Administer Evaluations Adjutant General Captains Career Course

Administer Evaluations Adjutant General Captains Career Course
Reporting Program Army Regulation 623-3 Personnel Evaluation Evaluation Reporting System Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC 31 March 2014 UNCLASSIFIED SHOW SLIDE 1: ADMINISTER EVALUATIONS REPORTING PROGRAM INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDANCE: Before presenting this lesson, instructors must thoroughly prepare by studying this lesson and identified reference materials. Throughout this lesson, solicit from students the challenges they experienced in the current Operational Environment (OE) and what they did to resolve them. Encourage the students to apply at least one of the eight critical variables: Political, Military, Economic, Social, Information, Infrastructure, Physical Environment, and Time. MOTIVATOR: One of the most important documents in Soldier's official files is the evaluation report, either the Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) or the Officer Evaluation Report (OER). Evaluation reports have a direct impact on personnel management, to include promotions, schooling, assignment, and retention. Human resources officers manage the system and help ensure that evaluations are not only error-free, but submitted in a timely manner. At some point in your career, each of you will be a rater, a senior rater, or a reviewer of an evaluation report, in addition to receiving evaluation reports as a rated officer. It is important to Soldier's careers that the evaluation reporting system be managed properly. Learning Step/Activity 1. Identify the Principles of the ERS. Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:16 Time of Instruction: 10 mins Adjutant General Captains Career Course January 2018

Terminal Learning Objective
ACTION: Administer Evaluations Reporting Program CONDITIONS: In a small group classroom environment, given access to AR (Evaluation Reporting System), DA PAM (Evaluation Reporting System), access to Army Human Resources Command Evaluation Entry System (EES) and awareness of Operational Environment (OE) variables and actors. STANDARDS: Students will meet the standard of 80% accuracy when they: 1. Identify the principles of the Evaluation Reporting System (ERS). 2. Determine rating chain qualifications and responsibilities. 3. Define counseling requirements that support the ERS. 4. Identify types of Evaluations Reports. 5. Compute report periods, rated months and non-rated time. Employ the Evaluation Entry System (EES). Manage Rater / Senior Rater Profiles. SHOW SLIDE 2: TERMINAL LEARNING OBJECTIVE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS: None. RISK ASSESSMENT LEVEL: Low. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: Environmental protection is not just the law but the right thing to do. It is a continual process and starts with deliberate planning. Always be alert to ways to protect our environment during training and missions. In doing so, you will contribute to the sustainment of our training resources while protecting people and the environment from harmful effects. Refer to FM Environmental Considerations and GTA ENVIRONMENTAL-RELATED RISK ASSESSMENT. EVALUATION: Students must successfully complete all practical exercises and pass an end-of-module exam with a score of 80% or higher. INSTRUCTIONAL LEAD-IN: Imagine you are assigned as a battalion S1. The commander wants you to present a briefing on evaluations to the NCOs and officers on the staff. The S1 NCOIC and the evaluations clerk are on leave and the briefing is scheduled for next week. You think to yourself, "What am I going to do now?" When we finish this block of instruction, you will be well versed in the evaluations system and the briefing will be no problem at all. 2

EVALUATION REPORTING SYSTEM
(ERS) OVERVIEW Encompasses the means and methods needed for developing people and leaders Identifies Soldiers who are best qualified for promotion and assignment to positions of greater responsibility Combines major elements of counseling, assessment, documentation, and integration with other Army, rating officials, and rated Soldiers in their current environments SHOW SLIDE 3: EVALUATION REPORTING SYSTEMS (ERS) OVERVIEW 1. The ERS encompasses the means and methods needed for developing people and leaders. An effective ERS involves the execution of leadership, the establishment of a rating relationship with personal interaction, the conduct of developmental counseling and reviews, and the determination of critical assessments. The Army routinely reviews the ERS to ensure that it remains relevant and in support of its goals. 2. The ERS identifies Soldiers who are best qualified for promotion and assignment to positions of greater responsibility. The ERS also identifies Soldiers who will be kept on active duty, retained in grade, or eliminated from military service. 3. The ERS combines major elements of counseling, assessment, documentation, and integration with other personnel functions to meet the needs of the Army, rating officials, and rated Soldiers in their current environments. Its basic foundation—to evaluate today’s Soldiers to select and develop tomorrow’s leaders—will remain consistent. AR 623-3, para 1-8

ERS RESPONSIBILITIES Human Resources Command
Acts as lead agency for the Secretary of the Army and is responsible for the effective operation of the ERS Clarifies policies, grants exceptions to policies, or formulates new policies, as the need arises Commanders (at all levels) will ensure that: AR is available Rating officials are fully qualified Reports are prepared by designated rating officials Rating chains correspond to the chain of command or supervision, are published, and provided to each Soldier Completed evaluation reports are submitted NLT 90 days after the thru date SHOW SLIDE 4: ERS RESPONSIBILITIES NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, paragraph 1-4, as needed. Facilitate learner-center discussion on ERS responsibilities. AR 623-3, para 1-4

Principles of Support The ERS will:
Evaluate the performance and potential in peacetime and wartime of: Officers - Warrant Officer One thru Brigadier General NCOs - Sergeant thru Command Sergeant Major Evaluate the performance of Soldiers during DoD, civilian educational, medical, or industrial institution programs Support the Army’s personnel life cycle function SHOW SLIDE 5: PRINCIPLES OF SUPPORT NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Paragraph 1-7. 1. The Army Evaluation System is designed for all officers (WO1 thru BG) and NCOs (SGT thru CSM) and is designed to capture the rating official’s individual, stand alone, assessment of performance and potential over an evaluation period. 2. The evaluation system has been in existence since before WWII. It has undergone significant but needed changes as time and our missions change. AR 623-3, para 1-7

ERS Functions Primary – provide information to HQDA for making personnel management decisions. Components include- thoughtful, fair, accurate and complete evaluation reports indoctrination of Army Values and basic responsibilities a “whole file” concept and continuous growth philosophy ensuring the selection of the best qualified to serve in positions of increasing responsibility Secondary – encourage leader professional development and enhance mission accomplishment through – stressing importance of senior / subordinate relationships increased emphasis on performance counseling necessary senior / subordinate communication SHOW SLIDE 6: ERS FUNCTIONS NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, paragraph 1-8c. The evaluation function is the responsibility of the Brigade S–1 (BDE S–1), Battalion S–1 (BN S–1), or unit personnel administration office, as well as the rating officials, rated Soldiers and Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA). 1. The primary function of the ERS is to provide information to HQDA for use in making personnel management decisions. The information is supplied to HQDA by the rating chain in the Soldier’s assigned or attached organization. Components of this information include: a. Evaluation reports, which will be accurate and complete to ensure that sound personnel management decisions are made and that a rated Soldier’s potential can be fully developed. Each report will be a thoughtful, fair appraisal of a Soldier’s ability and potential. b. Strengthening the ability of the Army to meet the professional challenges of the future through the indoctrination of Army Values and basic Soldier responsibilities. The continued use of Army Values and Soldier responsibilities as evaluation criteria will provide and reinforce a professional focus for the rating chain’s view of performance. c. Being part of a “whole file” concept and continuous growth philosophy. A single report will not, by itself, determine a Soldier’s career. An appraisal philosophy that recognizes continuous professional development and growth best serves the Army and the rated Soldier. d. Ensuring the selection of the best qualified Soldiers to serve in positions of increasing responsibility by providing rating chain view of performance and potential for use in centralized selection, assignment, and other personnel management. The information in evaluation reports, the Army’s needs, and the individual Soldier’s qualifications will be used together as a basis for such personnel actions as school selection, promotion, assignment, Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) classification, Command Sergeant Major (CSM) designation, and qualitative management. 2. The secondary function of the ERS is to encourage leader professional development and enhance mission accomplishment through: a. Stressing the importance of sound senior/subordinate relationships. ERS also stresses the importance of setting standards and giving direction to the performance of subordinate leaders. When properly used, the ERS can be a powerful leadership and management tool. b. Contributing to Army-wide improved performance and professional development through increased emphasis on performance counseling. Evaluation reports will provide the rated Soldier formal recognition for performance of duty, measurement of professional values and personal traits, and along with the required support forms is the basis for performance counseling. c. Senior/subordinate communication to make career development information, advice, and guidance readily available to rated Soldiers. Communication is necessary to maintain high professional standards. AR 623-3, para 1-8c

Categories of Evaluations
Mandatory and/or Optional Evaluations – Officer Evaluation Reports and NCO Evaluation Reports School Evaluations – Academic Evaluation Reports for both military and civilian institutions SHOW SLIDE 7: CATEGORIES OF EVALUATIONS Under the ERS, a Soldier is evaluated on his or her performance and potential. The ERS consists of two categories of evaluation reports: 1. Mandatory and/or Optional Evaluations. The applicable evaluation report forms are the DA Form 67–10 series and DA Form 2166–9 series. These evaluations focus on a Soldier’s duty performance, or how well a Soldier performs his or her assigned tasks as related to the Army Leadership Requirements Model. They also focus on potential assessments to include judgments about a Soldier’s ability to perform at the current and higher grade or rank, whether or not a Soldier will be given greater responsibility at the present rank, or retained for further military service. 2. School evaluations. The applicable evaluation report forms are DA Form 1059 (for military institutions) or DA Form 1059–1 (for civilian institutions). These evaluations focus exclusively on the Soldier’s performance and accomplishments while attending a school or course. NOTE: The time period covered by AERs is counted as nonrated time on OERs and NCOERs covering the same period. 3. Selection boards and personnel management systems will be used to evaluate a Soldier’s entire career and his or her personnel file. Evaluation reports are single time-and-place evaluations, all of which are considered when preparing evaluations. AR 623-3, para 1-8a(4)

Army Directive 2013-20 & MILPER Msg 13-306 Substantiated Findings
Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) Program and Evaluations Zero Tolerance! Both officers and noncommissioned officers must commit themselves to eliminating sexual harassment and assault and to fostering climates of dignity and respect in their units. Army Directive & MILPER Msg Help eliminate sexual harassment and assault Officers and NCOs are meeting their commitments and holding them appropriately accountable Requirements for evaluation reports Goals and Objectives Mandatory Officer Evaluation Report Support Form NCOER Counseling and Support Form Initial Counseling for students Raters Assessment Fostered a climate of dignity and respect Identify any significant actions or contributions Identify failures (on and off duty) Substantiated Findings Rater comments on evaluation Senior Rater comments on evaluation Academic Evaluation Reports (Military and Civilian) SHOW SLIDE 8: SEXUAL HARASSMENT/ASSAULT RESPONSE AND PREVENTION PROGRAM AND EVALUATIONS NOTE: Ensure students have access to Army Directive and MILPER Message Review as needed. 1. Army Directive and MILPER Message are the references for changes regarding the Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention Program (SHARP) and Evaluations. The Army is taking important steps to eliminate sexual harassment and assault and to foster climates of dignity and respect in their units. MILPER Message outlines the changes for annotating evaluations. 2. All Officers and NCOs will include goals and objectives to help eliminate sexual harassment and assault. The OER Support Form (or its equivalent) and NCOER Counseling and Support Form must be annotated with goal and objective adherence to SHARP Program. Soldiers attending military service schools, civilian education, medical, or industrial institutions, goals and objectives will be establish during the students’ initial counseling 3. The rater will assess the rated officer or NCO on how well they adhered to the SHARP Program and any significant actions or contributions the rated officer or NCO made: a. Promoting the personal and professional development of his or her subordinates. b. Ensuring the fair, respectful treatment of assigned personnel. c. Establishing a workplace and overall command climate that fosters dignity and respect for all members of the group. 4. Assessments should also identify, as appropriate, any failures by the officer or NCO to foster a climate of dignity, respect and adherence to the SHARP Program. 5. Raters and senior raters will document any substantiated finding on the officers’ DA Form series, NCOs’ DA Form , DA Form 1059 and DA Form such as: a. Committing an act of sexual harassment or sexual assault. b. Failing to report a sexual harassment or assault. c. Failing to respond to a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault. d. Retaliating against a person making a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault. Where do you put it on an evaluation? 8

Check on Learning 1. The ERS identifies Soldiers who are ____________ for promotion and assignment to positions of ________________. a. ready / influence b. eligible / importance c. qualified / importance d. best qualified / greater responsibility 2. ERS will evaluate the _____________ and _______________ of WO1 through BG, and SGT through CSM in peacetime and wartime. a. performance / intellect b. performance / potential c. intellect / fitness d. performance / fitness 3. The two categories of evaluations are _____________________________ and ______________. a. Mandatory and or optional / school b. officer / NCO c. performance / potential d. mandatory / optional SHOW SLIDE 9: CHECK ON LEARNING NOTE: Conduct a Check on Learning, poll for questions and summarize the learning activity. NOTE TO INSTRUCTOR: This slide is a build slide and contains 4 animations. Click the mouse to remove the incorrect answers. 1. The ERS identifies Soldiers who are ____________ for promotion and assignment to positions of ________________. (AR 623-3, para 1-8(2)) a. ready / influence b. eligible / importance c. qualified / importance d. best qualified / greater responsibility 2. ERS will evaluate the _____________ and _______________ of WO1 through BG, and SGT through CSM in peacetime and wartime. (AR 623-3, para 1-7a. & b.) a. performance / intellect b. performance / potential c. intellect / fitness d. performance / fitness 3. The two categories of evaluations are __________ and ______________. (AR 623-3, para 1-8a(4)) a. Mandatory and or optional / school b. officer / NCO c. performance and potential d. mandatory / optional

Rating Chain Requirements & Responsibilities
SHOW SLIDE 10: RATING CHAIN REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Learning Step/Activity 2. Determine Rating Chain Qualifications and Responsibilities Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:16 Time of Instruction: 15 mins We’ve discussed the basic principles of the evaluation reporting system, such as the types of evaluations and the primary and secondary functions of the evaluation system. Next, we’ll discuss the rating chain, including the qualifications and responsibilities of the rating chain. NOTE: Ask students what the purpose and requirements are for rating chains and lead a learner-centered discussion on the challenges of keeping rating chains updated in the Operational Environment (OE). Have students identify some of the common problems they are likely to experience as an S-1. Identify any “best practices” or lessons learned on establishing and maintaining rating schemes as you work through LSA 2.

Rules for Designating Rating Chain
NCOs Officers Rater (para 2-5) Rater (para 2-5) Senior Rater (para 2-7) Intermediate (para 2-6) Supplementary Reviewer Senior Rater (para 2-7) (para 2-8, affects both chains) Who can / cannot serve in the position? What is the time requirement? What are the restrictions? SHOW SLIDE 11: RULES FOR DESIGNATING RATING CHAIN NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, paragraph 2-5. 1. Rater. The rater will normally be the immediate supervisor of the rated Soldier responsible for directing and assessing the rated Soldier’s performance. The rater will normally be senior to the rated Soldier in grade or date of rank. Commanders will rate Commanders. Civilian raters for OERs and NCOERs will be designated as official supervisors on the established rating scheme. 2. Intermediate Rater (DA Form 67–10 series only). An intermediate rater will be included when there is a level of supervision between the rater and senior rater. We will discuss this in greater detail in a few minutes. 3. Senior Rater. The senior rater will normally be the immediate supervisor of the rater and a supervisor above all other rating officials in the rated NCO's/officer’s chain of command or chain of supervision. 4. Supplementary Reviewer. In most instances for DA Form series, the senior rater will conduct the final rating chain review. For DA Form series when a rated NCOs rating chain includes SGM/CSM, chief warrant officer three (CW3) through CW5 or an Army officer in the rank of CPT or above, as the senior rater, the senior rater will conduct the final rating chain review. A mandatory supplementary review is required for NCOERs when a senior rater within the rated NCOs rating chain includes an NCO in the rank of SFC through 1SG/MSG, warrant officers in the rank of WO1 through CW2, and Army officer in the rank of 2LT and 1LT. AR 623-3, Chapter 2

Officer Rating Chain Requirements
Rating Official Minimum Time Rank Requirement Rater 90 calendar days (AGR/Depl) (120 days non-mobilization) Senior to rated officer; sister and allied service ok Intermediate Rater 60 calendar days (90 days USAR/ARNG) Only when required. Senior to rated officer; sister and allied service ok Senior Rater (90 days ARNG) See AR 623-3, Table 2-1 Supplementary Reviewer None required Officer / GS12+; Senior to SR; sister service OK, when rater or SR is a uniformed Army Official SHOW SLIDE 12: OFFICER RATING CHAIN REQUIREMENTS NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Chapter 2, para 2-3 f (1) and paras 2-5 through 2-8 for rules which designate raters, intermediate raters, senior raters (SR), and reviewers. 1. Most officer rating chains consist of the rated officer, the rater, and the SR. The SR accomplishes the final rating chain review. Some officer rating chains will also include an intermediate rater. An intermediate rater will be designated only when a rated officer has a supervisor who is between the rater and senior rater and requires a technical expert in the chain of command. 2. In some cases, a rated officer’s rating chain may have a qualified rating official / supervisor who serves as both a rater and an SR. In other situations, a rated officer’s rating chain may consist of new supervision, when he/she is supervised and assigned different duties by two qualified, but separate chains of command or supervision through the entire rating period. 3. A military Rater will be senior to the rated officer, by grade or date of rank. Exceptions to this rule are — a. A rater in a command position may rate an officer who is of the same grade but senior in date of rank if the rater has been appointed to command by direction of the President and has command authority over the rated officer. b. Officers in command positions may rate an officer over whom they have command authority and who are senior in date of rank but ineligible by law or regulation to command troops other than those of their own branch, service, or department. In such cases, the raters will attach a copy of the written assumption of command as an enclosure to the rated officer’s report. c. An officer in a Joint headquarters or activity may rate an officer who is senior in date of rank provided — (1) The rater is not a U.S. Army officer. (2) The senior rater is at least one grade senior to the rated officer. (3) Each instance is approved in writing by the next senior Army member of the command or activity. A copy of the approval will be sent to HQDA as an enclosure to the evaluation form. d. For OERs, a civilian rater has no minimum grade requirement but will be the rated individual’s designated supervisor. e. Commanders will normally be rated by the next higher commander. An exception to this rule is allowed when a staff officer or higher level commander is the logical choice as the commander’s immediate supervisor because of functional, geographical, or technical supervision requirements. f. Officers who are selected for promotion and who are in authorized positions for the new grade may rate any officer they supervise if, after the rater’s promotion, they will be senior to the rated officer. g. A rater who has been selected for promotion and who is in an authorized position for the new grade will be considered to be serving in the new grade. The symbol “P” will be put next to the current grade on the applicable evaluation form. h. A rater who has been selected for promotion but is not in a position authorized for the new grade will be considered to be serving in the current grade. The symbol “P” will not be put next to the current grade on the applicable evaluation form. 4. Intermediate Rater - U.S. or allied officer or federal employee. No minimum grade requirement for civilian employees, but must be rater’s designated supervisor. 5. Senior Rater - Officer of U.S. Armed Forces or federal employee senior to all members of rating chain. Immediate supervisor of the rater who is two grades higher for WO1–MAJ and one grade higher for LTC–COL. Also conducts the final rating chain review. 6. Supplementary Reviewer – Officer and in direct line of supervision. Commanders may appoint sister service or DOD (GS12+) civilians when rater or senior rater is a uniformed Army official.

