Improved Retention has Reduced
Enlisted Personnel Turnover

A substantial reduction in required intakes of new personnel has been one of the direct benefits resulting from the uptrend in enlisted retention.

As shown on the chart, total new enlisted intake s averaged about 100,000 lower in Fiscal Years 1958 and 1959 than in 1957. About half of the reduction was due to the strength reduction during this period. However, the remainder, averaging about 50,000 per year, was directly due to the increase in enlisted retention rates since Fiscal Year 1957.

Similarly, projected intakes in Fiscal Years 1960-63 are estimated at about 60,000 less per year than would have been required under 1957 retention experience.

These reductions in needs for new personnel are the combined effect of increased reenlistment rates and of longer terms of service.

III. PERSONNEL QUALITY

Over-all Experience Level has been Raised

The general improvement in enlisted retention since FY 1957 has resulted in a more seasoned enlisted force. At the beginning of Fiscal Year 1957, only 34% of all enlisted personnel in the Armed Services were career personnel with four or more years of service. By the middle of Fiscal Year 1959, this proportion had risen to 45%. The separate trends by Service are shown in the accompanying chart.

Experience Level

PERCENT OF TOTAL ENLISTED PERSONNEL WITH FOUR OR MORE YEARS OF SERVICE, FY 1957-1959

Mental Quality Higher

As shown in the top panel of the accompanying chart, all Services have substantially reduced the percentage of new intakes from Mental Group IV -- the lowest acceptable mental group. These reductions were made possible by enactment of P. L. 85-564 (authorizing increases in induction standards), and by higher standards of enlistment under revised Department of Defense policies.

In addition, intensive efforts have been made to screen out personnel with limited potential for training and performance in required military skills. During Fiscal Year 1958, over 100,000 low-potential personnel were separated under special early release programs. Standards of reenlistment were also generally tightened, based on aptitude and performance criteria.

The combined result of these measures has been a consistent increase in the proportion of higher quality personnel on active duty as shown in the bottom panel of the chart.

16