# LFCPFS vs EXPRESS



## Char1991 (12 Sep 2012)

I searched around the site, internet, and DIN, and couldn't find an answer a direct answer.  So I'm hoping someone can help me with this question I was asked today. I believe I found the answer, I would like to check with others.

My friend is did his last CF EXPRESS Test October 2011, and in May 2012 did the LFCPFS for his MSE (Mission Support Element; essentially a high readiness deployment in the event of disasters) Training.  He belongs to an RCAF unit. His MCpl his telling him that he will require a new EXPRESS test come Oct.  After reviewing the DAOD 5023 series, I believe since he belongs to the RCAF, there is no requirement for his CoC to support the LFCPFS.

During my search of the site, it appears this is a very grey area; with some people saying LFCPFS trumping the EXPRESS, while others saying the opposite.  And while the DAODs do mention a list that mention when exemption from MPFS counts, it didn't give a definitive answer.

Am I correct in saying that being RCAF there is no required to accept the LFCPFS, or am I missing something?
Also as the mbr is a clerk, could you provide a ref so that he can provide his supervisor.

Thank you.

Thanks.


----------



## ModlrMike (12 Sep 2012)

You are correct in asserting that the RCAF is not required to recognize the LFCPFS. That being said, if you look at the PER handbook, the army fitness test is equivalent to an exempt on the EXPRES. One could argue that regardless of the type of test completed, the member has attained an exempt status. I seem to recall a message on the various fitness tests not long ago... perhaps the CDS Direction to Commanders on fitness, a CANFORGEN I believe. One issue that could potentially clear things up... did the member get a formal result from the fitness staff? I don't remember the form name... but I recall having the PSP staff complete them as part of any work-up BFT I did.


Take the foregoing with a grain of salt. I recollect one year where I did four different fitness tests because each principal wouldn't recognize the previous test as equivalent. I did a BFT, PT400, Coopers, and EXPRES all in the same year (and did well on them all).

My advice: do the EXPRES and get it over with. It's not worth the aggravation.


----------



## McG (12 Sep 2012)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> You are correct in asserting that the RCAF is not required to recognize the LFCPFS.


I am skeptical of that.  If an environment has its own BFOR based fitness test, then it is fair game to insist everyone do it within the environment.  However, the LFCPFS is equivalent to exempt standard from the CF perspective.  I am not saying it is an impossibility, but if the RCAF is not accepting the LFCPFS in a second year while it is accepting CF Express exempt, then there will exist a reference (probably in an ACO) that one could cite to prove this.  In the absence of such, the LFCPFS = Exempt in the eyes of the CF.

That being said, I think the guy should do the Express test.  The LFCPFS is not a statistical predictor of success on the Express test or the common fitness tasks.  Until there is a new test that confirms both Army and CF fitness standards, I think Army pers should be doing both tests annually too.


----------



## McG (12 Sep 2012)

... and there is such an ACO.  It is ACO ACO 5000-3.


----------



## DAA (12 Sep 2012)

Sure, here you go, DAOD 5023-2  http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/5000/5023-2-eng.asp  

This outlines the "Fitness Standards" CF wide, however, the ECS can stipulate just which specific testing method is or is not acceptable within their Command for employment purposes.  Here are a couple of examples:

a.  Your are recently posted to an Army Unit - you have a recent CF Expres Test result (Pass or Exempt) but because you belong to the "Army" you are required to complete the LFCPFS annually as a function of service within the Army;

b.  You are serving at a PRes Army Unit and want to do Class B outside the unit (ie; PRL Controlled position) - you have just completed the LFCPFS with your unit but for employment in a PRL controlled position, you MUST have a valid CF Expres test result.

Can you grieve this, probably, but the outcome will most likely be related to your "current" employment requirements and you may or may not be successful.  Fitness standards are "position/employment specific".  There are other mechanisms in place should you fail to achieve one standard or the other.



			
				MCG said:
			
		

> However, the LFCPFS is equivalent to exempt standard from the CF perspective.



Your are correct, LFCPFS is the equivalent to CF Expres Exempt but ONLY for evaluation purposes.  Keep in mind and this is what people forget, the LFCPFS must be done "annually" and not once every two years.


----------



## jeffb (12 Sep 2012)

Char1991 said:
			
		

> His MCpl his telling him that he will require a new EXPRESS test come Oct.  After reviewing the DAOD 5023 series, I believe since he belongs to the RCAF, there is no requirement for his CoC to support the LFCPFS.