NCO Rating Chain Requirements
Rating Official Minimum Time Rank Requirement Rater Normally 90 calendar days SGT or above / DoD civilian; senior to rated NCO; sister service OK Senior Rater 60 calendar days Senior to rater; DoD Civilian; sister service OK Supplementary Reviewer None required Officer / E-9 / GS12+; Senior to SR; sister service OK, when rater or SR is a uniformed Army Official SHOW SLIDE 13: NCO RATING CHAIN REQUIREMENTS NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Chapter 2, para 2-3f (2) and paras 2-5 through 2-8 for rules which designate raters, senior raters, and reviewers. 1. NCO rating chains consist of the rated NCO, the rater, the SR, and the reviewer. The reviewer will be a SGM, CSM, warrant officer, or officer in the direct line of supervision and senior in pay grade or date of rank to the SR. NCO rating chains will not include an intermediate rater. The following qualifications apply to the Rater for NCOERs: a. Minimum time. The rater will normally be the immediate supervisor of the rated NCO and designated as the rater for a minimum period of 90 calendar days, in most instances. Exceptions include relief for cause and similar situations. b. Rank requirement. The rater must be a sergeant or above if military and senior to the rated NCO by either pay grade or date of rank. (1) Commanders may appoint DoD civilians as raters when an immediate military supervisor is not available and when the civilian supervisor is in the best position to accurately evaluate the NCO's performance. (2) Members of other U.S. military services who meet the qualifications above may be raters. (3) Members of Allied Forces are not authorized to be appointed as raters. (4) If the rater is an NCO and is on a recommended list for promotion or frocked in one of the top three grades (1SG, SGM, or CSM) and is serving in an authorized position for the new grade, then he/she can rate any NCO supervised, if after the rater’s promotion he/she will be senior in pay grade or date of rank to the rated NCO. (5) CSMs of TOE and TDA units will be rated by the commander, in most instances. 2. Senior Rater - Officer or NCO of U.S. Armed Forces or federal employee; immediate supervisor of the rater; if an NCO and on promotion list or frocked and serving in top three NCO grades can senior rate any NCO supervised, if after promotion they will be senior. Must be designated as NCO’s SR for a minimum period of 60 calendar days. 3. Reviewer – Officer , SGM or CSM of U.S. Army and in direct line of supervision. Commanders may appoint sister service or DOD (GS12+) civilians when rater or senior rater is a uniformed Army official. Senior Rater: The senior rater will be the immediate supervisor of the rater and designated as the rated NCO’s senior rater for a minimum period of 60 calendar days (see chap 3, sections VIII and IX).

Rating Chain Responsibilities
Rater Provide Support Forms, if required Initial / quarterly counseling Assess Soldier using all reasonable means Review Support Form at end of rating period if applicable Provide an objective and comprehensive evaluation of the rated Soldier’s performance and potential Senior Rater Become familiar with Soldier’s performance Evaluate Soldier from a broad organizational perspective Only evaluate the rated Soldier’s potential relative to peers Ensure all reports are complete and realistic Ensure Soldier electronically signs eval Intermediate Rater (OERs) When required to link rater and senior rater (e.g., Physician Assistant, Chaplain) Assess performance based on personal contact, records, and reports Render and objective evaluation on both performance and potential An intermediate rater will not be incorporated within the rating chain as a means to promote pooling Supplementary Reviewer In most instances the senior rater (OER and NCOERs) will perform final rating chain review Ensure rating chain are correct Ensure report was reviewed by a 1SG / SGM / CSM (NCOER) Ensure comments are consistent with counseling, support forms (or equivalent), or other communications SHOW SLIDE 14: RATING CHAIN RESPONSIBILITIES NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, paragraphs 2-12 thru 2-16. NOTE: For additional information and specific instructions, refer students to DA Pam 623–3, as needed.

Rating Chain Information
Rating Chains: Are established by Commanders, Commandants and leaders of an organization and maintained by rating officials Tie individual performance to a specific senior / subordinate relationship and should correspond as nearly as practicable to chain of command and supervision Are established by name, effective dates, published and distributed to all concerned List the rated Soldier and all rating officials SHOW SLIDE 15: RATING CHAIN INFORMATION NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Chapter 2, para 2-2 and 2-3. 1. Rating chains must correspond as nearly as practicable to the chain of command and supervision within an organization, regardless of component or geographical location. Rating chains are established by name, given effective dates, published, and distributed manually or electronically to each rated officer, NCO, and civilian member of the rating chain. Any changes to the rating chain will also be published and distributed as required. Changes to the rating chain may not be retroactive. 2. Rating chains are established by Commanders or Commandants and maintained by rating officials to provide the best evaluation of an individual Soldier’s performance and potential. A rating chain also ties the rated Soldier’s performance to a specific senior/subordinate relationship. This allows for proper counseling to develop the rated Soldier and accomplish the mission. These functions are best achieved within an organization’s chain of command. 3. Generally, the evaluation of Soldiers by persons not involved in the chain of command or supervision is inappropriate. It is recommended that the BDE S-1/BN S-1 or other administrative office maintain superseded rating chains for a period of one to two-years for historical purposes only; however, there is no requirement to do this. Special rules for designating rating officials have been made to cover the death, relief, or incapacitation of a rating official. These rules are covered in AR 623-3, para 2-20. AR 623-3, para 2-2 and 2-3

Rating Chain Development
Example Rating Chain As of Rated Officer Rater Intermediate Rater Senior Rater LTC Jones Bn Cdr COL Reese Bde Cdr NA MG Smith Div CG CH(CPT) Cox Bn Chaplain MAJ Black Bn XO CH(MAJ) Ivy Bde Chaplain Rated NCO Supplementary Reviewer (some instances) CSM Posey Bn CSM SHOW SLIDE 16: RATING CHAIN DEVELOPMENT 1. Officer rating chains consist of the rated officer, the rater, and the senior rater and in some instances a supplementary reviewer . The senior rater accomplishes the final rating chain review. a. Some officer rating chains will also include an intermediate rater. An intermediate rater will be designated only when a rated officer has a supervisor who is between the rater and senior rater and requires a technical expert in the chain of command. b. In some cases, a rated officer’s rating chain may have a qualified rating official/supervisor who serves as both a rater and a senior rater. In such a case, refer to paragraph 2-20 of AR for further guidance. c. In other situations, a rated officer’s rating chain may consist of new supervision, when he/she is supervised and assigned different duties by two qualified, but separate chains of command or supervision through the entire rating period. d. For special rules governing the rating of officers under dual supervision, chaplains, Judge Advocate General Counsel (JAGC), Army Medical Department (AMEDD) and others, refer to section IV of Chapter 2, AR 2. NCO rating chains consist of the rated NCO, the rater, the senior rater, and in some instances a supplementary reviewer (See paragraph 2-3 & 2-8 for further information on supplementary reviewers). The reviewer will be a SGM, CSM, warrant officer, or officer in the direct line of supervision and senior in pay grade or date of rank to the senior rater. NCO rating chains will not include an intermediate rater. a. Generally, the evaluation of Soldiers by persons not involved in the chain of command or supervision is inappropriate. b. Special rules for designating rating officials have been made to cover the death, relief, or incapacitation of a rating official. These rules are covered in paragraph 2-19 of AR c. It is recommended that the battalion S-1/brigade S-1 or other administrative office maintain superseded rating chains for a period of 1 to 2 years for historical purposes only.

Counseling Requirements / Support Form Communication Process
Initial counseling/discussion and follow-up face-to-face: Initial counseling/discussion assists in developing duty description, responsibilities, and performance objectives Follow-up counseling enhances mission related planning, assessment, and performance development Follow-up counseling sessions conducted: Active Army NCOs – Quarterly ARNG and USAR NCOs – Semi-annually Active Army CPT / LT / CW2 / WO1 – Quarterly ARNG and USAR CPT / LT / CW2 /WO1 – Quarterly Field Grades and above – determined by rating officials Field Grade ARNG officers – Semi-annually SHOW SLIDE 17: COUNSELING REQUIREMENTS / SUPPORT FORM COMMUNICATION PROCESS Learning Step/Activity 3. Define Counseling Requirements that support the ERS. Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:16 Time of Instruction: 10 mins NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, para 3-4. 1. The communication process is characterized by initial and follow-up face-to-face counseling between the rater and the rated Soldier throughout the rating period. This process used for NCOs is DA Form A. 2. The initial face-to-face counseling/discussion assists in developing the elements of the rated individual’s duty description, responsibilities, and performance objectives. The follow-up counseling enhances mission-related planning, assessment, and performance development. 3. Through the communication process, rated individuals are made aware of the specifics of their duties and may influence the decision on what is to be accomplished. Thus the rated Soldier is better able to: a. Direct and develop their subordinates. b. Plan for accomplishing the mission. c. Gain valuable information about the organization d. Find better ways to accomplish the mission. 4. IAW AR 623-3, 3-6a(1)a- Officers draft their DA Form A, within the first 30 days of the rating period, using the rater or senior rater DA Forms A as input for goals and objectives. Submitting written performance objectives for approval must be followed up by a face-to-face counseling or an alternative follow-up discussion.

Support Forms NCO Support Form DA Form 2166-9-1A
Mandatory for CPL – CSM Initiate and complete in the Evaluation Entry System (EES) Used by Rater to prepare for, conduct, and record results of performance counseling Emphasize development and improvement Nested with the current leadership doctrine (ADRP 6-22) Officer Support Form Use of DA Form A is mandatory for COLs and below Initiate and complete in the Evaluation Entry System (EES) Data transferable between the support and evaluation forms within EES Facilitates the rater’s ability to easily complete future OERs Performance based counseling tool Ties performance objectives to measureable accomplishments Nested with the current leadership doctrine (ADRP 6-22) SHOW SLIDE 18: SUPPORT FORMS NOTE: Refer students to DA Pam 623-3, para 3-1, 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3. 1. NCO Counseling The purpose and process of DA Form A, NCOER Counseling and Support Form, is to contribute to Army-wide professional development by increased emphasis on performance counseling. DA Form is used by the rater along with a working copy of the NCOER to prepare for, conduct, and record results of performance counseling with the rated NCO. The form is mandatory for counseling all NCOs, CPL through CSM. The form contains a step-by-step guideline for conducting both the initial and later counseling sessions. The ultimate goal of the enlisted counseling is to help all NCOs be successful and to meet established standards. Conduct counseling sessions at least quarterly for Active Army and AGR NCOs and at least semi-annually for ARNGUS and USAR NCOs performing IDT. These counseling sessions differ from the first counseling session in that the primary focus is on telling the rated NCO how well they are performing. 2. Officer Counseling As discussed on the previous slide, use of DA Form A (OER Support Form) to document performance counseling is mandatory. While the requirement to conduct an initial discussion with the rated officer regarding the mission, goals, duties and objectives of their assigned duty position remains, the method or means for documenting that initial discussion must be documented on A. DA Pam 623-3, Table C-1 DA Pam 623-3, para 3-1

OER Support Form - Page 1 Part I – Rated Officer Admin Data
Part II – Rating Chain Part III – Counseling Part IV – Duty Title / Responsibilities Part V – Objectives / Accomplishments SHOW SLIDE 19: OER SUPPORT FORM - PAGE 1 NOTE: Review with students and facilitate discussion on Parts I thru V of the OER Support Form, as needed.

Support Form (Back) Nested with the current leadership doctrine (ADP 6-22) Pages 3-5 of the form contain instructions to assist Objectives / contributions Continued linked to Attributes and Competencies APFT Goals SHOW SLIDE 20: SUPPORT FORM (BACK) NOTE: Review with students and facilitate discussion on the various sections of Part V of the OER Support Form, as needed. Character Presence Intellect Leads Develops Achieves

NCOER Support Form Page 1
Up to 7 lines of text Up to 2 lines of text Up to 16 lines of text Part I – SSD and NCOES requirement met for next grade Part II – Senior Rater annotates counseling dates Part II – Supplementary Reviewer, if required Part IV – Rated NCO provides goals and expectations SHOW SLIDE 21: EXAMPLE OF NCOER SUPPORT FORM PAGE 1 NOTE: The next couple of slides are snapshots of the NCOER Support Form and the three grade-plate NCOERs. The support form includes the following new features: 1. Structured Self-Development (SSD) and Military Education Level (MEL) codes will auto-populate on the support form. This will serve two purposes. First, if the information is inaccurate, the rated NCO will need to contact their HR office or HRC to get it updated. Second, the rating chain will be able to mentor and counsel the rated NCO and track his/her progress in attaining promotion eligibility for the next grade (in the case of Sergeants Major, eligibility for joint and/or nominative assignments). 2. The rated NCO will list their goals and expectations in Part IV. This will place more onus or responsibility on the rated NCO to perform throughout the rating period and provide the rating officials with additional information to consider when evaluating overall performance and potential. 3. Another key change is that there is now a senior rater comments section. Senior raters should counsel the rated NCO twice at least twice during the rating period. This will complement the rater’s initial and quarterly counseling sessions. Also, with the implementation of a senior rater profile, it becomes more critical for the senior rater to provide counsel and mentorship to the rated NCO. DA Pam 623-3, Para 3-1 DA Pam 623-3, Para 3-1 DA Pam 623-3, Para 3-1

NCOER Support Form (Back)
Up to 8 lines of text for each field Part V – Attributes and Competencies (ADP 6-22) CHARACTER: Rater assesses the rated NCO’s performance in fostering a climate of dignity and respect and adhering to the requirements of the SHARP Program Part VI – Senior Rater provides comments SHOW SLIDE 22: NCOER SUPPORT FORM (BACK) The NCOER Support Form will align with leadership doctrine. Based on the attributes and competencies of ADP 6-22, the rater will discuss and establish major performance objectives in Part V. The senior rater should provide comments as discussed in the two counseling sessions. DA Pam 623-3, Para 2-1

Check on Learning 1. On an OER, who in the rating chain is responsible for commenting on an officer’s performance objectives? a. Rater b. Intermediate Rater c. Senior Rater d. Reviewer 2. Whose evaluation is the link between the day-to-day observation of the rated Soldier and the longer-term evaluation of the rated Soldier’s potential by HQDA selection boards? 3. What is the military senior rater minimum grade requirements for a 2LT? a. CPT b. CPTP / MAJ c. LTC d. COL SHOW SLIDE 23: CHECK ON LEARNING NOTE: Conduct a Check on Learning and summarize the learning activity. NOTE TO INSTRUCTOR: This slide is a build slide and contains 5 animations. Click the mouse to remove the incorrect answers. 1. On an OER, who in the rating chain is responsible for commenting on an officer’s performance objectives? (AR 623-3, para 2-12) a. Rater b. Intermediate Rater c. Senior Rater d. Reviewer 2. Whose evaluation is the link between the day-to-day observation of the rated Soldier and the longer-term evaluation of the rated Soldier’s potential by HQDA selection boards? (AR 623-3, para 2-14) 3. What is the military senior rater minimum grade requirements for a 2LT? (AR 623-3, Table 2-1) a. CPT b. CPTP / MAJ c. LTC d. COL

Types of Evaluation Reports
Two types: Mandatory Optional Further divided into: “90-day minimum” “other than 90-day minimum” SHOW SLIDE 24: TYPES OF EVALUATION REPORTS Learning Step / Activity 4. Identify types of Evaluation Reports Method of Instruction: Conference / Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:16 Time of Instruction: 30 mins NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, paragraph 3-2c, as needed. There are two types of reports: mandatory and optional. These are further divided into a 90-day minimum rating period and other-than-90-day-minimum requirement. To determine if a Soldier meets the minimum calendar day requirements to receive a report, nonrated periods occurring during the rating period are deducted from the total number of days served in the same position under the same rater. NOTE: Explain to students that the method to determine rating periods will be discussed in greater detail in a subsequent learning activity. To determine 90-day minimum requirements, nonrated periods are deducted from total number of days in rating period AR 623-3, Para 3-2c

