This lesson provides a basic overview of the Inspector General (IG) Assessment Program and the Inspector General Complaint System. Provided with this lesson is a sample IG assessment, unit assessment response, IG complaint letter, and the IG response to the complaint.
Note: For the latest information on CAP IG and how it will be organized under the Board of Governors see
CAP Inspector General Program  (PowerPoint) and 
CAP IG Web Page

The assessment of Civil Air Patrol (CAP) units is authorized by AFI 90-201, Inspector General Activities, and Section 36 of the Constitution and By Laws of the Civil Air Patrol. Assessments provide the Civil Air Patrol Headquarters (CAP HQ) a status report on unit efficiency, effectiveness, and unit readiness. In this regard, CAP HQ has developed guidelines, procedures, and criteria for inspections. The common core criteria are described in CAP Regulation 123-3  and will be used to assess units.

HQ CAP-USAF/IG inspects each CAP wing approximately every 36 months. This schedule is published semiannually by 1 June and 1 December. Copies of the schedules are forwarded to the appropriate units. Regional Commander(s) and Wing Commander(s) determine the specific visit dates within the month for the inspection. Additionally, all CAP units, programs, and resources are subject to no-notice assessment at the discretion of Civil Air Patrol Commander, Headquarters CAP Executive Officer, and/or the HQ Civil Air Patrol United States Air Force Commander.
See Civil Air Patrol - Inspector General Assessment Program

A five level grading system is normally used for assessments. This rating system consists of the grades Outstanding, Excellent, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory. Outstanding ratings are give for performance or operations far exceeding mission requirements. An example would be a unit in which resources and programs are very efficiently managed with exceptional merit; with few if any deficiencies. An excellent rating is given for performance or operations that exceed mission requirements. This rating can be achieved when procedures and activities are carried out in a superior manner. Satisfactory ratings are given for performance or operations meeting mission requirements. This rating is given when resources and programs are efficiently managed and only minor deficiencies exist that do not impede the mission. When performance or operations do not meet some of the mission requirements than the unit assessments are rated Marginal. Lastly, performance or operations that do no meet mission requirements are rated Unsatisfactory. Unsatisfactory ratings are given when significant deficiencies exist that preclude or seriously limit mission accomplishment or endanger personnel or resources.

IG assessment teams also identify "Benchmark Candidates" and "Commendable Items" during assessments. Benchmark candidates are defined as the best processes observed and researched to date by the assessment team. When the team finds a highly effective concept, technique, or management practice not observed in other units or significantly better than those found in other units they are identified as "Commendable Items". These awards are reported to CAP HQ so they can be shared with other units.

Perhaps the most useful tool available to you in preparing for the IG assessment team is CAP Regulation 123-3, Inspection/Civil Air Patrol Assessment Program. This regulation gives you many of the essentials necessary for preparing for the IG team. Attachment 1 covers the overall unit details and data usually presented at an inspection in-brief. Attachment 2 outlines the format of the assessment report the IG team will send to the Wing Commander after the inspection. Attachment 3 gives the format for your reply if corrective actions need to be taken. Attached to this lesson is a sample IG assessment report and also attached is a sample of an outstanding unit response.

The following are suggestions that will keep you focused as you prepare for an IG assessment and perhaps they may trigger other ideas. These items are a collection of time proven actions that have worked in the past and will help you put your best foot forward.

Know the applicable DoD Publications, Air Force and Wing Instructions and CAP Regulations, for each of your respective functional areas. Do not rely solely on your unit compliance checklists to get you through the inspection. Compliance checklists will list the primary references that cover each functional area; for more specific details on a particular process, there is usually a CAP Regulation or Air Force Instruction.

Do not forget local directives, such as Wing Supplements and unit Operating Instructions (OIs). Many processes are further governed by wing plans and checklists. Make sure that local plans and checklists adhere to CAP directives. If you find they are not in synchronization, you should immediately notify the Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) of the product so that changes can be made to update the document.

