I__. - International Military Testing Association

lost; but asking for more quality, i.e, 67% I-IIIA, 95% HSDG and 4% or less CAT IV,
is stretching the previous well-founded research arguments to the breaking point. The
marginal performance benefit is difficult to quantify, and the cost effectiveness of the
increased quality may not stand up to any close scrutiny.
The Future
Since the endstrength reductions mandated by Congress for the 1991-95 downsizing
precede USAREC structure cuts, USAREC is now recruiting fewer individuals with the
same number of recruiters that had been dictated by higher annual qualitative and
quantitative objectives. The decrease in recruiting difficulty is therefore only temporary;
the, need for models to predict accession requirements based on endstrength goals is critical.
Several accession and force structure models are in various stages of completion.
ALENO (Alternate Enlistment Options) which is being developed by the Concepts Analysis
Agency has the potential to provide future skill level one and two structure requirements
to the MOS level of detail with the input of such variables as term of service, quality and
accessions. ALENO also will translate endstrength requirements into accession inputs by
quality and term of service. In addition, SRA Corporation has developed a prototype of
its Army Force Structure Planning Model (AFSPM) which is aimed at determining
accession requirements in the future considering quality and term of service inputs as well
as retention/attrition rates. The ALENO and AFSPM models should be available within
the next six months. Other models, perhaps less sophisticated, are being developed to
answer the key concerns about accession missions for the future.
In a rather straightforward manner the steady state accession mission can be determined
by past accession ratios. Considering the variables of term of service mix, gender, quality
and its collateral attrition/retention rates and accepting the fact that the new endstrengths
place manpower management in completely foreign territory, the past ratio of enlisted
accessions to endstrength has remained relatively static for many years. Applying ratios of
mission to endstrength for the past six years to the 488,969 enlisted endstrength results in
high and low estimates for the end state mission of 103,200 and 85,600 respectively. A
reasonable estimate for the accession floor to support a 580,000 end state is therefore
85,000. However, with higher quality projected in the outyears (less first term attrition)
and lower average TOS mix, from the FY89 high of 3.88 years to the present average TOS
for FY90 of 3.7 years (and dropping, mostly as the result of offering shorter terms to
attract higher quality), the accession floor is expected to be closer to 90,000 by FY96. The
relationships and effects of these variables to one another and to the accession mission is
considerable. Establishing a Term of Service average objective for USAREC in the annual
rnission letters could be used to better align the force for the future downsizing. Although
the recruiting market dictates what can be sold in contracts, an overall TOS mix average
set in aggregate from the MOS requirements/TOS mix would foster more control over the
longevity (and experience) of the force.
Overall, the systems for establishing and monitoring accessions is in place and has been
effective. The accession objectives, although highly dynamic, can be achieved. The
downsizing, however, leads the Army into completely unmapped terrain which will greatly
test the systems, the personnel managers, and, most notably, the soldiers presently in the
Army.
11
,