Other than 90-Day Minimum Other Mandatory Reports (less common)
Change of Rater 3-40 JAG Officers 3-51 Annual 3-41 Initial Tour of Extended Active Duty 3-52 Extended Annual 3-42 HRC Directed 3-53 Change of Duty 3-43 Relief-for-Cause 3-54/55 Depart Temporary Duty 3-44 Special Duty or Temporary Change of Station 3-45 Officer Failed Promotion Selection 3-46 Other Mandatory Reports (less common) Initial Tour of Extended Active Duty (OER only) (AMEDD and JAGC officers only) Application for Active Army Appointment (OER only) (Active Duty officer applies for Active Army Appointment) Funded Legal Education Program (FLEP) officers participating in on-the-job training (OER only) (JAGC officers only) U.S. Army HRC Directed Release from Active Duty Service (U.S. Army Reserve and Army National Guard only) SHOW SLIDE 25: MANDATORY REPORTS 1. Mandatory reports with a 90-day minimum include- a. Change of Rater (paragraph 3-40). b. Annual (paragraph 3-41). c. Extended Annual (paragraph 3-42). d. Change of Duty (paragraph 3-43). e. Depart Temporary Duty (TDY), Special Duty (SD), or Temporary Change of Station (TCS) (Paragraph 3-44); including Supervisor Evaluations while TDY, SD, or TCS (paragraph 3-45). f. Officer failing selection for promotion (paragraph 3-46). 2. Mandatory reports with other than a 90-day minimum include- a. Initial Tour of Extended Active Duty (paragraph 3-52). b. Application for Army Appointment (paragraph 3-51). c. Funded Legal Education Program (FLEP) Officers participating in on-the-job training (paragraph 3-56). d. Human Resources Command (HRC) Directed (paragraph 3-53). e. Relief for Cause (paragraph 3-54). f. Release from Active Duty Service (U.S. Army Reserve and Army National Guard only) (paragraph 3-47). NOTE: The minimum rating period for a change of rater is 90 days. g. An OER report is mandatory when the rated officer ceases to serve under the immediate supervision of the rater and minimum rating qualifications are met (90-days). A Change of Duty report is mandatory when a rated Soldier is reassigned to a different principal duty while still serving under the same rater or when he or she is separated from Army service. rom active duty (REFRAD) will receive a change of duty report instead of this type of report. h. An NCOER is mandatory when the rated NCO- (1) Ceases to serve under the immediate supervision of the rater and minimum rating qualifications are met (90-days). (2) Is reduced to corporal/specialist or below. Reduction to another NCO grade does not require a report, unless the rated NCO’s immediate supervisor changes. (3) Is separated from active duty. As an exception, retirement reports of less than one year will be rendered at the option of the rater or senior rater or when requested by the rated NCO. (4) Is declared mission or becomes a prisoner or hostage. Under these situations, rating chain minimums do not apply. 3. An annual report for both OERs and NCOERs is mandatory for a rated Soldier on completion of one calendar year of duty following the THRU date of the last report. a. If one year has elapsed and the rated Soldier has not performed the same duty under the same rater for 90 days, an extended annual (Paragraph 3-41) will be submitted. b. If the rated Soldier must go TDY to attend a school and the annual report will be due, the Depart TDY report (paragraph 3-44) may be prepared and processed before departing to reestablish an annual cycle or an extended annual report may be prepared upon return to the same rating officials. c. Additional specific requirements for completion of an annual NCOER include- (1) One calendar year after the effective date of promotion to sergeant. (2) Reversion to NCO status after serving as a commissioned or warrant officer for 12 months or more. (3) Re-entry on active duty in a rank of sergeant or above after a break in enlisted service of 12 months or more. 4. There are two types of extended annual reports: a. The first type is a mandatory to cover nonrated periods since the previous evaluation when 1 calendar year has elapsed. b. The second type is optional and used only in exceptional situations. (See para 3-34 for those exceptional situations). 5. Change of Duty. A change of duty report is mandatory when the rated officer has a change of principal duty, even though the rater remains the same. This report is used for all reassignments, including PCS. No report is submitted when organizational changes merely alter the rated officer’s principal duty title but do not change the type of work performed. A report will be submitted when organizational changes result in a change of rater. a. A change of duty report is mandatory when the rated officer is separated from active duty. As an exception, retirement reports of less than one year will be rendered at the option of the rater or senior rater or when requested by the rated officer. b. When the rated officer is declared missing or becomes a prisoner or hostage, a report is required as of the date of the incident. Under these situations, rating chain minimums do not apply. 6. Depart TDY, SD or TCS. An OER or NCOER will be submitted on rated Soldiers by the rating officials in the organization from which they depart when they depart on temporary duty (TDY), special duty (SD), or temporary change of station (TCS) to perform duties not related to the rated Soldier’s primary functions in their units; and, while on TDY, SD, or TCS, they serve under a different supervisor for a period of 90 or more calendar days. However, this report is not required before departure on TDY for schooling. a. In cases where it cannot be determined if such duty-related TDY, SD, or TCS will last for 90 days, a report may be submitted. b. In cases when a mandatory report (annual, change of rater, etc.) may come due while Soldiers are attending schools that will result in nonrated time, this report may be submitted to alleviate the need for a mandatory report while at school. In these cases, an extended annual report is also an option. c. A report is not authorized when the rated Soldier is still responsible to or receiving guidance or instruction from the chain of command of the parent unit. d. An individual attached to an organization pending compassionate reassignment remains responsible to the parent unit and will not receive an evaluation report from the attached organization. A memorandum of input from the supervising officials at the attached organization to the Soldier’s rating officials in mandatory. e. Rated Soldiers on TDY, SD, or TCS who are not responsible to their parent organization will be rated by their TDY, SD, or TCS supervisors according to the rating chain requirements. In these cases, the TDY, SD, or TCS supervisor is responsible for ensuring that a rating chain is published and that a support form is initiated on the rated Soldier. Reports are not authorized for periods of fewer than 90 calendar days unless otherwise authorized as an exception. NOTE: Remind students that minimum rater qualifications must be met in the case of a TDY, SD, or TCS supervisor’s evaluation. 7. Promotion Selection Failure. An officer who fails to be selected for promotion by an active-duty promotion board will receive an OER prior to the next promotion board of the same type. The following conditions must be met: a. The rated officer has not received an OER since the convene date of the board that did not select the officer for promotion. b. The rating period must cover 90 or more calendar days as of the date announced in a DA message announcing the zone of consideration for the next board. c. The minimum time requirements for the rater are satisfied. NOTE: This requirement does not apply to officers who are not in a regular duty environment with an established rating chain, e.g., officers attending school are not eligible for an OER. 8. Relief-for-Cause. An OER or NCOER is required when a rated Soldier is relieved for cause regardless of the rating period involved. Relief for cause is defined as: a. Officer – early release of an officer from a specific duty or assignment directed by superior authority and based on a decision that the officer has failed in their performance of duty. In this regard, duty performance will consist of the completion of assigned tasks in a competent manner and compliance at all times with the accepted professional officer standards shown in DA Form 67-9, Part IV. These standards apply to conduct both on and off duty. b. NCO – removal of an NCO from a rateable assignment based on a decision by a member of the NCO’s chain of command or supervisory chain that the NCO’s personal or professional characteristics, conduct, behavior, or performance of duty warrants removal in the best interest of the U.S. Army. c. Additional considerations for these reports are as follows: (1) If the relief does not occur on the date the rated Soldier is removed from the duty position or responsibilities, the suspended period of time will be included in the report as nonrated time. (2) Cases where the rated Soldier is suspended from duties pending an investigation must be resolved as quickly as possible to reduce the amount of potential nonrated time involved. (3) If Relief-for-Cause is contemplated on the basis of an informal AR 15–6 investigation, referral procedures contained in that regulation will be followed before the act of initiating or directing the relief. This is irrespective of the fact that the resultant report will also be referred to the rated officer as described in Paragraph 3–34. T (4) The minimum time requirements for rating officials do not apply. (5) An NCOER report is required when an NCO is relieved for cause regardless of the rating period involved. The minimum rater and senior rater qualifications and the minimum rating period are 30 rated days. The fundamental purpose of this restriction is to allow the rated NCO a sufficient period to react to performance counseling during each rating period. Authority to waive this 30-day minimum rating period and rater and senior rater qualification period in cases of misconduct is granted to a general officer in the chain of command or an officer having general court-martial jurisdiction over the relieved NCO. (6) The rating official directing the relief will clearly explain the reason for the relief in his/her portion of the NCOER. If the relief is directed by an official other than the rater or senior rater, the official directing the relief will describe the reasons for the relief in an enclosure to the report. NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, para 3–54. 9. Reports are also submitted under the following circumstances. These reports are mandatory, but less common. a. Initial tour of extended active duty-An OER report will be prepared only for AMEDD and JAGC commissioned officers under specified circumstances. Specified circumstances requiring a report include officers who are: (1) Serving an initial tour of active duty in the Army (other than active duty for training or RC officers serving on statutory tours under 10 USC 175, 3021, 10211, 12301(d), and (2) Reentering active duty after a break in service of at least 1 year. (3) Completing law school under TJAG’s Funded Legal Education Program (AR 27–1) (see appendix D). (4) Army Medical Specialist Corps officers serving on an initial tour of extended active duty in the Army following completion of the dietetic internship, Occupational Affiliation Program, or U.S. Army Baylor University Program in Physical Therapy, or Physician Assistant Program. b. Application for Active Army appointment-An OER report will be required when an active-duty officer applies for appointment in the Active Army. This applies only if the applicant has completed fewer than 5 years Active Army commissioned or warrant officer service and has not been rated during the 90 days immediately preceding the date of application. The rating officials will meet the minimum time requirements. c. Funded Legal Education Program officers participating in on-the-job training- An OER report will be required when an officer taking part in TJAG’s Funded Legal Education Program (AR 27–1) completes on-the-job training (OJT) of 31 or more calendar days. Commanders, in coordination with JAGC officials at the OJT sites, will establish rating chains that ensure rating officials are present and available during OJT to ensure at least one report per year. OERs for officers who perform on-the-job training of 30 or fewer days may be submitted at the option of the rating officials. Rating chain time minimums do not apply. d. U.S. Army Human Resources Command directed evaluation report-For evaluation reports when HRC decides there is a need for a report (Para 1–4a(3) and other provisions of this chapter do not apply, HRC may direct that a report be submitted. The command directed report code will be used. e. These reports do not apply to NCOs. NOTE: These reports are submitted at the option of rating officials. AR 623-3, Chapter 3

Other than 90-Day Minimum
Optional Reports 90-Day Minimum Other than 90-Day Minimum Complete the Record 3-56 Not a basis for Standby Advisory Board (STAB) for promotion consideration. Senior Rater Option 3-57 60-Day Option 3-58 Rater Option 3-59 SHOW SLIDE 26: OPTIONAL REPORTS Complete-the-Record reports are optional. Therefore, the absence of such a report from the official file at the time of the board’s review will not be a basis to request standby reconsideration unless the absence is due to administrative error or a delay in processing at HQDA. 1. For officers a DA Form 67–10 series- Complete-the-Record report may be submitted on a rated officer who is about to be considered by a DA selection board for promotion, project manager, school, or command (battalion or brigade level) provided the following conditions are met: a. The rated officer will be in or above the zone of consideration for promotion. b. The rated officer will have served for a minimum of 90 calendar days (excluding nonrated periods) in the same position under the same rater as of the Complete the Record date announced in the DA message announcing the zones of consideration. c. All other rating chain time minimums apply. 2. For NCOs a DA Form 2166–9 series Complete-the-Record Report may be submitted on a NCO who is about to be considered by a DA centralized board for promotion, school, or CSM selection, provided the following conditions are met: a. The rated NCO will be in the zone of consideration (primary or secondary) for a centralized promotion board or in the zone of consideration for a school or CSM selection board. b. The rated NCO will have been under the same rater for at least 90 rated days as of the ending date established in the message announcing the zones of consideration. d. The rated NCO will not have received a previous report for the current duty position at the current organization. 3. Senior rater option reports. For DA Form 67–10 series and DA Form 2166–9 series, when a change in senior rater occurs, the senior rater may direct that a report be made on any officer whom they senior rate. This will apply only if the following conditions are met: a. The senior rater has served in that position for at least 60 calendar days. In cases where a general officer is serving as both rater and senior rater, the minimum rater requirement will also be 60 days versus the normal 90-day requirement. b. The rater meets the minimum requirements to give a report. c. The Soldier has not received a report in the preceding 90 calendar days. d. When an evaluation report is due within 60 calendar days of the change in senior rater, the senior rater will submit a senior rater option report to prevent that OER or NCOER being submitted without a senior rater evaluation. 4. Sixty-day option reports-When one of the conditions described in paragraphs 3–44 through 3–47 (Change of rater, change of duty etc.) occurs, and there are fewer than 90 calendar days but more than 59 calendar days (excluding nonrated periods) in the rating period, a report on rated Soldiers maybe initiated at the option of the rater. However, the following conditions will be met: a. The rated Soldier will be serving in an overseas designated short tour for a period of 14 months or less. b. The senior rater will meet the minimum time-in-position requirements to evaluate (60 days) and will approve or disapprove submission of the report. When the senior rater disapproves the submission of the report, the basis for the disapproval will be stated and the report returned through the rating chain to the rater. The rater will inform the rated individual that the report has been disapproved and destroy the report. 5. Rater option reports (DA Form 67–10 series only)-When one of the conditions described in Paragraph 3–59 occurs but there are fewer than 90 calendar days (excluding nonrated periods) in the rating period, an OER may be submitted at the option of the rater. However, the rated officer will have served continuously under the same rater in the same position for 90 or more calendar days in the previous rating period. NOTE: USE EXAMPLE IN AR: An officer received an annual OER on 31 March. The rated officer departs PCS on 22 May. The rating period is 51 days. If those 51 days were spent in the same duty position under the same rater as shown on the report ending 31 March, the rater may, at their option, render a report for the period 1 April-21 May. All other rating chain minimums apply. NOTE: Explain to students that Chapter 4 (Evaluation Redress Program) will not be explained in great detail during this class. However, as professional HR Soldiers and advisors to Soldiers and Commanders, they should research and become familiar with this program. NOTE: The “Reason” submission codes correspond with the type of report being submitted and is a part of the drop down menu on the new evaluation forms. AR 623-3, Chapter 3, Section X

Letter of Input Applies to:
Rated Soldiers on TDY, SD, or TCS (0 to 89 day periods) Release from Active Duty Service reports (USAR & ARNG only) Lack of Specific Rater Qualification Situations (See AR 623-3, E-5) All previous Memorandum of Input policy is removed in lieu of rendering an evaluation report. SHOW SLIDE 27: LETTER OF INPUT AR and DA PAM removes previous policy for memorandum of input use in lieu of rendering an evaluation report (throughout) except for special cases where a letter of input will be used. AR 623-3, Table 3-1

Restrictions Evaluation Parameters (3-16) Comments (3-17)
Prohibited narrative techniques(3-18) Unproven derogatory information (3-19) Prohibited comments (3-20) Comments about marital status and spouse (3-21) SHOW SLIDE 28: RESTRICTIONS NOTE: There are preparation and processing guidelines and restrictions for evaluation reporting. The perimeters are: 1. Each report will be an independent evaluation of the rated Soldier for a specific rating period. It will not refer to prior or subsequent reports. It will not remark on performance or incidents occurring before or after the period covered (para 3-20). a. For Relief-for-Cause reports have exceptions based on information pertaining to a previous reporting period. Example: A rating official may relieve a Soldier found to be involved in some illegal activity during a previous reporting period. They may refer to the prior rating period to explain the reasons for relief. b. When the most recent APFT performance or profile data occurred prior to the beginning date of the report. This exception is allowed in order to comply with APFT and height and weight requirements. 2. Comments will not exceed the space provided on DA Form 67–10 series, DA Form 2166–8, DA Form 1059, or DA Form 1059–1. In preparing their comments, rating officials will convey a precise but detailed evaluation to convey a meaningful description of an officer’s performance and potential. In this manner, both Army selection boards and career managers are given the needed information on which to base a decision. (para 3-21). 3. Prohibited narratives. The following techniques will not be used (para 3-20). a. Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. b. Too brief comments. These frequently need to be interpreted by the selection board and the career manager. If not correctly interpreted, the best interests of the Army and the rated soldier are not served. Some examples include, excessive use of technical acronyms or phrases not commonly recognized. c. Bullet comments. (1) Appropriate bullet comments are required for NCOERs. For example, “outstanding physical and mental toughness. “Ranger of the Year” or “performs brilliantly under fire and in the most austere conditions.” (2) Bullet comments are not acceptable for the OER or AER. d. Any technique aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative, including, but not limited to the following: (1) Underlining. (2) Excessive use of capital letters. (3) Unnecessary quotation marks. (4) Wide spacing between selected words, phrases, bullets or sentences to include double spacing within a Paragraph or between Paragraphs. Senior raters are not authorized any double-spacing between performance and potential comments. (5) Italics and similar techniques. (6) Bold or underlined text. (7) Compressed type face or spacing. (8) Handwritten comments. An exception is made for DA Form OER, parts IV, block b and part V for evaluations on BGs and on DA Form parts IV, blocks d; IV block e; and VI block c for evaluations on CW5s, which may be handwritten in black ink. In order to be processed and placed on the individual’s AMHRR, reports with handwritten comments must be legible. (9) Exaggerated margins (“picture framing”). Paragraph indentation (if not excessive) is an acceptable practice if applied as standard convention of English prose (OER only). (10) Inappropriate references to box checks (OERs). Senior raters may not make references to a profiled box check. (11) Specific selection board language. 4. Unproven derogatory information. No reference will be made to an incomplete investigation (formal or informal) concerning a Soldier. a. References will be made only to actions or investigations that have been processed to completion, adjudicated, and had final action taken before submitting the evaluation to HQDA. If the rated individual is absolved, comments about the incident will not be included in the evaluation. b. This restriction is intended to prevent unverified derogatory information from being included in evaluation reports. It will also prevent unjustly prejudicial information from being permanently included in a Soldier’s AMHRR, such as— (1 ) Charges that are later dropped. (2) Charges or incidents of which the rated individual may later be absolved. 5. Any verified derogatory information may be entered on an evaluation. This is true whether the rated Soldier is under investigation, flagged, or awaiting trial. While the fact that a rated individual is under investigation or trial may not be mentioned in an evaluation until the investigation or trial is completed, this does not preclude the rating chain’s use of verified derogatory information. For example, when an interim report with verified information is made available to a commander, the verified information may be included in an OER, NCOER, or AER. For all reports, if previously reported information later prove to be incorrect or erroneous, the Soldier will be notified and advised of the right to appeal the report in accordance with chapter 6. a. Reports will not be delayed to await the outcome of a trial or investigation. Reports will be done when due and contain what information is verified at the time of preparation. b. For OER, when previously unverified derogatory information is later verified, an addendum will be prepared in accordance with AR and forwarded to HQDA. Rating officials will initiate such addendum to report verified misdeeds or professional or character deficiencies unknown or unverified when the OER was submitted. The addendum will ensure that the verified information will be recorded in the Soldier’s official records. However, it will not be submitted until completion of the investigation, imposition of punishment or verification of the information. 6. Prohibited comments. The use of inappropriate or arbitrary remarks or comments that draws attention to differences relating to race, color, religion, gender, age or national origin is prohibited. Subjective evaluation will not reflect a rating official’s personal bias or prejudice (para 3-20). (a) When non-judicial punishment is given and filed on the restricted fiche or locally under AR 27–10, paragraph 3–37, and AR 600–8–104, rating officials may not comment on the fact that such nonjudicial punishment was given to a rated Soldier. This does not preclude mentioning the rated Soldier’s underlying misconduct that served as the basis for the non-judicial punishment. (b) No remarks on an evaluation report will be made on performance or incidents occurring before or after the rating period except: (1) Relief-for-Cause reports based on information pertaining to a previous reporting period. EXAMPLE: A rating official may relieve a Soldier found to be involved in some illegal activity during a previous reporting period. They may refer to the prior rating period to explain the reasons for relief. (2) The most recent APFT performance or profile data occurred prior to the beginning date of the report. This exception allows the rated individual to comply with APFT and height and weight requirements. 7. Comments about marital status and spouse. Any evaluation comments, favorable or unfavorable, will not be based solely on a rated Soldier’s marital status. For example, statements such as the following will not permitted: “LTC Doe and his wife make a fine command team” or “As a bachelor, MSG Doe can quickly react to this unit’s contingency missions.” a. Evaluation comments will not be made about the employment, educational, or volunteer activities of a rated individual’s spouse. For example, statements such as the following will not be permitted: “Mr. Doe’s participation in post activities is limited by civilian employment,” or “Mrs. Doe has made a significant contribution to Soldier morale by caring sponsorship of the hospital volunteer staff.” b. There are limited circumstances involving actual and demonstrable effect on the rated individual’s performance or conduct when comments containing reference to a spouse may be made. These comments will be focused on the rated Soldier’s actions, not those of the spouse. For example, statements such as the following will be permitted: “CPT Doe continued outstanding, selfless service, despite his wife’s severe illness,” or “COL Doe’s intemperate public confrontations with his wife were detrimental to his status as an officer.” 8. Special Interest Items that can be mentioned in a Soldier’s evaluation report, when substantiated by a completed command or other official investigation: a. Involvement in a driving under the influence charge. b. Physical or mental Incapacitation. c. Acts of sexual misconduct, physical, or mental abuse. d. Criminal Acts reported in official military or civil authorities. e. Behavior that is inconsistent or detrimental to the good order, conduct and discipline. f. Adverse equal opportunity investigations. g. Acts of reprisal. h. Activities or behavior otherwise prohibited by AR 600–20. Participation in Army Substance Abuse Program (3-24) Evaluation of adverse action (3-25) AR 623-3,Section VI

Referred Reports OERs with the following entries are referred or adverse evaluation reports: A “FAIL” for the APFT in part IV, block a; or a “NO” entry for height and weight A rater performance evaluation of “Unsatisfactory” in part IV (Performance Evaluation – Professionalism, Competencies, and Attributes) for DA Form / DA Form A rater performance evaluation of “Capable” in part IV (for CGP-OER and FGP-OERs), where the required explanation has derogatory information A rater potential evaluation in part IV where the required explanation has derogatory information (for SGP-OERs) A senior rater potential evaluation of “Not Qualified” or “Unsatisfactory” in part VI, block a (SR – Potential Compared with Officers Senior Rated in Same Grade) A senior rater potential evaluation of “Qualified” or “Retain as Colonel” in part VI, block a where the required explanation has derogatory information Any negative or derogatory comments contained in parts IV, parts V (Intermediate Rater), or parts VI (Senior Rater) of the evaluation report A “Relief for Cause” report submitted under the provisions of paragraph 3–54 SHOW SLIDE 29: REFERRED REPORTS OERs with the following entries are referred or adverse evaluation reports. Such OERs will be referred to the rated officer by the senior rater for acknowledgment and an opportunity to comment before being submitted to HQDA (see DA Pam 623–3 for detailed instructions and process for handling referred OERs). 1. A “FAIL” for the APFT in part IV, block a indicating noncompliance with the standards of AR 350–1; or a “NO” entry for the height and weight indicating noncompliance with the standards of AR 600–9. 2. A rater performance evaluation of “Unsatisfactory” in part IV, (for DA Form and DA Form ). 3. A rater performance evaluation of “Capable” in part IV (for CGP-OER and FGP-OERs), where the required explanation has derogatory information. 4. A rater potential evaluation in part IV where the required explanation has derogatory information (for SGPOERs). 5. A senior rater potential evaluation of “Not Qualified” or “Unsatisfactory” in part VI, block a. 6. A senior rater potential evaluation of “Qualified” or “Retain as Colonel” in part VI, block a where the required explanation has derogatory information. 7. Any negative or derogatory comments contained in parts IV, parts V, or parts VI of the evaluation report. 8. A “Relief for Cause” report submitted under the provisions of paragraph 3–54. NOTE: Rating officials are reminded AR (Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions) explains procedural requirements for a nontransferable flag for “referred” and “Relief for Cause” evaluation reports. NOTE: Refer to DA Pam 623–3, paragraph 2–26, for detailed instructions and process for handling referred OER reports.