And that is not a manifestly unlawful order. Therefore, he has to do it. I do several LFCPFS, BFT's, a year and while I  am only required to do one a year for IBTS purposes, my chain of command is well within their right to have me do one every day if they want. 

If he gets injured or for some reason is unable to do an EXPRESS test I suspect that the LFCPFS would be useable for PER purposes but I don't think that's what we are talking about.


----------



## McG (12 Sep 2012)

DAA said:
			
		

> Sure, here you go, DAOD 5023-2  http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/5000/5023-2-eng.asp


Congratulations.  It is a good thing I had already done the research, because your answer is a fail.  You have found the reference which says L1s can set their own standards - You did not find a citable reference to prove that the RCAF had done such.  Such a reference would have to come from within the RCAF, and it is ACO 5000-3.



			
				DAA said:
			
		

> Your are correct, LFCPFS is the equivalent to CF Expres Exempt but ONLY for evaluation purposes.  Keep in mind and this is what people forget, the LFCPFS must be done "annually" and not once every two years.


The LFCPFS must be done annually by pers within the Army because LFCO 24-02 states that “every CF member serving in the command, including those CF members who are affiliated with other services, be subject to annual fitness evaluation using the Land Force Command Physical Fitness Standard”  But, for a member who has done the LFCPFS and left the Army, DAOD 5023-2 tells us that


> A CF member is exempt from MPFS evaluation during an assessment period if the CF member:
> 
> qualifies for an exemption under the CF EXPRES incentive program;
> has met the applicable environmental or military occupation standard that has been assessed by the CFPSA as being equal to or higher than the MPFS incentive standard - the CF member is considered to have achieved the MPFS incentive standard in such cases;


MPFS incentive standard = 730 days.


----------



## DAA (12 Sep 2012)

MCG said:
			
		

> Congratulations.  It is a good thing I had already done the research, because your answer is a fail.  You have found the reference which says L1s can set their own standards - You did not find a citable reference to prove that the RCAF had done such.  Such a reference would have to come from within the RCAF, and it is ACO 5000-3.
> The LFCPFS must be done annually by pers within the Army because LFCO 24-02 states that “every CF member serving in the command, including those CF members who are affiliated with other services, be subject to annual fitness evaluation using the Land Force Command Physical Fitness Standard”  But, for a member who has done the LFCPFS and left the Army, DAOD 5023-2 tells us thatMPFS incentive standard = 730 days.



My answer is a "fail"???  Now you have my ear and I am up to the challenge, just be gentle with me.    I am sure I can find you something with respect to the RCAF requirements but I know for a fact that I can send you the letter from CMP (ie; L1) which overides the DAOD with respect to the LFCPFS.  Not to mention, you have to ask yourself, if your currently serving with an Army Unit, "How often do you do the LFCPFS?  As shown in the DAOD, I totally agree that YES it is valid for 730 days but that period of validity is "definitely" not being recognized across the other ECS's (ie' Airforce and probably the Navy).

And yes, I would have quoted an ACO had I looked it up...

So while the DAOD is a CF wide policy, then why are the ECS's ignoring the content???


----------



## armyvern (12 Sep 2012)

MCG said:
			
		

> ...You did not find a citable reference to prove that the RCAF had done such.  Such a reference would have to come from within the RCAF, and it is ACO 5000-3.
> ...



Can you post what that ref actually states?

____________________________________

Point of Note: Exemption status (or not) is not relevent to the original question based upon the follow up comments talking about :in the second year" or "for two years".

This kid did the BFT in May 2012 and thus achieved a CF exemption this FY. IAW the DAOD, he certainly would have a valid fiteness test result on his file for this FY --- even if he were serving in the Army too. This isn't about the RCAF not recognizing it in the second year after it's done, it's about whether or not they recognize it 5 months after it has been done and within the same FY. Career shop`s are certainly going to accept it as a valid fitness test result for this FY next month at the national merit boards.

When I served with the air force, my BFT was recognized for 730 days from the date of the test. I was not required to do an EXpress test either that first FY or the next. I then deployed and so did another BFT which was good for another two years there in Trenton as per the DAOD that states it is a higher standard PT test than the CF Expres. That is also why even with a valid CF Express members posted into the Army must still complete the higher standard LFCPFTS test. Times, of course, may have changed.