Take advantage of crossfeed reports. One of the best ways to impress the IG is to make it obvious to your inspector that you are doing your homework. Researching other wings inspection reports and ensuring you do not have similar findings is the easiest way to have an error free assessment. Learning from others mistakes is a great way to avoid the same mistake. Each unit has a compliance monitor that has copies of reports for you to review. If not, contact your Regional CAP/IG and ask for copies of previous reports.

You do not need to read the entire report. The report index will tell you where your functional area is located. Read your functional area report and than call your counterpart at the wing that was inspected and discuss the IG findings. Your inspector should be looking at the same IG report for your functional area. Having the correct answers, verbally and in writing, is the best way to let your inspector know that you are working hard to do a great job. Also, check out the "Benchmark Candidate" and "Commendable Items" in each report. This is another great way to make your program a successful program.

Admit your mistakes and start fixing them immediately. No one wants to admit mistakes, but by reading other IG reports you will be able to identify the same problems in your unit. If this is the case, you need to act quickly and put into place necessary corrective actions. Show your inspector that you now have a handle on the problem. If the problem is not a major item and you fix it on the spot, the IG often times will not mention it in the report.

If the problem area is a major issue, you want to be careful not to "pencil and ink" changes in your program. Additionaly, now is not the time to start new programs as this could come back to haunt you if your changes end up being "eye wash". Your IG inspector will be good at finding "eye wash."

If you have a problem area, admit it. You do not want to point fingers and say it was someone elses fault of another office. Remember, we are all on the same CAP team.

You will want to report your discovery up the chain so that they can have a chance to help you get a handle on the problem. You do not want anyone to have surprises during the IG assessment. You can also call other wings and see if they may have a solution to the problem.

Remember the Civil Air Patrol core values: Integrity, Volunteer Service, Excellence, and Respect. Integrity is the very fiber of all core values without it all other core values cannot prevail. It is the cornerstone for all that is moral and just in our society. It embraces attributes such as courage, responsibility, accountability, openness, and self-respect. If you remember the Integrity core value as you prepare for the assessment you will be doing a service to the Civil Air Patrol and the United States.

Civil Air Patrol IGs derive their authority from 10 United States Code (U.S.C.) 8014 and 8020, Air Force Policy Directive (AFPD) 90-3, Inspector General - Complaints Program, Air Force Instruction (AFI) 90-301, Inspector General Complaints, and Civil Air Patrol Regulation (CAPR) 123-2, Complaints. The Air Force Chief of Staff has delegated to the Civil Air Patrol Inspector General the authority to investigate IG complaints at all levels of the organization.

The Civil Air Patrol IG Complaints Program has four goals. First, it is a leadership tool that shows command where involvement is needed to correct systematic, programmatic, or procedural weaknesses and ensures resources are used effectively and efficiently. Next, the IG Complaints Program resolves problems affecting Civil Air Patrol missions, promptly and objectively. Third, this program creates an atmosphere of trust in which issues can be objectively and fully resolved without retaliation or the fear of reprisal. Lastly, the program assists commanders in instilling confidence in Civil Air Patrol leadership.

The mission of the IG is to sustain a credible Civil Air Patrol IG complaint system by ensuring the existence of responsive complaint investigations, and Fraud, Waste, and Abuse (FWA) program characterized by objectivity, integrity, and impartiality. The IG ensures the concerns of the Civil Air Patrol members, their families, and the Civil Air Patrol are addressed through fact finding.
See CIVIL AIR PATROL COMPLAINTS PROGRAM 

Personal complaints and FWA disclosures help commanders discover and correct problems affecting the productivity and morale of personnel. Resolving the underlying cause of a complaint may prevent more severe symptoms or costly consequences, such as reduced performance, accidents, poor quality work, poor morale, or loss of resources. Even though allegations may not be substantiated, the evidence or investigation findings may reveal systemic morale, or other problems which impede efficiency and mission effectiveness.