Referral Process (1 of 3) SR places an “X” in Part II, block d; OER given to rated officer for signature and placement of an “X” indicating whether or not comments will be provided Rated officer may refuse to sign referred OER; however, must check “YES” or “NO” comments box Rated officer comments must be: Factual Concise Limited to matters directly related to the referred OER Rated officer’s comments do not constitute an Appeal or request for Commander’s Inquiry – these actions are processed separately. A reasonable suspense date must be given Part II, Block d SHOW SLIDE 30: REFERRAL PROCESS (1 of 3) NOTE: Refer the students to DA PAM 623-3, para 2-28 1. If an OER is referred, the SR will place an “X” in the appropriate box in part II, block d (or part II, block c for GOR–OERs) on the completed OER (for example, when the senior rater has signed and dated the completed OER). 2. The OER will then be given to the rated officer for signature and placement of an “X” in the appropriate box in part II, block d. 3. While the rated officer may refuse to sign a referred OER, the rated officer must check either the “YES” or “NO” box to indicate whether or not comments will be provided. 4. Rated officer may comment if he or she believes that the rating and/or remarks are incorrect. The comments must be factual, concise, and limited to matters directly related to the evaluation rendered on the OER; rating officials may not rebut rated officer’s referral comments. 5. Enclosures that contain voluminous material or items already contained within the officer’s file are not normally in the rated officer’s best interest and should be avoided. 6. Any enclosures to rebuttal comments will be withdrawn and returned to the rated officer when the OER is forwarded to HQDA. 7. The rated officer’s comments do not constitute an Appeal or a request for Commander's Inquiry - these actions are processed separately (Chapter 6 and Chapter 4, AR 623-3). NOTE: A reasonable suspense date will be given for the rated officer to complete this action (AR 623-3, para 3-28(1)(a).

Referral Process (2 of 3) SHOW SLIDE 31: REFERRAL PROCESS (2 of 3)
1. If the rated officer is unavailable to sign the OER for any reason or cannot be contacted and a written referral is required (referral process for OERs is in AR 623–3) the following procedure must be followed: a. The senior rater will refer, in writing, a copy of the completed OER (signed and dated by all rating officials) to the rated officer for acknowledgment and comment. (See fig 2–6 for a sample referral memorandum and fig 2–7 for a sample acknowledgment memorandum). b. A referral memorandum is provided within the Evaluation Entry System portal. This will be done even if the rated officer has departed due to PCS, retirement, or release from active duty (REFRAD). A reasonable suspense date should be given for the rated officer to complete this action. In this referral, the rated officer will be advised that his or her comments do not constitute an appeal or request for a Commander’s or Commandant’s Inquiry. 2. Upon receipt of the rated officer’s acknowledgment, the senior rater will include it with an original or a signed copy of the referral letter to the original OER and forward it to— a. Reviewer, if appropriate. b. Battalion and/or brigade S1, administrative section, or HQDA, as appropriate. c. The other rating officials if applicable. 3. If the rated officer fails to respond within the suspense period, the senior rater will include a signed copy of the referral to the original OER and indicate either on the original referral memorandum or a second document that the rated officer failed to complete his or her acknowledgment. The senior rater will then send it to the reviewer. Reviewers will complete administrative review and forward to BN and/or BDE S1, administrative section, or HQDA, as appropriate. 4. Senior raters will, when possible, refer OERs to the rated officer prior to his or her departure. 5. A rated officer is responsible for leaving a current forwarding address or address when he or she departs a unit. Mailing a referred OER by certified mail to an officer’s last disclosed mailing address is sufficient to constitute constructive service of a referred OER. If an OER sent by certified mail to an officer’s last known forwarding address is returned, indicating that the officer may not be reached at that address, the senior rater will attach a signed copy of the referral to the original report and indicate either on the original referral or a second attachment that the rated officer failed to complete his or her acknowledgment. The senior rater will then send it to the reviewer, BN and/or BDE S1, or HQDA, as appropriate.

Referral Process (3 of 3) If SR decides comments provide significant new facts about rated officer’s performance, may refer comments to other rating officials who may reconsider their individual evaluations SR will not pressure or influence other rating officials Evaluation may not be lowered because of comments If OER is changed - but still requires referral – repeat acknowledgment and comments process Only the latest acknowledgment and comments (if submitted) will be forwarded to HQDA with the completed OER SHOW SLIDE 32: REFERRAL PROCESS (3 of 3) 1. If the senior rater decides that the comments provide significant new facts about the rated officer’s performance and that they could affect the rated officer’s evaluation, he or she may refer them to the other rating officials. They, in turn, may reconsider their individual evaluations. 2. The senior rater will not pressure or influence the other rating officials to change their evaluations. Any rating official who elects to raise his or her evaluation of the rated officer as a result of this action may do so. However, the evaluation may not be lowered because of the rated officer’s comments. a. If the OER is changed but still requires referral, the OER must again be referred to the rated officer for acknowledgment and new comments. b. Only the latest acknowledgment and comments (if submitted) will be forwarded to HQDA with the completed OER.

Unmasking of OERs Elimination of the masking process supports transparency Improves the accuracy of an officer’s file in the personnel management decisions for the individual officer and the Army Boards are now best qualified vs. fully qualified – ensures the Army retain and promote best qualified SHOW SLIDE 33: UNMASKING OF OERS Per Army Directive and MILPER (Unmasking of Army Evaluation Reports), effective immediately U.S. Army Human Resources Command will stop masking OERs and will move previously masked OERs to the performance section of the official Army Military Human Resource Records (AMHRR) file for all Army components. All OERs, including previously masked OERs will be placed in the performance section of the official Army Military Human Resource Records file.

EVALUATION REDRESS PROGRAM
Both preventive and corrective in nature. Protects the Army’s interests and ensures fairness to the rated Soldier. First program element is the communication process; second element is the various regulatory requirements Commander’s Inquiry Provide command involvement in preventing obvious evaluation injustices and in correcting errors before they become a matter of permanent record Not a prerequisite for submission of an appeal Not used to document differences of opinion amongst rating officials Commanders will not pressure/force raters to change their evaluation Appeals Process Soldier or another party can file an appeal of an evaluation report that he or she feels is unjust Results of a Commander’s Inquiry does not constitute an appeal -- they may be used to support it Substantiating evidence must support an appeal Appeals based solely on the lack of counseling will not normally serve as a basis to invalidate a report Two types: Administrative (no time limit) Substantive (3 year limit) SHOW SLIDE 34: EVALUATION REDRESS PROGRAM 1. The Evaluation Redress Program consists of several elements at various levels of command (e.g., field, AHRC, Army G–1, and HQDA). The program is both preventative and corrective, in that it is based upon principles structured to prevent, and provide a remedy for, alleged evaluation injustices or regulatory violations, as well as to correct them once they have occurred. a. The first program element is the communication process fostered by DA Form 2166–9–1A, which affords the rated NCO a forum for establishing duty requirements and a discussion of actual accomplishments. b. A second element is the various regulatory requirements, such as each report standing on its own without reference to facts or events occurring prior or subsequent to the rated period (para 3–20); the prohibition against command influence on rating officials during the preparation of reports. 2. The Evaluation Redress Program includes (in this order): a. The Commander’s or Commandant’s Inquiry b. The Appeals System c. Army Board of Correction of Military Records Army Board of Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Highest level of administrative review within HQDA with the mission to correct errors in or remove injustices from Army military records

Special Branch Rating Chain Requirements
JAG Officers (AR 623-3, Appendix D) JAGC officers assigned to BCTs will have a rating chain that is in accordance with paragraph 2–3 and will normally be considered as serving under “dual” supervision; therefore, paragraph 2–21 applies BDE JAs will, whenever possible, be rated by their local SJA and senior rated by the BCT CDR Trial counsel officers will normally be rated by the BDE judge advocate, intermediate rated by the BCT executive officer, and senior rated by the SJA Chaplains (AR 623-3, Appendix C) There will be a supervisory chaplain in the rating chain when possible. For example, a BDE chaplain, as the supervisory chaplain, will be the intermediate rater for a BN chaplain In the absence of a supervisory chaplain, a senior chaplain familiar with the rated chaplain’s performance will be designated as the intermediate rater if qualifications are met (see para 2–6 for intermediate rater qualifications) SHOW SLIDE 35: SPECIAL BRANCH RATING CHAIN REQUIREMENTS NOTE: Reference AR 623-3, Appendix C (Chaplains) and Appendix D (JAGC Officers) for these Special Branch officers.

Check on Learning Q1. Explain the proper use of a Letter of Input. A. The letter of input use applies to both Officer Evaluation Reports and Non-Commissioned Officer Evaluation Reports. AR and DA PAM removes previous policy for memorandum of input use in lieu of rendering an evaluation report (throughout) except for special cases where a letter of input will be used. Q2. What constitutes a “Referred Report?” (1) A “FAIL” for the APFT in part IV, block a indicating noncompliance with the standards of AR 350–1; or a “NO” entry for the height and weight indicating noncompliance with the standards of AR 600–9. (2) A rater performance evaluation of “Unsatisfactory” in part IV, (for DA Form and DA Form ). (3) A rater performance evaluation of “Capable” in part IV (for CGP-OER and FGP-OERs), where the required explanation has derogatory information. (4) A rater potential evaluation in part IV where the required explanation has derogatory information (for SGPOERs). (5) A senior rater potential evaluation of “Not Qualified” or “Unsatisfactory” in part VI, block a. (6) A senior rater potential evaluation of “Qualified” or “Retain as Colonel” in part VI, block a where the required explanation has derogatory information. (7) Any negative or derogatory comments contained in parts IV, parts V, or parts VI of the evaluation report. (8) A “Relief for Cause” report submitted under the provisions of paragraph 3–54. Q3. Match the type of report to the definition: a. Annual b. Extended Annual c. Change of Rater d. Change of Duty e. Senior Rater Option SHOW SLIDE 36: CHECK ON LEARNING NOTE: Conduct a Check on Learning, poll for questions, and summarize the Learning Activity. NOTE TO INSTRUCTOR: This is a build slide and includes 7 animations. Click the mouse to reveal the correct answers. Q1. Explain the proper use of Letter of Input. (AR 623-3, table 3-1) A1. The letter of input use applies to both Officer Evaluation Reports and Non-Commissioned Officer Evaluation Reports. AR and DA PAM removes previous policy for memorandum of input use in lieu of rendering an evaluation report (throughout) except for special cases where a letter of input will be used. Q2. What constitutes a “Referred Report?” (AR 623-3, para 3-26) A2. OERs with the following entries are referred or adverse evaluation reports. Such OERs will be referred to the rated officer by the senior rater for acknowledgment and an opportunity to comment before being submitted to HQDA (see DA Pam 623–3 for detailed instructions and process for handling referred OERs): (1) A “FAIL” for the APFT in part IV, block a indicating noncompliance with the standards of AR 350–1; or a “NO” entry for the height and weight indicating noncompliance with the standards of AR 600–9. (2) A rater performance evaluation of “Unsatisfactory” in part IV, (for DA Form and DA Form ). (3) A rater performance evaluation of “Capable” in part IV (for CGP-OER and FGP-OERs), where the required explanation has derogatory information. (4) A rater potential evaluation in part IV where the required explanation has derogatory information (for SGPOERs). (5) A senior rater potential evaluation of “Not Qualified” or “Unsatisfactory” in part VI, block a. (6) A senior rater potential evaluation of “Qualified” or “Retain as Colonel” in part VI, block a where the required explanation has derogatory information. (7) Any negative or derogatory comments contained in parts IV, parts V, or parts VI of the evaluation report. (8) A “Relief for Cause” report submitted under the provisions of paragraph 3–54. Q3. Match the type of report to the correct definition. 5 1 4 2 3 1. Mandatory to cover any period of nonrated time since the previous evaluation report when 1 calendar year has elapsed. 2. When a rated Soldier is reassigned to a different principal duty while serving under the same rater. 3. May be rendered when a change in senior rater occurs. 4. When the rated officer ceases to serve under the immediate supervision of the rater and minimum rating qualifications have been met. 5. Upon completion of 1 calendar year of duty, without periods of unrated time.

Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs)
DA Form Company Grade Plate (O1 - O3; WO1 - CW2) OER DA Form Field Grade Plate (O4 - O5; CW3 - CW5) OER DA Form Strategic Grade Plate (O6) OER DA Form Strategic Grade Plate General Officer Evaluation OER SHOW SLIDE 37: OFFICER EVALUATION REPORTS (OERS) Learning Step/Activity 5. Define Forms used for Evaluations Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:16 Time of Instruction: 20 mins

Company Grade Form Page 1
Administrative data remains consistent with the legacy OER (67-9) Highlights the need for a supplementary reviewer is required by updated AR / DA PAM 623-3 Addresses the completion of the multi-source assessment feedback Rater’s comments pertaining to APFT move to Page 1 Performance block checks and the Rater’s overall performance assessment SHOW SLIDE 38: COMPANY GRADE FORM PAGE 1 NOTE: This is an example of what the front side of the Company Grade form looks like. I show you for frame of reference; I will enlarge portions of the form on subsequent slides for discussion. 1. The Company Grade Evaluation will be used for 2LTs through CPT and WO1s through CW2. 2. Note that the top half closely resembles the previous evaluation with the exception of a 360 MSAF date box which will replace the mandatory Multi-Source Assessment and Feedback (MSAF) statement required on the previous OER form. 3. Just below the duty description is a new APFT field. Raters now have the option to comments APFT if desired. Mandatory comments will be required for failures, profiles which preclude an officer from performing his/her duties, and failing to meet height/weight standards, etc. 4. The rater will indicate the number of officers he or she rates at that current grade and whether or not the OER Support Form was submitted to the rater. 5. Below the APFT section is where the Rater will indicate his/her assessment based on duty performance against the Army officer peers that a Rater rates. You will notice that the names of the boxes have changed to “EXCELS,” “Proficient,” “Capable,” and “Unsatisfactory. Raters will be limited and not be able to give more than 49% in the “EXCELS”. 6. The Rater’s comment block will allow for up to “four” lines of narrative text as it pertains to “PERFORMANCE” only. Up to 4 lines of text 38

Rater Assessment Company
Grade Form Page 2 Focused on Attributes and Competencies (ADRP 6-22) More prescriptive Performance based assessment Mandatory entry for each Attribute/Competency Encourages specific discussion with Rated Officer on desired traits Comments on performance – not potential Intermediate Rater if applicable Senior Rater block checks redefined to better identify leader potential Most Qualified Highly Qualified Qualified Not Qualified Up to 4 lines of text Up to 5 lines of text SHOW SLIDE 39: RATER ASSESSMENT COMPANY GRADE FORM PAGE 2 1. Page 2 of the Company Grade form is broken down into 6 different areas where the Rater will write up to “four” lines of narrative for the leadership attributes and competencies which align with the Support Form and ARDP 6-22 (Army Leadership) doctrine. 2. The Intermediate Rater comments block will only be utilized for special branches that require dual supervision/advisory such as Chaplains and JAG officers etc. Intermediate Raters may enter up to “five” lines of narrative comments where they will address both “Performance” and “Potential.” 3. The Senior Rater box checks will still have 4 box checks, though the names of the boxes have changed. The previous “Above Center of Mass” is now the “MOST QUALIFIED” which is still limited to LESS than 50%. The previous “Center of Mass” is now “Highly Qualified.” “Qualified” does not refer the report. Highly qualified is not constrained and it is important to note that “Qualified” is not adverse. 4. The Senior Rater comments box looks similar but will be limited to “five” lines of narrative and the Senior Rater will only comment on “Potential.” 5. The future assignments field at the bottom of the form has changed. The SR Rater must now list three “future successive” assignments looking 3-5 years out. Up to 5 lines of text 39

Field Grade Form Page 1 Administrative data remains consistent with the CO Grade evaluation Raters have the opportunity to comment on possible broadening and operational assignments Attribute of Character is highlighted on the Field Grade Form SHOW SLIDE 40: FIELD GRADE FORM PAGE 1 NOTE: This slide shows page 1 of the Field Grade form. 1. The administrative data in the top third of the form is the same as the Company Grade Report. 2. There are two new assignments fields at the bottom of the page. The first is where the Rater can indicate up to three “Broadening” assignments best suited for the rated officer. The second is where the Rater may list the 3 “Operational” assignments where the rated officer is best suited for. Ideally think 3-5 years out. 3. The last field at the bottom of the form is where the Rater will write up to 4 lines of narrative text commenting on Character. 40

Rater Assessment: Field Grade Form Page 2
Rater comments on the Officer’s performance against the Attributes and Competencies during the rating period Box checking philosophy remain consistent; less than 50% EXCELS Rater’s overall performance is further codified in the Comments section No comments on potential Up to 5 lines of text Up to 4 lines of text Up to 5 lines of text SHOW SLIDE 41: RATER ASSESSMENT: FIELD GRADE FROM PAGE 2 1. Raters will have up to 5 lines of narrative text which demonstrate “Performance” regarding Field Grade attributes and competencies as it relates to the Rated Officer’s duty description. (NOTE: Raters will not mention potential) 2. The Rater will indicate how many Army Officer he/she “currently” rates and indicate whether an OER Support Form was submitted to the Rater. The Rater will check the appropriate box based on overall performance based on all of the officers in that specific grade that he or she has rated. 3. The Rater’s “EXCELS” box check is the only constrained box. It is limited to 49% or less. 4. Just below the Rater’s overall performance box check, the Rater has up to 4 lines of narrative text to comment on the Rated Officer’s overall performance as compared to everyone of that grade the rater has rated to date. 5. Intermediate Raters will only be used for Special Branches and some Joint situations. They will have 5 lines of narrative text where they will comment on both performance and potential. 6. The Senior Rater portion is the same as on the Company Grade form. The Senior Rater will have up to 5 lines to comment on “potential” only, then list the 3 future successive assignments the officer is best suited for, looking 3-5 years out. Up to 5 lines of text 41

Rater Recommended Assignments
(Field Grade and Strategic Level) Field Grade Plate- Rater Recommended Strategic Grade Plate- Rater Recommended SHOW SLIDE 42: RATER RECOMMENDED ASSIGNMENTS NOTE: This slide shows close up portions of the Field Grade and Strategic grade reports where Raters MAY recommend potential “Broadening,” “Operational”, and “Strategic” assignments looking 3-5 years out. This data will assist Assignment and Career Managers in selecting the right officer for the right assignment. Unclassified 42

Strategic Report (COL) Page 1
Admin data mirrors Company and Field Grade forms Raters will recommend future strategic assignments to assist talent managers in placing the Rated Officer into their next duty assignment SHOW SLIDE 43: STRATEGIC REPORT (COL) PAGE 1 The front page of the Strategic Grade Colonel report mirrors the field grade report with one exception. Instead of recommending “Broadening” and “Operational” assignments, on the COL report Raters “may” provide up to 3 “Strategic” level assignments best suited for that officer. Raters will have up to 4 lines of narrative text to comment on character.

