An Analysis of the Populations of the Air Force's Medical and Professional Officer Corps

Edward G. Keating, H. G. Massey, Judith D. Mele, Benjamin F. Mundell

ResearchPublished Jun 9, 2010

Since the advent of the all-volunteer force, one of the foremost personnel challenges of the U.S. Air Force has been recruiting and retaining an adequate number of medical and professional officers in the Air Force’s seven medical and professional officer corps: the Biomedical Sciences Corps (BSC), the Chaplain Corps, the Dental Corps, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps (attorneys), the Medical Corps (physicians), the Medical Service Corps (MSC), and the Nurse Corps. For each of these corps, there are highly similar jobs in the private sector, so attracting and retaining these corps’ officers is a constant challenge. This report analyzes all seven Air Force medical and professional officer corps and their relative statuses with regard to end strengths, accession levels, promotion flow, and attrition since the late 1970s. The authors find that recent accession and retention trends have been most adverse in the Air Force’s Nurse Corps, while the MSC and the JAG Corps appear to have the most stable populations.

Topics

Document Details

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Keating, Edward G., H. G. Massey, Judith D. Mele, and Benjamin F. Mundell, An Analysis of the Populations of the Air Force's Medical and Professional Officer Corps. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2010. https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR782.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Air Force and conducted by RAND Project AIR FORCE.

This publication is part of the RAND technical report series. RAND technical reports, products of RAND from 2003 to 2011, presented research findings on a topic limited in scope or intended for a narrow audience; discussions of the methodology employed in research; literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; and preliminary findings. All RAND technical reports were subject to rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.