The IG plays an important role with the Wing Commander. They are the "eyes and ears" of the commander, keeping the commander informed of potential areas of concern as reflected by trends based on analysis of complaint data. The IG functions as the ombudsman, fact-finder, and honest broker in the resolution of complaints. They educate and train commanders and members of the Civil Air Patrol on their rights and responsibilities in regard to the CAP IG system. The IG helps commanders prevent, detect, and correct fraud, waste and abuse, and mismanagement. To fulfill these roles, the IG is an integral member of the commander's staff and has access to the commander. The independence of the IG is firmly established and supported, overcoming any perceived lack of autonomy that would discourage potential complaints and preclude disclosures of wrongdoing from being brought to the attention of the IG.

Commanders have no authority to take a complaint submitted to an IG for disposition and transfer it to command channels for resolution by a commander-directed inquiry or investigation. Only complainants may elect to withdraw a complaint from IG channels and then file it through command channels for resolution. However, IGs may elect to proceed with an investigation if allegations clearly identify a recognizable wrong or a violation of law, policy, procedure, or regulation. There is one exception: Allegations of reprisal must be investigated within IG channels.

Generally, IGs should not accept complaints that belong in another Air Force investigative or grievance channel. For example: Complaints of discrimination, sexual abuse or complaints involving criminal conduct are immediately forwarded to the National Headquarters Civil Air Patrol General Council (NHQ CAP/GC). NHQ CAP/GC will notify appropriate Air Force authorities when DoD directives are involved. No investigation shall occur unless and until specifically authorized by NHQ CAP/GC (See CAPR 39-1, Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs; CAPR 52-10, CAP Cadet Protection Policy; and CAPR 52-16, Cadet Program Management).

The IG will investigate and process complaints in accordance with the applicable regulations involving the following subjects. Membership termination or non-renewal (see CAPR 35-3, Membership Termination and CAPM 39-2). Membership suspension or suspension from duty status (see CAPR 35-1, Assignment and Duty Status). Suspension or removal from corporate office (see CAPR 35-8, National Appeal Board). Suspension or removal from CAP flying privileges (see CAPR 60-1, CAP Flight Management). Lastly, Cadet sexual abuse, physical abuse and hazing (see CAPR 52-10 and CAPR 52-16).

All commanders possess inherent authority to investigate matters or incidents under their jurisdiction unless preempted by a higher authority. The primary purpose of a Commander Directed Investigation and Inquiry (CDI) is to gather, analyze, and record relevant information about matters of primary interest to command authorities. Commanders may refer issues/allegations to an IG to obtain the protection and privileged status an IG report provides for complainants only if the issues/allegations are appropriate for IG action. Once transferred into the IG system, the investigation is no longer commander-directed and becomes an official IG complaint. Commanders should not refer suspected criminal or subversive activities or allegations to IG channels.

To provide an opportunity for the internal resolution of disputes, unit commanders are encouraged to maintain an open door policy for the members of their respective units. Members must follow the chain of command. Commanders and members should make every attempt to resolve problems, conflicts, and disputes within CAP at the lowest unit level possible.

Members shall not send copies of complaints, or correspondence related to complaints, to other CAP members, including any member of the national CAP staff and/or the USAF staff. However, nothing in this lesson should be interpreted as restricting a member's right to communicate with elected or regulatory federal, state, and local governmental and local governmental officials or legal counsel.

All complaints must be in writing, dated and signed by the complainant. E-mail complaints require a written follow up with a signature within 5 days. Complaints must be accompanied by all available documentation in the possession or control of the complainant. Priority investigations may be initiated upon receipt of a verbal or e-mail complaint, which must be followed by a written complaint submitted within 5 days. Only members have the right to file complaints, with the exception that parents or legal guardians may submit complaints on behalf of cadet members.

Complaints shall be submitted to the wing inspector general to which the member is assigned (group inspector general in those wings with groups). Should the complaint be against the wing commander or wing inspector general, the complaint shall be filed with the region inspector general. Complaints against the group commander or group inspector general shall be filed with the wing inspector general.

Complaints against the region inspector general, members of the CAP National Executive committee, and members assigned to National Headquarters shall be submitted directly to the National Commander. No other complaints may be submitted directly to the National Commander.

The complainant shall submit the complaint within 60 days of the occurrence or action upon which the complaint is based. Complaints may be delivered personally, by mail, or by e-mail. The date of actual receipt or 3 days following the date of the postmark, which ever is earlier, is the effective date of the complaint.

Complainants, respondents, and witnesses are expected to be truthful in all matters concerning an investigation. Failure to be truthful, to respond, or to cooperate fully in an investigation or the submission of a frivolous complaint may cause termination of membership privileges or other privileges provided by CAP directives.

Receipt of a complaint shall be acknowledged in writing by the inspector general or investigative officer assigned investigative officer within 30 days. The inspector general will notify notify the respondent's commander of the complaint and, on behalf of the commander, shall either personally investigate the complaint, or cause an investigation to be completed. Upon initiation of an investigation, the inspector general or investigative officer shall provide the respondent a short, plain statement of the general nature of the complaint and that the complaint is under investigation. The identity of the complainant shall remain confidential.

Since the purpose of an investigation is to seek a fair and rightful conclusion, complainants, respondents, and witnesses, who are CAP members, are required to cooperate fully. Failure to respond with truthful and complete information or any action to impede the process of the investigation in any way may subject a member to disciplinary action including termination of membership. Every individual providing evidence in an investigation will sign the Read In Document. There is no requirement for legal representation, recorded testimony, formal hearing, or application of the rules of evidence. If any complainant, respondent or witness fails to appear after being properly notified, the investigation should proceed without their input.

Upon completion of an investigation the inspector general or investigative officer will submit written findings and recommendations to the appropriate commander. The complaint conclusion will be classified in one of the following categories: UNFOUNDED - The inquiry determined that the act or acts complained of did not occur. EXONERATED - The inquiry revealed that the acts complained or occurred but were justified according to applicable directives, and the action was proper. INCONCLUSIVE - The inquiry failed to establish the facts of the allegation or to disclose sufficient information to prove or disprove the allegation. SUSTAINED - The inquiry disclosed substantial evidence or significant amount of information in support of the allegation made in the complaint.

Upon receipt of the findings and any recommendations, and when the commander is satisfied that the complaint has been fully investigated, the commander will provide the complainant and the respondent with a written response stating the commander's decision by official memorandum.

If either the complainant or respondent desires a review of a commander's decision, the person requesting the review shall forward, with the request for review, the following to the next higher commander: A copy of the complaint, the findings, and the decision. A detailed, written statement enumerating, with supporting information, each alleged error in the findings or decision. Requests for review must be submitted within 30 days of the receipt of the decision. The reviewing commander upon good cause shown may extend this deadline.

The commander considering the request for review may: affirm or modify the decision that has been sent for review; or in the event the reviewing commander determines that additional information is required, the commander shall instruct the inspector general to gather the information necessary to complete the review.

Upon receipt of the information requested and once the reviewing commander is satisfied that the complaint has been fully investigated, a decision, in writing, setting forth the reviewing commander's findings and decision must be furnished to the parties as well as to the commander who made the initial decision.

Reviews of findings and decisions may continue up the chain of command until the review reaches the region commander whose decision will be final.

No review or referral of any complaint to the National Commander is authorized except those initially filed against a regional inspector genera, National Executive Committee members, or members assigned to National Headquarters. The decision of the National Commander on any such complaint will be final.

This lesson provided a basic overview of the Inspector General (IG) programs. We discussed the Assessment Program as described in CAPR 123-3, the assessment schedule, grading system, applicable publications, and crossfeed reports. Additionally, we discussed how the IG maintains a credible Civil Air Patrol IG complaint system by ensuring the existence of responsive complaint investigation process.