Strategic Report (COL) Page 2
Rater’s of COLs will comment on the Officer’s potential Senior Rater box check labels change from Company and Field Grade Officer forms Up to 5 lines of text Up to 5 lines of text SHOW SLIDE 44: STRATEGIC REPORT (COL) PAGE 2 1. Because the math will change, Senior Raters of Colonels, had their COL profile restarted on 1 Apr 14 for reports rendered using the They were given a credit of 5 in “Retain as Colonels” which will allow immediate recognition of top performers. 2. Unlike the Field Grade report, Raters of Colonels will have 5 lines of narrative to comment on Performance and an additional 5 lines of narrative to comment on Potential. 3. The names of the box checks in the Senior Rater section have changed to better stratify top performers. There is a “Multi-Star” and “Promote to BG” block. Both are equivalent to the previous “Above Center of Mass.” The Multi-star potential block is limited to not more than 24%. The cumulative percentage of both Multi-star and Promote to BG cannot exceed 49%. (NOTE: A Senior rater can elect NOT to give any multi-star blocks and issue up to 49% for the Promote to BG block). 4. There is a 3rd box, “Retain as Colonel” which is equivalent to a Center of Mass. Cumulative percentage must remain below 50%

Strategic Grade Plate General Officer Evaluation Report
1-Page OER for BGs Rater and Senior Rater both comment on character and potential No rater and senior rater box check Processes thru HRC to Officer’s Army Military Human Resource Record SHOW SLIDE 45: STRATEGIC REPORT (BG) REPORT NOTE: This slide shows an example of the Brigadier General evaluation report. It is a one page evaluation report. Raters and Senior Raters will comment on both “Character” and “Potential.” Like the other three evaluation reports, this evaluation report will also be processed through HRC and ultimately to the Officer’s AMHRR.

Rater Profile Maintain less than 50% of reports written by grade in the “EXCELS” box (for Raters of LTCs and below) Flexibility - Raters have a “credit” of 3 in the “Proficient” box to start profile OER profiles calculated based on date Rater “Locks” the profile May not Lock profile earlier than 14 days prior to report THRU Date OERs are due at HRC within 90 days after the thru date of evaluation Senior Rater sequencing does not interfere with the Rater’s Locked profile Maintain a working copy of your rater profile and monitor for accuracy Profile calculators will be provided in EES for raters to use, which will assist with profile management SHOW SLIDE 47: RATER PROFILE NOTE: This slide covers some of the basic fundamentals of the Rater Managed Profile Technique. 1. Raters of LTCs and below will now be accountable and limited to the number of “EXCELS” block he/she can give. Raters must ensure that of the OERs submitted that he/she remains awards less than 50% of all OERs, by grade, as a top box EXCELS selection. 2. Raters will receive a credit of 3 in the “Proficient” box which will allow a Rater the flexibility to render an “EXCELS” for not more than “two” of the first 3 reports. (Note: If a Rater submits 1 “EXCELS” then the math is 1 EXCELS combined with credit of 3 proficient which makes 1 “EXCELS” of 4 combined reports which equals 25% total for EXCELS – when a Rater submits 2 EXCELS combined with credit of 3 “proficient’s”, then the profile is 2 “EXCELS” of 5 reports which equals 40% EXCELS (which is less than 50% and within tolerance.) 3. Evaluations are still due to HRC NLT 90 days after thru date on the evaluation. 4. The new Evaluation Entry System (EES) will have built in profile calculators to assist raters. It is extremely important to note that evaluations that are mailed in must be accounted for by rater until they have been received at HRC and calculated into an individual’s profile numbers. The Entry Evaluation System will prevent an individual from breaking their profile; however, it is only as accurate as what it can see. Remember, mailing an evaluation is like writing a check. Your bank does not know you have written a check until it arrives and gets deducted.

Rater Box Check Defined
EXCELS: Results far surpass expectations The officer readily (fluently/naturally/effortlessly) demonstrates a high level of the all attributes and competencies Recognizes and exploits new resources; creates opportunities Demonstrates initiative and adaptability even in highly unusual or difficult situations Emulated; sought after as expert with influence beyond unit Actions have significant, enduring, and positive impact on mission, the unit and beyond Innovative approaches to problems produce significant gains in quality and efficiency Proficient: NORM Consistently produces quality results with measurable improvement in unit performance Consistently demonstrates a high level of performance for each attribute and competency Proactive in challenging situations Habitually makes effective use of time and resources; improves position procedures and products Positive impact extends beyond position expectations Capable: Meets requirements of position and additional duties. Capable of demonstrating Soldier attributes and competencies and frequently applies them Actively learning to apply them at a higher level or in more situations Aptitude, commitment, competence meets expectations Actions have a positive impact on unit or mission but may be limited in scope of impact or duration SHOW SLIDE 48: RATER BOX CHECK DEFINED EXCELS: Results far surpass expectations. The officer readily (fluently/naturally/effortlessly) demonstrates a high level of the all attributes and competencies. Recognizes and exploits new resources; creates opportunities. Demonstrates initiative and adaptability even in highly unusual or difficult situations. Emulated; sought after as expert with influence beyond unit. Actions have significant, enduring, and positive impact on mission, the unit and beyond. Innovative approaches to problems produce significant gains in quality and efficiency. Proficient: NORM Consistently produces quality results with measurable improvement in unit performance. Consistently demonstrates a high level of performance for each attribute and competency. Proactive in challenging situations. Habitually makes effective use of time and resources; improves position procedures and products. Positive impact extends beyond position expectations. Capable: Meets requirements of position and additional duties. Capable of demonstrating Soldier attributes and competencies and frequently applies them; Actively learning to apply them at a higher level or in more situations. Aptitude, commitment, competence meets expectations. Actions have a positive impact on unit or mission but may be limited in scope of impact or duration.

Rater Profile Management
Rater profile established for raters of company and field grade officers Maintain less than 50% of reports written by grade in the “EXCELS” box (for raters of LTCs and below) Flexibility - Raters have a “credit” of 3 in the “Proficient” box to start profile Rater OER profiles calculated based on Profile LOCK date as evidenced by “LOCKING” the profile indication (Locking as a Rater is the same as signing and sending to HQDA for a Senior Rater); once an indication of performance is LOCKED, the rater cannot retrospectively change mind (undo) on block check without HQDA exception to policy LOCKING cannot be completed earlier than 14 days before the THRU Date on the Evaluation OERs are due at HRC within 90 days after the thru date of evaluation Maintain a working copy of your rater profile and monitor for accuracy EES will have built in profile calculators. This profile calculator is your profile. It does not predict your plans. Profile calculators are provided for raters to use (example on next slide) are available on the Evaluation Webpage at HRC HRC will explore an automated “Profile Predictor” for future release** SHOW SLIDE 49: RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT NOTE: This slide you’ll see some of the basic fundamentals of the new Rater Managed Profile Technique for raters of LTCs and below. 1. The Managed Profile Technique ensures raters can have confidence that other Raters are not gaining an advantage and that they are still able to give their best officers a good rating without hurting other. 2. The bottom line of the technique is that Raters must keep less than 50% of all OERs written, separated by grade, as a top box “EXCELS”. 3. HRC will apply a credit of 3 in “Proficient” once the profile is started. 4. The rater cannot mention the box check in any way as a means to ‘beat” the restriction. The rater cannot say: “if I had an EXCELS box to give”--- The rater cannot go back and “retrospectively” change the block check either. The profile is calculated upon rater’s LOCKING the report in EES. 5. OERs are due at HRC within 90 days of Thru date on report, so plan accordingly. EES will assist raters and senior raters with profile management, but raters can always keep a separate tracker/calculator that I will show you later.

Rater Profile - 4 Box System
Profile Credit of 3 – By Grade Profile Credit Start After first 10 Reports with Credit After first 20 Reports with Credit Rater profile credit of 3 in Proficient Box. Profiles are counted by grade, not cumulative for all grades Rater may submit: 6 of first 10 as EXCELS EXCELS box must be less than 50% profile limitation Rater may submit: 11 of first 20 as EXCELS EXCELS cannot exceed the 50% profile limitation SHOW SLIDE 50: PROFILE CREDIT OF 3 – BY GRADE NOTE: This slide depicts the Rater profile math using the 4 box system. 1. Each grade will receive a credit of 3 in the “Proficient” category. 2. Looking at the first diagram you can see where the rater has been credited with 3 in the “Proficient” category. 3. The second diagram shows how the math will add up after the first 10 evaluations have been submitted (13 evaluations factoring in the credit of 3). After submitting 6 evaluations with “EXCELS” and 7 with “Proficient” it will bring the rater’s profile to 46% in “EXCELS” which is within the LESS THAN 50% standard. The “Proficient” category will be at 53%. 4. The third diagram shows how the math will calculate after the first 20 reports have been submitted with a credit of 3 in “Proficient.” A rater can submit up to 11 evaluations with “EXCELS” and 12 with “Proficient” which will put the Rater’s “EXCELS” profile at 47.8% which is still within standard of being LESS THAN 50%. Using a Profile Credit of 3: Minimal inflation in the “EXCELS” Box Unclassified

Rater Box Check Rater overall assessment of rated officer’s performance compared to officers in same grade Limited to Company and Field Grade forms e. This Officer’s Overall Performance is Rated as: (Select one box representing Rated Officer’s overall performance compared to others of the same grade whom you have rated in your career. Managed at less than 50% in EXCELS.) I currently rate____ Army Officers in this grade. EXCELS PROFICIENT CAPABLE UNSATISFACTORY X Norm Comments: Example Rater Label: HQDA COMPARISON OF THE RATER’S PROFILE AND BOX CHECK AT THE TIME THIS REPORT PROCESSED SHOW SLIDE 51: RATER BOX CHECK NOTE: This slide depicts the box checks that a Rater can select with regard to the rated officer’s performance as compared to all of the officers the Rater has rated throughout his/her career. The bottom portion of the slide shows an example of the HQDA label that will be over-stamped on the OER once processed at HQDA. The label will contain the Rated Officer’s name, date the evaluation was submitted to HQDA, the number of ratings for this officer, and the total number of ratings for officers in this grade. PROFICIENT RO: RANK SOLDIERS NAME SSN: xxx-xx-xxxx DATE: RATINGS THIS OFFICER: R: RANK/GRADE NAME SSN: xxx-xx-xxxx TOTAL RATINGS: Comments:

Rater Managed Profile Labeling Rules
Rule #1: If the Rater checks “Proficient” box, then the report is always labeled Proficient. Rule #2: If the Rater checks “Capable” or “Unsatisfactory” box, then the report is always respectively labeled “Capable” or “Unsatisfactory”. The sum of “Proficient,” “Capable,” and “Unsatisfactory” box checks should always be greater than 50% of total ratings Rule #3: If the Rater checks “EXCELS” box and rater’s profile is less than 50%, then the report is labeled “EXCELS”. An entry of “EXCELS” will only be accepted if the mathematical result of the entry is less than 50% of the total number of reports rendered in that grade SHOW SLIDE 52: RATER MANAGED PROFILE LABELING RULES NOTE: Shown on the slide are the four rules involved with a managed profile technique for those receiving a box check. 1. Rule #1: If the Proficient box is checked, a HQDA electronically generated Proficient label will be applied to the report, regardless of the senior rater’s profile. 2. Rule #2: If Capable box or Unsatisfactory box is checked, a HQDA electronically generated Capable label or Unsatisfactory label will be applied to the report, regardless of the senior rater’s profile. NOTE: Tell the students that the Proficient, Capable, and Unsatisfactory are added together when determining the next two rules - those for EXCELS boxes. 3. Rule #3: If the Rater checks “EXCELS” box and rater’s profile is less than 50%, then the report is labeled “EXCELS.” An entry of “EXCELS” will only be accepted if the mathematical result of the entry is less than 50% of the total number of reports rendered in that grade 4. Rule #4: MISFIRE – “If the Rater checks the “EXCELS” box and rater’s profile is equal to or greater than 50%, then the report is labeled “Proficient" and the rater is charged with EXCELS. EES will not allow Misfires online. Rule #4: MISFIRE – “If the Rater checks the “EXCELS” box and rater’s profile is equal to or greater than 50%, then the report is labeled “Proficient" and the rater is charged with EXCELS. EES will not allow Misfires online.

Example Rater Profile Calculator/Tracker
Will be available thru Evaluation Entry System Website SHOW SLIDE 53: RATER PROFILE CALCULATOR/TRACKER INSTRUCTIONS FOR RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT CALCULATOR 1. This worksheet is designed to assist raters in keeping track of ratings rendered under the Officer Evaluation Entry System using DA Form This unofficial worksheet should mirror information found on the profile report. It is available thru Evaluation Entry System Website 2. Raters must maintain a separate worksheet for each rank, for the ranks of WO1, CW2, CW3, CW4, 2LT, 1LT, CPT, MAJ, and LTC. The rater will have one combined profile for each component: Active, USAR, and ARNG are not separate. Promotable officers serving in positions authorized at the promotable grade are profiled at the higher grade by entering a rank with (P) in Part Ic on the OER. 3. This is an unofficial worksheet, which may be modified to meet individual needs. Instructions for columns on the worksheet follow: a. On the correct rank TAB at bottom of sheet, enter the Ratee’s Name, Type, and Date of Evaluation. b. Enter a one in the corresponding Box Checks (grey box) column. You see a credit of 3 in Proficient Box to allow Raters some flexibility on issuing EXCELS for initial reports. c. Annotate the box check the Rater made on the OER in the Profile (green box) column by adding a “1” to the respective box and carry the balances down from above. For computing and profiling purposes Proficient, Capable, and Unsatisfactory box checks are totaled, then the number of EXCELS issued is divided by the total number of reports completed to get % EXCELS (must remain under 50%). The total column (in yellow) calculates the total number of Evals completed for that rank. Information should be verified with HRC (by reviewing EES periodically). d. Enter date due to HRC (forecast 90 days after thru date of evaluation) e. Enter the actual date completed at HRC (verify in EES). f. Total EXCELS % calculates number of EXCELS at far right of the sheet (tan), which must maintain less than 50%. 4. POC: OER Profile Policy questions. Evaluation Systems Office, USA HRC, (502) (DSN: 983),

Senior Rater Box Check LTC & Below
Four box profile remains consistent with previous system; provides more options for senior raters Highly Qualified and Qualified enable greater stratification Most Qualified becomes the control box (limited to less than 50%) No restart of profile; no close-out reports MOST QUALIFIED: Strong potential for BZ and CMD; potential ahead of peers HIGHLY QUALIFIED: Strong potential for promotion with peers QUALIFIED: Capable of success at the next level; promote if able NOT QUALIFIED: Not recommended for promotion Box Check Assessment SHOW SLIDE 54: SENIOR RATER BOX CHECK LTC & BELOW 1. Senior Raters will continue to have a 4 box check system they can use to assess Potential. 2. The top 3 blocks are favorable. Each recommends promotion. 3. Highlighted in yellow box to the right, it defines the level of stratification for potential and future promotion. 4. Profile transfers for LTC and below. The New system will read from your existing SR profile, and continue to include any reports submitted using the 67-9 when providing the real-time SR profile. 5. Additionally, Senior Raters will receive a “Warning Label” if rendering a Most Qualified box will cause a misfire. NOTE: An official misfire (going over 49.9% in that rank) will calculate the SR profile against the Most Qualified box, but show a DA Label of Highly Qualified when the board reviews the OER. = Current COM Not Referred 54

Rater Tips EXCELS = Absolute top performers
Proficient = Good performers, but less than the best Capable = Meets the expectations of grade (Not referred) Unsatisfactory = Failed one or more standards (Referred) Require OER counseling / mentorship from subordinates Be honest and forthright in your assessments Be prepared to explain / justify your rating LT / WO1 reports are no longer masked Don’t be afraid of Referred Reports Clearly articulate success and failures and explain Know your rated population, e.g., how they perform, when they are eligible for boards, when reports will be due Review rating chains regularly and ensure they are current Know your profile at all times Understand how to manage and maintain your profile SHOW SLIDE 55: RATER TIPS 1. The Rater is the first rating official in the military rating chain. Raters should use their position and experience to evaluate the rated Soldier from a performance perspective. Rater’s assessment is the link to the day to day observation of the rated Soldier’s performance. Raters use the narrative and block check with definitions to provide this assessment. Use the support form as a communication tool and be honest and forthright. NOTE: Inform the students that LT reports are no longer masked upon promotion to CPT and WO1 reports are no longer masked upon selection to CW3. 2. There will be times when the Rater will have to make a hard call to identify weak performers, so be ready to explain your rating. Don’t be afraid of referred reports to hold substandard performers accountable! Put it in writing and tell rated officers what they need to do to improve. On the other side, ensure success is articulated and recognized. 3. Raters must become familiar with their rated population of officers and track when reports are due. In addition, raters must always have an idea of their profile status and manage accordingly. We’ll discuss how to manage a profile during the next few slides.

Senior Rater “Rating Philosophy”
• Mission: Identify your best • Develop “Rating Philosophy” and consider communicating it to rated officers • Counseling – ensure counseling is accomplished • Decide how to assess (particularly) “MOST QUALIFIED” based on performance and potential (not position) • Write well – quantify and qualify in narrative; correspond comments with box check as the system allows and if box check is used. If not, use the narrative to paint the picture • Plan ahead, think series of reports (number of times you will senior rate an officer); use “MOST QUALIFIED” sparingly SHOW SLIDE 56: SENIOR RATER “RATING PHILOSOPHY” 1. Before you begin rating, Raters and Senior Rater should consider developing and communicating a rating philosophy for those you rate. When you have a standard and communicate that standard, there are no surprises - your officers know what right looks like, what they have to do, and how well they have to do it. 2. As rating officials you need to have a plan – know your rated population and when they are eligible for promotion. Many of you will rate the same officer more than once- you need to think about what you want to say and how you intend to say it before the rating is due. 3. Incorporate counseling into you rating philosophy. Remember the purpose of counseling is to provide feedback about how well the Rated Officer is doing and ways to improve (or strengthen an already good performance) - think of counseling and support from use as a Leadership In Progress Review (IPR). Conducting IPRs ensures a better outcome. 4. Once you establish a philosophy, stick to it. Identify your best and hold those not performing accountable in your rating.

Senior Rater Comments (1 of 2)
SR assessment of rated officer’s potential for promotion when compared with other officers Intended to capitalize on SR’s: Experience Broad organizational perspective Tendency to focus on organizational requirements and actual performance results OER Support Form should assist SR and supplement more traditional means of evaluation – personal observation, reports and records, other rating officials, etc “Good” SR Comments Enumeration Promotion potential Next higher position potential Schooling DA PAM 600-3, Chapter 2 SHOW SLIDE 57: SENIOR RATER COMMENTS (1 OF 2) Promotion and selection boards expect clear and concise Senior Rater comments. Good SR comments should provide enumeration, potential on promotion, potential on next higher position, and schooling. The OER Support Form should be prepared with care and is intended to assist the SR and supplement the more traditional means of evaluation – personal observation, reports and records and input from other rating officials. DA PAM provides the following guidance: 2-8. Part VI, Senior Rater a. Part VI is the senior rater's assessment of the rated officer's potential. Part VI is intended to capitalize on the senior rater's additional experience, broad organizational perspective, and tendency to focus on the organizational requirements and actual performance results. Information on the rated officer's DA Form A is intended to assist the senior rater and supplement more traditional means of evaluation, such, as personal observation, reports and records, and other rating officials. b. In evaluating the whole officer, the senior rater makes an assessment of the officer's potential for promotion to the next higher grade when compared with other officers. In doing so, a senior rater must carefully manage the percentage of his or her "MOST QUALIFIED" ratings and must, therefore, be aware of when an officer will be in a zone of consideration for promotion, command, or school selection in order to render "MOST QUALIFIED" ratings accordingly.

