{
  "id": "97-217",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "97-217",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 316331,
      "date": "1997-02-06",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:59:57.327941",
      "title": "The DOD Service Academies: Issues for Congress",
      "summary": "This document also available in  PDF Image .\n  Congress has exercised close oversight over the DOD service academies (the Military Academy\nat West Point, NY; the Naval Academy at Annapolis, MD; and the Air Force Academy at Colorado\nSprings, CO) since West Point was founded in 1802. Seventy-five percent of academy appointments\nare made by Members of Congress. There has been considerable legislation affecting academy\nprograms since the late 1980s. There has also been controversy over the moral and ethical standards\nand atmosphere at the academies. Both reflect a broader issue -- whether the special status of the\nacademies and their graduates in their services, and within the nation and the American people, adds\nvalue to the officer accession system commensurate with their costs. \n  Academy graduates cost DOD more in appropriated funds than those from college Reserve\nOfficer Training Corps (ROTC) or through Officer Candidate Schools (OCS). The issue is whether\nthe product is worth the cost, and whether factors other than costs are significant. The academies\naccept high-quality young men and women; they are among the most competitive colleges in the\nnation. Academy graduates outperform ROTC and OCS officers in terms of promotion and\nretention. The difference is not large, however, and it is impossible to attribute the difference\ndirectly to the academy background.\n  Since 1989, several aspects of academy programs and costs have been the object of\ncongressional review and action. These include whether academy graduates should receive regular\nor reserve commissions; the appropriate active duty service obligation for academy graduates; the\nmix of military and civilian faculty at the academies; problems related to women and minorities at\nthe academies; the academy prep schools; and academy athletic programs.\n  The long-standing reputation of the academies for high ethical standards is being questioned\nmore than at any time in the past several decades. It is not clear, however, if the incidence of\nmisconduct involving academy students has, in fact, risen, or the cause of the rise if it does exist. \nMany cite both broader social problems and aspects of the academies' environment which may not\nsufficiently reinforce moral and ethical standards. There are indications that many incidents of\nmisconduct are related to relations between male and female students.\n  Options for Congress include: (1) doing nothing, assuming major problems are being\nadequately addressed and minor ones can be solved administratively; (2) insuring that minor reforms\nnot fundamentally changing the academies are undertaken; (3) cutting or increasing enrollment; (4)\nmaking the academies exclusively military schools for persons already having undergraduate\ndegrees; (5) adding graduate education to the academies; and (6) abolishing the academies altogether. \nGiven the centrality of the academies in the institutional life of the armed forces, the onus of\ndemonstrating the worth of major change in their roles may lie",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/97-217",
          "sha1": "4cd9921af044d8ba4e10f38148d920f399b3d14b",
          "filename": "files/19970206_97-217_4cd9921af044d8ba4e10f38148d920f399b3d14b.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/19970206_97-217_4cd9921af044d8ba4e10f38148d920f399b3d14b.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": []
}