the Sen/Rep. That’s in essence a national competition among all the fully qualified nominees on hundreds of slates. No way to figure % on that.
- Multiple noms, fully qualified, gives the SA flexibility as to where to charge an appointment, IF they want the candidate.
I tend not to use 100% because there always seems to be an outlier case. And, the U.S. Code language for USNA, different from other SAs, allows them not to offer an appointment to a principal nom even if fully qualified. They usually do, though.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Messages
- 5,970
Exactly what CaptMJ said. I supplied those numbers to stop the guessing...and let everyone know the basic main thought you must keep in mind: DO NOT WORRY ABOUT OTHERS...just make yourself the most appealing candidate you can. Being "Fully Qualified" guarantees nothing more than you will "go the distance" in the admission process. The rest is very complex, convoluted, and fortunately for all, something the SAs are VERY good at.
But back to Franknd's last question/comment: "...candidate who has a nomination, is DoDMERB qualified, and passes the CFA, but doesn't get an appointment, may or may not be 3Q (i.e. also academically qualified), and USAFA won't tell the candidate either way." You are correct. They don't inform the non-select of the precise reason for their non-selection.
But back to Franknd's last question/comment: "...candidate who has a nomination, is DoDMERB qualified, and passes the CFA, but doesn't get an appointment, may or may not be 3Q (i.e. also academically qualified), and USAFA won't tell the candidate either way." You are correct. They don't inform the non-select of the precise reason for their non-selection.
Looking for something else entirely, I stumbled across this data from this past March. Candidly, I don't know what to make of this number: Class of 2027 "Qualified Candidates" - 1,554. (See p. 4.) Perhaps that was a function of DoDMERB delays from last spring??
A1Janitor
Member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2018
- Messages
- 5,925
Does the March date mean something?
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Messages
- 5,970
The end-of-the-year (cycle) briefing from Col Primas has quite a bit more fully qualified as I recall it. I'm not allowed to post it (if I still have it, to be honest) as I'm an ALO and we were told it's not shareable; USAFA/RRS would have to do that.
What is the difference/definition between an applicant, a candidate, and a qualified candidate? The N/A for qualified candidates throws me. There were 283 appointments at the time.
I think the #'s on a presentation like this should line up. The same data element is represented on slides 5 and 6 with different breakdowns. Total class of 24 applicants. And there is a different #. Seems like a typo on slide 6, as the sum of the #'s adds up to the total represented on slide 5. somebody should catch that on a document like this before it goes out. I know it's not a huge deal, but it's sloppy.
A1Janitor
Member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2018
- Messages
- 5,925
An applicant - whoever initiated the process.
A candidate - the applicants that meet their requirements to be a candidate. A very small number of applicants don’t proceed.
A qualified candidate is a candidate that has been deemed academically, physically, and medically qualified.
I did just a quick review of what you talk about - it appears there is a typo (a 0 instead of a 4). Sloppy mistake? Sure. It happens to the best of us.
A candidate - the applicants that meet their requirements to be a candidate. A very small number of applicants don’t proceed.
A qualified candidate is a candidate that has been deemed academically, physically, and medically qualified.
I did just a quick review of what you talk about - it appears there is a typo (a 0 instead of a 4). Sloppy mistake? Sure. It happens to the best of us.