15 Nominations per MOC per Academy - Up from 10

[A1Janitor]

Interesting thought…USNA has been dispelling the rumor to MOCs for years that USNA does not “find” a nomination for those with LOAs. Another piece of language that could have been included would be that a candidate who receives an LOA (guaranteed offer of appointment) by an SA would not count towards the 10 (or now 15) nominees, provided it occurred/was submitted before January 31. There would have to be an assumption that a MOC would still due their due diligence to make sure the LOA candidate deserves/earns the nomination.

I have always had a suspicion after my son got an LOA that they are the discretionary appointments. When the slates are settled, the LOA is assigned to the MOC if they won the slate, opening up a discretionary spot.

But what you suggest - not counting LOAs as one of the ten (15) - does that really change the appointments (other than for highly competitive districts that have ten appointments with more top national candidates that didn’t get noms)?

Honestly - why bother with the nom process (other than the law)? They can still have slates and appoint whoever they want, following the geography requirements of the law.

 

[usnabgo08]

I have always had a suspicion after my son got an LOA that they are the discretionary appointments. When the slates are settled, the LOA is assigned to the MOC if they won the slate, opening up a discretionary spot.

But what you suggest - not counting LOAs as one of the ten (15) - does that really change the appointments (other than for highly competitive districts that have ten appointments with more top national candidates that didn’t get noms)?

Honestly - why bother with the nom process (other than the law)? They can still have slates and appoint whoever they want, following the geography requirements of the law.

What I’m suggesting was IF an LOA candidate did NOT get any nominations because the MOCs were operating under a notion that USNA would “find” the candidate one, then allowing them to list an LOA candidate without it counting against the 10/15 would eliminate this issue of LOA candidates not receiving an appointment (assuming they met all other conditions). In the grand scheme, it would also likely to be a small number. However, as we know there have been LOA candidates/DS/DDs who had LOAs, but no nomination…and subsequently did not receive an appointment.

 

[S_Austin]

I would be surprised if this results in more appointments from competitive districts. There already is an over representation of those areas at USNA. USNA is looking to increase appointments from underrepresented districts. In the end, more candidates will be in the mix but #11-15 aren’t likely to be appointed.

Is there a limit that each MOC can only 5 cadets per academy at any given time?

 

[IronmanDaremo]

Yes. ^^

 

[time2]

And where a NOM is issued isn't necessarily where it is charged since there are various sources for NOM's.

I don't follow that this change will result in MORE appointments from competitive districts. Since it has already been indicated total class size is staying the SAME, that would tend to indicate FEWER appointments from less competitive areas. For the math to work, every "+" would need a corresponding "-". Not sure how that could be the intent and would seem to result in an unintended consequence.

 

[A1Janitor]

And where a NOM is issued isn't necessarily where it is charged since there are various sources for NOM's.

I don't follow that this change will result in MORE appointments from competitive districts. Since it has already been indicated total class size is staying the SAME, that would tend to indicate FEWER appointments from less competitive areas. For the math to work, every "+" would need a corresponding "-". Not sure how that could be the intent and would seem to result in an unintended consequence.

Just the case of the LOA without nom gives us this.

If the LOA now gets the nom - do they swap out someone from the same slate, or a lesser candidate somewhere else?

5 additional noms would have had no effect on my son’s slate - it wasn’t competitive and only had 6 nominations.

 

[NavyHoops]

And where a NOM is issued isn't necessarily where it is charged since there are various sources for NOM's.

I don't follow that this change will result in MORE appointments from competitive districts. Since it has already been indicated total class size is staying the SAME, that would tend to indicate FEWER appointments from less competitive areas. For the math to work, every "+" would need a corresponding "-". Not sure how that could be the intent and would seem to result in an unintended consequence.

I think this is to be seen. I think in some of the very highly competitive districts it could lead to a few more appointments from the top 150. In the top 5 districts the stats on those slates are pretty crazy. It could lead to a few more appointments from the national pool. Overall, I really don’t think it will change things much.

 

[Wahoo Fan]

I have talked with various people who are from less competitive districts about the situation when one lives in an ultra-competitive district. I don’t think it is easy to describe what it is like to go through the process being from one of these areas where a nomination is really difficult to come by. So if you don’t get it, that is okay, and I don’t think arguing about it is helpful. But I am very glad to hear that the number is going from 10 to 15 because that is great news for some future applicants.

 

[USMC Crayons]

It’s possible the admissions board deferred some of these decisions pending first semester senior year transcripts or for additional college testing scores to come in before they decide an individual should go to NAPS/prep (and when these updates come in…it isn’t like all of the other candidates’ packages go to the side…goes back into some queue). Additionally, there is now a NAPS waitlist. It isn’t as cookie cutter like you make it out to be. I get that everyone wants transparency and to know how every decision is made behind the admissions walls…but that isn’t the model for USNA admissions.

I didn't imply that it was cookie cutter, and frankly not really looking for transparency...it's the Naval Academies' ship and they can steer it any way that they want to. However, I will say that when you ask a candidate on 2/5 (after they know no dice on a nomination) for high school course work and then make them wait 73 days with radio silence only to get a turn down, that's just being cruel. That's almost certainly a decision that could have been made much sooner. It's tough enough to wait that long when you know at least you have a nomination in hand and know that you have a chance, but that wait is torture when you have to deal with the fact that you are empty handed. The stakes have never been higher in college admissions, costs keep going up, and competition is unreal. The least USNA could do is cut the "dead" wood as soon after 1/31 as possible so people can move on.

 

[usnabgo08]

I didn't imply that it was cookie cutter, and frankly not really looking for transparency...it's the Naval Academies' ship and they can steer it any way that they want to. However, I will say that when you ask a candidate on 2/5 (after they know no dice on a nomination) for high school course work and then make them wait 73 days with radio silence only to get a turn down, that's just being cruel. That's almost certainly a decision that could have been made much sooner. It's tough enough to wait that long when you know at least you have a nomination in hand and know that you have a chance, but that wait is torture when you have to deal with the fact that you are empty handed. The stakes have never been higher in college admissions, costs keep going up, and competition is unreal. The least USNA could do is cut the "dead" wood as soon after 1/31 as possible so people can move on.

There are a lot of assumptions being made here and no one on this forum has the exact insights on how, why, and when some decisions are being made. However, if you have suggestions on how to improve the process, you (or anyone else) are certainly welcome to provide that feedback to the admissions office.

 

[Full Steam]

I think this is to be seen. I think in some of the very highly competitive districts it could lead to a few more appointments from the top 150. In the top 5 districts the stats on those slates are pretty crazy. It could lead to a few more appointments from the national pool. Overall, I really don’t think it will change things much.

The NDAA also increased the number of additional appointments from the qualified alternate pool to 200 (from 150).

 

[OldRetSWO]

I didn't imply that it was cookie cutter, and frankly not really looking for transparency...it's the Naval Academies' ship and they can steer it any way that they want to. However, I will say that when you ask a candidate on 2/5 (after they know no dice on a nomination) for high school course work and then make them wait 73 days with radio silence only to get a turn down, that's just being cruel. That's almost certainly a decision that could have been made much sooner. It's tough enough to wait that long when you know at least you have a nomination in hand and know that you have a chance, but that wait is torture when you have to deal with the fact that you are empty handed. The stakes have never been higher in college admissions, costs keep going up, and competition is unreal. The least USNA could do is cut the "dead" wood as soon after 1/31 as possible so people can move on.

Note that this is not a "USNA Change" it is a USNA/USMA/USAFA change that CONGRESS imposed on the Department of Defense.