Sea Shore Flow Optimizing Enlisted Career Paths

1. Sea Shore FlowOptimizing Enlisted Career Paths Information Brief

2. Geographic Stability FIT Satisfying Real Work Pers & Prof Development Predictability Sea Shore FlowDesired Outcomes under a New Lens Away from sea-to-shore billet ratios… Impact to the Sailor • Predictable career path • Increased meaningful work • Improved geographic stability • Incentives for more time at sea (> 60 months) Impact to the Navy • Manning at right experience level • Right mix of work within fleet concentration areas • Force structure determines manpower requirements … to managing the whole community Sea Tour lengths determined by Fleet requirements and community behavior 30 year Career SSF Provides Best Balance of Sea and Shore Duty Throughout a Sailor’s Career

3. Evolution of Sea Shore FlowNone … Close Enough … Optimal Seavey Shorevey Sea Shore Rotation Sea Shore Flow TACOMA CLASS (PF-3) 900 Ship Navy – 775K Personnel Policy: 1957 – 1974 Sailors remained at sea indefinitely and rolled ashore based on time in grade and shore billet availability Catalyst: Centralized Distribution -Previous decentralized system caused large scale “bottle necks” in moving inventory across the Navy - First computer based “fair share” personnel assignment system - Sea Survey and Shore Survey rotation program O.H. PERRY CLASS (FFG-7) 600 Ship Navy – 600K Personnel Policy: 1974 – 2008 Sailors’ sea tour length determined by a ratio of sea billets to shore billets for each particular rating and paygrade Catalyst: All Volunteer Force - Fixed PRD required to calculate inventory projections - Predictable sea tour lengths needed to recruit and retain volunteer Sailors - Sea-shore billet ratio provided a close enough approximation for tour lengths FREEDOM CLASS (LCS-1) 313 Ship Navy – 322K Personnel Policy: 2008 – 20XX Sailors’ sea tour length determined by an optimal career path for each enlisted community Catalyst: Sea-Centric Force - Reduced shore billet structure driven by fiscal constraints - SSR billet ratio metric lacks fidelity needed to manage a sea-centric force - SSF provides optimal sea tour lengths

4. t n end t n start t t n start n end IST n Sea Shore FlowOptimizing Enlisted Career Paths 30 year LOS Profile f (E, C, G, T) Billets Aligned to Sea Tours f (E, C, G, T) dt = Billets Aligned to Sea Tours E - EPA C - Continuation Rate G - Gain Distribution T - Time n - Sea Tour Index {Sea Tour 1, Sea Tour 2, …} - Sea Tour ‘n’ start month - Sea Tour ‘n’ end month - User Defined Ideal Sea Tour Length Objective Function 1: Minimize Total Time at Sea Objective Function 2: Minimize Deviation from User Defined Ideal Sea Tour Lengths Constraint: Billets Aligned to Sea Tours = Sea EPA

5. Sea Shore FlowLeaky Bucket Analogy Tour 4 Global Requirements Tour 3 Tour 2 Tour 1 Sea Shore Flow Model Projects flow from sea to shore, using - EPA Length of Service Spread - Continuation Rates - Gain Distributions Flow projection used to set tour lengths to sustain 100% manning. Accessions Continuation Rate Flow Rate  EPA Sea Tour 1 Shore Tour 1 Sea Tour 2 Attrition Rate Improve SSF by Improving Retention or Increasing Accessions 4

6. Sea Shore FlowWhat We Have Learned • Sea Shore Rotation (SSR), the ratio of sea billets to shore billets by paygrade, is not an accurate metric for determining sea tour lengths in a sea-centric Navy • Sea Shore Flow (SSF), the optimal career path for an enlisted community, determines sea tour lengths based on a rating’s entire billet structure (EPA), gain distribution, and continuation/advancement rates • The Navy is not as sea-intensive as indicated by SSR • Can improve FIT by shortening some sea tour lengths

7. Shorter First Sea Tour: - Sea billets manned by Sailors with appropriate experience level - Distributes the sea billets and tour lengths more uniformly over 30 years - Meets Fill and FIT Long First Sea Tour: - Large portion of the sea billets are filled by Sailors on their first Sea Tour - Subsequent sea tours can be shorter than currently prescribed by SSR policy - Meets Fill not FIT Sea Shore FlowObtaining Desired FIT GM Sea Shore Rotation Solution GM Sea Shore Flow Solution Optimal Sea Shore Flow Driven by Fleet Requirements

8. Sea Shore FlowWhat We Have Done • Received Enlisted Community Managers’ Inputs • Identified Sea-Intensive Ratings • Validated SDIP Candidate Ratings • Validated FC(AEGIS) Action Group Billet Strategy • Determined Current Feasibility for Geographic Stability • Identified/Quantified Shore Billet Shortages/Excesses • Developed POM-10 Sea Shore Flow Guidance • Developed POM-10 Geographic Stability Guidance • Developed POM-10 Community Health Matrix • Revised Sea Shore Flow Enlisted Career Paths Based on Detailers and Enlisted Community Managers’ Feedback • Drafted Sea Shore Flow Enlisted Career Path NAVADMIN

9. Shore Intensive vs. Sea Intensive Shore Intensive Sea Centric Sea Intensive Excess Shore Billets Military Essential? Excess Shore Billets Shore Billets Shortfalls Shore Billets Shortfall Requires 4,240 Shore Billets aligned to Sea Intensive Ratings Shore Intensive 86,000 Sailors Sea Centric 118,000 Sailors Sea Intensive 68,000 Sailors Total EPA

10. Sea Tour Length ComparisonSea Shore Flow vs Sea Shore Rotation Evolution of Sea Shore Flow SSF vs. SSR based on Rating Count : Impact to the Sailor - Predictable career path - Increased meaningful work - Improved geographic stability - Incentives for more time at sea (> 60 mos) Impact to the Navy - Manning at right experience level - Right mix of work within fleet concentration areas - Force structure determines manpower requirements SSF vs. SSR based on Billet Count : Most Sailors will see No Change or a Decrease in Sea Tour Lengths

11. Sea Shore Flow Sea Tour Lengths

12. Sea Shore Flow Sea Tour Lengths