Waiver Recipients Take Advantage of 'Second Chance' in Army

By John J. Kruzel
American Forces Press Service

May 8, 2008 - Army recruits who joined the ranks on conduct waivers are slightly more prone to misconduct, but also are promoted faster, re-enlist in higher numbers and represent higher-quality recruits than recruits who enlisted without needing a conduct waiver, an internal Army study revealed. The analysis, conducted late last year, compared the re-enlistment rates, performance and effects on recruiting standards of soldiers who didn't need a conduct waiver to enlist to those whose prior malfeasance was waived.

"For the most part, the individuals that we're bringing in [on waivers] are not the folks that are dabbling in crime," said Army Maj. Jake LaPorte, who works in the strength forecasting division of the Army's personnel, policy and guidance office. "I think they're the ones who have had a mistake, and we're giving them a second chance."

The Army runs potential recruits convicted of a felony or of both serious and minor offenses through a 10-person review. Before a waiver is granted, a general officer must approve the enlistment.

The study sample was made up of first-time recruits from fiscal 2003 to 2006, allowing time for re-enlistment figures to emerge. Findings that reflect positively on waiver recipients include:

-- The conduct-waiver population from fiscal 2003 re-enlisted at a higher rate -- 28.4 percent -- compared to a rate of 26.7 percent for soldiers who didn't need conduct waivers;

-- The infantry conduct-waiver population was promoted to sergeant faster, at 34.7 months of service vs. 39;

-- The conduct-waiver population had a higher ratio of valorous awards, 13.87 percent vs. 12.73 percent; and

-- The conduct-waiver population represented higher-quality recruits, producing a higher percentage of high school graduates -- 86.58 percent vs. 84.2 percent -- and higher Armed Forces Qualification Test scores, 61.2 vs. 60.1.

However, the conduct-waiver population had higher losses in six of nine "adverse loss" categories:

-- Misconduct: 5.95 percent vs. 3.55 percent;

-- Pattern of misconduct: 1.78 percent vs. 1.35 percent;

-- Alcohol rehabilitation failure: 0.27 percent vs. 0.12 percent;

-- Desertion: 4.26 percent vs. 3.59 percent;

-- Military prisoner, bad conduct discharge or dishonorable discharge: 0.5 percent vs. 0.4 percent;

-- Discharge in lieu of courts-martial: 2.58 percent vs. 2.04 percent.

In 2007, the Army granted 511 felony waivers, an increase from the 249 it granted the previous year. Despite this spike, a senior officer said, the Army's standards have not wavered.

"I would say they're probably more stringent," Lt. Col. Val Siegfried, the Army branch chief for enlisted accessions, said of today's requirements for enlistment compared to those in recent decades.

He said that society judges petty theft and in-school fighting more harshly now than in the past. "If you get in a fight in school as a 14-year-old and kick somebody, it's aggravated assault with a deadly weapon," he said, adding that the Army takes a "whole person" look at each recruit, examining the context in which they committed their crime.

"Should that [person] not be brought into the Army and serve his country simply because he got in a fight in school?" he said. "Those are a lot of the kind of people that have been given a waiver for a felony offense in the juvenile life."

Fiscal 2007 Sexual Assault In The Military And 2006 Gender Relations Survey Results Released

The Defense Department today released two reports: the Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2007 Report on Sexual Assault in the Military and the 2006 Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members.

The Report on Sexual Assault, prepared by the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO), provides an overview of the SAPR program and data on alleged sexual assaults reported during fiscal 2007. In fiscal 2007, 2,688 reports of sexual assault involving service members as subject and/or victim were filed.

Restricted reporting, which provides a victim with support services without initiating the criminal investigation process and preserves the victim's anonymity, continues to be a crucial option for service members. Some research had found that victims may choose to forego services rather than participate in the investigative process. Of the 2,688 reports made, 705 were under the restricted program. In 102 of these cases, victims later decided to pursue legal charges and switched their report to unrestricted.

The report indicates that the services placed a high priority on training. Comprehensive programs were developed and delivered in methods ranging from traditional, in-person training to more innovative, automated methods delivered on compact disc or the Internet. All of the military services continued to build education and training programs designed to foster a climate of confidence.

The Gender Relations survey, conducted by the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC), was based on a sample of 23,595 respondents and found that 34 percent of active duty women and 6 percent of active duty men indicated experiencing sexual harassment, while 6.8 percent of women and 1.8 percent of men indicated experiencing unwanted sexual contact.

Active duty members gave positive marks for improvement in Department of Defense sexual misconduct training and climate. About 90 percent indicated they received training in the previous year on topics related to sexual harassment and sexual assault and that their training was effective. More than 80 percent reported the Department's sexual harassment and sexual assault policies and procedures were well publicized. Overall, they were more positive in their assessment of the climate in the military than they were of the climate in the nation in regards to sexual harassment and sexual assault.

As a result of the survey and annual report, SAPRO and DMDC will partner along with other organizations within and outside of the Department of Defense to evaluate the effectiveness of past and present reporting efforts, identify enhanced prevention opportunities and strategies, and continue to monitor victim services.

Academy Officials: Sexual Assault Reporting Shows System is Working

By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

Dec. 13, 2007 - Rather than being alarmed by 40 reports of sexual assault at the U.S. service academies during the 2006-2007 school year, officials are calling them a sign that programs designed to encourage victims to report are working. "It tells me that cadets are coming forward," said Air Force Col. Gail Colvin, vice commandant of cadets at the U.S. Air Force Academy, in Colorado Springs, Colo. "It shows they have trust in the system and view it as a safe place where they can seek help."

Colvin's assessment came days after the Defense Department released its annual report on sexual harassment and violence at the Air Force Academy; U.S. Military Academy, in West Point, N.Y.; and U.S. Naval Academy, in Annapolis, Md.

The annual report reveals 40 cases of sexual assault between June 1, 2006, and May 31, 2007: 19 at the Air Force Academy, 16 at West Point and five at the Naval Academy. It defines sexual assault as rape, sodomy, indecent assault or attempts to commit these offenses.

But officials at all three schools are quick to point out that sexual assault is a national problem that transcends the military. The name of a sexual harassment and assault prevention class offered to first-year midshipmen at the Naval Academy, "1 in 4," hints to the national statistic that one in four college women experiences an actual or attempted sexual assault during college.

Army Col. Jeanette McMahon, the U.S. Military Academy's special assistant to the superintendent for human relations, said the numbers of reported assaults alone don't tell the whole story.

She pointed to broad sexual assault and sexual harassment prevention programs at all three academies designed to ensure every cadet and midshipman understands what sexual harassment and sexual violence is, what to do if they or someone else is victimized, and their responsibility as leaders to intervene. When cadets are more aware about what behavior is acceptable and what constitutes sexual assault or harassment and that victims aren't to blame, they are more willing to report such incidents, she said.

Noting that sexual assault is one of the most underreported crime nationwide, McMahon said she's convinced the number of incidents at the academies is actually higher than the annual Defense Department report shows.

An anonymous 2006 survey at West Point in 2006 revealed that 65 women, or 10 percent of West Point's female cadets, and 10 of its males, experienced a sexual assault. "So, clearly, we are not getting all the reports that are out there," she said.

The DoD report cites a perception by some West Pointers of "a negative stigma associated with reporting sexual assault." Similarly, it points out that cadets at the Air Force Academy may hesitate to report sexual assault for fear they will experience "retaliation by their command in the form of punishment for collateral misconduct."

Officials say they want to dispel those impressions and agree the best way to encourage more victims to report sexual assaults is to continue building their confidence and trust in the system.

Navy Cmdr. Ricks Polk, the Naval Academy's sexual assault response coordinator, cited two initiatives aimed at breaking down barriers to reporting sexual misconduct.

The academy offers a variety of ways to report to make victims as comfortable as possible with the process, Polk said. They can turn to a peer, specially trained midshipmen called sexual assault victim intervention guides; to a senior enlisted leader or officer serving as a victim's advocate; to a chaplain or counselor; or to their chain of command. "We think that with all those different avenues of people being able to report, that maybe one of those will be appealing to them, and that they are ... more likely to report," Polk said.

In addition, a confidential reporting option introduced in 2005 offers victims mental and medical care and other support without requiring them to get involved in the criminal justice process. Half of the cadets and midshipmen who reported sexual assaults during the 2005-2006 academic year elected this option, according to the DoD report.

Colvin said this option, called "restricted reporting," enables some victims who may feel stigmatized to step forward. "This takes all that off the table," she said.

The report notes that the 20 sexual assault victims who chose "unrestricted" reporting during the report period, agreeing to follow through with the military justice process, also received support and care.

The challenge ahead, Colvin said, is for the academies to continue advancing programs to prevent sexual assault and sexual harassment from happening in the first place. "It's about creating a culture and climate of respect, both for oneself and others," she said.

This leads to an environment of trust so when incidents do occur, victims are more likely to report them, she said.

The DoD report supports Colvin's assertion. "A command that is seen as fair and balanced in its response to sexual assault is more likely to create an environment that will not deter reporting," it says.

As the academies strive to create that climate, Colvin said she's satisfied they're on the right track. "The numbers tell me our programs are working ... and that cadets have a deeper trust and are coming forward," she said. "We're trying to attack the issue ... (and) to get more cadets to come forward."

Defense Department Outlines Recoupment Policies

By Fred W. Baker III
American Forces Press Service

Nov. 29, 2007 - Defense Department policy prohibits services from recouping bonuses and other pay from servicemembers who do not complete their military contracts due to no fault of their own. "Repayment will not be sought if the member's inability to fulfill the eligibility requirements is due to circumstances determined reasonably beyond the member's control," the policy guidance put in place this year reads.

Pentagon officials re-stated their policy this week after a wounded soldier in Pennsylvania received a bill from the Army. Jordan Fox was an Army private first class wounded in an improvised explosive device explosion in Iraq. He was medically discharged and later received a letter demanding repayment of $2,800 of his $7,500 enlistment bonus. A second letter from the Army stated interest would be charged if a payment wasn't made within 30 days.

Army officials later said Fox will not be required to pay back any enlistment money he received.

According to the policy, circumstances could include a servicemember's death, injury, illness or other impairment which is not the result of the servicemember's misconduct.

It could also apply if the servicemember is forced to reclassify into a new military specialty or if the servicemember is separated due to hardship.

The policy also allows for the service secretary to make case-by-case determinations on repayment.

Policy guidance published earlier this year also prohibits any debt collection from combat-related bonuses or incentives paid to a servicemember after medical evacuation form a combat zone. For example, if a soldier receives additional monthly combat pay and those payments are not stopped in a timely manner after his evacuation, the combat pay he receives after leaving the combat zone cannot be recouped by the services.

"Therefore, ... the secretaries of the military departments, in coordination with the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, will expeditiously remit or cancel all theater debt incurred by members of the U.S. armed forces who were medically evacuated from a combat zone due to battle injury or illness, nor non-battle injury or illness, except when misconduct on the part of the member contributed to the indebtedness," the guidance reads.