Senior Rater Comments (2 of 2)
Should quantify and qualify the passion (or lack thereof) that senior rater has for rated officer’s performance and potential. • Selection boards should understand what input the Senior Rater is providing without having to guess • There are no “magic” or “buzz” words to convey Senior Rater intent • Focus on potential (3 to 5 years; command, assignment, schooling and promotion) • Cannot mention Box Check in the narrative (i.e., “MOST QUALIFIED” officer…..“If my profile allowed, I would rate this officer higher.” • Avoid Disconnect with Box Check Example: Large population, “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” Box Check, but Exclusive Narrative. Exceptions: Immature profiles, Back-to-Back reports • Be careful with your narrative – don’t say the same thing for all your people (Boards can easily detect repeated verbiage) SHOW SLIDE 58: SENIOR RATER COMMENTS (2 OF 2) NOTE: The SR Narrative should quantify and qualify the passion (or lack thereof) that senior rater has for rated officer’s performance and potential. Key points: • Selection boards should understand what input the Senior Rater is providing without having to guess. • There are no “magic” or “buzz” words to convey Senior Rater intent. • Focus on potential (3 to 5 years; command, assignment, schooling and promotion). • Cannot mention Box Check in the narrative (i.e., “MOST QUALIFIED” officer…..“If my profile allowed, I would rate this officer higher.” • Avoid Disconnect with Box Check Example: Large population, “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” Box Check, but Exclusive Narrative. Exceptions: Immature profiles, Back-to-Back reports. • Be careful with your narrative – don’t say the same thing for all your people (boards can easily detect repeated verbiage).

Senior Rater Profile Management
Senior Rater profile established for Senior Raters of company and field grade officers Maintain less than 50% of reports written by grade in the “Most Qualified” box (for raters of LTCs and below) Flexibility - Raters may indicate Most Qualified for 1 of the first 4 reports Senior Rater OER profiles are calculated based on date and time of receipt at HQDA; once an evaluation is completed, the rater cannot retrospectively change mind on block check OERs are due at HRC within 90 days after the thru date of evaluation Maintain a working copy of your rater profile and monitor for accuracy EES will have built in profile calculators. Profile calculators are provided for raters to use (example on next slide) available on Evaluation Webpage SHOW SLIDE 59: SENIOR RATER PROFILE 1. Senior raters must maintain less than 50% for all reports written on officers WO1-LTC in a single grade in the Most Qualified Box to retain the MOST QUALIFIED label at final processing. 2. A rule in AR allows any one of the first four OERs written in any grade to be a Most Qualified, even though the percentage might exceed the 50% rule. After the first four reports are rendered, any OERs for a given grade must maintain an Most Qualified percentage less than 50%. 3. OER Senior Rater profiles are calculated based on date of receipt at HQDA. Multiple OERs received on the same day will profile as of DATE TIME OF receipt and will include HARD COPY (mailed or copies) as of the synchronization date (day prior). If the rated officer’s name is not included in your profile numbers and his or her OER was not sent via EES, you may misfire. 4. OERs process and profile at HQDA in date of receipt order. An OER received today will not complete processing and profiling before one of the same rank and same senior rater that arrived last week. 5. The profile for any single grade may only be restarted if at least 3 OERs for the same grade have processed, senior raters obtain permission /authorization from their senior raters and at least one OER in this grade has already been documented as a misfire. The senior rater must notify HQDA Evaluations Systems Branch (AHRC-PD) and both must agree to the effective date and grade(s) for the restart.

Senior Rater Box Check (COLs)
No Rater “box check” Rater narrative comments focused on performance and potential Change Box Check Terminology and option of 24% and % limits (more restrictive than current system) More clearly identifies the best compared to current system Required restart of COL population Senior Rater received a “credit” of 5 to start profile in “Retain as Colonel” block Senior Rater philosophy will best determine how to describe the rated officer’s General Officer Potential a. POTENTIAL COMPARED WITH OFFICERS SENIOR RATED IN SAME GRADE (OVERPRINTED BY DA) MULTI-STAR POTENTIAL (Limited to no more than 24%) PROMOTE TO BG (25% to 49%) RETAIN AS COLONEL UNSATISFACTORY Note: Combined cumulative percentages of both “MULTI-STAR POTENTIAL” and “PROMOTE TO BG” will not exceed 49% CUMULATIVE % Remains less than 50% SHOW SLIDE 60: SENIOR RATER BOX CHECK COLs 1. Because the math changed, Senior Raters of Colonels, had their COL profile restarted on 1 Apr 14 for reports rendered using the They were given a credit of 5 in “Retain as Colonels” which will allow immediate recognition of top performers. 2. Unlike the Field Grade report, Raters of Colonels will have 5 lines of narrative to comment on Performance and an additional 5 lines of narrative to comment on Potential. 3. The names of the box checks in the Senior Rater section have changed to better stratify top performers. There is a “Multi-Star” and “Promote to BG” block. Both are equivalent to the previous “Above Center of Mass.” The Multi-star potential block is limited to not more than 24%. The cumulative percentage of both Multi-star and Promote to BG cannot exceed 49%. (Note. A Senior rater can elect NOT to give any multi-star blocks and issue up to 49% for the Promote to BG block). 4. There is a 3rd box, “Retain as Colonel” which is equivalent to a Center of Mass. Multi-Star limited to 24% of total reports Promote To BG limited to 25 – 49.9% of total reports MULTI-STAR POTENTIAL (Limited to no more than 24%) PROMOTE TO BG (25% to 49%) Two ACOM Boxes

Profile Credit of 5 for Colonel Report
Profile Credit at Implementation After first 5 Reports with Credit After first 10 Reports with Credit Senor Rater Limit: No more than 24% Multi-Star. No more than 25-49% cumulative total for PROMOTE TO BG and MULTI-STAR. Senior Rater may submit: 2 of first 5 reports as MULTI-STAR 24%. 2 of first 5 as PROMOTE TO BG. Top two boxes cannot equal (50%) cumulative profile limitation for the top two boxes. Senior Rater may submit: 3 of first 10 reports as MULTI-STAR 24%. 4 of first 10 as PROMOTE TO BG. Top two boxes cannot equal (50%) cumulative profile limitation for the top two boxes. SHOW SLIDE 61: PROFILE CREDIT OF 5 FOR COLONEL REPORT NOTE: This slide shows what the math looks like once the Colonel profile was reset and given a credit of 5 in the “Retain as Colonel” category. 1. The second box shows what the profile will look like after the first 5 reports with credit of 5 factored in. A senior rater can give up to 2 “Multi-star” and 2 “Promote to BG.” The cumulative percentage of both Multi-star and Promote to BG is 40%. 2. The third box shows what the profile will look like after the first 10 reports with credit of 5 “Retain as Colonel” factored in. Three of the first 10 reports can be given a “Multi-star” and 4 of the first 10 can be “Promote to BG.” The combined total of Multi-star and Promote to BG is 46% which is just below the maximum percentage of 49%. Upon system restart, profiles look like this. 61

Lock the Sr Rater Profile Allows Sr Raters to see their profile
SHOW SLIDE 62: HOW TO LOCK THE RATER PROFILE NOTE: This slide shows a snapshot of what the “Rater” will see within the new Evaluation Entry System. 1. After entering the Performance block comments, the Rater will select the appropriate overall performance block rating then will have to “lock” that rating. 2. The system has a built in profile calculator which will not let you select an “EXCELS” block if your profile does not support it. If an individual’s profile does not support giving an “EXCELS” box check then the option will be grayed out and not allow you to select it. 3. Once the rater “Locks” his/her box check, it cannot be unlocked by the rating official. If there is a need to make a change to the rater box check, the rater must contact HQDA and request an exception to policy.

WO1-LTC RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT CALCULATOR
Senior Rater Profile Calculator SHOW SLIDE 63: W01-LTC RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT CALCULATOR Instructions for Rater Profile Management Calculator 1. This worksheet is designed to assist raters in keeping track of ratings rendered under the Officer Evaluation Entry System using DA Form This unofficial worksheet should mirror information found on the profile report. 2. Raters must maintain a separate worksheet for each rank, for the ranks of WO1, CW2, CW3, CW4, 2LT, 1LT, CPT, MAJ, and LTC. The rater will have one combined profile for each component: Active, USAR, and ARNG. Promotable officers serving in positions authorized at the promotable grade are profiled at the higher grade by entering a rank with (P) in Part Ic on the OER. 3. This is an unofficial worksheet, which may be modified to meet individual needs. Instructions for columns on the worksheet follow: a. On the correct rank TAB at bottom of sheet, enter the Ratee’s Name, Type, and Date of Evaluation. b. Enter a one in the corresponding Box Checks (grey box) column. You see a credit of 3 in Proficient Box to allow Raters some flexibility on issuing EXCELS for initial reports. c. Annotate the box check the Rater made on the OER in the Profile (green box) column by adding a “1” to the respective box and carry the balances down from above. For computing and profiling purposes Proficient, Capable, and Unsatisfactory box checks are totaled, then the number of EXCELS issued is divided by the total number of reports completed to get % EXCELS (must remain under 50%). The total column (in yellow) calculates the total number of Evals completed for that rank. Information should be verified with HRC (by reviewing EES periodically). d. Enter date due to HRC (forecast 90 days after thru date of evaluation) e. Enter the actual date completed at HRC (verify in EES). f. Total EXCELS % calculates number of EXCELS at far right of the sheet (tan), which must maintain less than 50%. NOTE: POC: OER Profile Policy questions. Evaluation Systems Office, USA HRC, (502) (DSN: 983),

What’s a Misfire? Definition: An OER with an Most Qualified box checked that receives a Highly Qualified DA label because the senior rater’s profile (50% or greater) does not support the Most Qualified rating. Mechanism to Prevent: Senior Rater Contact Program. Once OERs are processed, a daily Potential Misfire roster ID’s problems. The SR is contacted and given options: Submit Highly Qualified OER(s) to support Most Qualified / re-sequence Withdraw / return potential misfire OER Give authorization to change box check to Highly Qualified (SR should notify rated officer) Officially misfire the report - What happens? Rated officer receives a Highly Qualified DA Label Most Qualified counts on SR profile, further limiting SR ability to give future Most Qualified SR receives a Discipline Memo thru their rating chain Bottom line: Know and manage your profile Management Support Division (HRC Ft Knox) will help and work with you SHOW SLIDE 64: WHAT IS A MISFIRE? NOTE: Ask students if anyone has provided assistance to a senior rater regarding this topic. As discussed on the previous slide, a documented misfire is an OER submitted to HQDA with a DA Form 67-10, Part VIa “Most Qualified” box check not supported by the senior rater profile for that grade will be labeled by HQDA as “Highly Qualified.”

Methods for Combating “Pooling”
Inclusion and specific discouraging of “pooling” via regulatory guidance Raises visibility of issue in a public forum which has not previously been done Still allows commanders and senior leaders to be responsible for designating rating schemes / approved one level up Intermediate Rater limited to specialty branches only Examples: AR Para 2-5: AS READ: "The Rater will normally be the immediate supervisor of....." NOW READS: "The Rater will be the immediate supervisor of...“ Para 2-7 AS READ: "The SR will normally be the immediate supervisor of....." NOW READS: "The SR will be the immediate supervisor of the Rater...” Also, NOW READS: “Commanders will rate Commanders” Also, NOW READS: “Rating Schemes will be approved one level up” Added "notes" throughout regulation at applicable locations (i.e. Managing the Rating Chain, Roles and Responsibilities, etc.) that brings "Pooling" to light Evaluation Entry System (EES) will prompt the Senior Rater to validate that the form is accurate, and to attest that he/she is not promoting pooling SHOW SLIDE 65: METHODS FOR COMBATING “POOLING” 1. Pooling - Elevating the rating chain beyond the senior rater's ability to know the officer, in an attempt to provide an elevated assessment. Feedback: a. Suggestions to combat “pooling” were solicited from 4 Stars only. b. Develop a directive/CSA Sends, which prohibits gaming system by pooling. c. Discourage pooling in regulation; requiring senior raters to brief their senior raters on their rating schemes. Talking points: a. Pooling runs counter to the intent and spirit of the evaluation system. b. Discouraging Pooling will enhance fairness and equity of the system. c. Regulatory guidance as measure to combat pooling will raise visibility in a public forum. 4. There is no method to monitor or prevent pooling from the TOP down. Stronger rules about rating chain designation will enable the field to challenge rating chains through Commander’s Inquiry or IG investigation. a. Make language "stronger" under rules of designating Rater and SR in AR 623-3, para 2-5 and para 2-7. Para 2-5 AS READS: "The Rater will normally be the immediate supervisor of....." WILL READ: "The Rater will be the immediate supervisor of..." Para 2-7 AS READS: "The SR will normally be the immediate supervisor of....." WILL READ: "The SR will be the immediate supervisor of the Rater... b. Will add "note" throughout regulation at applicable locations (i.e. Managing the Rating Chain, Roles and Responsibilities, etc.) that brings "Pooling" to light. Example Note: "Pooling of Officers, or elevating the rating chain beyond the senior rater's ability to know the officer, in an attempt to provide an elevated assessment (i.e. Most Qualified) protection for a specific group, not only runs counter to the intent and spirit of the evaluation system but is unprofessional as well. Rating schemes established under this criteria erode Soldier's confidence in the fairness and equity of the Evaluation Reporting System and in leaders. Commanders at all levels must ensure rating chains correspond as nearly as practical to the chain of command and supervision within an organization. Subsequently, senior raters must evaluate and identify their best officers based on performance and potential regardless of the particular position they occupy." 65

Check on Learning 1. What is the maximum percentage of ratings a rater can give in the “EXCELS” box? a. 51% b. 50% c. 49% d. 48% 2. Rater Profiles will receive a credit of ____ “PROFICIENT” box checks for each rank rated. a. 1 b. 2 c. 3 d Evaluations are due to HRC NLT ____ days after the THRU date. a. 30 b. 60 c. 90 d. 120 SHOW SLIDE 66: CHECK ON LEARNING NOTE: Conduct a Check on Learning, poll for questions, and summarize the Learning Activity. NOTE TO INSTRUCTOR: This is a build slide and includes 6 animations. Click the mouse to reveal the correct answers. 1. What is the maximum percentage of ratings a rater can give in the “EXCELS” box? (AR 623-3, para 3-7c(2)) a. 51% b. 50% c. 49% d. 48% 2. Rater Profiles will receive a credit of ____ “PROFICIENT” box checks for each rank rated. (AR 623-3, para 3-7(4)) a. 1 b. 2 c. 3 d. 4 3. Evaluations are due to HRC NLT ____ days after the THRU date. (AR 623-3, para 3-33) a. 30 b. 60 c. 90 d. 120

Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports (NCOERs)
DA Form Series Learning Step/Activity 6. Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports (NCOERs) Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:16 Time of Instruction: 20 mins

Why Change? Development Process
Key Focus of the Evaluation Reporting System Review:  Reflect current leadership doctrine (ADP 6-22)  Establish and enforce rating official accountability (NCOER Inflation) Address the “one size may not fit all” assessment of different skills and competencies at different grades  Encourage counseling through improvement of support form Query reports to identify talents Development Process  Current NCOER (DA Form ) implemented in 1987  Proposed changes based on the following: 38th CSA Strategic Priorities DA Centralized Selection Board comments noting the difficulty in identifying the very best Field input Lessons learned during fielding of OER Mirrors development of OER with modification by SMA Training is essential for successful implementation SHOW SLIDE 68: WHY CHANGE? 1. The New NCOER began in 2010 when the Chief of Staff of the Army directed a review of the Evaluation Reporting System. Army leadership wanted to focus on three key areas. a. The first was to align NCOER with current leadership doctrine. The current NCOER has been in place since Though it has served the Army well, it is outdated and has not adapted to changes in doctrine or the expectations of our Army and NCO Corps over time. b. Second, Army leadership wanted to focus on establishing and enforcing rating official accountability in order to eliminate inflation within the system. c. Third, was determining if the current “one-size-fits-all” NCOER was still appropriate in today’s Army and NCO Corps. Currently one NCOER is used regardless of one’s rank, position, scope, or level of responsibility. 2. Based on the CSA’s guidance, the Sergeant Major of the Army, his Board of Directors, and NCO working groups reviewed the process and made recommendations that were then validated by a Council of Colonels and General Officer Steering Committee in June Army leadership then directed HRC to gather Army-wide feedback on the recommended changes, review DA Centralized Selection Board AAR comments, and identify lessons learned from fielding the revised OER. 3. Building on the initial proposal, the final recommendations were presented to the SMA in April 2014 and approved by the CSA and SECARMY on 1 August As noted in the CSA’s Strategic Priorities, GEN Odierno identified the need for instituting new evaluation and assessment tools that enable Army leaders to more clearly identify the best talent and encourage leaders to seek self-improvement which shaped the following approved changes. 4. It is important to know that the Army did not change the NCOER just for the sake of changing it. The New NCOER was deliberately changed to enable better leader development and increase accountability while improving talent management. NOTE: Over the last four years, Human Resources Command has completed coordination with TRADOC and FORSCOM, Center for Army Leadership, and the Sergeant Major of the Army and his Board of Directors (BOD) in addition to receiving input from all levels of the Army.

What Changed? SHOW SLIDE 69: WHAT CHANGED?
Characteristic PREVIOUS NCOER (DA Form ) CURRENT NCOER (DA Form Series) NCOER Counseling Support Form Based on the Leadership Dimensions of FM Rater counsels initially and quarterly Senior Rater – no requirement to counsel Reviewer – no requirement to counsel; provides oversight/assists rating chain Aligns with Leadership Requirements Model of ADP 6-22 Rated NCO provides goals and expectations Senior Rater counsels, at a minimum, twice during rating period Supplemental Reviewer provides oversight/assists rating chain Incorporates SSD/NCOES completion box for next grade Form One report for all NCOs Three reports SGT (Direct Level) SSG through 1SG/MSG (Organizational) CSM/SGM (Strategic) Rating Chain Responsibilities Rater assesses performance and potential Senior Rater assesses performance and potential Reviewer provides oversight/assists rating chain Rater assesses performance Senior Rater assesses potential Army Leadership Doctrine Assessment Format Bullet comments for all NCOs Rater Bullet comments for SGT through 1SG/MSG Narrative comments for CSM/SGM Senior Rater – narrative comments for all NCOs Senior Rater Assessment Uncontrolled promotion-based “1” – Recommendation for immediate promotion “2” – Strong recommendation for promotion “3” – Recommendation for promotion “4” – Should not be promoted at this time “5” – Do not promote Controlled potential-based Most Qualified (24%) Highly Qualified Qualified Not Qualified Rating Chain Accountability No accountability Rater Tendency Label and Constrained Senior Rater Profile for SSG through CSM/SGM SHOW SLIDE 69: WHAT CHANGED? 1. The NCOER Counseling Support Form, NCOER Form, Rating Chain Responsibilities, Army Leadership Doctrine for usage of the new NCOER, Assessment Format, Senior Rater Assessment, and Rating Chain Accountability are all changing. 2. The form will change from one report to three reports based upon the rank of the rated NCO (1. SGT- Direct Level, 2. SSG through 1SG/MSG – Organizational, and 3. CSM/SGM – Strategic). The rating chain responsibilities will be separated between each individual member of the rating chain. 3. The Army leadership doctrine for the new NCOER will align with the Leadership Requirements Model of ADP 6-22. 4. Comments for the new NCOER will be either bullet and narrative comments or all narrative comments depending on if the rated NCO is a CSM/SGM or not. 5. The senior rater assessment will focus on a more controlled potential based assessment vs. an uncontrolled potential based assessment. 6. Also, the rating chain accountability will be enforced with a rater tendency label and constrained senior rater profile for SSG through CSM/SGM.

