In the announcement to transition this June from the Army Combat Fitness Test to the Army Fitness Test, the Army referenced a study by RAND, published in late December, 2024. Here is a link to the full study as well as a summary.
www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RRA3000/RRA3092-1/RAND_RRA3092-1
Key Findings
There is sufficient evidence to inform the Army’s decision on raising ACFT standards for close combat MOSs
The ACFT with current administration protocols and standards has been evaluated against injury outcomes.
Higher ACFT standards for close combat MOSs can be implemented as a strategy to ensure that overall fitness is maintained at the higher levels demonstrated by soldiers in close combat MOSs.
For the MDL, there is strong evidence that can inform a specific higher minimum standard for combat MOSs based on combat task performance. For the other five ACFT events, the quality and quantity of evidence varies.
Results from the Practice Phase highlight trade-offs among alternative standards
Evidence from the Practice Phase suggests that an overall ACFT score minimum of 450 points and 150 pounds on the MDL may be too high to achieve a 95 percent overall pass rate and 90 percent pass rate for select subgroups. Under all options considered, the reserve component exhibits lower pass rates.
Alternative approaches to higher standards affect ACFT pass rates differently. Younger, female soldiers have lower pass rates when the MDL standard increases, while several MOSs have lower pass rates when the standard for total ACFT points is increased to 450.
However, prior research shows that soldiers’ performance improves with experience, so the pass rates observed in the Practice Phase may understate the extent to which soldiers will continue to improve toward new standards.
Recommendations
The Army should weigh the evidence across such key decision criteria as defensibility and relevance to general fitness or combat task performance and select a standard accordingly.
Consider compensatory approaches that raise as a new standard the overall points requirement to ease implementation and minimize variation in subgroup outcomes.
Supporting policy should be implemented to facilitate the movement to higher standards. This could include glide paths to allow soldiers sufficient time to train, access to training resources, and clear messaging about the goals of the higher ACFT standard.
Consider re-norming the scoring system at the same time as adopting higher standards to reflect current age and gender norms throughout the Army and ensure that norms are appropriately set for soldiers in both close combat and non–close combat MOSs.
Collect further evidence for minimum ACFT standards through criterion-related validation studies that examine the relationship between each ACFT event and organizational outcomes, such as combat task performance, retention rates, and other relevant metrics.