It would be nice to know what the ref quoted actually states.


----------



## DAA (12 Sep 2012)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> This isn't about the RCAF not recognizing it in the second year after it's done, it's about whether or not they recognize it 5 months after it has been done and within the same FY.



That's the point ArmyVern.....they are NOT recognizing the DAOD across the ECs (Environmental Commands).  Case in point, if our Reg F unit hires a PRes member for full-time Class B employment who happens to belong to an "Army" PRes unit, they must have a "valid CF Expres Test result" prior to ocommencement of employment or as a bare minimum, within 60 days after the date of commencement of employment.  If not, their contract will be terminated.  Even if they have just successfully completed an LFCPFS the week prior....which I have just seen within the last month.....

So it begs the question, why are the ECs not following the DAOD?


----------



## dapaterson (12 Sep 2012)

In a year or so Project FORCE will come out, providing a single CF standard.


----------



## DAA (12 Sep 2012)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> In a year or so Project FORCE will come out, providing a single CF standard.



Care to expand on this statement?  Cause, now I am all ears.....lol


----------



## dapaterson (12 Sep 2012)

There's some info out on the PSP side about the research; my understanding is that they are doing the final testing now to gather the data needed.  I know Armed Forces Council has been briefed - and went on site to see some of the testing.

And a link: https://public.cfpsa.com/en/AboutUs/PSP/DFIT/DFIT_Newsreel/Pages/news-reel-4.aspx


----------



## McG (12 Sep 2012)

DAA said:
			
		

> My answer is a "fail"???  Now you have my ear and I am up to the challenge


Giddy-up.



			
				DAA said:
			
		

> I am sure I can find you something with respect to the RCAF requirements …


You don't have to.  I gave you the reference twice now:  ACO 5000-3.



			
				DAA said:
			
		

> …I know for a fact that I can send you the letter from CMP (ie; L1) which overides the DAOD with respect to the LFCPFS.


I understand the concept of an L1, and that the label applies to such things as the ECSs and ADMs. You will have to explain how one cancels published departmental orders with a letter (as opposed to something such as a CANFORGEN or proper policy amendment).  In any case, I have also seen correspondence from on high in the Army stating that, in spite of the the LFCO requirement for annually achieving the LFCPFS, the CFPAS exemption was good for two years of PERs because the DAOD was the authoritative direction on that element.



			
				DAA said:
			
		

> Not to mention, you have to ask yourself, if your currently serving with an Army Unit, "How often do you do the LFCPFS?


I have also already given you the reference for this.  See my previous excerpt from LFCO 24-02.




			
				DAA said:
			
		

> So while the DAOD is a CF wide policy, then why are the ECS's ignoring the content???


The DAOD says ECSs can have their own standards.  Perhaps this interpreted to allow ECSs to determine the CF Express must take precedent over fitness tests of other environments.  This is why I initially stated that there would be published RCAF reference (something at the L1 level) such as an ACO if the RCAF did indeed not accept the LFCPFS - and I have found such an ACO to exist (again, it is 5000-3).


Vern,
I no longer have the ref in front of me.  In a nut shell, it said LFCPFS was not to be undertaken by pers within the command except when required for deployed operations.  Pers coming from Army units would would see their LFCPFS recognized for the year in which it was achieved only, and the CF Express would be required in the following year.


----------



## DAA (12 Sep 2012)

MCG said:
			
		

> In a nut shell, it said LFCPFS was not to be undertaken by pers within the command except when required for deployed operations.  Pers coming from Army units would would see their LFCPFS recognized for the year in which it was achieved only, and the CF Express would be required in the following year.



Exactly.....and while I don't have the ACO handy, that is what it says and I know what the LFCO says as well.  As you so kindly pointed out, EC's can stipulate what is or what isn't acceptable within their Commands, as I said in my orignal post, but why do we have cases of people doing the Expres Test or LFCPFS and then having to do the other within a few months of arrival and I have seen it happen?

And what didn't you understand about my generic lead in statment of "This outlines the "Fitness Standards" CF wide, however, the ECS can stipulate just which specific testing method is or is not acceptable within their Command for employment purposes."

So why are some places accepting the results for what they are and others aren't?

Departmental Orders are it and Command Orders "amplify" these, but cannot go above and beyond the construct...


----------



## Char1991 (13 Sep 2012)

MCG said:
			
		

> ... and there is such an ACO.  It is ACO ACO 5000-3.





			
				MCG said:
			
		

> In a nut shell, it said LFCPFS was not to be undertaken by pers within the command except when required for deployed operations.  Pers coming from Army units would would see their LFCPFS recognized for the year in which it was achieved only, and the CF Express would be required in the following year.



Thank you for the ACO ref, I'll take a look at it tomorrow when I have DWAN access.
However, if your description of the ACO is correct, would this mean that the mbr is covered until May 2013? ???

And to those who say the mbr should just do it, that's what I said.  It's just a little run.  ;D


----------



## armyvern (13 Sep 2012)

MCG said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> 
> Vern,
> I no longer have the ref in front of me.  In a nut shell, it said LFCPFS was not to be undertaken by pers within the command except when required for deployed operations.  Pers coming from Army units would would see their LFCPFS recognized for the year in which it was achieved only, and the CF Express would be required in the following year.



If that's what it actually states, then the kid in the original post scenario does not have to complete the Express Test having done the BFT this FY - and that would indeed be the kids' ref for backing that up.

Thanks.


----------



## McG (13 Sep 2012)

DAA said:
			
		

> … but why do we have cases of people doing the Expres Test or LFCPFS and then having to do the other within a few months of arrival and I have seen it happen?
> 
> …
> 
> So why are some places accepting the results for what they are and others aren't?


There are two possibilities that I see:
1. Various local staff officers are "inventing policy" as opposed to reading the actual regulations and advising commanders appropriately.
2.  Many examples cited have been PRes - it is possible that there is a seperate ACO or a mil pers instr that provides differing direction for the purpose of P Res employment 
3. Some combination of 1 & 2



			
				DAA said:
			
		

> And what didn't you understand about my generic lead in statment of "This outlines the "Fitness Standards" CF wide, however, the ECS can stipulate just which specific testing method is or is not acceptable within their Command for employment purposes."


I understand the statement.  However, I presented the case that there would be a published RCAF direction without which elements of the command would have to accept the LFCPFS.  You then replied with "here it is" and the DAOD … as though you couldn't understand the difference between the CF/DND level DAOD and something out of the RCAF.  The existence of authorization for ECSs to set environmental standards is not proof that the RCAF has discounted the validity of the LFCPFS within the command, nor is it authority for any local level authority to substitute its own fitness standard.


----------



## McG (13 Sep 2012)

As an aside, I think COs should be able to order fitness tests more frequently to ensure pers are in shape for a coming exercise, to follow-up individuals' difficulties performing physical duties, or because it is a sunny Thursday & we are obligated to be fit today.  Unfortunately, I am aware of grievance decisions that have removed the consequences from pers who were unable to pass a specifically ordered fitness test because a prior pass was still valid.


----------



## DAA (13 Sep 2012)

Thanks.  I reviewed the ACO and it actually makes sense.  We just need people to follow it.  Far too many times I see people arriving on a Wing from an Army Unit who are told to get an Expres Test even though their LFCPFS results are still valid.  Goes something like this "I really don't care if you just did a BFT at your old unit, around here we do Expres Testing on an annual basis, so we expect it to be done by 31 Dec."     :


----------



## Haggis (13 Sep 2012)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> There's some info out on the PSP side about the research; my understanding is that they are doing the final testing now to gather the data needed.



Project FORCE Phase 3 testing is underway for the next three weeks here in the NCR.  The target audience this time is females 40+ and males 50+ of any shape, size and fitness level in order to fully validate the test within all age groups. (I am a guinea pig for Phase 3)  the aim is to have the new fitness standards and testing methodology in place by April 2013, I believe.


----------



## ModlrMike (13 Sep 2012)

DAA said:
			
		

> Goes something like this "I really don't care if you just did a BFT at your old unit, around here we do Expres Testing on an annual basis, so we expect it to be done by 31 Dec."     :



Which also doesn't make sense to me. I've only had to have my fitness done by 31 Mar, the fiscal/PER year end.


----------



## Char1991 (14 Sep 2012)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Which also doesn't make sense to me. I've only had to have my fitness done by 31 Mar, the fiscal/PER year end.



I believe this is because of an order (can't remember which one at the moment) that says all testing should be complete by 31 Dec of the year, so that pers who fail still have time by end of fiscal year.

After searching the DAODs and QR&Os I believe it was either a CFAO, or some other intranet only pub. I'll do a it of research on Monday at work.

Or you know I could just be crazy about what I read. Haha.


----------



## Char1991 (17 Sep 2012)

Char1991 said:
			
		

> I believe this is because of an order (can't remember which one at the moment) that says all testing should be complete by 31 Dec of the year, so that pers who fail still have time by end of fiscal year.
> 
> After searching the DAODs and QR&Os I believe it was either a CFAO, or some other intranet only pub. I'll do a it of research on Monday at work.
> 
> Or you know I could just be crazy about what I read. Haha.



Couldn't edit my original post, so here's what I found; CANFORGEN 066/07.  Contents are below.

CANFORGEN 066/07 CMP 027/07 101753Z APR 07
PHYSICAL FITNESS EVALUATION PROTOCOL CHANGES
UNCLASSIFIED
REFS: A. CANFORGEN 002/07 CDS DIRECTION FOR PHYSICAL FITNESS 2007 </vcds-exec/pubs/canforgen/2007/002-07_e.asp>
B. CDS GUIDANCE TO COMMANDING OFFICERS/CHAPTER 22
1.      AT REFS A AND B THE CDS ANNOUNCED HIS INTENT TO REINVIGORATE OUR MILITARY CULTURE OF FITNESS AND TO PUBLISH A CAMPAIGN PLAN TO ACHIEVE THIS OBJECTIVE. WHILE THE CAMPAIGN PLAN WILL BE ANNOUNCED SHORTLY, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EVALUATION PROTOCOL CHANGES THAT WILL COME INTO EFFECT 1 APRIL 2007, TO COINCIDE WITH THE BEGINNING OF THE 07/08 FITNESS EVALUATION YEAR. THESE CHANGES ARE DESIGNED TO IMPROVE THE EVALUATION PROCESS AND EMPHASIZE THE ADVANTAGES OF GROUP/UNIT EVALUATIONS IAW THE CDS GUIDANCE AT REF B. THE CHANGES ARE AS FOLLOWS:
2.      THE 20 METER SHUTTLE RUN (20 MSR) WILL BECOME THE AEROBIC FITNESS EVALUATION PROTOCOL FOR ALL CF PERSONNEL SUBJECT TO CF EXPRES. THE STEP TEST WILL ONLY BE OFFERED TO PERSONNEL IN RECEIPT OF A MEDICAL OFFICERS EXCEPTION FROM THE 20 MSR
3.      THE SURG GEN HAS APPROVED NEW BLOOD PRESSURE CEILINGS FOR EXPRES. THE CURRENT 140/90 MM HG (SYSTOLIC/DIASTOLIC) WILL BECOME 150/100 MM HG
4.      THE PRACTICE OF INDIVIDUAL EXPRES EVALUATIONS WILL BE DISCOURAGED IN FAVOUR OF GROUP/UNIT AND SUB/UNIT EXPRES EVALUATIONS
5.      UNIT GROUP FITNESS EVALUATIONS WILL BE FOCUSED ON THE MIDDLE TWO QUARTERS OF THE FITNESS EVALUATION YEAR (JUL-DEC) ALLOWING TRAINING PROGRAMS IN THE FIRST QUARTER AND REMEDIAL TRAINING DURING THE LAST QUARTER. ALL CF PERSONNEL SHOULD HAVE THEIR INITIAL FITNESS EVALUATION COMPLETED BY 31 DEC OF EACH YEAR
6.      IN CONCLUSION, WHILE THESE MEASURES FOCUS ON FITNESS EVALUATION IMPROVEMENTS, THE THRUST OF OUR EFFORTS MUST CONTINUE TO CENTER ON REGULAR PARTICIPATION IN EFFECTIVE FITNESS PROGRAMS COMPLEMENTED BY HEALTHY LIFESTYLE CHOICES


----------



## OldSolduer (17 Sep 2012)

DAA said:
			
		

> Thanks.  I reviewed the ACO and it actually makes sense.  We just need people to follow it.  Far too many times I see people arriving on a Wing from an Army Unit who are told to get an Expres Test even though their LFCPFS results are still valid.  Goes something like this "I really don't care if you just did a BFT at your old unit, around here we do Expres Testing on an annual basis, so we expect it to be done by 31 Dec."     :



And this happens in Army units: completing your BFT with Unit X, then posted to Unit Y and told  to do the BFT. When it was pointed out that the BFT had been done and documented, we were told "it doesn't count. You didn't do it with us"


----------