Approved Changes (1 of 2) Applicable to all Army components (Regular Army, Reserve, and Guard) Three NCOER forms aligned with Army Leadership Doctrine (ADP 6-22) SGT (Direct) SSG-1SG/MSG (Organizational) CSM/SGM (Strategic) Rater Tendency for Raters of SSG-CSM/SGM; imprinted on completed NCOER Senior Rater Profile for Senior Raters of SSG-CSM/SGM; limited to 24% for the MOST QUALIFIED selection Identifies best performers and forces leader accountability Clear delineation of rating official roles & responsibilities Rater assesses performance Senior Rater assesses potential SHOW SLIDE 70: APPROVED CHANGES (1 OF 2) Based on the development process during the past four years and recommendations presented to Army Leadership, the Secretary of the Army approved the following key changes that will apply to all Army components (Active, Reserve, and National Guard): 1. The Army will transition from one NCOER to three different reports based on grade plate. These three reports recognize the differences between junior and senior NCOs while allowing assessments to focus on grade-specific technical performance objectives. The New NCOER aligns with current doctrine by capturing the attributes and competencies from Army Doctrine Publication (ADP) 6-22, Army Leadership. 2. As for the three reports, there will be a direct-level report for Sergeant (SGT) that will focus on proficiency and is developmental in nature. There will be an organizational-level report for Staff Sergeant through First Sergeant / Master Sergeant (SSG-1SG/MSG) which will focus on organizational systems and processes. There will also be a strategic-level report for Command Sergeant Major / Sergeant Major (CSM/SGM) that will focus on large organizations and strategic initiatives. NOTE: Remind audience that the draft forms and assessment tools will be addressed later in the slide deck. 3. Rating chain accountability will be accomplished by implementing an unconstrained rater tendency label and a constrained senior rater profile for those in the ranks of Staff Sergeant through Sergeant Major. Unconstrained simply means that there will not be a limitation to the rater’s assessment of overall performance. The constrained senior rater profile will function the same way it does for the OER where the senior rater is limited to 24% top block or “MOST QUALIFIED”. A constrained profile will not only identify the best but also enforce leader accountability. 4. There will be a clear delineation of rating official roles and responsibilities. Raters will focus strictly only on performance, while senior raters focus strictly on potential. This separation allows rating officials to focus on their specific area which will eliminate inconsistent ratings that we sometimes have with the current NCOER.

Approved Changes (2 of 2) Assessment Format
Rater Bullet comments (SGT-1SG/MSG) Narrative comments (CSM/SGM) Senior Rater – narrative comments for all NCOs Supplementary review required for all Senior Raters in the rank of 1LT and below and in certain situations NCOER Support Form aligned with Army Doctrine (ADP 6-22) New Senior Rater comments box Senior Rater should counsel at least twice during rating period Discourage creation of large senior rater populations (pooling) SHOW SLIDE 71: APPROVED CHANGES (2 OF 2) 1. There have been changes to how rating officials will assess. Raters for Sergeant through First Sergeant/Master Sergeant will continue to assess in bullet comment format. However, raters for Command Sergeant Major/Sergeant Major and Senior Raters for all ranks will assess in narrative comment format. 2. The New NCOER Support Form has a new Senior Rater comments section. Senior raters “should” counsel at least twice during the rating period which will complement the rater’s initial and quarterly counseling requirement. Moreover, with the approved use of a senior rater profile, it will be even more critical for the senior rater to provide counsel and mentorship to the rated NCO. 3. The reviewer’s role will transition to a supplementary reviewer requirement. The senior rater will have the primary responsibility to ensure the evaluation meets all regulatory requirements and policies. A supplementary review will be required for all NCOERs when the senior rater is a 1LT and below. This includes all warrant officers and all enlisted senior raters. This provision will ensure proper oversight for senior raters who may be inexperienced and/or unfamiliar with managing a senior rater profile and writing narrative comments. The supplementary reviewer requirement will also be used when there are no uniformed Army rating officials (i.e., all civilians or sister services) within the rating chain and when the senior rater or someone outside the rating chain directs a “Relief for Cause” report. 4. All of these approved revisions, in particular the senior rater profile, will create a significant culture change in how the Army assesses Noncommissioned Officers. It is crucial that all rating officials and NCOs at every level fully understand the new assessment tools and policy changes so that the Army can better identify the best talent in today’s Army and support the Chief of Staff’s Strategic Priorities.

NCOER Support Form – Page 1
Part I – SSD and NCOES requirement met for next grade Part II – Senior Rater annotates counseling dates Part II – Supplementary Reviewer, if required Part IV – Rated NCO provides goals and expectations Up to 7 lines of text SHOW SLIDE 72 : NCOER Support Form – Page 1 The next couple of slides are snapshots of the NCOER Support Form and the three grade-plate NCOERs. 1. The support form includes the following new features: a. Structured Self-Development (SSD) and Military Education Level (MEL) codes will auto-populate on the support form. This will serve two purposes. First, if the information is inaccurate, the rated NCO will need to contact their HR office or HRC to get it updated. Second, the rating chain will be able to mentor and counsel the rated NCO and track his/her progress in attaining promotion eligibility for the next grade (in the case of Sergeants Major, eligibility for joint and/or nominative assignments). b. The rated NCO will list their goals and expectations in Part IV. This will place more onus or responsibility on the rated NCO to perform throughout the rating period and provide the rating officials with additional information to consider when evaluating overall performance and potential. 2. Another key change is that there is now a senior rater comments section. Senior raters should counsel the rated NCO twice at least twice during the rating period. This will complement the rater’s initial and quarterly counseling sessions. Also, with the implementation of a senior rater profile, it becomes more critical for the senior rater to provide counsel and mentorship to the rated NCO. Up to 2 lines of text Up to 2 lines of text Up to 16 lines of text

NCOER Counseling Support Form
Part V – Attributes and Competencies (ADP 6-22) CHARACTER: Rater assesses the rated NCO’s performance in fostering a climate of dignity and respect and adhering to the requirements of the SHARP Program Part VI – Senior Rater provides comments Up to 8 lines of text for each field SHOW SLIDE 73: NCOER Counseling Support Form 1. The NCOER Support Form will align with leadership doctrine. Based on the attributes and competencies of ADP 6-22, the rater will discuss and establish major performance objectives in Part V. 2. The senior rater should provide comments as discussed in the two counseling sessions.

Bullet comments for all grade plates except Strategic Report (CSM/SGM)
DA Form Front Page Administrative data is the same for all reports Supplementary Reviewer required when the Senior Rater is a 1LT and below and in certain situations Part II, block d2 – Rated NCO’s signature verifies seeing the report and the accuracy of administrative data in Part I, rating chain and counseling dates in Part II, duty description in Part III, and APFT and HT/WT data in Part IV Part IV Bullet comments for Direct- and Organizational-level reports Narrative comments for Strategic-level report Up to 7 lines of text SHOW SLIDE 74: DA Form Front Page 1. The front page format of the NCOER will be the same for all three grade plate forms. In Part II, if the supplementary reviewer is not required, then the user will check “NO” in Part II block c1 and leave the remaining section blank. 2. Starting in Part IV block c, the rater will begin assessing the rated NCO on the attributes and competencies from ADP 6-22. NOTE: The only difference is in Part IV block c for the CSM/SGM grade plate form which will be narrative format. The other two grade plate forms will be bullet format.) Up to 5 lines of text Bullet comments for all grade plates except Strategic Report (CSM/SGM)

Direct-level Report (SGT) - Page 2
Focuses on proficiency and is developmental in nature; aligns with Army Leadership Doctrine Assessment based on 2-box scale MET STANDARD DID NOT MEET STANDARD Rater – bullet format Unconstrained Senior Rater box check Senior Rater – narrative format Up to eight (8) lines of text (bullet format) for each field in Part IV, blocks c through h SHOW SLIDE 75: Direct-level Report (SGT) – Page 2 1. During the review process, all of the key stakeholders (i.e., the Sergeant Major of the Army and his Board of Directors, the Council of Colonels, and the General Officer Steering Committee) wanted the direct-level report for Sergeant to be simple and straightforward. That is why raters will assess using a 2-box scale (MET STANDARD or DID NOT MEET STANDARD). The direct-level report will be focused on technical proficiency and is developmental in nature. 2. Rater comments will continue to be in bullet format. 3. As for the overall performance, the rater will assess the rated NCO’s overall performance compared to other NCOs in that rank/grade. For those who are assessing NCOs in a particular rank for the first time, the rater will use their experience when providing comments. 4. The senior rater’s assessment of the rated NCO’s overall potential will be unconstrained which basically means that there will not be a limitation imposed. Please note that this only applies to the direct-level report for Sergeant. The senior rater will also provide narrative comments to support their box check (“MOST QUALIFIED”, “HIGHLY QUALIFIED”, “QUALIFIED”, “NOT QUALIFIED”) and list two successive assignments and one broadening assignment that the rated NCO can best serve the Army in the future. Up to five (5) lines of text (bullet format) Up to 5 lines of narrative text

Organizational-level REPORT (SSG-1SG/MSG) – Page 2
Focuses on organizational systems and processes; aligns with Army Leadership Doctrine Rater – bullet format Senior Rater – Narrative format Assessment based on 4-box scale FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD EXCEEDED STANDARD MET STANDARD DID NOT MEET STANDARD Unconstrained Rater Tendency Constrained Senior Rater Profile (limited to 24% for “Most Qualified” selection); no credit applied Up to eight (8) lines of text (bullet format) for each field in Part IV, blocks c through h SHOW SLIDE 76: ORGANIZATIONAL-LEVEL REPORT (SSG-1SG/MSG) – Page 2 1. Whereas the direct-level report for Sergeant uses a 2-box scale, the organizational-level report for Staff Sergeant through First Sergeant / Master Sergeant (SSG-1SG/MSG) uses a 4-box scale (FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD, EXCEEDED STANDARD, MET STANDARD, DID NOT MEET STANDARD). This NCOER will focus on organizational systems and processes. 2. As far as distinguishing between the four performance measures, TRADOC provided CMF-specific guidance which was gathered from the proponents. In keeping with Army guidance and to avoid inflation, an EXCEEDED STANDARD box check is demonstrated by the upper 20% of the NCOs of the same grade while the FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD box check is demonstrated by the top 5% of the NCOs of the same grade. Rater comments will continue to be in bullet format. 3. The rater will assess the rated NCO’s overall performance compared to other NCOs in that rank/grade using the 4-box scale while providing comments. For those who are assessing NCOs in a particular rank for the first time, the rater will use their experience when providing comments. 4. The senior rater assessment of the rated NCO’s overall potential will be CONSTRAINED and limited to 24% top block or “MOST QUALIFIED”. The “Silver bullet” refers to the senior rater being able to render a top block for any one of the first four reports for each grade he/she assesses. For example, if the senior rater renders a “MOST QUALIFIED” for the first NCOER, then the next three will have to be either “HIGHLY QUALIFIED”, “QUALIFIED”, or “NOT QUALIFIED”. The senior rater profile requires the rating official to identify the best talent and reserve the top block assessment for those who are truly deserving. While the box check is important, the senior rater’s narrative comments are critical and should quantify and/or support the box check. NOTE: No credit will be applied to the senior rater profile. Everyone will start from zero (0).) Up to five (5) lines of text (bullet format) Up to 5 lines of narrative text 10

Strategic-level (CSM/SGM) – Page 2
Focuses on large organizations and strategic initiatives; aligns with Army Leadership Doctrine Rater and Senior Rater – narrative format Rater Overall Performance is not limited Unconstrained Rater Tendency Senior Rater Profile (limited to 24% for "MOST QUALIFIED" selection); no credit applied “Silver Bullet” – only one of the first four reports may be “MOST QUALIFED” Up to 5 lines of narrative text SHOW SLIDE 77: Strategic-level (CSM/SGM) – Page 2 1. The strategic-level report for Command Sergeant Major / Sergeant Major (CSM/SGM) will focus on large organizations and strategic initiatives. Both the rater and senior rater will assess using narrative comments. The rater comments on performance and the senior rater comments on potential. 2. The rater’s assessment of overall performance and the senior rater’s assessment of overall potential will function the same as the organizational-level report for Staff Sergeant through First Sergeant / Master Sergeant (SSG-1SG/MSG). Up to 4 lines of narrative text Up to 5 lines of narrative text

Exceeds Standards (applies to Organizational and Strategic-level NCOERs)
mentored two squad members to be inducted into the Sergeant Audie Murphy Club graduated from M1A2/MGS/Bradley Master Gunner’s Course scored 2+/2+ on the Defense Language Proficiency Test (DLPT); surpassed Army standard in a Category IV language recognized with the Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal for volunteering over 100 hours with local community selected over eight seniors and 15 peers by the Deputy Commanding General to serve as Master Driver EXCEEDED STANDARD Rated NCO performs above the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes; this NCO and his/her Soldiers often take disciplined initiative in applying leader competencies and attributes; results have an immediate impact on the mission, their Soldiers, the unit, and the Army; this level of performance is not common, typically demonstrated by the upper third of NCOs of the same grade. SHOW SLIDE 78: Exceeds Standards Rated NCO performs above the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes typically demonstrated by the upper third of NCOs of the same grade.

FAR EXCEEDED STANDARDS
Far Exceeded Standards (applies to Organizational and Strategic-level NCOERs) FAR EXCEEDED STANDARDS Rated NCO performs extraordinarily above the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes; leadership enables Soldiers and unit to far surpass required organizational and Army standards; demonstrated performance epitomizes excellence in all aspects; this NCO and his/her Soldiers consistently take disciplined initiative in applying leader competencies and attributes; results have an immediate impact and enduring effect on the mission, their Soldiers, the unit, and the Army; demonstrated by the best of the upper third of NCOs of the same grade. placed 1st of 23 teams in the recent LTG David E. Grange Jr. Best Ranger Competition nominated and selected over 11 senior NCOs to serve as the Army Corrections Command Operations Sergeant selected as the Secretary of the Army Career Counselor of the Year; incomparable retention knowledge expertly led his/her SGLs to earn an Institute of Excellence rating within eight months of arrival selected by Corps/Division G-1 as the best Brigade S-1 within area of responsibility SHOW SLIDE 79: Far Exceeded Standards Rated NCO performs extraordinarily above the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes; demonstrated by the best of the upper third of NCOs of the same grade. 10

Met Standard (applies to all Grade Plate NCOERs)
established a workplace environment and overall command climate that fostered dignity and respect for all team members scored 263 on last APFT helping company to achieve a 250 average assisted in the weapons qualification of 200 Soldiers throughout the battalion developed a strong priority work plan and anticipated constant change; successfully completed all missions developed several SOPs that were effectively used by Soldiers for accomplishment of daily missions MET STANDARD Rated NCO successfully achieves and maintains the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes; effectively meets and enforces the standard for the unit and those in his/her charge; succeeds by taking appropriate initiative in applying the leader competencies and attributes; results have a positive impact on the mission, their Soldiers, the unit, and the Army; this level of performance is considered normal and typically demonstrated by a majority of NCOs of the same grade. SHOW SLIDE 80: Met Standard Rated NCO successfully achieves and maintains the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes; typically demonstrated by a majority of NCOs of the same grade.

Did Not Meet Standard (applies to all Grade Plate NCOERs)
failed to consistently adhere to rules, regulations, or standard operating procedures demonstrated no concern for security and accountability of sensitive items displayed meager enthusiasm and optimism; his/her actions discouraged others to develop and reach their full potential failed to maintain accountability of Soldiers under his supervision; fabricated status reports declined to address subordinate’s request for assistance with personal issues DID NOT MEET STANDARD Rated NCO fails to meet or maintain the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes; does not enforce or meet the standard for the unit or those in his/her charge; exhibits/displays minimal or no effort; actions often have a negative effect on the mission, their Soldiers, the unit, and the Army. SHOW SLIDE 81: Did Not Meet Standard Rated NCO fails to meet or maintain the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes

Rater Tendency Label (applies to SSG-CSM/SGM)
2 3 6 1 Total Ratings: 12 Note: This is the Rater’s “capstone” assessment of performance and opportunity to “stratify / quantify.” Rater Tendency Label – the value below each box equals the overall history of those ratings in this grade and the rated NCO’s overall performance compared to NCOs in same grade SSG-CSM/SGM Rater Tendency (i.e., rating history) will be imprinted on the NCOER and viewable within the Evaluation Entry System (EES) by the Rater’s Rater and Senior Rater Emphasizes the following: Importance of the Rater’s role and responsibility to provide credible information to HQDA Importance of a Rater’s sequencing of NCOER submissions to avoid inflation Provides information to HQDA Selection Boards and Army Leadership on the Rater’s rating tendency Continues without interruption as the Rater moves from unit to unit, position to position, regardless of promotion SHOW SLIDE 82: Rater Tendency Label 1. The Rater Tendency Label depicts the Rater’s overall rating history in a particular grade. The example shows that the Rater rendered 12 ratings for Sergeant First Class. Of those 12, the Rater identified two (2) as “FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD”, three (3) as “EXCEEDED STANDARD”, six (6) as “MET STANDARD”, and one (1) as “DID NOT MEET STANDARD”. Because the Rater Tendency is unconstrained (i.e., no limitation), it is imperative that the Rater maintain a credible rating history. In the event the Rater Tendency reflects inflation (for example, out of 12 total ratings, eight (8) are either “FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD” or “EXCEEDED STANDARD”), then there is the potential for the Rater’s credibility to be questioned when reviewed by a HQDA DA Centralized Selection Board and the rater’s chain of command who can view this report. 2. An additional feature within the Evaluation Entry System (EES) is the ability for the Rater’s Rater and Senior Rater to view the Rater’s Rater Tendency. This will allow the Rater’s rating chain to provide oversight and guidance to ensure the Rater is managing his/her Rater Tendency in accordance with Army guidance. 3. The rated NCO will not be at a disadvantage. Selection board members will see the rater’s tendency, the performance box check that was rendered along with the supporting narrative comments that should reflect the selected box check. The Senior Rater renders the overall potential assessment which is constrained. 4. It is also important to note that the Rater’s Rater and Senior Rater will have visibility of the rater’s tendency report. Leaders are responsible for developing, mentoring, and counseling raters in order to discourage inflation and protect a Rater’s credibility.

