The six-month independent review, commissioned by Undersecretary of Defense Anthony Tata in December, was originally set to be performed by the Institute for Defense Analyses, a Washington, D.C.-area nonprofit that administers three research centers supported by federal funding. The effectiveness study, according to a Pentagon official, was set to kick off with the 10-year anniversary of Defense Secretary Ash Carter’s lifting of the ban on women in ground combat roles at the end of 2015.

This review, the official told Military Times on Monday, is “in line with standard [Department of War] practice for evaluating the effects of significant policy changes.”

But a reevaluation of study requirements has led to a reassignment of the work, the official said.

“The Department has since recognized the need to incorporate combat-relevant field tests, based on established tasks, conditions, and standards, into the independent review to produce the comprehensive data required for this effort,” the official said. “DoW has engaged the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory to assume responsibility for the study from IDA, effective April 2026. JHU/APL, a University Affiliated Research Center, has the capability to examine existing personnel and operational data, as well as conduct the field tests, ensuring a unified effort that will further posture our warfighters to meet mission objectives.”

JHU/APL will now complete work over the next 12 months to inform what’s now being called the “Performance, Readiness, and Integrated Mission Effectiveness Assessment,” according to the Pentagon. The assessment will use established analytical techniques “to identify the dominant drivers of combat performance variance in ground combat units and provide evidence-based findings to inform force design, training, physical standards, and readiness decisions,” the official said.

A request for information to JHU/APL for more details on the study and data collection milestones did not receive an immediate response.

Pentagon officials emphasized the long tradition of conducting reviews of policy changes, citing specifically an internal assessment of the 2010 Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal that was conducted in 2021, and reviews by the Pentagon-connected Rand Corporation of the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986 and the Blended Retirement System of 2015.

Historically, these analyses have been used to evaluate major changes and their impacts, but have not carried with them the possibility of reopening the matter for potential reversal. It’s not clear that the same considerations are in play here.

In a December memo first reported on by NPR, Tata described the review as gauging “the operational effectiveness of ground combat” elements and the impact of permitting women to enter the roles.

Leaders of the Army and Marine Corps were asked to provide the Institute for Defense Analyses with a broad slate of data ranging from training performance to command climate; and metrics showing individual service members’ readiness to deploy.

An email from Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson at the time also appeared to open the door to changes based on the review, saying the Pentagon “will not compromise standards to satisfy quotas or an ideological agenda — this is common sense.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth expressed opposition to women serving in combat roles in his 2024 book “The War on Warriors,” saying they couldn’t meet the physical requirement and adding, “We need moms. But not in the military, especially in combat units.”

His Senate confirmation hearing in 2025 softened the stance. He said then that women would continue to have access to ground combat roles, “given the standards remain high.”

In September, he announced that ground combat jobs would be reserved for those who meet “the highest male standard.”

The Pentagon official said the pending combat effectiveness review, now to be carried out by JHU/APL, showcased the military’s commitment to “continuous learning and improvement.”

“These types of studies enable the Department to maximize our efforts in support of peace through strength,” the Pentagon official said Monday. “The ‘Performance, Readiness, and Integrated Mission Effectiveness Assessment’ is expected to further this tradition, increasing the lethality and readiness of the force.”

The 29-year-old soldier and Olympic pairs skater currently preparing to compete in the Milan Cortina Games is the first figure skater in the Army’s program that nurtures elite athletic talent, according to the program director.

Willie Wilson, director of the World Class Athlete Program, told Military Times in a phone interview from Italy that Howe, who enlisted in October 2024 and graduated boot camp in February 2025 as a Motor Transport Operator, had been excited to join the ranks.

“He has done a great job of not only representing WCAP, but also representing the Army,” Wilson said.

WCAP, which dates to 1997, offers athletes from a broad range of disciplines the opportunity to train and compete while benefiting from elite in-house coaching while receiving a military paycheck. For U.S. athletes, who don’t receive any money from the government to compete in the Olympics and typically have to pay out of pocket for equipment, coaching and other needs, this can be a pretty attractive deal. In return, the athletes stay current on typical military training and requirements and serve in addition as an outreach and recruiting branch.

“They hold clinics, speak to high school and college audiences, talk with athletic teams and make appearances in support of Army recruiting stations,” WCAP says on its website.

At the Milan Cortina Games, the Army has six WCAP members participating, including Howe and bobsledder Frank Del Duca, who, alongside speedskater Erin Jackson, was selected by fellow athletes to carry the U.S. flag in the Olympic opening ceremonies Feb. 6. The Air Force also sent two members of its WCAP to the Games.

Howe, who has skated with partner Emily Chan since 2019, narrowly made it to the Olympics following a disappointing eighth-place finish in the short program at the U.S. Figure Skating Championships in January. They squeaked into a qualifying position after finishing third in the free skate program.

“The roller coaster of the trials really opened my eyes,” Howe, who like other athletes is under a media blackout until the conclusion of the Olympics, said in an Army release. “Looking back at how the competition unfolded and how we were ultimately named to the team, we’re grateful and honored. Now we want to do our best representing the Army and the United States.”

This season, he and Chan are skating to the Italian “Caruso,” performed by Josh Groban, in their short program, and “Unchained Melody” from “Ghost: The Musical” in their free skate.

In an interview with U.S. Figure Skating last November, Howe acknowledged that taking time out to complete Army Basic Training and follow-on job requirements had come with its challenges.

“Even though I learned how to be an 88M, my current duty is to maintain a high level of military standard and a high level of athletic standard as they both now coincide with each other,” he said in the interview. “Every day I check in remotely with my platoon sergeant, and I take on each training day as an opportunity to fulfill my duties as that soldier-athlete.”

When he finally returned to training last June, he said, he came with an additional set of skills — beyond those required to operate and maintain the vehicles in the Army’s motor pool.

“I started looking at skating from a soldier’s perspective and not just an athlete. Taking on the responsibility to compete at the highest level — not just for Team USA but also for the Army — is a different level of commitment,” he said. “Working with my partner Emily every day isn’t just a job; it feels like a duty. Approaching training with that mindset has changed how I work and helped me excel.”

According to Army releases, Howe plans to join the Chaplain Candidate Program after finishing his undergraduate degree, begun last year. Eventually, he said, he plans to earn his Master of Divinity.

Wilson, who is attending his eighth Olympics since joining the program in 2007, said Army Secretary Dan Driscoll had already visited the Games to encourage and congratulate the athletes. While the competitors will return to the U.S. at different times following their events, Wilson said the camaraderie and team spirit was strong and would be capped off with a get-together at WCAP headquarters in Colorado Springs later this year.

While WCAP wants its athletes to do as well as they can, it’s a lower-pressure environment than most sports sponsorship programs.

“If your best today is an Olympic gold medal, we’re pretty excited about that,” Wilson said. “But if your best turns out to be a sixth-place performance, we’re honored that you’re here and proud of you, and we would consider that success within the program.”

The pairs skating competition begins Feb. 15.

Speaking at an event hosted by the Association of the United States Army on Tuesday, Gen. Randy George touted the M1E3, which last week made its debut as a pre-prototype at the Detroit Auto Show.

“Obviously, not as fast as the Chevy ZR1,” George said, referring to the flashy Corvette also on display at the show. “But this is a tank that can also hit a target. So it won’t meet that quarter-mile speed, but I know it can hit a target in a tenth of a second at a quarter mile.

The M1E3 is reaching prototype stage six years early, George said, adding that new features are also coming to light.

The “Formula One cockpit” contains a driver interface that “looks like an X-Box controller,” George said, referring to the control device made by Fanatec – a company that designs F1 simulator controls and many popular video game cockpits.

“It’s modular, so it can be updated,” George added.

He also touted the engine made by Caterpillar, transmission made by Michigan-based company SAPA and software through “a bunch of tech companies” enlisted to increase the tank’s awareness and effectiveness.

In a release published from the show, Army officials revealed that the M1E3 would feature GenAI among “a suite of AI-powered digital engineering tools” to help integrate other technologies more quickly and keep it up to date in a perpetually changing modern battlefield.

Unlike the current Abrams, which has a four-person crew including a loader, the M1E3 will have a crew of three and an autoloader, which will help the notoriously heavy Abrams get 25% lighter.

“We’re very excited to get that out — and again, that’s the way of the future here. Nothing should take us five to seven years to produce,” George said. “And when we get an upgrade just like we have with the [infantry fighting vehicles], it should come naturally. We’ve had upgraded engines and upgraded transmissions, and we should expect that. And I know our soldiers expect that with the equipment that’s coming to them.”

While many details are still unknown, officials have also cited advanced protection that accounts for contemporary threats including enemy drones and long-range weapons.

Michigan-based news site MLive reported that the turret on display in Detroit was remote, and featured a 120mm smoothbore main cannon — like the current M1A2 — as well as a Mk. 19 40mm grenade launcher and Javelin missile launcher.

“The crew compartment … it’s going to look a lot like a race car,” Brig. Gen. Troy Denomy, program executive officer for PEO Soldier, told the outlet.

Another new feature for the next-gen tank is a hybrid-electric drivetrain that will reportedly make the vehicle 50% more fuel efficient.

“The M1E3 Abrams represents a bold step forward in modern vehicle design, combining advanced protection, reduced weight and a smaller logistical footprint to meet the challenges of tomorrow’s battlefield,” Michelle Link, the deputy capability program executive, Ground-Combat Platforms, said in a statement.

While the M1E3 was originally slated to reach initial operational capability in 2030, officials said late last year that the first prototypes would be inside active Army formations sometime in 2026.

For George, the new tank program represents a new way of doing business in acquisition that evaluates tradeoffs and doesn’t get bogged down in developing a perfect solution. He described efforts to put more acquisition and contracting functions under a single individual, citing Maj. Gen. Frank Lozano, program executive officer for Missiles and Space, as an example.

“I think trades are critically important,” George said. “We may say, hey, it needs to go 100 miles an hour. It needs to do a certain number of things. … Frank can come back to us and basically say, ‘Hey, for 30% less cost, it can go 90 miles an hour, and you can have it in six months, or you can wait to do those things.’ And I think these are important things that were trades that we have not considered and that we need to, moving forward.”

In a letter responding to queries from a coalition of lawmakers, Anthony Tata, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for personnel and readiness said that “hazing and bullying have no place in the U.S. military,” despite comments from Hegseth that appeared to blur the lines on acceptable training.

“The definition of toxic has been turned upside down, and we’re correcting that. That’s why today, at my direction we’re undertaking a full review of the department’s definitions of so-called toxic leadership, bullying and hazing, to empower leaders to enforce standards without fear of retribution or second guessing,” Hegseth said in his remarks.

“Of course, you can’t do, like, nasty bullying and hazing. We’re talking about words like bullying and hazing and toxic. They’ve been weaponized and bastardized inside our formations, undercutting commanders and NCOs. No more. Setting, achieving and maintaining high standards is what you all do. And if that makes me toxic, then so be it.”

Drill instructors, Hegseth said, would be empowered “to instill healthy fear in new recruits.”

“Yes, they can shark attack, they can toss bunks, they can swear, and yes, they can put their hands on recruits,” he said. “This does not mean they can be reckless or violate the law, but they can use tried and true methods to motivate new recruits, to make them the warriors they need to be.”

In his response letter, Tata put guardrails around the use of physical contact with military recruits, saying it would be used to ensure the safety of personnel.

“Drill instructors have the difficult task of shaping civilians into soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardians, and Marines,” he wrote. “Basic training involves real world scenarios and weapons. When the safety of the recruit or others is jeopardized, drill instructors may take appropriate actions to ensure the safety of the recruits.”

The response letter did not define the scope of “appropriate actions” or what would determine whether a drill instructor’s physical response to a recruit was justified. But Tata did stress that Hegseth’s effort to reevaluate definitions of terms including “bullying” and “hazing” would, he said, make it easier to identify and respond to truly objectionable behavior.

“What the department is trying to get after is the unduly burdensome complaints system in the military that undermines leaders’ effectiveness,” he wrote. “By providing definitions that focus on the egregious misconduct described in your letter, leaders will be empowered to more easily address inappropriate conduct that does not constitute hazing or bullying while focusing resources on preventing and addressing incidents of hazing and bullying.”

Rep. Judy Chu, the California congresswoman who led the group of 28 Democratic lawmakers in requesting responses from Hegseth regarding his plans to change recruit training and hazing definitions, has a personal connection to the issue: Her nephew, Lance Cpl. Harry Lew, died by suicide in Afghanistan in 2011 after a night of physical hazing and abuse by fellow Marines in punishment for falling asleep on post.

“We want a strong military where people feel that they’re unified in their desire to protect this country,” Chu told Military Times in a November interview. “Not where they are torturing one another to the point where certain people feel like they have to kill themselves.”

The most recently compiled report on military hazing, from 2024, shows that about one in five hazing and bullying complaints is substantiated, and that reporting numbers, while on a recent upswing, are relatively low, with 138 hazing complaints for that year. The Marine Corps has accounted for a disproportionately high share of hazing allegations since congressionally mandated reporting began in 2020.

Tata maintained in the letter that a “clearer definition” of hazing and bullying following the Hegseth-ordered review of definitions would increase the percentage of substantiated complaints. He also cited a new database under development by the Pentagon, thanks to funding provided in 2025 to collect and compile hazing complaints more effectively.

“Historically, these data were collected manually, and some details of the complaints were not reported to the department,” he wrote.

Pentagon officials did not officially have an update on the definitions review, which was initially expected to take 30 days, but was affected by the October government shutdown.

In a statement to Military Times following the Pentagon’s response letter, Chu was cautious.

“I am pleased that the Department of Defense has responded to our letter but remain concerned about its decision to change the definition of hazing and processes to handle hazing, bullying and harassment complaints,” she said. ”I will continue to lead my congressional colleagues in ensuring the dignity and safety of all service members and recruits and that the department accurately fulfills its annual reporting requirements to Congress. No one should have to endure abuse and hazing while honorably serving our country.”

That’s according to a Defense Department report published in June and obtained by Military Times. The congressionally mandated report, which tracks the reporting and adjudication of hazing and bullying within the armed forces but does not include reports from boot camp and entry-level training, shows that while overall numbers remain small, the Marine Corps continues to be the greatest source of complaints among the services. It also shows that data collection on accountability actions for those found to have perpetrated hazing behaviors is inconsistent. 

In fiscal 2024, the last year for which data is available, troops submitted 138 complaints of hazing, of which 31, or 22%, were substantiated. That’s up from 121 complaints and 29 substantiations the previous year. They also made 1,058 reports of bullying, of which 227, or 21%, were substantiated. That’s up from 932 bullying reports and 175 substantiations in fiscal 2023.

While hazing reports saw an upswing in 2024 after three years of steady decline, bullying complaints, both total and substantiated, have been steadily increasing since 2020.

Perhaps the most notable data point is the uneven spread of complaints across the services. In 2020, the first year for which reporting is available, the Marine Corps made up 82% of hazing reports. In 2024, its smallest percentage across the four-year spread, the Corps — the smallest DOD service, except for the Space Force — accounted for 47% of reports.

Bullying reports are more evenly spread across the services. In 2024, the Navy had the most bullying complaints with 381, or 36% of the total, followed by the Air Force at 271 and the Marine Corps at 223. Notably, the Army, the largest service by far, has consistently had among the fewest reports of both hazing and bullying.

What happens following reports of hazing and bullying is not as clear. In 2024, disposition of 44 out of 138 hazing complaints was listed as “unknown,” including 30 of the 66 complaints submitted within the Marine Corps. The same was true for 123 bullying complaints. No hazing or bullying complaints were withdrawn by the complainants themselves during the report time frame. And while some data was provided regarding disciplinary actions for substantiated incidents, it was incomplete. In the Marine Corps, for example, half of the perpetrators of substantiated hazing received nonjudicial punishment, and actions regarding the other half were listed as “other.”

As provided in the recent report, the military definitions of hazing and bullying are somewhat broad. Hazing, according to the report, can be conducted in person or electronically, via social media and other means. It can involve physical actions such as striking another person; pressing or piercing an object into someone else’s skin; “branding, handcuffing, duct taping, tattooing, shaving, greasing, or painting another person;” and subjecting a person to forcible consumption of food, water, alcohol, drugs or any other substance. It can also include oral or written scolding and humiliation; “playing abusive or malicious tricks;” or “encouraging another person to engage in illegal, harmful, demeaning, or dangerous acts.”

Bullying, as defined, is even broader, including “degrading or damaging another’s property or reputation” and “intimidating, teasing, or taunting another person” in addition to the activities listed under hazing. 

Yet, as U.S. Rep. Judy Chu emphasizes, the consequences of hazing and even bullying can be deadly. Chu, a Democrat representing California’s 28th Congressional District, authored the legislative language requiring the military’s annual reports to Congress on hazing. The issue became personal to her in April 2011, when her nephew, Marine Lance Cpl. Harry Lew, took his own life in Afghanistan after a night of “merciless” physical and hazing and scolding meant to punish him for falling asleep at his post, according to an investigation into the event.

Following Hegseth’s address to the generals and an accompanying memo calling for a review of current military definitions of hazing and bullying, Chu sent a letter of concern, signed by 27 other congressional Democrats, to his office.

The letter included five detailed questions regarding the intent and potential impact of narrowing the definition of hazing, setting a Nov. 7 deadline for response.

“We strongly urge DOD to retain the existing definitions and take steps to strengthen hazing prevention and reporting policies, rather than roll back these critical protections,” the authors wrote. “All service members and recruits must be treated with dignity and respect. Weakening these protections will only worsen the existing problem of military hazing and endanger more lives.”

In an interview with Military Times, Chu said Hegseth had not responded by the set deadline, though she’d followed up and still hoped for an answer.

Chu cited other high-profile examples of military hazing with deadly results in the last 15 years, including Raheel Siddiqui, a Muslim Marine recruit who jumped off a roof at boot camp in 2016 following treatment by a drill instructor involving being forced into an industrial clothes dryer, and Army Staff Sgt. Logan Melgar, who died in 2017 of asphyxiation after an apparent hazing incident gone wrong at the hands of Marine Raiders and Navy SEALs.

“This does not serve our military,” Chu said. “We want a strong military where people feel that they’re unified in their desire to protect this country, not where they are torturing one another to the point where certain people feel like they have to kill themselves.”

It’s not yet clear how Hegseth’s memo and exhortation will affect the military. 

“Of course, you can’t do, like, nasty bullying and hazing. We’re talking about words like bullying and hazing and toxic. They’ve been weaponized and bastardized inside our formations, undercutting commanders and NCOs,” Hegseth said during his Quantico speech. “No more. Setting, achieving and maintaining high standards is what you all do. And if that makes me toxic, then so be it.”

He specifically addressed entry-level training too, saying that drill instructors and drill sergeants would once again be able to “put their hands on recruits” and “swear.”

A Sept. 30 memo coinciding with Hegseth’s speech ordered a 30-day review of definitions, saying policy defining hazing, bullying and harassment was “overly broad, jeopardizing combat readiness, mission accomplishment, and trust in the organization.”

“When commanders face undue administrative burdens, it distracts from their core mission,” the memo signed by Hegseth stated. “This review aims to strike a balance, ensuring leaders have the tools necessary to foster a warrior ethos rooted in mutual respect and accountability, while also maintaining a lethal and ready Force.”

The memo was signed just before the 43-day government shutdown, which paused or delayed operations across the federal enterprise.

A Pentagon official told Military Times this week there was nothing yet to announce about the review’s progress or findings.

Capt. Gabriel Coppinger, an aviation officer and commander of Company B, 1st Battalion, 11th Aviation Regiment, out of Fort Rucker, Alabama; and Chief Warrant Officer 3 Shane Hawkins, an instructor pilot at Rucker’s 1st Battalion, 14th Aviation Regiment, recently received the Soldier’s Medal, Rucker officials announced this week. Officials noted that only about 300 soldiers currently wear the award.

In remarks delivered at the ceremony, Coppinger spoke of the toll the crash, which claimed the lives of three soldiers, had taken on those who experienced it.

“This day is not just about recognition; it is a symbol of the journey many of us have endured these past two years,” Coppinger said, according to a news release. “It represents the courage, the pain, and the resilience of those who lived through that day and those we will forever carry in our hearts.”

The two Fort Wainwright-based Apaches collided April 27, 2023, about 50 miles east of Healy, Alaska, while returning from a training flight. The aircrew members killed in the crash included Chief Warrant Officer 3 Christopher Robert Eramo, 39, of Oneonta, New York; Chief Warrant Officer 2 Kyle D. McKenna, 28, of Colorado Springs, Colorado; and Warrant Officer 1 Stewart Duane Wayment, 32, of North Logan, Utah.

The two helicopters had been among a group of 14 Apaches returning to base in clear weather conditions following training. A heavily redacted Army investigation released at the end of 2023 found the collision took place about 30 seconds after the formation executed a turn to head for a mountain pass.

“The pilot of one of the Apaches slowed down and lost sight of the other, then tried to increase airspeed and hit the main rotor blades of the other aircraft. Both of the helicopters then crashed into the side of a mountain,” Alaska news station KTOO reported at the time.

The award citations, and Coppinger’s remarks, shed new light on the aftermath of the crashes and how soldiers in the formation responded.

“Six soldiers flying in three separate aircraft landed without hesitation in the aftermath of the mishap,” Coppinger said, according to the release. “Without regard for their own safety, each of them quite literally ran directly into harm’s way. … If not for their selfless actions, I don’t know that I would be standing before you today.”

He saluted the fallen aviators by name, noting that Wayment had been his co-pilot that day.

“I am honored to have served alongside each of you. Blue skies and tail winds,” he said. “Your memory will forever guide my service.”

Army officials declined to specify which aircraft Coppinger and Hawkins had been in prior to their crash response efforts.

Coppinger and Hawkins, according to their medal citations provided by the Army Aviation Center of Excellence, “put [themselves] back in danger” to provide aid to soldiers following the crash. Coppinger extracted a severely injured soldier from the wreckage of a mishap aircraft and provided immediate medical aid, then “helped coordinate the chaotic scene until air medevac arrived,” according to his citation.

Hawkins, then a chief warrant officer 2, provided aid to three other severely injured soldiers and participated in controlling the chaos until the arrival of a medevac aircraft.

Hawkins’ actions “are in keeping with the finest traditions of military service,” his citation states.

A subset of the general population, veterans are most easily reached en masse through Department of Veterans Affairs rolls. But that leaves approximately half of all veterans out, according to the Pentagon-linked Rand Corporation think tank.

Alongside research organization NORC at the University of Chicago, Rand on Tuesday rolled out the Veterans Insight Panel, a survey cohort intended to allow for high-fidelity and rapid survey research on a veteran population representative of all ages, geographic areas and demographics.

The initial population, built by collecting data from Rand’s American Life survey panel and NORC’s AmeriSpeak cohort, has about 3,000 members, Robert Bozick, a RAND senior demographer and director of RAND Survey Panels, told Military Times. He expects that to grow as the organizations continue to recruit.

“It is a moving target,” he said. “We wanted to make sure that we could at least field a survey and get about 1,000 responses before we launched, because that’s typically the size of surveys that our researchers and external researchers need.”

The effort to launch a new survey panel followed “an increasing need for more sophisticated, more nuanced data on veterans than what is typically being collected,” Bozick said.

National organizations collecting data on Americans, from the U.S. Census to the Centers for Disease Control, typically include a question asking survey respondents to identify their status, he said, but data collected on veterans using these methods is incidental and limited in depth.

“You can compare veterans who have asthma to the general population, but you can’t dig down deeper and beyond that, because the purpose is not to survey veterans; it’s to survey the general population,” Bozick said. “So, for example, the next logical question [would be], ‘Were you in combat? Were you in a combat zone where there may have been a burn pit?’ Things like that. You can’t get those from national data sources.”

An upcoming project for 2026 that’s sponsored by the Pittsburgh-based Heinz Endowments, for example, will focus on veteran underemployment and employment trajectories, Bozick said.

While veteran employment data is included in monthly U.S. Department of Labor reports, veteran underemployment — meaning employment that doesn’t fully utilize and recognize a veteran’s skills and experience — has been much harder to quantify.

In the last two years, the National Veterans’ Training Institute has reported that one-third of veteran job seekers are underemployed; the Journal of Veterans Studies has found 10% of post-9/11 veterans report underemployment; and the Raymond A. Mason School of Business has cited veteran underemployment as high as 60%.

“This is something our researchers are struggling with. When they try to go collect data, they get small samples,” Bozick said. “You either get a pool with a lot of Vietnam vets, not a lot of younger veterans or vice versa. All of those samples have challenges, given the diversity of the military experience.”

Notably, the Veterans Insight Panel is not exclusively for academic research. Groups and organizations will be able to pay to survey the cohort on topics of interest at a rate on the order of $2,000 per question, Bozick said.

The intent, he said, is to make the panel available to entities seeking to advance the wellbeing of veterans.

“We’re really trying to keep it in that sort of community framework, as opposed to an academic data set where PhD scientists are analyzing data and publishing in journals,” he said. “Not that we frown upon that, but that’s secondary to what we’re trying to do here.”

Also planned for early 2026, he said, is an omnibus survey containing questions from a variety of sources on issues relevant to the veteran community.

Aviation officials say, however, that they hope to reach that target without forcing many troops out of the service.

Maj. Gen. Clair Gill, commander of the Army Aviation Center of Excellence and Fort Rucker, Alabama, told reporters at the Association of the United States Army’s annual meeting that talent panels recently launched are intended to keep decision-making power with the soldiers and would not immediately lead to involuntary transfers or reductions.

“We went out to the formations and asked commanders to counsel every single soldier that was in the targeted population [where] we are over strength, and talk to them about where they are, what their goals are, what they want to do in the Army, if this is what they want to do, and if they’re looking for other things,” Gill said. “And then they created an order-of-merit list for their formations and sent that to us.”

That list would be evaluated by a panel that would assess all the soldiers’ records and organize them into top, middle, and bottom thirds, he said.

“We’re going to give that back to those commanders and say, ‘Here’s where your folks fell out. We want you to counsel them and talk to them about options,’” Gill said.

“Right now, they’ll use that as a tool to say, ‘Hey, if you’re in the bottom third, you’re in the at risk population. You might want to think about options available to you, and here’s what they look like.’”

Those affected by the talent panels include junior officers in year groups 2020 to 2023 and untracked warrant officers in year groups 2022 to 2024. The cuts reflect the rise of unmanned aviation and Army force restructuring that will see the elimination of cavalry squadrons within the continental U.S.

Between voluntary transfers within the Army, to other services, or out of the service, Gill said he hopes the Army can avoid mandatory eliminations. If the service does need to use involuntary cuts, he said, he doesn’t expect them to happen for at least a year – one to two manning cycles. Officials have previously said that the aviation reduction they hope to achieve will be complete by fiscal 2027.

Targeted force reduction goals by year group are “in the dozens,” Gill said, and the Army is taking other steps to realign soldiers. For the cavalry squadrons undergoing divestment, Army leaders are planning to overstaff attack battalions to the maximum allowable level – with that cap still to be determined by leadership, he said.

“We may have had units that were manned at 70-80% – now we’ll have units that are manned over 100%, so there’s some goodness there,” Gill said. The overstaffing, he said, would allow for additional maintenance and readiness for AH-64 Apache squadrons.

“Bottom line, the Army has a structure for all these people. So if we can align them with something that they’re interested in, now they’re going to have to compete, right? So they’re going to compete with everybody else that wants to go do that job,” he said. “But if they compete favorably in another organization, then I think we’re going to get down to where we’re really having hard conversations with very few people.”

While soldiers facing talent panels are being asked about future career preferences, Gill said they will be pushed to consider careers in the unmanned space, where the Army is continuing to build capability. For example, he said, Apache mechanics with military occupational specialty 15X would be a good fit for the 15W enlisted tactical unmanned aircraft systems operator.

“So yes, initially, we want to solve our own challenges, and then we want to proliferate talent around the Army, where there’s a need and they want to serve,” Gill said.

Officials, including Sergeant Major of the Army Michael Weimer, addressed questions about the pilot program, announced at the end of September, at the Association of the United States Army’s annual meeting Monday.

They didn’t rule out possible alcohol sales at some locations and would not address whether soldiers could be asked to add a tip to a government-provided meal.

Weimer stressed that the dining pilot, designed to give soldiers more options and better meet their dining habits and needs while emphasizing nutritious choices, furthers the Army’s goals of lethality and readiness.

“We’ve got to feed the machine … we’ve got to feed them in the field; we’ve got to feed them at home station,” Weimer said.

“And just like everything else we do in holistic health and fitness, nutrition is a huge part of that. Everything we put in our body is either going to help us seek peak performance or hurt us from accomplishing that goal.”

Language in a 134-page January request for proposals raised concerns about limited accountability, undefined terms such as “fresh” and “high-quality” related to food, and opportunities contractors might find to upcharge soldiers at mealtime and split the profits with the Army. The service published a statement in June pushing back on a Military.com report questioning the language, emphasizing that the pilot dining sites were supplementary to existing Army dining facilities, that alcohol sales would be evaluated as to whether they aligned with the goals of the pilot, and that soldiers would only be charged for items beyond the “essential station messing” provided meal.

In response to questions about alcohol sales, Col. Craig Thompson, deputy chief of staff for logistics, facilities and environment at Army Materiel Command, acknowledged the issue was still on the table. Moreover, he stressed the Army’s definition of these new dining sites as morale, welfare and recreation – MWR – restaurants, rather than service dining facilities.

“Just like any other MWR restaurant in any installation, it is the senior commander’s decision on how that’s utilized, whether it’s allowed or whether it’s limited,” Thompson said.

The panel twice would not acknowledge questions about whether a point-of-sale tip might be solicited, as contracting documents refer to tipped workers. But Cindy Smith, director of Supply Policy and Programs, said while the question was under the purview of AMC, it wasn’t part of the Army’s intent.

“If there were pressure for soldiers to tip … we would address that,” she said because the Army would not want soldiers, “especially your meal card soldier, who’s not paying money at that point to eat” to feel obliged to tip.

While the first of the five campus-style dining facilities, the one at Fort Bragg, N.C., is not set to open until January, the Army is already evaluating opening 10 more facilities over the next 12 to 18 months, including one or two locations overseas.

Feedback from a separate two-week pilot at Fort Hood, Texas, in August, in which soldiers were able to use their meal card allowance for preset meals at base restaurants showed “lots of success,” Thompson said with 70% of the 217 soldiers in the pilot choosing meals deemed “green,” or healthy. Soldier feedback will also be emphasized in the campus pilot, according to Maj. Gen. Gavin Lawrence, deputy chief of staff for logistics and operations at AMC, with soldiers able to access an evaluation form via QR code as they enter the facility.

Weimer said the Army continued to learn lessons about privatization from its quarter-century private housing venture, which in recent years has come under scrutiny as reporting has revealed systemic problems with black mold and vermin.

“We’re looking for honest feedback from the soldiers at those five locations, and then the contract oversight we’re going to be responsible for holding them accountable,” Weimer said. “In our history … when, let’s say, we have catastrophic success, and then we scale the contract, and then we’re not paying attention as much as we were in the past. That’s where we as an Army have to get better with holding folks accountable.”

This is Lumena Mindgym, a flashy new curriculum-based therapeutic tool that’s taking the Air Force by storm. More than two dozens Mindgyms have been installed at base fitness centers and support facilities for about $100,000 apiece; Mindgym just marked its first installations outside the continental United States, in Kuwait and Turkey, earlier this year.

As the number of Mindgym advocates across the Air Force grows, other services are also entering talks to purchase the technology. It’s a lot of flash and glitz to deliver relaxation to stressed-out service members. But the number of passionate advocates for Mindgym in the military is growing, and some argue the attention it’s getting from troops who might otherwise avoid meditation and de-stressing techniques might make it worth every penny.

The technology itself was created by an entrepreneur with a finance background, rather than a scientist; company executives make clear they are not the clinical experts.

“We don’t have anybody in-house that’s a neuroscientist or Ph.D.,” Brandon Murphy, head of growth for Lumena, told Military Times in an interview, adding that they did maintain an advisory board of doctors and researchers.

Nor was Mindgym designed with the military specifically in mind. Founders were shopping the technology at a Colorado-based sporting tradeshow in 2019, Murphy said, when they encountered Adam Strang, Biotechnology Product Line Lead at the Air Force Research Laboratory.

Strang was intrigued by the tech and connected the team with veteran Air Force pilot and human performance expert Jannell MacAulay, who’d become a vocal advocate for Mindgym and help develop the curriculum to be used by airmen.

“It’s like a flight simulator for your mind,” MacAulay posted on Facebook in April during a visit to one of the Air Force’s facilities.

By 2022, a seed fund grant had enabled the installation of the first Mindgym at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, complete with a clinically validated curriculum and wearable components that measured brain activity and heart rate.

The first users were explosive ordnance disposal technicians from Hill’s 775th Civil Engineering Squadron. And that initial group of 55 airmen gave Mindgym its best evidence for effectiveness.

Over 219 20-minute training sessions, according to Lumena Labs, the group self-reported an average 30% improvement in mood. The biodata receptors documented a 16.2% reduction in stress indicators, while 61% of users said their stress management capabilities improved. Sleep quality also improved for 15% of users.

“Many in the group reported stronger focus during the Weighted Airmen Performance Systems (WAPS) testing — the program that determines promotions for Staff Sergeant (E-5) and Technical Sergeant (E-6),” Lumena stated in study analysis. “They also cited decreased incidents of road rage and across-the-board improvements in their marital relations, gym workouts, and even their golf scores.”

While follow-up studies have not been conducted, the feedback appears to demonstrate how even a small amount of therapeutic attention to the brain and the mental resilience of service members under stress can make a significant difference.

Strang, at the Air Force Research Lab, told Military Times in an interview that Mindgym compared favorably to the sensory deprivation float tanks popular for promoting relaxation and stress reduction.

“Float tanks are messy and maintenance is challenging,” Strang said, adding that it was never clear to him if the atmosphere of the tank or the opportunity to take a nap in it made the most difference to his mental state.

“I hopped into Mindgym, and it didn’t feel like a waterless float tank to me at all,” he said. “It felt like a psychedelic experience.”

AFRL has plans to study the efficacy of Mindgym in comparison with other mindfulness and relaxation technologies, though those are predicated on future funding awards.

Strang emphasized that Mindgym is not a panacea for mental health or resilience but said boosting cognition and reducing stress, particularly in a “next frontier” warfare environment where troops are joining a real fight from their desks as drone pilots or Space Force satellite operators, was worth the dedicated investment.

“They’re $100,000 cubes, I think, the last time I checked,” Strang said. “Let’s say they facilitate relaxation and recovery across 100 people by 10%; what’s the operational impact of that? I don’t know. But what happens if one person who is flying an F-35 sits in that cockpit and, because of these interventions, prevents a mishap of a $60 million aircraft? Would that be worth it? Probably.”

As the Air Force continues to install Mindgyms, the company has recently had more conversations with Navy officials, even demonstrating the Mindgym at the Sea Air Space naval trade show earlier this year. Murphy said he saw value for the technology particularly in the submarine community, where stress and operational tempo were high.

There are now 32 different sessions a service member can select in Mindgym; a grant last year enabled the recent development and deployment of a stroboscopic light therapy protocol that is supposed to promote higher theta brain wave state, enabling reduced stress in high-intensity situations.

“I’d honestly love to have [a Mindgym] on every military base on the globe,” Murphy said, “so that there’s not a service member that doesn’t have access to something like this.”