FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Naval Audit Service

Audit Report

Naval Pilot and Naval Flight Officer Diversity

This report contains information exempt from release under the Freedom of Information Act. Exemption (b)(6) applies.

Do not release outside the Department of the Navy or post on non-NAVAUDSVC Web sites without prior approval of the Auditor General of the Navy

N2012-0001 19 October 2011

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Obtaining Additional Copies

Providing Suggestions for Future Audits

To obtain additional copies of this report, please use To suggest ideas for or to request future audits, please the following contact information: use the following contact information: Phone: Fax: E-mail: Mail: (202) 433-5757 (202) 433-5921 [email protected] Naval Audit Service Attn: FOIA 1006 Beatty Place SE Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5005 Phone: Fax: E-mail: Mail: (202) 433-5840 (DSN 288) (202) 433-5921 [email protected] Naval Audit Service Attn: Audit Requests 1006 Beatty Place SE Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5005

Naval Audit Service Web Site

To find out more about the Naval Audit Service, including general background, and guidance on what clients can expect when they become involved in research or an audit, visit our Web site at: http://secnavportal.donhq.navy.mil/navalauditservices

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL AUDIT SERVICE 1006 BEATTY PLACE SE WASHINGTON NAVY YARD, DC 20374-5005

7510 N2010-NFO000-0145 19 Oct 11 MEMORANDUM FOR DEPUTY CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS (TOTAL FORCE) Subj: NAVAL PILOT AND NAVAL FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY (AUDIT REPORT N2012-0001) Ref: (a) NAVAUDSVC memo 7510 N2010-NFO000-0145.000, dated 12 Aug 2010 (b) SECNAV Instruction 7510.7F, Department of the Navy Internal Audit

1. The report provides results of the subject audit announced in reference (a).

Section A of this report provides our findings and recommendations, summarized management responses, and our comments on the responses. Section B provides the status of the recommendations. The full text of the management responses are in the appendix.
2. The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) concurred with

Recommendations 1-6, and planned actions meet the intent of the recommendations. The recommendations are considered open pending completion of agreed-to actions.
3. Management should provide a written status report on the recommendations within 30

days after target completion dates. Please direct any correspondence regarding this audit report to the Assistant Auditor General for Manpower and Reserve Affairs Audits, Jonathan Kleinwaks, by e-mail at [email protected], with a copy to the Director, Policy and Oversight, Vicki McAdams, [email protected]. Please submit correspondence in electronic format (Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat file), and ensure that it is on letterhead and includes a scanned signature.
4. Any requests for this report under the Freedom of Information Act must be approved

by the Auditor General of the Navy as required by reference (b). This audit report is also subject to followup in accordance with reference (b).

Subj: NAVAL PILOT AND NAVAL FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY (AUDIT REPORT N2012-0001)
5. We appreciate the cooperation and courtesies extended to our auditors.

JONATHAN KLEINWAKS Assistant Auditor General Manpower and Reserve Affairs Audits

Copy to: UNSECNAV OGC DCMO ASSTSECNAV FMC ASSTSECNAV FMC (FMO) ASSTSECNAV IE ASSTSECNAV MRA ASSTSECNAV RDA CNO (DNS-33, N4B, N40, N41) VCNO CMC (RFR, ACMC) DON CIO CNAF COMFLTFORCOM (N00IGA) COMPACFLT (N00IGA) NETC (N00GA) CNATRA (00IG) CNRC (N00IG) USNA NAVINSGEN (NAVIG-4)
AFAA/DO

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 1

Overview .......................................................................................................................... 1 Reason for Audit............................................................................................................... 1 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................... 1 Noteworthy Accomplishments ......................................................................................... 2 Aviation Selection Test Battery Enhanced.................................................................... 2 Introductory Flight Screening ....................................................................................... 2 Commander, Naval Air Forces Diversity Outreach ...................................................... 2 Increased Enrollments ................................................................................................... 2 Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act ...................................................................... 3 Corrective Actions ............................................................................................................ 3
SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ......... 5

Finding: Impediments to Naval Pilot/Flight Officer Diversity ..................................... 5 Synopsis ............................................................................................................................ 5 Discussion of Details ........................................................................................................ 5 Background.................................................................................................................... 5 Aviation Pipeline ........................................................................................................ 5 Pertinent Guidance ........................................................................................................ 6 Audit Results .................................................................................................................... 7 Projected Diversity for Naval Pilots/Flight Officers ..................................................... 7 Detailed Charts of Impediments to Naval Pilot/Flight Officer Diversity at Commissioning Sources and Chief of Naval Air Training ......................................... 10 Asian/Pacific Islander Impediments to Diversity........................................................ 13 Hispanic Impediments to Diversity ............................................................................. 14 Chief of Naval Air Training Performance................................................................... 15 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 15
SECTION B: STATUS OF RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................... 18 EXHIBIT A: SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................ 20 Impediments to Diversity ....................................................................................................... 20 Assumptions Made for Commissioning Source Estimates ................................................. 20 Assumptions Made for Flight Training Estimates .............................................................. 21 Other Audit Steps Performed ................................................................................................. 22 EXHIBIT B: CHIEF OF NAVAL AIR TRAINING SELECTION STANDARDS .............. 24