Senior Rater Assessment (SSG-CSM/SGM)
Most Qualified: Definitely select for higher levels of responsibilities (24%) Highly Qualified: Possesses the ability to perform at the next level of responsibility Qualified: Retain at current level Not Qualified: Needs improvement Limited to 24% SHOW SLIDE 83: Senior Rater Assessment (SSG-CSM/SGM) 1. Senior raters will have to manage a constrained profile which will be limited to 24% for the top block or “MOST QUALIFIED”. This limitation will require senior raters to carefully manage and forecast so they are able to identify the very best. 2. Based on the profile limitation of 24%, a senior rater can render a MOST QUALIFIED assessment for a particular grade (SSG through CSM/SGM) as follows: Any one of the first four reports. The second MOST QUALIFIED assessment no earlier than the ninth report (2 / 9 = 22.2%). The third MOST QUALIFIED assessment no earlier than the thirteenth report (3 / 13 = 23.1%). d. The fourth MOST QUALIFIED assessment no earlier than the seventeenth report (4 / 17 = 23.5%). Senior Rater’s assessment of rated NCO’s overall potential compared to NCOs in same grade Profile limited to 24% Only one of the first four NCOERs may be rated as Most Qualified (“Silver bullet”) Narrative comment format

Immature Profile / Small Population
HQDA COMPARISON OF THE SENIOR RATER’S PROFILE AT THE TIME THIS REPORT PROCESSED HIGHLY QUALIFIED RNCO: SMITH, BOB SR: DODD, JANE DATE: TOTAL RATINGS: 3 RATINGS THIS NCO: 1 Small Population (3 or less) Immature Profile (5 or less) SHOW SLIDE 84: Immature Profile / Small Population 1. The administrative information on the Senior Rater Profile Label is designed to assist selection board members to quickly identify when an immature profile and/or small population exists for the Senior Rater and the Rated NCO’s NCOER. 2. An immature profile is when the Senior Rater has rendered five (5) or less reports for a particular grade. 3. A small population is when the Senior Rater’s population is three (3) or less for a particular grade. 4. Here is an example of how it works: a. If you look at the “TOTAL RATINGS” on the HQDA label, you can see that this is the Senior Rater’s third SGM rating. This is an immature profile which is defined as up to five (5) reports rendered for a particular grade. b. If you look at Part V block a, you can see that it reflects a small population (any number of 3 or less). Examples of small populations are: one Army Sergeant First Class in a Joint office, or two Sergeants Major working in a battalion. When the number is small, you know the Senior Rater is not going to be able to write a lot of reports that impact their profile. The rated NCO may get an annual, another annual, and a change of rater. c. When you combine an immature profile and/or small population with the “Silver bullet” exception (one of the first four reports assessed as “MOST QUALIFIED”), then there is a strong likelihood that most reports processed by HQDA and viewed by DA Centralized Selection Boards will be “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” assessments. Taking all of this into account, selection board members will be advised to focus on the narrative to determine the senior rater’s intent. Future Guidance to DA Centralized Selection Boards for the New NCOER Check DA Label: “Total Ratings” (5 or less = immature profile) Check Part Va – same grade in population (3 or less = small population) Expect “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” assessment if immature profile and/or small population exists Focus on Senior Rater’s narrative

Senior Rater Profile Calculation
Type of Report THRU Date Box Check “Most Qualified” “Highly Qualified” “Qualified” “Not Qualified” Profile MQ HQ Q NQ Total Date of Receipt SR Profile Annual X 1 100% CoR 2 50% 3 33.3% 4 25% 5 20% 6 16.7% 7 14.3% Ext Annual 8 12.5% 9 22.2% 10 20.0% SHOW SLIDE 85: Senior rater Profile Calculation 1. The senior rater profile calculation begins when the senior rater renders their first NCOER for SSG-CSM/SGM. To determine the senior rater profile, you have to divide the # of “MOST QUALIFIED” assessments by the total number of reports rendered. In the example, the senior rater utilized the “Silver bullet” except and rendered a “MOST QUALIFIED” assessment for the first report. The next three are either “HIGHLY QUALIFIED”, “QUALIFIED”, or “NOT QUALIFIED”. After the fourth report, the SR Profile is 25%. Because the senior rater profile is limited to 24%, the next time the senior rater can render another “MOST QUALIFIED” assessment is the ninth report for a particular grade. 2. Please note that the Evaluation Entry System or EES will automatically calculate the senior rater profile. If the senior rater profile does not support a “MOST QUALIFIED” box check, the system will gray out that option and not be available to the senior rater. In the event a hard copy report is mailed to HRC, the senior rater box check for overall potential will be verified against the senior rater profile. If the senior rater profile does not support a “MOST QUALIFIED” box check, the report will be considered a “misfire” and then automatically downgraded to a “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” prior to processing. Based on the profile limitation of 24%, a senior rater can render a “MOST QUALIFIED” assessment for a particular grade (SSG through CSM/SGM) as follows: Any one of the first four reports The second “MOST QUALIFIED” assessment no earlier than the ninth report (2 / 9 = 22.2%) The third “MOST QUALIFIED” assessment no earlier than the thirteenth report (3 / 13 = 23.1%) The fourth “MOST QUALIFIED” assessment no earlier than the seventeenth report (4 / 17 = 23.5%)

Senior Rater Grade Requirements
SHOW SLIDE 86: Senior Rater Grade Requirements NOTE: Per AR 623-3, Table 2-1, there is a policy change that updates and clarifies minimum grade requirements to serve as Senior Raters for evaluation reports.

Evaluation Narrative Selection boards should understand what input the Rating Chain is providing without having to guess Raters – focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance Senior Raters Amplify potential box checks by using the narrative to capture the rating official’s passion (or lack thereof) for the Rated NCO Reserve exclusive and strong narratives for the very best NCOs Focus on the next 3-5 years (assignment, schooling, and promotion) “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” box checks will be the norm Assessment of Overall Potential Most Qualified: Strong potential for selection in the secondary zone; potential ahead of peers Highly Qualified: Strong potential for promotion with peers Qualified: Capable of success at the next level; promote if able Not Qualified: Not recommended for promotion; consider for separation SHOW SLIDE 87: Evaluation Narrative 1. The evaluation narrative should clearly explain what the Rated NCO did and how well he/she did it. For the rater, he/she must quantify and qualify the performance measure box checks with substantiated bullet comments. The senior rater will reserve exclusive and strong narrative for only the very best NCOs. 2. Exclusive narratives describe superior performance/potential above that of the vast majority, associated with early promotion; are restrictive in nature (e.g., top 1%, 3%, 5%, etc., of all NCOs, the best among a select grade or group, promote in the secondary zone). Should only be used for the best “MOST QUALIFIED” reports within a mature profile, or “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” reports that follow a “MOST QUALIFIED” for same rated NCO and at times for the very best NCOs with “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” reports in small population/immature profile situations. 3. Strong narratives describe significant performance accomplishments and enthusiastically recommend promotion, assignment to key duty positions linked to upward mobility and appropriate military schooling (e.g., among the best, easily in the top third of the NCO corps, definitely promote this NCO, secondary zone potential, one of my best NCOs). Should be used for “MOST QUALIFIED” reports and for the very best NCOs receiving “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” reports.

Check on Learning 1. What is the maximum percentage a senior rater can give a “MOST QUALIFIED” rating to rated NCOs? a. 23% b. 24% c. 25% d. 26% 2. Only ___ of the first four NCOERs received for processing at HQDA for any given grade may be rated as “MOST QUALIFIED”. a. one b. two c. three d. four 3. The senior rater will identify ____ successive duty assignments and ____ broadening assignment for which the rated NCO is best suited. a. one/one b. two/two c. two/one d. one/two SHOW SLIDE 88: CHECK ON LEARNING NOTE: Conduct a Check on Learning, poll for questions, and summarize the Learning Activity. NOTE TO INSTRUCTOR: This is a build slide and includes 6 animations. Click the mouse to reveal the correct answers. 1. What is the maximum percentage a senior rater can give a “MOST QUALIFIED” rating to rated NCOs? (AR 623-3, para 3-9(3)1.a)) a. 23% b. 24% c. 25% d. 26% 2. Only ___ of the first four NCOERs received for processing at HQDA for any given grade may be rated as “MOST QUALIFIED”. (AR 623-3, para 3-9(3)2.c)) a. one b. two c. three d. four 3. The senior rater will identify ____ successive duty assignments and ____ broadening assignment for which the rated NCO is best suited. (AR 623-3, para 3-9) a. one/one b. two/two c. two/one d. one/two

Evaluation Entry System (EES)
SHOW SLIDE 89: EVALUATION ENTRY SYSTEM (EES) Learning Step/Activity 7. Employ the Evaluation Entry System (EES) Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:16 Time of Instruction: 15 mins

Evaluation Entry System (EES)
EES is the revised web-based tool at HRC, used to complete and submit evaluations EES consolidates AKO Myforms wizard, IWRS, EXCEL profile calculators, etc Benefits of EES: Enhanced wizard to guide rating chain and Human Resource professionals in preparing the evaluation Multi-pane dashboard allows user to view data input and forms simultaneously Built-in tool to view and manage Rater and Senior Rater profiles Provides quick reference to AR and DA PAM 623-3 Eliminates accessing multiple systems and consolidates evaluation tools to one system Does not delay evaluation processing due to rater profile “misfires” (automatic downgrade) SHOW SLIDE 90: EVALUATION ENTRY SYSTEM (EES) 1. EES is the revised web-based tool at HRC, used to complete and submit evaluations. 2. EES consolidates AKO Myforms wizard, IWRS, EXCEL profile calculators, etc

Evaluation Entry System (EES) https://evaluations.hrc.army.mil/
EES link from HRC Self-Service tools & online applications page SHOW SLIDE 91: Evaluation Entry System (EES) NOTE: EES link from HRC Self-service tools & online applications page.

Homepage 10 most current Evaluations Support Forms SHOW SLIDE 92: Evaluation Entry System (EES) HOMEPAGE The Evaluation Entry System or EES is the web-based system in which all NCOERs will be created, submitted, and processed. The EES homepage allows the user to create a NCOER Support Form and/or NCOER. Once a NCOER is initiated, the rating officials will complete their respective sections and the rated NCO will review/sign prior to submission.

Homepage - tools Shows all active evaluations related to you, as the Rater, Senior Rater, or Delegate. Allows delegates to view Senior Rater profile (if delegated). Shows Rater & Senior Rater Profile; will show Rater Tendency SHOW SLIDE 93: Evaluation Entry System (EES) HOMEPAGE - TOOLS Some of the tools available to EES users include: Continue/View Active Evaluations View Profiles where I am a delegate View my Rater Tendency and Senior Rater Profile Manage Delegates Allows signature removal if correction or amendment is required Allows Senior Rater or Rater to add Delegates who can draft, edit, remove signatures, and submit reports on your behalf. Only the designated rating official can sign/authenticate evaluations.

Enlisted Advisor Delegate Function
(“Manage Delegates” link located under “TOOLS”) Additional CSM/SGM/1SG Reviewer Column – rating officials may identify up to two (2) individuals to review and provide comments; visible only to rating officials and CSM/SGM/1SG Reviewer(s) SHOW SLIDE 94: Enlisted Advisor Delegate Function A new feature within EES will be the Enlisted Advisor delegate function which will be listed under the Manage Delegates page. This tool will allow the rating official to designate up to two individuals to review and provide comments concerning all NCOERs the rating official assesses. Within each report in EES, there will be an online dialogue box that only the rating officials and the delegated enlisted advisor will have access to. As long as the delegated enlisted advisor has access to the EES portal, this tool will allow him/her to review reports whether they are in their office, on leave, or TDY. The dialogue box will be purged from EES after the report has been processed by HQDA.

Check on Learning 1. Senior Raters of Company and Field Grade officers focus on which of the following? a. Performance b. Potential c. Military Education d. Promotion 2. An APFT must be completed during the rated period in order for it to be included on the DA Form series? a. True b. False 3. Match the form to the correct title. DA Form A DA Form DA Form a DA Form DA Form DA Form DA Form 1. Company Grade Plate Officer Evaluation Report 2. Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (SGT) 3. NCO Counseling and Support Form 4. Strategic Grade Plate (O7) General Officer Evaluation Report 5. Officer Evaluation Report Support Form 6. Strategic Grade Plate (O6) Officer Evaluation Report 7. Field Grade Plate Officer Evaluation Report SHOW SLIDE 95: CHECK ON LEARNING NOTE: Conduct a Check on Learning, poll for questions, and summarize the Learning Activity. NOTE TO INSTRUCTOR: This is a build slide and includes 11 animations. Click the mouse to reveal the correct answers. 1. Senior Raters of Company and Field Grade officers focus on which of the following? (DA PAM 623-3, Table 2-6) a. Performance b. Potential c. Military Education d. Promotion 2. An APFT must be completed during the rated period in order for it to be included on the DA Form ? (DA PAM 623-3, Table 3-4) a. True b. False 3. Match the form to the correct title. A-3 B-2 C-5 D-1 E-7 F-6 G-4

Computing Reporting Periods, Rated Months and Nonrated Time
SHOW SLIDE 96: COMPUTING REPORTING PERIODS, RATED MONTHS, AND NON-RATED TIME Learning Step/Activity 8. Computing Reporting Periods, Rated Months, and Nonrated Time Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:16 Time of Instruction: 10 mins

Computing Reporting Periods, Rated Months and Nonrated Time (1 of 3)
Step One: Determine the Report Type What is the triggering factor that requires an Evaluations? (e.g., PCS, Annual, Change of Rater, etc.) Refer to DA PAM 623-3, tables 2-24 (officer) and 3-16 (NCO) for codes and reasons Step Two: Determine the Reporting Period Start date: Always the day after the thru date of previous report Thru date: Based on report type and last day of rating (if departing a unit, it is the day before you sign out) Step Three: Determine and calculate the nonrated periods Refer to DA PAM 623-3, Tables 2-25 (officer) and 3-17 (NCO) for nonrated codes Subtract all non-rated from the rating period and divide the number of days by 30 If 15 or more days are left after dividing the rating period by 30, count them as a whole month (for example, 130 days is 4 months and 10 days and is entered as 4 months; 140 days is 4 months and 20 days and is entered as 5 months) SHOW SLIDE 97: COMPUTING REPORTING PERIODS, RATED MONTHS, AND NONRATED TIME (1 of 3) STEP 1: Determine the appropriate report code and reason that identify why the evaluation report is being prepared for submission from DA PAM STEP 2: Determine the period covered. The period covered is the period extending from the day after the “THRU” date of the last evaluation report to the date of the event causing the report to be written. The rating period is that portion of the period covered during which the rated Soldier serves in an assigned position under the rater who is writing the report. The period covered and the rating period will always end on the same date. The beginning date of the rating period may not be the same as the beginning date of the period covered (the “FROM” date). EXAMPLE: An officer departs on permanent change of station (PCS) on 1 July and is given a change or rater evaluation report with a “THRU” date of 30 June. After 5 days of in-transit travel and 20 days of leave, the officer reports for duty at his or her new unit on 26 July. Then, on 1 November, the officer changes duty (but the rater remains the same) and is given a “Change of Duty” evaluation report. The period covered on this report would be 1 July (“FROM” date) to 31 October (“THRU” date); however, the rating period would be from 26 July to 31 October. STEP 3: Determine and calculate nonrated time (if any). NOTE: Refer to DA PAM 623-3, Table 2-25 for nonrated codes and reasons for officers; Table 3-17 for NCOs.

Calculating Nonrated Time
SLIDE SHOW 98: CALCULATING NONRATED TIME NOTE: Reference AR 623-3, Figure 3-1 1. Continuous, extended periods of nonrated time on an OER or NCOER require special considerations. When a Soldier has received a report within 90 days of starting a continuous, greater-than-9-months period of nonrated time on an OER or NCOER because of schooling, AER, patient status, or any other reason covered by nonrated code where the Soldier is not performing duties at an assigned unit, the FROM date for the next report will be one day after the THRU date of last OER/NCOER reflected on the file. 2. However, the rated months will be calculated on the basis of the date of arrival under a valid unit rating scheme. Resulting reports can reflect a rating period greater than 12 months (they include the non-evaluated time), but the rated months cannot exceed 12 months of evaluated time. Examples are shown in figure 3–1. AR 623-3, Figure 3-1

Computing Reporting Periods, Rated Months and Non-rated Time (2 of 3)
SFC Craven Last NCOER ended Received assignment instructions to Fort Jackson with a report date of Was hospitalized from to Will sign out of his unit on Complete Part I, item i-l on SFC Craven’s next NCOER SHOW SLIDE 99: COMPUTING REPORTING PERIODS, RATED MONTHS, AND NONRATED TIME (2 of 3) Note to Instructor: Walk through example of how to complete Part 1, items i through l for SFC Craven.

Computing Reporting Periods, Rated Months and Non-rated Time (3 of 3)
SFC Craven i. 03 Change of Rater (DA PAM 623-3, Table 3-16) j – (DA PAM 623-3, Table 3-6) k. 361 days – 17 days / 30 = 11 months (DA PAM, Table 3-6) l. P (DA PAM 623-3, Table 3-17) SHOW SLIDE 100: COMPUTING REPORTING PERIODS, RATED MONTHS, AND NONRATED TIME (3 of 3) Note to Instructor: Walk through solution of how to complete Part 1, items i through l for SFC Craven.

Apply iPERMS SCENARIO SHOW SLIDE 101: iPERMS SCENARIO
Note to Instructor: Inform students that they will have to access the iPERMS Training Database to complete the next two practical exercises. Note to Instructor: There are six animations to this slide. NOTE: Have students logo into iPERMS via the AGS Dashboard at the following web address: 1. Students will click on the “AMHRR/iPERMS” icon to access iPERMS. Click “I Accept” then click “Certificate Login.” The system will connect to AKO for certificate verification click “OK” at your AKO user name and enter your “AKO Password.” 4. “Accept” the terms of accessing the system and click “Log in as Yourself.” 5. Click on “Authorized Official” and go to “Lookup Soldier by SSN” 6. Type in the applicable Soldier SSN as indicated the scenario to retrieve the requested data.

iPERMS SCENARIO # 1 You are the S1 for 2d BCT. As part of your duties to prepare for the upcoming Command and Staff you review the Evaluation Reports data to ensure you have accurately captured the current status of officer and enlisted personnel requiring evaluation reports within the next 60 days. Verify the type of report, period covered, and rated months on the last evaluation report loaded in iPERMS for the following Soldiers: MAJ AustinHankins, Shownette MAJ McNeely, Chadwick A., JR CW2 Stoute, Christopher M WO1 Harwig, Monica E SFC Jacksonbutler, Angela M SHOW SLIDE 102: iPERMS SCENARIO #1 NAME TYPE OF REPORT FROM DATE THRU DATE RATED MONTHS MAJ AUSTINHANKINS /ANNUAL MAJ MCNEELY /CHANGE OF RATER CW2 STOUTE /ANNUAL WO1 HARWIG ACADEMIC SFC JACKSONBULTER /CHANGE OF RATER

iPERMS SCENARIO # 2 You are the S1 for 2d BCT. The Bde Cdr/CSM want you to verify the Service School Academic Evaluation Reports, for highest military educational training attendance, for the following Officers and NCOs assigned to the Bde. Verify in iPERMS the Academic course attended and the period of attendance reflected on the DA Form 1059 on the following Soldiers: MAJ Carrier, Anthony A MAJ Homiller, Michael M CW3 Pendleton, Jarvis M CW2 Hutchins, Galen D SFC Leclerc, Bryan L SFC Ritz, Crystal C SHOW SLIDE 103: iPERMS SCENARIO #2 NAME COURSE ATTENDED FROM THRU MAJ CARRIER ILE/CGSC MAJ HOMILLER ILE/CGSC CW3 PENDLETON WO ADVAN CRS CW2 HUTCHINS WO BASIC CRS SFC LECLERC SR LDR CRS (SLC) SFC RITZ SR LDR CRS (SLC)

Terminal Learning Objective
ACTION: Administer Evaluations Reporting Program CONDITIONS: In a small group classroom environment, given access to AR (Evaluation Reporting System), DA PAM (Evaluation Reporting System), access to Army Human Resources Command Evaluation Entry System (EES) and awareness of Operational Environment (OE) variables and actors. STANDARDS: Students will meet the standard of 80% accuracy when they: 1. Identify the principles of the Evaluation Reporting System (ERS). 2. Determine rating chain qualifications and responsibilities. 3. Define counseling requirements that support the ERS. Identify types of Evaluations Reports. Compute report periods, rated months and non-rated time. Employ the Evaluation Entry System (EES). Manage Rater / Senior Rater Profiles. SHOW SLIDE 104: TERMINAL LEARNING OBJECTIVE Summary. Review TLO, poll for questions, summarize the lesson, and transition to Practical Exercises.

Administer Evaluations Adjutant General Captains Career Course

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Administer Evaluations Adjutant General Captains Career Course"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Administer Evaluations Adjutant General Captains Career Course

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Administer Evaluations Adjutant General Captains Career Course"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback