A LOOK AT THE ADVANCEMENT RECORD OF THE ALUMNI FROM THE FIRST 5 JOT CLASSES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 14, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 25, 2002
• Sequence Number: 25
• Content Type: REPORT

Approve4or Release 2005 Elk-RDP80-Q 26R000100140025-3
wntluENiIAL
A Look At The Advancement Record
21 ME ' .
Al unni From. The First 5 JIDT Classes
INTROION
Through the years quite a few studies have been made of JOT's: their
academic backgrounds, training, attrition, distribution among components, etc.
Here is yet another to satisfy some of our interest in how rapidly former JOT's
are add in the Agency and how their progress compares with that of their
contempo cries Who came into the organization through other avenues.
To allow JOT's a reasonable time to make their marks before having their
progress subjected to close scrutiny, this stud)' is limited to the "alumni" of
the first 5 JOT classes -- i.e., these hired from 1 January 1951 to 1 January
1956. All, of them have now had 8-13 years to become established in the Agency
and the youngest is at least 30 years of age. Therefore, their records are
legitimate targets of interest and it is fair to make some comparative observa-
tions about them.
FACTS
To begin with, let's bare a few facts about our first 5 JOT classes. How
many trainees came into each class and how many still ruin? Are they sale,
female, military? Dote: All statistics shown below were correct as of 31 Dec -
ber 1963]
CLASS OF
Hired
Non-Mil. male
21
Military
13
Pelaate
2
TOTAL
41
CLASS OF
1952
On
Duty
Hired
Pa
Duty
13
25
16
2
26
8
1
12
2
16
63
26
CLASS OF
on
Hired Duty
21 12
2$ #
1
48 17
CLAD t
1954
On
Hired Duty
30 10
15 8
1 0
46 18
RECAP
Non-Mil. Mule
Military
Female
Hired
211142
126
88
28
on Duty
96
66
26
4
% On Ditty
40%
52%
30%
1
CLASS OF
1955
on
Hired Duty
29
1
10 14.
.2 0
44 19
Next, let' a look at the present status of - the 96 "alai." from the first
5 classes -t grads, age, and asreer designation. TABS A, B, C, D, and E contain
25X1 By CONE
Da0 llr 7tAE ve: J
TIAL
0516 C01r4P ------ - ~~' ~-~"`
05th O WS '~ PA'i'tS ----L-1I~6C C~3$ `"-"
l GROUP I
l 0 NGRAMNG
3/ DP80
0 8 6
e
-
XT %KVJIr!ZWSLU--L-
Q? O A S 1io9 -
JUST d0 s
 ApproveUor Release 20
class rosters which give this information as of 31 December 1963- It can be
sumiarized as follows:
GRADE
30-34
GO-155
-
GS-14
1
GS-13
10
GS-12
20
GS-11
3
TOTAL
34
AGE GROUPS
35-39 40-" 45-I TOTAL
6 2 1 7
- 12
16 2 1 29
22 1 1 44
1 - - - I.
49 10 3 96
Career Group
G8-15
DCI
1
UDS&T
DDS
MI
5
DDP
1
TOTAL
7
GS-1
GS-12 GS-11 TOTAL
1
2 2
1 1 2 4
7 10 1 1 24
4 16 41 2
12 29 4 96
Finally, let's make some comparisons between the progress of our JOT
"alumni" and their contemporaries. Efforts to portray such comparisons "in depth?
can lead to some pretty complex research and in the long run might have little,
if any, more value than rough measurements which compare JOT "alimmi" against
other employees of the same sex and career service group, using only an age-grade
index as the measuring device. Therefore, let's see what we get with just the
age-grade index.
Since there are only 1 female aloe in our group, comparisons of their
progress can be brief. Two are GS-12 "D" careerists, ages 39 and 40. Two are
11
.
OCI careerists, a 39 year old GS-13 and a 34 year old G8-
Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
25X1
 25X1 Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
 Approved- Release 20054" BA-RDP80-03J6R000100140025-3
CONCLUSIONS
Since many of the 96 JOT's in our. study group are still relatively young and
8-13 years represent a fairly short time for their careers to unfold, it is ob-
viously too early to attempt any "final, verdict" regarding the caliber of the
first 5 JOT classes. Even so, perhaps some useful observations can be offered.
First, though, let's dispose of the question as to whether the 96 alumni
still remaining from the first 5 JOT classes are truly representative of the
original membership of these classes. Or did the best ones get away? All avail-
able evidence indicates that the 96 are very nearly a scaled-down mirror image of
the total group. According to the A&F Staff, the average test scores for the re-
maining members of each class are virtually identical with the average scores for
the entire class in each case. And a rough look at the age distribution and edu-
cational level of each class shows no significant difference between those who
left and those who stayed.
Now, what about those 96? Were they really "executive trainees", as some
thought when they were first brought on duty, or were they simply junior officers
cast in the same mold as those who followed in later JOT classes? The answer
seems fairly plain. They were the initial members of what has became a sound,
well established junior officer program. And it is by no means unlikely that
later classes, particularly the 1956-61 groups, will produce higher proportions
of Agency "executives" from among their ranks than will the first 5 JOT classes.
So far the advancement of the 96 members of our study group has been well
above average Agency rates. Comparative age-grade tables suggest that they were
carefully selected and, on the whole, are making very good progress. Only 3 ob-
vious "laggards" show up on the charts. At the saute time however no "whiz kids"
appear, as evidenced by the fact that only 7 members of the group have reached
GS-15, the youngest of wham is 36. It thus appears that the group is likely to
produce a high proportion of "solid performers" but few "stars."
Some interesting differences show up in the comparative progress of DDI ver-
sus DDP members of the study group. 5 of the 24 alumni in DDI are GS-15's and 7
have reached GS-14 while but 1 of the 65 DDP members is at GS.-15 and only 4 have
reached GS-14. Before one is tempted to conclude that professionals simply ad-
vance more rapidly in DDI, a look at average age-grade relationships is in order;
they are virtually the same for both DDI and DDP.
Another comment that might be offered is that JOT alumni, despite their
fairly significant numbers, have yet realty to break into the "executive" ranks
of DDP. Only 6 have risen above GS-13 and 3 of them are age 40 or more. Yet DDP
is richly supplied with young non..JOT's who occupy "executive" chairs. =non- 25X1
JOT's below age 40 hold positions 08--.k or above. DDI, on the other hand, has
opened its executive doors scamewhat more readily to JOT's. Whether these differ-
ences between the Directorates are "enviro>ental" or simply reflect differences
in the relative ability of the alumni each received from the first 5 JOT classes
remains to be seen.
Approved For Release 20Q0~29E~IA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
 STAT Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
 ll
Approved fps` Release 2003/A%Rk A-RDP80-01,82,6R000100140025-3
Class of 1951
Name
As amber 1963
Awe, Career Desigr>ation
15 46 D
25X1A9A
MI l i t4Wy JOT
Fema.e
15 39 Et,
14 40 D
14 38 8P
14 37 IN
.14 36 D
14 35 IOB
14, 35 IR
13 4+5 D
.13 38 R
.13 37 D
13, 36 8
12 40 D
12 36 D
12 34 D
12 33 D
Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
 Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
SECRET
Class of 1952
25X1A9A
* Military JOT
Female
An of 31 December 1963
Grade
Career Designation
~ffe
15 40 IN
15 40 Ic
15 38 Ic
15 37 ID
15 36 IN
14 41 D
14 39 D
14 33 IR
13 44 Ic
13 40 D
13 39 IC
13 38 IR
13 37 R
13 37 D
13 34 D
13 33 IOC
13 33 D
13 33 Ic
12 39 D
12 38 D
12 37 D
12 35 D
12 34 D
12 34 ST
12 33 D
12 32 D
Approved For Release 2SECRET9 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
 Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
SECRET
Maas of 1953
* Military JOT
Female
As of 31 December 1963
A
Career Detsigmtion
14 43 IR
14 41 IC
14 40 IR
13 37 Ic
13 37 D
13 34 I0c
13 33 IN
12 46 D
12 39 IR
12 36 D
12 35 D
12 35 D
12 34 D
12 33 D
12 33 D
.12 32 D
11 34
Approved For Release 20Q.3(~~,(?.~ : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
 Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
sue
tUNUDENTIAL
Class of 1954
As of 31 December 1963
25X1A9A
Grade Age Career Designation
13 39 D
13 37 D
13 37 7R
13 36 D
13 35 D
13 35 D
13 35 D
12 39 D
12 37 D
12 36 D
12 36 D
12 35 D
12 34 D
12 32 D
12 32 SP
12 31 D
12 31 D
12 31 D
* Military JOT
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 200 / . CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
 Approved For Release 2003/01/29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
25X1A9A
* Military JOT
Class of 1955
As of 31 December 1963
Grade
a
Career Designation
13
39
D
13
37
IR
13
34
D
13
33
D
12
38
D
12
38
D
12
37
D
12
36
D
12
36
D
12
35
D
12
35
D
12
35
D
12
34
D
12
33
D
12
31
D
12
30
D
1l
38
D
11
31
D
u
30
D
J
Approved For Release 2003/0,V29 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000100140025-3
RET