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXHIBIT C: ACTIVITIES VISITED AND/OR CONTACTED ......................................... 25 APPENDIX: MANAGEMENT RESPONSE FROM DEPUTY CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS (TOTAL FORCE) .................................................................................. 26

ii

Executive Summary
Overview
The Chief of Naval Operations has placed an emphasis on the diversity of the Navy. He explained in his 2011 Diversity Policy that the Navy must reflect the diversity of the nation in order to attract a diversity of thoughts, ideas, and competencies. The Naval Pilot and Naval Flight Officer (hereafter referred to as Naval Pilot/Flight Officer) communities represent a large portion of the commissioned officers in the Navy. Over 25 percent of newly commissioned officers in the Navy are assigned to Naval Pilot/Flight Officer training, and over 27 percent of Navy Flag Officers are promoted from the aviation community. We conducted the audit during the period of 10 August 2010 through August 2011. We briefed the audit finding and recommendations to the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) on 7 April 2011. We also provided him with a Naval Audit Service information package containing much of the information in this report on 20 May 2011.

Reason for Audit

The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) requested this audit. He expressed an interest in the diversity of the Naval Pilot/Flight Officer communities in general, and specifically with the diversity of the Jet Pilot/Flight Officer communities. The objective of this audit was to verify that the processes that lead to the selection and assignment of Naval Pilots/Flight Officers support diversity.

Conclusions
We determined that despite recent increases in minority enrollments at the United States Naval Academy and Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps, new Naval Pilot/Flight Officer accessions are not on track to reflect the diversity of the nation. This condition existed because compared to their classmates, certain minority groups: 1) enrolled into commissioning sources at a low rate, 2) graduated from commissioning sources at a low rate, 3) preferred Naval Pilot/Flight Officer careers at a low rate, 4) were selected as Naval Pilot/Flight Officers at a low rate, and 5) averaged lower scores during flight

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

training.1 Implementation of our recommended Corrective Actions (page 3) and continuation of Noteworthy Accomplishments (page 2) should enable new Naval Pilot/Flight Officer accessions to more closely reflect the diversity of the nation.

Noteworthy Accomplishments
Aviation Selection Test Battery Enhanced

The Aviation Selection Test Battery is a selection tool given to Naval Pilot/Flight Officer candidates that predicts success in flight training. The Bureau of Medicine and Surgery is in the process of upgrading the test to include testing for psychomotor skills, personality measures, and a biographical inventory with response verification. These enhancements are expected to reduce group differences in test performance, and better predict success in flight training. According to officials at the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, this should help increase diverse enrollments in flight training.
Introductory Flight Screening

Introductory Flight Screening provides student Naval Pilots/Flight Officers with no previous flight experience an opportunity to receive basic flight training in civilian aircraft prior to beginning flight training. Chief of Naval Air Training officials report that since diverse student Naval Pilots/Flight Officers are less likely to enroll at Chief of Naval Air Training with previous flight experience, Introductory Flight Screening will help to level the playing field and reduce the performance gap between minority and majority students.
Commander, Naval Air Forces Diversity Outreach

Beginning in 2009, Commander, Naval Air Forces Diversity office has committed a post-command-tour officer to place a full-time focus on diversity within Naval Aviation. They have focused on outreach to the community by building relationships with schools, athletic programs, flying clubs and other organizations in order to reach more students. They also coordinate with squadrons to make aircraft and pilots available to potential students.
Increased Enrollments

Both the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps and United States Naval Academy have had an increase in diverse enrollments. The increased diverse enrollments and projected resulting Naval Pilot/Flight Officer accessions are described in the body of this report.

Not all of the five situations applied to every group. See the Audit Results for a breakdown.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act

The Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act of 1982, as codified in Title 31, United States Code, requires each Federal agency head to annually certify the effectiveness of the agencys internal and accounting system controls. In our opinion, the conditions noted in this report do not warrant reporting in the Auditor Generals annual FMFIA memorandum identifying management control weaknesses to the Secretary of the Navy.

Corrective Actions
We recommend that Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) assess the reasons that when compared to their classmates: African Americans and Asian/Pacific Islanders enroll at the United States Naval Academy at low rates, African American officer candidates have high attrition at the United States Naval Academy, African American, Asian/Pacific Islander and Hispanic officer candidates at the United States Naval Academy prefer careers in the Naval Pilot/Flight Officer communities at low rates, Asian/Pacific Islanders enroll at Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps at a low rate, African American and Asian/Pacific Islander officer candidates in the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps prefer careers in the Naval Pilot/Flight Officer communities at low rates, African American officer candidates in the Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps, who prefer Naval Pilot/Flight Officer careers, are selected for these careers at low rates, African Americans, Asian/Pacific Islanders and Hispanics enroll to be commissioned through Officer Candidate School as Naval Pilots/Flight Officers at low rates, and African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic student Naval Pilots/Flight Officers average low scores during flight training.

We also recommended that the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) develop a plan of action and milestones to address the causes of the above.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) concurred with Recommendations 1-6, and planned actions meet the intent of the recommendations. The recommendations are considered open pending completion of agreed-to actions.

Section A:

Finding, Recommendations, and Corrective Actions

Finding: Impediments to Naval Pilot/Flight Officer Diversity
Synopsis
The Naval Pilot/Flight Officer communities, a significant portion of the Navys commissioned officers, are not on track to reflect the diversity of the nation. In his 2011 Diversity Policy, The Chief of Naval Operations states that we mustbuild a Navy that always reflects our Countrys make up. Low enrollment, high attrition, low preference, and low selection at commissioning sources for certain minority groups, and low performance in flight training, are contributing to the lack of diversity. If this trend continues, future senior leadership in the aviation community will not reflect the diversity of the nation.

Discussion of Details
Background
Aviation Pipeline

Naval Pilots/Flight Officers are first commissioned at one of the commissioning sources: the United States Naval Academy, Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps, or Officer Candidate School. At the Naval Academy and the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps, officer candidates select their community prior to graduation, and are placed in a community based on this selection and the needs of the Navy. At Officer Candidate School, officer candidates select a community prior to enrollment. Student Naval Pilots/Flight Officers from all three commissioning sources then attend Introductory Flight Screening2 and Naval Aviation Fundamentals, and are sent to the Chief of Naval Air Training for flight school. The Chief of Naval Air Training oversees three phases of training: primary, intermediate, and advanced training. Naval Pilots choose their pipeline at the end of primary training, while Naval Flight Officers choose their pipeline at the end of primary and intermediate training.
2

Students may be exempt from Introductory Flight Screening if they have previous flight experience.

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Figure A. Naval Pilot/Flight Officer Pipeline

Pertinent Guidance

According to the Chief of Naval Operations 2011 Diversity Policy: We must not be locked in time. As leaders, we must anticipate and embrace the demographic changes of tomorrow, and build a Navy that always reflects our Countrys make up. We must lead in ways that will continue to draw men and women to service to our Country and to our Navy. The U.S. Census Bureau counts every resident in the United States every 10 years. In order to establish criteria to compare Naval Pilot/Flight Officer diversity, we obtained 2010 U.S. Census statistics. However, since Naval Pilots/Flight Officers are commissioned officers, we determined that using data relating to U.S. college graduates would provide a better picture of the recruiting pool. Therefore, we obtained 2009 Department of Education statistics for U.S. college graduates, the most recent data available, and used this as our criteria for comparing Naval Pilot/Flight Officer accessions to the diversity of the country.

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Figure B. Diversity Statistics Used to Identify Impediments College Race/Ethnicity Census 2010 Graduates 2009 Total Population Caucasian African American (AA) Asian/Pacific Islander (API) Other/Multiracial Hispanic (HIS)3 308,745,538 72.4% 12.6% 5.0% 10.0% 16.3% 1,601,368 71.5% 9.8% 7.0% 3.7% 8.1%

Navy Officers September 2009 52,031 81.4% 8.3% 4.3% 6.1% 6.0%

Audit Results
Projected Diversity for Naval Pilots/Flight Officers4

We determined that despite recent increases in minority enrollments at the Naval Academy and in the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps, new Naval Pilot/Flight Officer accessions will not reflect the diversity of the United States. Building a Navy that always reflects our Countrys makeup was stated in the 2011 Chief of Naval Operations Diversity policy. We estimated that African American officers from the commissioning Class of 2013 will represent 4.2 percent of Naval Pilot/Flight Officer advanced training graduates, and 2.8 percent of jet graduates (see Figure C). This is far below the 2009 African American college graduate percentage of 9.8 percent. Our analysis showed similar results for Asian/Pacific Islander officers (2.3 percent advanced training graduates/1 percent jet graduates/7 percent college graduates) and Hispanic officers (7.2 percent advanced training graduates/6.3 percent jet graduates/8.1 percent college graduates).

Hispanic is considered an ethnicity. For Census and Navy statistics, personnel select a race and then answer yes or no for Hispanic ethnicity. Therefore, each Hispanic is also identified with a race, and those percentages will total over 100 percent. 4 About 70 percent of aviation admirals were from the jet community. In addition to measuring the diversity of the overall Naval Pilot/Flight Officer advanced flight training graduates, we measured the Jet Pilot/ Flight Officer advanced flight training graduates.

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Figure C. Commissioning: Class of 2013

To arrive at our estimates, we calculated diversity percentages at various points in the commissioning and Chief of Naval Air Training flight training processes, beginning with enrollment at the commissioning source and continuing through graduation from the Chief of Naval Air Training course. We analyzed student data5 from commissioning sources and the Chief of Naval Air Training for the period 2006 to 2010.

Student data included name, race, ethnicity, performance measures, training dates, and other data.

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Impediments to Naval Pilot/Flight Officer Diversity

We identified five primary impediments to Naval Pilot/Flight Officer diversity. Low enrollment, high attrition, low preference, and low selection for these career paths were the primary impediments at the commissioning sources.6 Low performance was the primary impediment at the Chief of Naval Air Training. See Figure D. Figure D. Impediments to Naval Pilot/Flight Officer Diversity Navy Reserve Naval Academy Officers Training Impediments Corps AA API HIS AA API HIS Low Enrollment X X X High Attrition X Low Preference X X X X X Low Selection X Chief of Naval Air Training AA API HIS X X X

Officer Candidate School AA X N/A7 N/A API X N/A N/A HIS X N/A N/A

Impediments Low Performance

6 7

Not all impediments to diversity applied to every group. For Officer Candidate School, candidates apply for a career in the Naval Pilot/Flight Officer communities prior to being accepted. Therefore, no preference or selection of career choices is made while at the school.

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Detailed Charts of Impediments to Naval Pilot/Flight Officer Diversity at Commissioning Sources and Chief of Naval Air Training

The following sections provide separate detailed analysis for each of the three diversity groups we analyzed. Figures F, H, and J show the Naval Pilot/Flight Officer pipeline from commissioning source enrollments to aviation selection by racial/ethnic groups. Figures G, I, and K display diversity levels at various stages in the Chief of Naval Air Training process based on commissioning source aviation selection numbers. Figure E provides the information necessary to interpret the commissioning source charts that follow. Figure E. Interpreting Commissioning Source Charts
Naval Academy/Reserve Officer Training Corps/Officer Candidate School Class of 2010 Projections Class of 2013 Projections with no attrition gap Projections with no preference gap Projections with no selection gap Enrollment groups percentage of total enrollments and number Actual Actual for Class of 2013 Actual for Class of 2013 Actual for Class of 2013 Actual for Class of 2013 Graduation groups percentage of total graduations and number Actual Projection based on actual 2010 graduations Projection assumes group attrites at same rate as entire class Projection based on actual 2010 graduations Projection based on actual 2010 graduations Aviation Preference groups percentage of total first choice Naval Pilot/Flight Officer and number Actual Projection based on actual 2010 aviation preferences Projection based on actual 2010 aviation preferences Projection assumes group prefers at same rate as entire class Projection based on actual 2010 aviation preferences Aviation Selection groups percentage of total selected for Naval Pilot/Flight Officer and number Actual Projection based on actual 2010 aviation selection Projection based on actual 2010 aviation selection Projection based on actual 2010 aviation selection Projection assumes group selects at same rate as entire class

10

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

African American Impediments to Diversity

Impediments to diversity are determined by comparing diversity representation at each milestone to diversity representation at previous milestones,8 with the expectation that the percentages should remain consistent at each milestone. For example, as established in Figure B, African Americans represent 9.8 percent of 2009 college graduates. In the Naval Academys Class of 2013, 99 African American enrollments represent 7.9 percent of the class (see Figure F). The decrease from 9.8 to 7.9 percent is greater than one percent, which we defined as an impediment to increasing or maintaining diversity, and is highlighted in red. The 65 African Americans projected to graduate would represent 6.2 percent of the class. The decrease from 7.9 to 6.2 percent is greater than our one percent threshold; therefore, this attrition is also considered an impediment and is highlighted in red. Figures H and J should also be read in this manner. Projections with no attrition gap9 describes the impact of the attrition impediment to diversity by showing what the diversity levels would be if the impediment did not exist. We assumed that 7.9 percent representation at enrollment is maintained at graduation. After applying to the remaining milestones, the result is an increase from 12 African Americans (representing 3.9 percent of aviation selections) to 15 African Americans (representing 5 percent of these selections). Figure F. African American Commissioning Sources
United States Naval Academy Class of 2010 Projections Class of 2013 Projections no attrition gap Projections no preference gap Projections no attr, no pref gap Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps Class of 2010 Projections Class of 2013 Projections no preference gap Projections no selection gap Projections no pref, no selec gap Officer Candidate School11 Class of 2010 Enrollment 4.6% 7.9% 7.9% 7.9% 7.9% 56 99 99 99 99 Graduation 3.6% 6.2% 7.9% 6.2% 7.9% 37 65 83 65 83 Aviation Preference 2.1% 7 3.6% 12 4.6% 15 6.2% 21 7.9% 27 Aviation Preference 3.0% 9 13.0% 62 17.6% 85 13.0% 62 17.6% 85 Aviation Selection 2.3% 7 3.9% 12 5.0% 15 6.8% 21 8.6% 27 Aviation Selection 2.7% 7 11.5% 48 15.7% 66 13.0% 55 17.6% 74

Enrollment 2.8% 12.0% 12.0% 12.0% 12.0% 21 146 146 146 146

Graduation10 4.1% 17.6% 17.6% 17.6% 17.6% 30 209 209 209 209

Aviation Enrollment 1.9% 6

Aviation Selection 1.7% 5

7+7+5=19
See Figure G

Except for enrollments, which are compared to the 2009 college graduates representation. These projections are only displayed for impediments identified as meeting the one percent threshold. For example, African Americans have an attrition impediment at the Naval Academy, but not at the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps. 10 Due to the way the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps keeps student data, we could not compare enrollments to graduations by class year. Therefore we used a separate analysis to measure attrition. Details can be found in Exhibit A, Scope and Methodology. 11 Officer Candidate School is not a 4 year program. Class of 2010 is most recent data available and is used for all projections.
9

11

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

The aviation selections from Figure F are totaled to give Chief of Naval Air Training enrollments in Figure G.12 The 34 projected African American advanced graduates in 2013 will represent 4.2 percent of all advanced graduates, and the 6 projected African American Jet graduates will represent 2.8 percent of all Jet graduates (Jet graduates are a subset of advanced graduates). Figures I and K should also be read in this manner.

Figure G. African American (Chief of Naval Air Training)

Chief of Naval Air Training Class of 201013 Projections Class of 2013 Projections no USNA14 attrition gap Projections no NROTC,15 USNA pref Projections no NROTC selection Projections USNA no attr- nopref, NROTC no pref-no selection Enrollment 2.2% 6.5% 6.8% 9.0% 7.0% 10.4% 19 66 69 92 72 106 NAF Graduation 1.3% 11 3.8% 38 4.0% 5.3% 4.2% 6.2% 40 53 41 61 Primary Graduation 1.4% 11 4.2% 38 4.4% 5.8% 4.6% 6.7% 40 53 41 61 Advanced Graduation 1.4% 10 4.2% 34 4.4% 5.9% 4.6% 6.7% 36 48 38 56 Jet Graduation 1.0% 2 2.8% 6 2.9% 3.9% 3.0% 4.5% 7 9 7 11

12 13

Numbers may not add up due to rounding. Class of 2010 refers to students from the commissioning sources Class of 2010 who enrolled in Chief of Naval Air Training around that time. This also applies to Projection Class of 2013, and to both classes in Figures I and K. 14 USNA- United States Naval Academy 15 NROTC- Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps

12

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Asian/Pacific Islander Impediments to Diversity

Figure H. Asian/Pacific Islander Commissioning Sources

United States Naval Academy Class of 2010 Projections Class of 2013 Projections no preference gap Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps Class of 2010 Projections Class of 2013 Projections no preference gap Officer Candidate School Class of 2010 Enrollment 2.6% 4.6% 4.6% 32 58 58 Graduation 2.2% 4.0% 4.0% 23 41 41 Aviation Preference 1.2% 4 2.1% 7 4.0% 13 Aviation Preference 4.4% 13 3.3% 15 4.7% 22 Aviation Selection 1.3% 4 2.3% 7 4.3% 13 Aviation Selection 3.9% 10 2.9% 12 4.1% 17

Enrollment 6.1% 4.5% 4.5% 45 55 55

Graduation 6.3% 4.7% 4.7% 46 55 55

Aviation Enrollment 2.5% 8

Aviation Selection 2.4% 7

4+10+7=21
See Figure I

Figure I. Asian/Pacific Islander (Chief of Naval Air Training)

Chief of Naval Air Training Class of 2010 Projections Class of 2013 Projections no USNA, NROTC16 pref Enrollment 2.5% 2.6% 3.7% 21 26 38 NAF Graduation 2.5% 21 2.6% 26 3.8% 38 Primary Graduation 2.3% 18 2.5% 22 3.6% 32 Advanced Graduation 2.2% 15 2.3% 18 3.3% 27 Jet Graduation 1.0% 2 1.0% 2 1.5% 3

16

USNA- United States Naval Academy, NROTC- Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps

13

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Hispanic Impediments to Diversity

Figure J. Hispanic Commissioning Sources

United States Naval Academy Class of 2010 Projections Class of 2013 Projections no pref gap Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps Class of 2010 Projections Class of 2013 Officer Candidate School Class of 2010 Enrollment 11.0% 14.1% 14.1% 134 177 177 Graduation 10.9% 14.0% 14.0% 111 146 146 Aviation Preference 9.6% 32 12.3% 42 14.0% 47 Aviation Preference 7.4% 22 14.1% 68 Aviation Selection 9.8% 30 12.6% 39 14.3% 44 Aviation Selection 7.7% 20 14.6% 62

Enrollment 4.7% 8.9% 34 108

Graduation 5.8% 11.0% 42 130

Aviation Enrollment 6.2% 20

Aviation Selection 6.2% 18

30+20+18=68
See Figure K

Figure K. Hispanic (Chief of Naval Air Training)

Chief of Naval Air Training Class of 2010 Projections Class of 2013 Projections no USNA, NROTC17 pref Enrollment 8.0% 11.6% 12.2% 68 119 124 NAF Graduation 4.8% 40 7.0% 70 7.3% 73 Primary Graduation 4.8% 37 7.1% 65 7.4% 68 Advanced Graduation 4.9% 34 7.2% 59 7.5% 62 Jet Graduation 4.3% 9 6.3% 15 6.6% 16

17

USNA- United States Naval Academy, NROTC- Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps.

14

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Chief of Naval Air Training Performance

Student Naval Pilots/Flight Officers performance is measured using a Navy standard score. To be eligible for the jet training pipeline, a student Naval Pilot must receive a score of 50 or above. We reviewed the flight training performance standards and found that they appeared objective.18 However, we determined that African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic students average Navy standard scores were lower than Caucasians. These lower scores negatively affected the number from each minority group entering the jet pipeline. The low representation of African Americans, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics among jet graduates is shown in the Jet Graduation numbers in Figures G, I, and K. Figure L. 5-Year Average Navy Standard Scores by Racial Group Race Score 47.6 African American 44.1 Asian/Pacific Islander 50.7 Caucasian 45.6 Hispanic For the Naval Flight Officer career path, students do not need to obtain a specific score to be eligible for the jet training pipeline; however, the students must obtain a Navy standard score of 35 to continue training.

Recommendations
We recommend that the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force): Recommendation 1. For the U.S. Naval Academy, determine the reasons why: a. African Americans and Asian/Pacific Islanders enroll at low rates; b. African American officer candidates have high attrition; and c. African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic officer candidates prefer careers in the Naval Pilot/Flight Officer communities at low rates.

18

See Exhibit C for details.

15

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Recommendation 2. For Reserve Officers Training Corps, determine the reasons why: a. Asian/Pacific Islanders enroll at a low rate; b. African American and Asian/Pacific Islander officer candidates prefer careers in the Naval Pilot/Flight Officer communities at low rates; and c. Enrolled African American officer candidates who prefer Naval Pilot/Flight Officer careers are selected at a low rate. Recommendation 3. For Officer Candidate School, determine the reasons why African Americans, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics enroll to be commissioned as Naval Pilots/Flight Officers at low rates. Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) Response to Recommendations 1, 2, and 3. Concur, and offer the following comments: A review of the reasons why certain groups enroll at low rates, or have higher attrition, may identify issues beyond or outside Navy control. The Diversity Policy office, OPNAV N134, is tasked with supporting the reviews by USNA and NSTC, and coordinating recommendations to Navy leadership on any required follow-on actions. Target completion date is 7 October 2012. Naval Audit Service comments on Responses to Recommendations 1, 2 and 3. Actions planned by the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) meet the intent of the recommendations, which are considered open pending completion of agreed-upon actions. Recommendation 4. For Chief of Naval Air Training, coordinate with Commander, Naval Air Forces as appropriate and determine the reasons why African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic student Naval Pilots/Flight Officers average low scores during flight training. Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) Response to Recommendation 4. Concur. This recommendation is for DCNO (N1) to task CNATRA to determine the reasons why certain diverse candidates average low scores during flight training. More review is required to ascertain the current picture with regard to Hispanic candidates, but DCNO (N1) does not dispute the overall findings of the audit. We concur with this recommendation with the understanding that the performance standards used in the selection and training of aviation candidates are valid and proven to predict adequate performance in Fleet operations. The focus of this effort must be identification of systemic reasons for variance in performance, vice modification of proven performance standards. Target completion date is 7 October 2012.

16

SECTION A: FINDING, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FINDING: IMPEDIMENTS TO NAVAL PILOT/FLIGHT OFFICER DIVERSITY

Naval Audit Service comments on Responses to Recommendations 4. Actions planned by the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) meet the intent of the recommendation, which is considered open pending completion of agreedupon actions. It should be noted that this recommendation does not require DCNO (N1) to task CNATRA, but to determine the reasons in coordination with Commander, Naval Air Forces. Also, this audit did not determine whether the performance standards used in the selection and training of aviation candidates are valid and proven to predict adequate performance in Fleet operations. The audit did, however, determine that the standards appeared to be objective. Recommendation 5. Develop a plan of action for implementation of corrective actions to address each of the reasons identified in Recommendations 1-4. Ensure the plan includes implementation dates for each action. Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) Response to Recommendation 5. Concur. DCNO (N1) concurs with Recommendation 5. Target completion date is 7 October 2012. Naval Audit Service comments on Responses to Recommendations 5. Actions planned by the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) meet the intent of the recommendation, which is considered open pending completion of agree-upon actions. Recommendation 6. Establish metrics to monitor and track progress of enrollment, graduation, preference, selection, and performance relative to Recommendations 1-4. Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) Response to Recommendation 6. Concur. DCNO (N1) concurs with Recommendation 6. Target completion date is 07 October 2012. Naval Audit Service comments on Responses to Recommendations 6. Actions planned by the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) meet the intent of the recommendation, which is considered open pending completion of agree-upon actions.

17

Section B:

Status of Recommendations
Recommendations
19

Finding

Rec. Page No. No. 1 15

Subject

Status

20

Interim Target or Action Actual Target Command Completion Completion Date Date21 Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) 10/7/2012

For the U.S. Naval Academy, determine the reasons why: a. African Americans and Asian/Pacific Islanders enroll at low rates; b. African American officer candidates have high attrition; and c. African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic officer candidates prefer careers in the Naval Pilot/Flight Officer communities at low rates

16

For Reserve Officer Training Corps, determine the reasons why: a. Asian/Pacific Islanders enroll at a low rate; b. African American and Asian/Pacific Islander officer candidates prefer careers in the Naval Pilot/Flight Officer communities at low rates; and c. Enrolled African American officer candidates, who prefer Naval Pilot/Flight Officer careers, are selected at a low rate.

Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force)

10/7/2012

16

For Officer Candidate School, determine the reasons why African Americans, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics enroll to be commissioned as Naval Pilots/Flight Officers at low rates. For Chief of Naval Air Training, coordinate with Commander, Naval Air Forces as appropriate and determine the reasons why African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic student Naval Pilots/Flight Officers average low scores during flight training.

Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force)

10/7/2012

16

10/7/2012

19 20

/ + = Indicates repeat finding. / O = Recommendation is open with agreed-to corrective actions; C = Recommendation is closed with all action completed; U = Recommendation is undecided with resolution efforts in progress. 21 If applicable.

18

SECTION B: STATUS OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations
19

Finding

Rec. Page No. No. 5 17

Subject

Status

20

Interim Target or Action Actual Target Command Completion Completion Date Date21 Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force) 10/7/2012

Develop a plan of action for implementation of corrective actions to address each of the reasons identified in Recommendations 1-4. Ensure the plan includes implementation dates for each action. Establish metrics to monitor and track progress of enrollment, graduation, preference, selection, and performance relative to Recommendations 1-4.

17

10/7/2012

19

Exhibit A:

Scope and Methodology

We conducted the audit during the period of 10 August 2010 through August 2011.
Impediments to Diversity

To determine a benchmark for measuring the nations diversity, we first reviewed the Chief of Naval Operations 2011 Diversity Policy. This policy states that we mustbuild a Navy that always reflects our Countrys make up. To determine the countrys make-up, we reviewed the 2010 Census statistics and 2009 Department of Education national college graduate statistics. We obtained student data for 2006 through 2010 from the Chief of Naval Air Training; the United States Naval Academy; Commander, Navy Recruiting Command; and the Naval Service Training Command. We used this data to identify representation of diverse students at various stages in the commissioning and flight training pipelines. We identified reductions in diversity as impediments to increasing or maintaining diversity. We also estimated how much diversity would increase if these impediments were removed. We conducted a review of data reliability and determined the data was sufficiently reliable to support the conclusions in this report. We performed electronic testing to compare the accuracy of common data elements contained in different systems to determine whether discrepancies between the systems existed. This included testing between United States Naval Academy and Chief of Naval Air Training, between Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps and Chief of Naval Air Training, and between two Chief of Naval Air Training data sets. We also manually tested a sample of discrepancies identified during the electronic testing. It should be noted that race and ethnicity was self-reported by the students, and they could self-report as a different race or ethnicity when asked at different times. The following assumptions were necessary for these estimates.
Assumptions Made for Commissioning Source Estimates

For the United States Naval Academy and Naval Reserve Officer Training Corpss Projections Class of 2013, we displayed the actual number and representation percent of those who enrolled in the Class of 2013. We then assumed that this class would graduate, prefer, and be selected for Naval Pilot/Flight Officer careers at the same rate as the Class of 2010, for which we have the most recent data available.

20

EXHIBIT A: SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

The Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps graduation, aviation preference, and aviation selection data obtained for 2010 was missing the last 3 months of data for the calendar year, and was, therefore, about 10 to 20 percent lower than the actual 2010 numbers. We reduced the enrollment data (based on percent of enrollments occurring during first 9 months of 2009) so that we could compare 9 months of enrollments to 9 months of graduates. This assumes that the diverse representation of the last 3 months of the year was relatively consistent with the rest of the year. We did not find evidence that this will materially affect the results. Due to the way Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps tracks student data, we could not compare enrollments to graduates by class year. Also, students do not all follow a 4-year program, and they are able to enroll throughout the 4 years. Therefore, they are not tracked as class groups. In Figures F, H, and J,22 Naval Reserve Officers Corps, we compared Class of 2010 4-year scholarship enrollments (enrollment column) to Class of 2010 all graduates (graduation column). Any change in diversity representation between these two points is affected by both attrition and the number of additional enrollments. This assumes that the diversity of the 4-year scholarship enrollments is relatively consistent with the diversity of the additional enrollments. In order to evaluate Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps attrition and its effect on diversity, we obtained Fiscal Year 2008 and 2009 universe and attrition figures for the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps. For each year, we looked at total students enrolled in the program and the number enrolled at the end of each year after subtracting those who resigned. We then compared the diversity representation of each group. None of these showed a drop of one percent or greater in diversity representation. Consequently, they are not included as impediments to maintaining or increasing diversity.
Assumptions Made for Flight Training Estimates

The data for the Chief of Naval Air Training students only applied to individuals who graduated from Naval Aviation Fundamentals, not the total enrollments in that program. Therefore, we were unable to directly link commissioning source graduates with Chief of Naval Air Training enrollments. We did not believe it was cost effective to use resources to directly link commissioning source graduates with Chief of Naval Air Training enrollments. Instead, we used multiple methods of analysis to estimate the attrition between commissioning source graduates and Naval Aviation Fundamentals graduates. This included using count-based and percentage-based methods. Our analysis assumed that students who were reported by commissioning sources as selected for Naval Pilot/Flight Officer, did actually enroll in the Chief of Naval Air Training. Comparing the results of the different analyses showed that the estimated diversity representation of
22

These figures are located in the Finding of the report.

21

EXHIBIT A: SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

Naval Pilot/Flight Officer graduates and Naval Jet Pilot/Flight Officer graduates varied, but did not change the overall conclusion. To link commissioning source graduations and Chief of Naval Air Training graduates, we used known counts and percentages of: 1) commissioning source graduates from 2010 and 2) Chief of Naval Air Training graduates from 2007. We reviewed trends in commissioning source graduations from 2006 through 2010 and chose to use 2010 as the best representation for our analysis because it was the most recent data. We reviewed Chief of Naval Air Training graduate diversity counts and rates from 2007 through 2010 and determined that despite some spikes, they were relatively stable over time. Also, the 2007 data was complete with only one student under instruction, no students awaiting training, and the rest having completed the entire training pipeline. At the time of our request, complete data for the Chief of Naval Air Training 2010 graduates was not yet available.
Other Audit Steps Performed

We met with Commander, Naval Air Forces Diversity Office to discuss the ongoing diversity program and outreach efforts. We observed the student pipeline selection process at Chief of Naval Air Training, and interviewed flight training personnel in Corpus Christi, TX. We interviewed pilots and instructors at several training squadrons to obtain background on pilot training processes and flight training curriculum. We reviewed flight training standards and the evaluation procedures. We met with the Naval Aviation Schools Command to discuss Naval Aviation Fundamentals training and performance standards. We also met with officials responsible for the Introductory Flight Screening program. We reviewed the Naval Aviation Student Training Attrition Report, from Naval Operational Medical Institute, which focused on survey responses for why students chose an aviation career, why they attrite, demographics, and more. The report covered surveys from October 2007 through September 2008, and included a section that allowed students to report whether they believed they were victims of harassment or discrimination. We met with personnel from the United States Naval Academy, Commander, Navy Recruiting Command, and Naval Service Training Command regarding the three commissioning sources. We discussed selection standards, student preferences, diversity outreach efforts, and more. We contacted Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps units at colleges and universities to discuss the specific policies and procedures at those units.

22

EXHIBIT A: SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

We reviewed prior audit reports from the Naval Audit Service, Department of Defense Inspector General, and the Government Accountability Office, and found there were no reports published in the past 5 years covering Naval Pilot/Flight Officer diversity. Therefore, no followup was required. We reviewed other resources, including: Minorities and Women in Naval Education Training 1997;23 Taking Flight: Education and Training for Aviation Careers;24 and Difficulties in Accessing a Representative Pilot Force: The Demographic Challenge and Views of Minority Pilot Focus Groups, a study performed for the U.S. Air Force in 1998.25 We did not conduct a review of internal controls. Because we limited the focus of our audit primarily to an analysis of existing data, we determined that internal controls were not significant to the context of our audit work. We conducted this performance audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Uriell, Zannette A. and Rosenfeld, Paul. Minorities and Women in Naval Education Training 1997 (NPRST-TN-10). Navy Personnel Research, Studies, and Technology, Bureau of Naval Personnel, Millington, TN. December 2009. 24 Hansen, Janet S. and Oster, Clinton V. (editors). Taking Flight: Education and Training for Aviation Careers. National Academy Press. 1997. 25 Barucky, Jerry M. and Stone, Brice M. Difficulties in Accessing a Representative Pilot Force: The Demographic Challenge and Views of Minority Pilot Focus Groups. Metrica, Inc. November 1999.

23

23

Exhibit B:

Chief of Naval Air Training Selection Standards

We concluded that the Multi-Service Pilot Training System, used by Chief of Naval Air Training to measure student performance, appeared objective. To account for potential differences in scoring across training squadrons, student scores are normalized over the last 60 students that graduated from the same squadron to create the Navy standard score. According to Chief of Naval Air Training officials, the Multi-Service Pilot Training System is a legally defensible and objective system. It contains objective course training standards for each item26 within a flight event and the detailed permissible error magnitude for each item. For each flight event, it lists a series of items to be graded, along with the expected performance standards. The flight events are organized into blocks and student Naval Pilots must reach the minimum performance standards by the end of each training block. We also reviewed the Naval Aviation Student Training Attrition Report, 27 a summary of exit surveys administered to student Naval Pilot/Flight Officers after they resign from or complete major phases in flight training. When asked whether diverse students were discriminated against, 0.08 percent (4 of 4,996) of respondents indicated that this occurred, and 0.39 percent (3 of 766) of diverse respondents indicated that this occurred. When asked whether female students were discriminated against, 0.46 percent (23 of 4,996) of respondents indicated that this occurred, and 2.67 percent (12 of 450) of female respondents indicated that this occurred.

26 27

Portion of the flight that will be graded (i.e. basic air work or takeoff). The report covered October 2007 through September 2008.

24

Exhibit C:

Activities Visited and/or Contacted

Commander, Naval Air Forces Diversity Office* Commander, Navy Recruiting Command United States Naval Academy* Navy Diversity Officer, Highly Qualified Expert* Naval Service Training Command, Officer Development* Naval Operational Medicine Institute/Naval Aerospace Medical Institute* Officer Candidate School* Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps Hampton Rhodes Consortium Savannah State University University of Florida Jacksonville University Southern University and A & M College Naval Aviation Schools Command* Chief of Naval Air Training* Training Air Wing Four Training Squadron Twenty-Seven* Training Air Wing Six Training Squadron Four, Training Squadron Ten, Training Squadron Eighty-Six*

*Activities Visited

25

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Appendix:

Management Response from Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Total Force)

FOIA (b)(6)

26

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

27

We spoke to a representative in the office of the DCNO (N1) who confirmed that the response provided for Recommendation 6 contained a typographical error, and should have said, "DCNO(N1) concurs with Recommendation 6. Target Completion date is 07 October 2012."

28

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Use this page as

BACK COVER
for printed copies of this document

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY