Adjutant General School Administer Evaluations Reporting Program

Adjutant General School Administer Evaluations Reporting Program
WOBC Department of the Army Pamphlet 623-3 Personnel Evaluation Evaluation Reporting System Headquarters Washington, DC 4 November 2016 UNCLASSIFIED Army Regulation 623-3 Personnel Evaluation Evaluation Reporting System Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC 4 November 2015 UNCLASSIFIED SHOW SLIDE 1: ADMINISTER EVALUATIONS REPORTING PROGRAM Title: Administer Evaluations Reporting Program References: AR 623-3, Evaluation Reporting System DA PAM Evaluation Reporting System SECTION I. ADMINISTRATIVE DATA: Academic Hours/Methods 0 hr/10 min Introduction 4 hrs / 45 min Conference / Discussion 3 hr/00 Practical Exercise 0 hr/05 min Summary 8 hrs Total Hours SECTION II. INTRODUCTION: Today we are going to discuss administering the Evaluations and Reporting Program. Introduction: Identify the Principles of the Evaluation Reporting System Method of Instruction: Conference / Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:36 Time of Instruction: 10 mins Media: Large Group Instruction 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. INSTRUCTIONAL LEAD-IN. Imagine you are assigned as a battalion S1. The commander wants you to present a briefing on evaluations to the noncommissioned and commissioned officers on the staff. The S1 Noncommissioned Officer in Charge (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. Instructor Material and Student Materials: Regulations, Slides, Student Handouts, and PEs NOTE: Discuss the current state of the evaluation system in comparison to the future changes that are being considered. The NCOER is still under revision. The goal of this lesson is to keep students informed of the multiple changes to ERS. Before providing this lesson, do additional research to determine if there is additional guidance, MILPER Messages, ALARACT Messages, or regulation updates. Administer Evaluations Reporting Program

Terminal Learning Objective TERMINAL LEARNING OBJECTIVE:
ACTION: Administer Evaluations Reporting Program CONDITIONS: In a classroom environment, given access to AR (Evaluation Reporting System), DA PAM (Evaluation Reporting System), access to Army Human Resource Command and Army Knowledge Online and awareness of Operational Environment (OE) variables and actors. STANDARDS: Students will meet the standard of 70% accuracy when they: 1. Identify the principles of the Evaluation Reporting System 2. Determine rating chain qualifications and responsibilities 3. Define counseling requirements that support the ERS 4. Identify types of Evaluations Reports 5. Identify Forms used for Evaluations 6. Define the Noncommissioned Officer Reports (NCOER) 7. Define the Officer Evaluation Reports (OER) 8. Communicate the Evaluation Entry System (EES) and ERS LESSON OUTCOME: This lesson provides an overview of doctrinal responsibilities, philosophies, and objectives for processing evaluation reports. At the conclusion of this block of instruction, students will be able to complete and process evaluation reports. SHOW SLIDE 2: TERMINAL LEARNING OBJECTIVE 21st CENTURY SOLDIER COMPETENCIES STATEMENT: This lesson covers the following 21st Century Soldier Competencies: Character and Accountability Comprehensive Fitness Adaptability and Initiative Lifelong Learner (includes digital literacy) Teamwork and Collaboration Communication and Engagement Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Culture and Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental and Multinational Competence Tactical and Technical Competence (full spectrum capable) SAFETY REQUIREMENTS: In a training environment, leaders must perform a risk assessment in accordance with DA PAM , Risk Management. Leaders will complete a DD Form 2977 Deliberate Risk Assessment Worksheet during the planning and completion of each task and sub-task by assessing mission, enemy, terrain and weather, troops and support available-time available and civil considerations, (METT-TC). Local policies and procedures must be followed during times of increased heat category in order to avoid heat related injury. Consider the work/rest cycles and water replacement guidelines IAW TRADOC Regulation Everyone is responsible for safety. No food or drink is allowed near or around electrical equipment (CPU, file servers, printers, projectors, etc.) due to possible electrical shock or damage to equipment. Exercise care in personal movement in and through such areas. Avoid all electrical cords and associated wiring. In event of electrical storm, you will be instructed to power down equipment. 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. 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 operational environment (OE) and what they did to resolve them. Encourage students to apply at least one of the critical variables: Political, Military, Economic, Social, Information, Infrastructure, Physical Environment and Time (PMESII-PT). Conditions: With an awareness of the Operational Environment (OE) variables and actors. EVALUATION. You will be given a graded end of module examination which will include Administer Evaluations Reporting Program. A passing score on this end of module examination is 70% for AC students and 60% International Students.

Principles and Standards of Evaluation Reporting System (ERS)
The ERS encompasses the means and methods needed for developing people and leaders The ERS identifies Soldiers who are best qualified for promotion and assignment to positions of greater The ERS combines major elements of counseling, assessment, documentation, and integration with other Army, rating officials, and rated Soldiers in their current environments Soldier is evaluated on his/her performance and potential SHOW SLIDE 3: IDENTIFY THE PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS OF THE EVALUATIONS REPORTING SYSTEM (ERS) Learning Step/Activity 1. Identify the Principles of the Evaluation Reporting System Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:36 Time of Instruction: 20 mins AR 623-3, Section II, Para 1-8

ERS Responsibilities HRC:
Acts as lead agency for the Secretary of the Army and is responsible for the effective operation of the ERS Clarifies policies, grant exceptions to policies, or formulate 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 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 AR 623-3, Para 1-4

Principles of Support Evaluate the performance and potential in peacetime and wartime Warrant Officer 1 (WO1) thru Brigadier General (BG) Noncommissioned Officers (NCOs), Sergeant (SGT) thru Command Sergeant Major (CSM) Evaluate the performance and compliance of Soldiers during DoD, Civilian Educational, Medical, or Industrial Institution programs Support the Army’s personnel life cycle SHOW SLIDE 5: PRINCIPLES OF SUPPORT NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Paragraph 1-7 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 increase mission accomplishment through – stressing importance of senior/subordinate relationships increased emphasis on performance counseling necessary senior/subordinate communication Para 1-9 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). d. 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: (1) 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. (2) 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. (3) 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. (4) 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. e. The secondary function of the ERS is to encourage leader professional development and enhance mission accomplishment through: (1) 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. (2) 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. (3) 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/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: (a) Mandatory and/or optional evaluations. The applicable evaluation report forms are the DA Form 67–10 series (OER) and DA Form 2166–9 series (NCOER). 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. Performance and potential assessments by rating officials are extremely important factors when determining a leader’s potential compared to their peers. (b) 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. (c) 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)a-c

Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention 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 Performance Objectives and Special Interests Army performance objectives have been identified at the highest levels of the Army as areas of special interest Rating officials of Soldiers with substantiated issues or incidents regarding Army performance objectives and/or command special interest items during the rating period will include such information on evaluation reports Goals and objectives Mandatory Officer Evaluation Report Support Form NCOER Counseling and Support Form Initial Counseling for students Rater’s 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 1. Army performance objectives have been identified at the highest levels of the Army as areas of special interest regarding officer and NCO leaders Army wide. a. Rated Soldiers will include this information in the development of support forms or counseling documents. b. When applicable, rating officials will include rated Soldier performance related to these special interest items in their overall assessment on the evaluation report. Additionally, AR 600–20 provides policy for when items will be mentioned in a Soldier’s evaluation report when substantiated by a completed command or other official investigation (for example, CDR’s or Commandant’s Inquiry, AR 15–6 investigation, equal opportunity (EO) investigation, and/or investigations by official military or civil authorities). (1) In accordance with applicable Army guidance, rating officials of Soldiers with substantiated issues or incidents regarding Army performance objectives and/or command special interest items during the rating period will include such information on evaluation reports. The items in paragraph 3–5b(2) and those mentioned in paragraphs 3–24 through 3–27 may be considered. (2) Special interest items are not all inclusive. Comments related to safety, individual and unit deployment readiness, energy-informed actions (see para 3–5b(2)(k)), support of behavioral health goals, support of the EO and Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Programs, and goals for fostering a climate of dignity and respect and supporting the SHARP Program will be included on all support forms. Special interest item topics are not expected to be reflected on subsequent OERs and NCOERs (except for those defined as being required), but they may be addressed when evaluating the rated officer’s or NCO’s overall performance and potential. CDRs may establish their own special interest items and performance objectives. (a) Safety. See AR 385–10. All officers and NCOs will have a safety-related objective or task developed as part of their counseling requirements. (b) Individual and unit deployment readiness. All officers and NCOs will indicate a full understanding of their responsibility to maintain individual and unit deployment readiness as part of their counseling requirements. Leaders must be aware of the deployability status of their subordinates. (c) Support of behavioral health goals. All officers and NCOs will discuss how their actions in handling Soldiers with behavioral health issues impact the command climate and overall unit performance as part of their initial counseling requirements. Leaders play a key role in decreasing stigma and promoting positive attitudes toward behavioral health issues among subordinates. (d) Internal evaluation systems. See AR 11–2. (e) Contracting and acquisition. See DODI (f) Information Security Program. See AR 380–5. The rating officials will consider and may evaluate the rated Soldier’s discharge of any assigned security responsibilities. Rating officials are to comment on any action, behavior, or condition that would constitute a reportable matter under Army security regulations and indicate if an appropriate evaluation report has been made. (g) Natural resources management. See AR 200–1. (h) Property accountability. See AR 735–5. (i) Command inspections. See AR 1–201. (j) Training. A leader’s execution of training on prevention of sexual harassment and/or avoidance of sexual misconduct will be included in counseling. (k) Energy informed actions. See AR 420–1. All officers and NCOs will discuss responsibilities regarding energy and water impacts and potential conservation measures in all decisions with subordinates as part of their counseling requirements. (l) Casualty assistance officer. See AR 638–8. (m) Promoting a climate of dignity and respect and eliminating sexual harassment and sexual assault. All officers and NCOs will include objectives for fostering a climate of dignity and respect and eliminating sexual assault and sexual harassment in their units on their support form. (n) Equal opportunity and Equal Employment Opportunity Programs. All officers and NCOs will include and discuss objectives for supporting the EO and EEO Programs (see AR 600–20). 2. Raters Assessment: a. Raters will comment on how well the rated officer/NCO promoted a climate of dignity and respect and adhered to the requirements of the SHARP Program. This assessment should identify, as appropriate, any significant actions or contributions the rated officer/NCO made toward— Promoting the personal and professional development of subordinates; Ensuring the fair, respectful treatment of unit personnel; and Establishing a workplace and overall command climate that fosters dignity and respect for all members of the unit. This assessment should also identify any failures by the rated officer to foster a climate of dignity and respect and adhere to the SHARP Program. Raters will comment on any substantiated finding, in an Army or DOD investigation or inquiry, that the rated officer/NCO— Committed an act of sexual harassment or sexual assault; Failed to report a sexual harassment or sexual assault; Failed to respond to a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault; or Retaliated against a person making a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault. b. Senior raters will comment on any substantiated finding, in an Army or DOD investigation or inquiry, that a rated officer/NCO: Committed an act of sexual harassment or sexual assault. Failed to report a sexual harassment or assault. Failed to respond to a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault. Where do you put it on an evaluation? See AR 623-3, para 2-12k- Note. Raters will include this information in the following locations: for DA Form 67–10–1, part IV, block c1 (Character); for DA Form 67–10–2, part IV, block d1 (Character); for DA Form 67–10–3, part IV, block c1 (Character); for DA Form 2166–9 series (NCOER), part IV, block c. Where do you put it on an evaluation?

LSA1 Check on Learning 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 ERS will evaluate the ___ and ___ of Warrant Officer One (WO1) through brigadier general (BG), and Sergeant (SGT) through Command Sergeant Major (CSM) in peacetime and wartime. a. performance / intellect b. performance / potential c. intellect / fitness d. performance / fitness SHOW SLIDE 9: CHECK ON LEARNING 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 ERS will evaluate the (_) and (_) of Warrant Officer One (WO1) through brigadier general (BG), and Sergeant (SGT) through Command Sergeant Major (CSM) in peacetime and wartime a. performance / intellect b. performance / potential c. intellect / fitness d. performance / fitness

LSA1 Summary SHOW SLIDE 10: LSA1 SUMMARY
During this activity, we have identified the principles of the Evaluation Reporting System. Do you have any questions?

Rating Chain Requirements & Responsibilities
SHOW SLIDE 11: RATING CHAIN REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Learning Step/Activity 2. Determine the Rating Chain Qualifications and Responsibilities Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:36 Time of Instruction: 30 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 student-centered discussion on the challenges of keeping rating chains updated in the Contemporary Operational Environment (COE). 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.

Rules for Designating a Rating Chain
Rater (OER & NCOER) (Para 2-5) Intermediate Rater (OER only) (Para 2-6) Senior Rater (OER & NCOER) (Para 2-7) Supplementary Reviewer (Para 2-8) (OER & NCOER) SHOW SLIDE 12: RULES FOR A DESIGNATING RATING CHAIN NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Chapter 2 CDRs, commandants, and organization leaders will establish rating chains and publish rating schemes within their units or organizations in accordance with locally developed procedures and ARs. Established rating chains will correspond as nearly as practicable to the chain of command or supervision within a unit or organization, regardless of component or geographical location. Once established and approved, rating chains are 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 or subordinate relationship. This allows for proper counseling to develop the rated Soldier and accomplish the mission. These functions are normally best achieved within an organization’s chain of command or supervision. In the absence of a comprehensive published unit rating scheme, the support form can serve as a means to notify individual Soldiers of their rating officials. Generally, the evaluation of Soldiers by persons not involved in the chain of command or chain of supervision is inappropriate. Special rules for designating rating officials are outlined to cover the death, missing status, relief, incapacitation, or suspension of a rating official. Who can / can’t serve in the position? What is the time requirement? What are the restrictions? AR 623-3, Chapter 2

Officer Rating Chain Requirements
Rating Official Minimum Time Rank Requirement Rater Minimum 90 calendar days (120 days ARNG) Senior to rated officer; sister and allied service ok Intermediate Rater Minimum 60 calendar days (90 days ARNG) Only when required; Senior to rated officer; sister and allied service ok Senior Rater Minimum 60 calendar days (90 days ARNG) See Table 2-1 Supplementary Reviewer No time period is required U.S. Army Officer; Senior to rated officer and SR SHOW SLIDE 13: OFFICER RATING CHAIN REQUIREMENTS NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Chapter 2, Para 2-3f(1) and Para 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. 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. A military Rater will be senior to the rated officer, by grade or date of rank. Exceptions to this rule are, an officer in a command position may rate an officer over whom he or she has command authority. In cases when the CDR rates an officer of the same grade but senior in date of rank, the rater will attach a copy of the memorandum announcing the assumption of command as an enclosure to the rated officer’s OER. A COL serving as a COL-level Chief of Staff may rate a COL who is senior in date of rank. Note. This does not apply to promotable lieutenant colonel (LTC)Ps serving in a Chief of Staff position or COLs serving as acting Chiefs of Staff. e. In situations such as Joint commands, an officer in a supervisory position may rate an officer who is senior in date of rank provided— The rater is other than an Army officer. 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 OER. For OERs, a civilian rater has no minimum grade requirement but will be the rated officer’s supervisor responsible for directing and assessing the rated Soldier’s performance as established on the rating scheme. CDRs will normally be rated and senior rated by the next higher CDRs. An exception to this rule is allowed when a staff officer or higher level CDR is the logical choice as the CDR’s supervisor because of functional, geographical, or technical supervision requirements. Officers who are selected for promotion and who are in authorized positions for the next grade may rate any officer they supervise if, after the rater’s promotion, they will be senior to the rated officer. A rater who has been selected for promotion (that is, whose name is on a promotion list), and who is in an authorized position for the next grade, will be considered to be serving in the next grade. The symbol “P” will be put after the current rank on the applicable OER. A rater who has been selected for promotion (that is, whose name is on a promotion list), 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 appear after the current rank on the applicable OER. For ARNG see para 2–11 for specific requirements. 2. Intermediate Rater – An intermediate rater is only authorized for use by specialty branches (Chaplain Corps, JAGC, and AMEDD) when there is a level of technical supervision between the rater and senior rater, in dual supervisory situations, or in unique instances when the rater’s immediate supervisor is the logical senior rater, but does not meet senior rater eligibility requirements. a. An intermediate rater will be an officer of the U.S. Armed Forces, U.S. Coast Guard, or allied armed forces, or an employee of a U.S. Government agency (including nonappropriated fund employees). In addition, the intermediate rater will— Be senior to the rated officer in grade or date of rank. A civilian intermediate rater has no minimum grade requirement but will be officially designated on the established rating scheme. Be a supervisor between the rater and senior rater in the rated officer’s rating chain, unless the rated officer is serving under dual supervision. Be the rater’s immediate supervisor and may be any supervisor between the rater and senior rater in the rated officer’s chain of command. This rule is waived when the provisions of paragraph 2–21 or appendixes C, D, or E apply. In cases of dual supervision, the designated intermediate rater, if from a nonparent unit, may be senior to the senior rater (see para 2–21). Have served in that capacity for a minimum of 60 calendar days in order to evaluate the rated officer. 3. Senior Rater - senior rater will be a commissioned officer of the U.S. Armed Forces, U.S. Coast Guard, or a DOD civilian employee (including nonappropriated fund employees). Members of allied armed forces are not authorized to be senior raters. The minimum grade for a senior rater will be in accordance with table 2–1. A civilian senior rater will be a designated supervisor of the rated officer serving at an appropriate grade level above the rater and meeting the minimum grade or rank requirements in table 2–1. The senior rater will be the immediate supervisor of the rater and a supervisor above all other rating officials in the rated officer’s chain of command or chain of supervision, except as indicated in paragraph 2–6 and paragraph 2–7a(13). To render a written OER, the senior rater must have been designated as the rated officer’s senior rater for a minimum period of 60 calendar days, except as otherwise provided below. 4. Supplementary reviewer eligibility and responsibility. In most instances, the senior rater will conduct the final rating chain review. In instances when there are no uniformed Army designated rating officials for the rated officer, an Army officer within the organization will be designated as a Uniformed Army Advisor and perform a supplementary review. The Uniformed Army Advisor will be an U.S. Army officer, senior to the rated officer and normally senior to the senior rater, within the organization. The Uniformed Army Advisor will monitor evaluation practices, and provide assistance and advice to rating officials (as required) on matters pertaining to Army evaluations. When a supplementary review is required for DA Form 67–10–1, DA Form 67–10–2, and DA Form 67–10–3, the Uniformed Army Advisor’s information will be entered in part II, blocks f1 and f2 of the OER. If the Uniformed Army Advisor determines the OER is accurate and comments are unnecessary, he or she will indicate select “NO” in part II, block f5 of the OER. If the Uniformed Army Advisor determines comments are necessary, he or she will select “YES” in part II, block f5 of the OER and prepare an enclosure to the OER, and comment on the accuracy and clarity of the completed OER. The comments will not include evaluative statements about the rated officer or statements that amplify, paraphrase, or endorse the ratings of the other members of the rating chain. When a supplementary review is required for DA Form 67–10–4, the Uniformed Army Advisor will prepare an enclosure to the OER (see fig 2–1). If necessary, the reviewer will comment upon the accuracy and clarity of the completed OER. The comments will not include evaluative statements about the rated officer or statements that amplify, paraphrase, or endorse the ratings of the other members of the rating chain. If there are no comments, the Uniformed Army Advisor will indicate in the enclosure that no added comments are necessary. If no Army officer is available above the senior rater in the organization or chain of supervision to perform a review, the submitter will request a review by HQDA.

NCO Rating Chain Requirements
Rating Official Minimum Time Rank Requirement Rater Minimum 90 calendar days (120 days ARNG) SGT/GS7+; senior to rated NCO; sister service OK Senior Rater Minimum 60 calendar days Senior to rater; GS9+; sister service OK Supplementary Reviewer No time period is required Officer/SGM/GS12+; Senior to SR; sister service OK, when rater or SR is a uniformed Army Official SHOW SLIDE 14: NCO RATING CHAIN REQUIREMENTS NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Chapter 2, Para 2-3f (2) and Para 2-5 through 2-8 for rules which designate raters, intermediate raters, senior raters, and reviewers. 1. NCO rating chains consist of the rated NCO, the rater, the SR, and the supplementary reviewer. NCO rating chains will not include an intermediate rater. 2. Rater Qualifications for NCOERs: Minimum time. The rater will be the supervisor for a minimum period of 90 calendar days. in most instances. Exceptions include relief for cause and similar situations. Rank requirement. The rater will normally be senior to the rated Soldier in grade or date of rank. A rater will be an officer or NCO of the U.S. Armed Forces, U.S. Coast Guard, or an employee of a U.S. Government agency (including nonappropriated fund rating officials). Only in rare instances will service members of allied armed forces be authorized to serve as raters. Commanders may appoint U.S. civilians, GS7 and above, 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. Members of other U.S. military services who meet the qualifications above may be raters. If the rater is an NCO and is on a recommended list for promotion or frocked in one of the top three grades (First Sergeant (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. CSMs of TOE and TDA units will be rated by the commander, in most instances. 3. SR Qualifications – Except as otherwise specified, a senior rater will be an officer or NCO of the U.S. Armed Forces, U.S Coast Guard, or a DOD civilian (or nonappropriated fund employee). Members of allied armed forces are not authorized to be senior raters. Rank requirement. The minimum grade for a senior rater will be in accordance with table 2–1. The senior rater will be the immediate supervisor of the rater. Senior raters will be senior in grade or date of rank to the rater; senior raters will meet the minimum grade requirements of table 2–1. Senior executive service (SES) members serving in DOD positions may senior rate all grades of rated NCOs, provided they are in the rated NCO’s chain of supervision and are at least one level above the rater. Senior raters may evaluate the rated NCO with fewer than 60 days as a senior rater if they also served as the rated NCO’s rater in a previously published chain, and the combined total of time served in the rating chain equals 60 days or more. To senior rate NCOs in the ranks of SGT or SGTP, military senior raters will be at least the rank of sergeant first class (SFC) or above. An exception exists which allows SSGPs serving in an authorized position for the next grade to senior rate. To senior rate NCOs in the ranks of staff sergeant (SSG) or SSGP, military senior raters will be at least the rank of master sergeant (MSG) or above. An exception exists which allows SFCPs serving in an authorized position for the next grade to senior rate. To senior rate NCOs in the ranks of SFC or SFCP, military senior raters will be at least the rank of SGM or above. To senior rate NCOs in the ranks of MSG through CSM, military senior rater will be senior in grade or date of rank to the other members of the rating chain. 4. Supplementary Reviewer - In instances 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 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. This supplementary review will be performed by a uniformed Army Soldier, senior to the senior rater within the rated NCO’s organization in the rank of SGM/CSM, CW3 through CW5, or CPT and above. Mandatory supplementary reviews are also required when no uniformed Army-designated rating officials exist in the rating chain. This also includes when the senior rater is other than a uniformed Army Soldier and a rater is an NCO in the rank of SGT through 1SG/MSG, warrant officers in the rank of WO1 through CW2, and Army officer in the rank of 2LT and 1LT. This supplementary review will be performed by a uniformed Army Soldier, senior to the senior rater within the rated NCO’s organization in the rank of CSM/SGM, CW3 through CW5, or CPT and above. No minimum time period is required for reviewer qualification. 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 only 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 Can comment on both performance and potential An intermediate rater will not be incorporated within the rating chain as a means to promote pooling Reviewer (NCOERs) Ensure rating safeguard and over watch Ensure rating chain is followed Ensure report was reviewed by a 1SG/CSM Comment only when a disagreement exist between rater and senior rater SHOW SLIDE 15: RATING CHAIN RESPONSIBILITIES NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Paragraphs 2-12 and 2-14. NOTE: For specific instructions, refer students to DA Pam 623–3. The rater will— a. Provide a copy of their support form, along with the senior rater’s support form, to the rated Soldier at the beginning of the rating period. b. Discuss the scope of the rated Soldier’s duty description with him or her within 30 days after the beginning of the rating period. This counseling will include, as a minimum, the rated Soldier’s duty description and the performance objectives to attain. The discussion will also include the relationship of the duty description and objectives with the organization’s mission, problems, priorities, and similar matters. c. Counsel the rated Soldier. (1) If the rated Soldier is recently assigned to the organization, the rater may use the counseling to outline a duty description and performance objectives. This discussion gives the rated Soldier a guide for performance while learning new duties and responsibilities in the unit of assignment, or requirements in achieving military or civilian academic standards. (2) If the rater is recently assigned, this first counseling may be used to ask the rated Soldier for an opinion of the duty description and objectives. By doing this, the rater is given a quick assessment of the rated Soldier and the work situation. It will also help the rater develop the best duty description and performance objectives for the rated Soldier. (3) See paragraph G–2 for counseling requirements for USAR Soldiers. d. Use the support forms. (1) For officers, grades WO1 through COL, DA Form 67–10–1A is mandatory for use throughout the rating period. (2) For NCOs, DA Form 2166–9–1A will be used to document the required initial and quarterly NCO counseling, professional development throughout the rating period, and to prepare the final evaluation. e. Advise the rated Soldier about any changes in their duty description and performance objectives, when needed, during the rating period. f. Provide an honest assessment of the rated Soldier’s performance and potential (as applicable), using all reasonable means, including personal contact, records and reports, and the information provided by them on the applicable support form or associated counseling documents. g. Review the applicable support form and counseling documents at the end of the rating period and, as appropriate; provide more information about the job description or performance objectives to other rating officials for use in preparing their portions of the evaluation report. h. Verify the rated Soldier’s APFT results, if taken, height and weight data (including compliance with AR 600–9) for entry on the evaluation report (OER, part IV, block a; NCOER, part IV, blocks a and b and DA Form 1059, item 14). The rater must provide comments for an APFT failure, a “NO” entry annotated after height and weight indicating noncompliance with AR 600–9, or the absence of APFT and/or height and weight data (refer to DA Pam 623–3). i. Provide an objective and comprehensive evaluation of the rated Soldier’s performance and potential (as applicable) on the evaluation report. j. Assess the rated Soldier’s performance in fostering a climate of dignity and respect and adhering to the requirements of the Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) Program. This assessment should identify, as appropriate, any significant actions or contributions the rated officer or NCO made toward— (1) Promoting the personal and professional development of subordinates; (2) Ensuring the fair, respectful treatment of unit personnel; and (3) Establishing a workplace and overall command climate that fosters dignity and respect for all members of the unit. (4) This assessment should also identify any failures by the rated Soldier to foster a climate of dignity and respect and adhere to the SHARP Program. Note. Raters will include this information in the following locations: for DA Form 67–10–1, part IV, block c1 (Character); for DA Form 67–10–2, part IV, block d1 (Character); for DA Form 67–10–3, part IV, block c1 (Character); for DA Form 2166–9 series (NCOER), part IV, block c. k. Document any substantiated finding, in an Army or DOD investigation or inquiry, that the rated Soldier— (1) Committed an act of sexual harassment or sexual assault; (2) Failed to report a sexual harassment or sexual assault; (3) Failed to respond to a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault; or (4) Retaliated against a person making a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault. 2–13. The intermediate rater (DA Form 67–10 series (OER)) The provisions of the Intermediate Rater does not apply to NCOERs or AERs. An intermediate rater is only authorized for use by specialty branches (Chaplain Corps, JAGC, and AMEDD), when there is a level of technical supervision between the rater and senior rater, in dual supervisory situations, and/or in unique instances when the rater’s immediate supervisor would be the logical senior rater, but does not meet senior rater eligibility requirements as prescribed in table 2–1. For exceptions, see para 2–6. a. Intermediate raters will assess the performance and potential of rated officers using all reasonable means, including the following: (1) Personal contact. (2) Records and reports. (3) The rater’s evaluation of the rated officer given on the OER. (4) The information provided by the rated officer on DA Form 67–10–1A. b. Intermediate raters will render an objective evaluation of a rated officer’s performance and potential on the OER. Note. An intermediate rater will not be incorporated within the rating chain as a means to promote pooling. 2–14. The senior rater (DA Form 67–10 series (OER) and DA Form 2166–9 series (NCOER)) or reviewing official (DA Form 1059 and DA Form 1059–1) a. Role. Senior raters or reviewing officials use their positions and experiences to evaluate the rated Soldier’s performance and/or potential within a broad organizational perspective, military program of instruction, or civilian academic course standards. The senior rater’s 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. Normally, senior raters or reviewing officials control the accurate preparation and timely submission of evaluation reports. The overarching roles of senior raters or reviewing officials and specific roles by form type are outlined below: b. Requirements. Senior raters and reviewing officials will— (1) Ensure support forms are provided to all rated Soldiers they senior rate at the beginning of and throughout the respective rating periods. (2) Use all reasonable means to become familiar with a rated Soldier’s performance. When practical, use personal contact, records and reports, and the information provided on the rated Soldier’s support form. (3) Assess and evaluate the abilities and/or potential of the rated Soldier relative to his or her contemporaries. Note. For OERs, this includes officers of the same rank and promotable officers who are serving at the same rank as the rated officer. This involves evaluating performance in perspective by considering— (a) The rated Soldier’s experience. (b) The relative risk associated with the performance. (c) The difficulty of the organization’s mission. (d) The prudence and results of action taken. (e) The adequacy of resources. (f) The overall efficiency of the organization. (g) When applicable, adherence to established military course or academic standards established by the civilian educational, medical, or industrial institution. (4) Ensure rating officials counsel the rated Soldier, individually and throughout the rating period, on meeting their objectives and complying with the professional standards of the Army. (5) Ensure all evaluation reports that the senior rater and subordinates write are complete, provide a realistic evaluation of the rated Soldier, and are submitted to HQDA in a timely manner (in accordance with this regulation and DA Pam 623–3). (6) Ensure rated Soldiers sign evaluation reports before departing from a unit of assignment or military or civilian school or course of instruction. Note. The digitally signed evaluation report will serve as the Soldier’s copy. If the rated Soldier manually signs a paper copy, is unavailable to sign, or refuses to sign an evaluation report, an electronic or paper copy will be provided to them. (7) Document any substantiated finding, in an Army or DOD investigation or inquiry, that the rated Soldier— (a) Committed an act of sexual harassment or sexual assault; (b) Failed to report a sexual harassment or sexual assault; (c) Failed to respond to a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault; or (d) Retaliated against a person making a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault. c. DA Form 67–10 series (OER). Senior raters will— (1) In addition to evaluating rated officers, normally perform the final review of the OER before it is provided to the rated officer for signature. A senior rater who is not qualified to evaluate a rated Soldier due to lack of time in the position will still act as a reviewer. Following his or her signature in the senior rater signature block on the completed OER, and signature by the rated officer, he or she will ensure that the final OER is submitted to HQDA in a timely manner and a copy is provided to the rated officer (in accordance with this regulation and DA Pam 623–3). (2) Review and initial DA Form 67–10–1A, at the beginning of the rating period and the completed DA Form 67–10–1A at the end of the rating period when preparing his or her portion of the OER. (3) Whenever possible, for referred OERs (part II, block d on DA Form 67–10–1, DA Form 67–10–2, DA Form 67–10–3, and part II, block c on DA Form 67–10–4), ensure that the rated officer is given an opportunity to review the AR 623–

Rating Chain Information
Rating Chains: Are established by Commanders, Commandants or 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 16: RATING CHAIN INFORMATION NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Chapter 2, Para 2-2 and 2-3. 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. 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. 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

Special Branch Rating Chain Requirements
JAG Officers 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 2–22 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 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 (refer back to Para 2–6 for intermediate rater qualifications) SHOW SLIDE 17: SPECIAL BRANCH RATING CHAIN REQUIREMENTS Note: Refer Students to AR 623-3, Paragraphs 2-21 (Dual Supervision) through 2-23 and Appendix C & D AR 623-3, Appendix C & D

Rating Chain Development
Example Rating Chain As of Rated NCO Rater Senior Rater Reviewer CSM Posey LTC Jones COL Reese MG Smith Bn CSM Bn Cdr Bde Cdr Div CG Rated Officer Intermediate Senior Rater Rater Rater LTC Jones COL Reese N/A MG Smith Bn Cdr Bde Cdr Div CG CH(CPT) Cox MAJ Black CH(MAJ) Ivy LTC Jones Bn Chaplain Bn XO Bde Chaplain Bn Cdr Par 1-4 SHOW SLIDE 18: RATING CHAIN DEVELOPMENT Officer rating chains consist of the rated officer, the rater, and the senior rater. The senior rater accomplishes the final rating chain review. (1) 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 a senior rater. In such a case, refer to Paragraph 2-20 of AR for further guidance. (3) 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. (4) 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 c. NCO rating chains consist of the rated NCO, the rater, the senior rater, and the reviewer. The reviewer will be a Sergeant Major (SGM), CSM, warrant officer, or commissioned 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. d. Generally, the evaluation of Soldiers by persons not involved in the chain of command or supervision is inappropriate. (1) 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 2-20 of AR (2) 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.

LSA 2 Check on Learning 1. On an OER, who in the rating chain is responsible for commenting on an officers Performance? a. Rater b. Intermediate Rater c. Senior Rater d. Reviewer 2. What is the military senior rater minimum grade requirements for a 2LT? a. CPT b. CPTP / MAJ c. LTC d. COL 3. The _________ ties the rated Soldier’s performance to a specific senior/subordinate relationship. SHOW SLIDE 19: CHECK ON LEARNING On an OER, who in the rating chain is responsible for commenting on an officers Performance? a. Rater b. Intermediate Rater c. Senior Rater d. Reviewer What is the military senior rater minimum grade requirements for a 2LT? a. CPT b. CPTP / MAJ c. LTC d. COL The rating chain ties the rated Soldier’s performance to a specific senior/subordinate relationship

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 ARNGUS and USAR NCOs – Semi-annually Active Army CPT/LT/CW2/WO1 – Quarterly ARNGUS and USAR CPT/LT/CW2/WO1 – Quarterly All Field Grades and above – Determined by rating officials SHOW SLIDE 21: SUPPORT FORM COMMUNICATION PROCESS Learning Step / Activity 3. Define the counseling requirements that support the ERS Method of Instruction: Conference / Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:36 Time of Instruction: 30 mins Media: Large Group Instruction NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Para 3-4, 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. 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. 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: (1) Direct and develop their subordinates. (2) Plan for accomplishing the mission. (3) Gain valuable information about the organization. Find better ways to accomplish the mission. AR 623-3, 3-6a(1)a- 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.

Performance Counseling
Support Forms Officer Support Form Use of DA Form A is mandatory for COLs and below Initiate and complete in the Evaluation Entry System 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) NCO Support Form DA Form A is 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) SHOW SLIDE 22: SUPPORT FORMS NOTE: Refer students to DA Pam 623-3, Para 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3. 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 A 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. 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, Para 3-1 Objective Setting Performance Counseling Evaluation DA Pam 623-3, Table C-1

OER Support Form Page 1 Part I–Rated Officer Admin Data
Part II–Authentication/Rating Chain Part III–Counseling Part IV–Duty Title/Responsibilities Part V–Objectives/Accomplishments SHOW SLIDE 23: OER SUPPORT FORM PAGE 1

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 24: 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 25: EXAMPLE OF NCOER SUPPORT FORM PAGE 1 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: 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). 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. 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.

NCOER Counseling Support Form
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 26: OER SUPPORT FORM PAGE 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. The senior rater should provide comments as discussed in the two counseling sessions.

LSA3 Check on Learning When are counseling sessions conducted for all Field Grades Officers and above? a. Quarterly b. Determined by rating officials c. Annually d. Semi-annually SHOW SLIDE 27: LSA3 CHECK ON LEARNING When are counseling sessions conducted for all Field Grades Officers and above? a. Quarterly b. Determined by rating officials c. Annually d. Semi-annually

Types of Evaluation Reports
Two types: Mandatory Optional Further divided into: SHOW SLIDE 29: TYPES OF EVALUATION REPORTS Learning Step / Activity 4. Identify Types of Evaluation Reports Method of Instruction: Conference / Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:36 Time of Instruction: 30 mins Media: Large Group Instruction NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3; Paragraph 3-2c. Ask students to name the different types of reports. 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 more fully in a subsequent learning activity. “90-day minimum” “other than 90-day minimum” 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 Mandatory Reports (less common)
90-day minimum Other than 90-day minimum Change of Rater (3-40) Annual (3-41) Extended Annual (3-42) Change of Duty (3-43) Depart Temporary Duty, Special Duty or Temporary Change of Station (3-44) Temporary Duty, Special Duty, or Temporary Change of Station (3-45) Officer Failing Selection Promotion (3-46) JAG Officers (3-51) Initial Tour of Extended Active Duty (3-52) HRC Directed (3-53) Relief for Cause (3-54/3-55) AER (DA Form 1059) (3-49) for schools longer than 12 months AR 623-3, Chapter 3 *Other Mandatory Reports (less common) Initial Tour of Extended Active Duty (OER Only) (AMEDD and JAGC commissioned 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 officer only) U.S. Army HRC Directed Release from Active Duty Service (USAR and ANG only) SHOW SLIDE 30: MANDATORY REPORTS a. Mandatory reports with a 90-day minimum include- (1) Change of Rater (Paragraph 3-40). (2) Annual (Paragraph 3-41). (3) Extended Annual (Paragraph 3-42) (4) Change of Duty (Paragraph 3-43) (5) Depart Temporary Duty (TDY), Special Duty (SD), or Temporary Change of Station (TCS) (Paragraph 3-44) (6) Temporary Duty, Special Duty, or Temporary Change of Station (3-45) Officer failing selection for promotion (Paragraph 3-46) b. Mandatory reports other than a 90-day minimum include- (1) JAG Officers (3-51) (2) Initial Tour of Extended Active Duty (3-52) (3) HRC Directed (3-53) (4) Relief for Cause (3-54/3-55) c. The minimum rating period for a change of rater is 90 days. (1) 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). Officers who undergo a permanent change of station (PCS) or are released from active duty (REFRAD) will receive a change of duty report instead of this type of report. (2) An NCOER is mandatory when the rated NCO- (a) Ceases to serve under the immediate supervision of the rater and minimum rating qualifications are met (90-days). (b) 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. (c) 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. (d) Is declared mission or becomes a prisoner or hostage. Under these situations, rating chain minimums do not apply. d. 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. (1) 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 3-46) will be submitted. (2) If the rated Soldier must go TDY to attend a school and the annual report will be due, the Depart TDY report (Paragraph 3-48) 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. (3) Additional specific requirements for completion of an annual NCOER include- (a) One calendar year after the effective date of promotion to sergeant. (c) Reversion to NCO status after serving as a commissioned or warrant officer for 12 months or more. (d) Re-entry on active duty in a rank of sergeant or above after a break in enlisted service of 12 months or more. e. There are two types of extended annual reports (Para 3-42): (1) An extended annual will be prepared if one year has elapsed and the rated Soldier has not performed the same duty under the same rater for 90 days. This extended annual will be only 90 evaluated (rated) days. (2) An extended annual report can be prepared in cases when mandatory reports (for example, annual, change of duty/rater) come due while Soldiers are attending schooling (nonrated time). This report may be submitted to alleviate the need for a mandatory report while at school. The total number of evaluated months (rating period minus nonrated time) will be no more than 12 months even though the rating period may be longer. f. 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. (1) 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. (2) 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. g. 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. (1) 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. (2) 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. (3) 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. (4) 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. (5) 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. i. 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: (1) The rated officer has not received an OER since the convene date of the board that did not select the officer for promotion. (2) 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. (3) The minimum time requirements for the rater are satisfied. j. 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. k. 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: (1) 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. (2) 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. l. 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. m. Reports are also submitted under the following circumstances. These reports are mandatory, but less common. (1) 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: (a) 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 (b) Reentering active duty after a break in service of at least 1 year. (c) Completing law school under TJAG’s Funded Legal Education Program (AR 27–1) (see appendix D). (d) 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. (2) 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. (3) 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. (4) 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. (5) These reports do not apply to NCOS. n. These reports are submitted at the option of rating officials.

Optional Reports 90-day minimum Other than 90-day minimum
Complete the Record report (3-56) Senior Rater Option (3-57) Sixty Day Option (3-58) Rater Option (3-59) Complete the Record(3-56) Not a basis for Stand By Advisory Board (STAB) for promotion consideration SHOW SLIDE 31: OPTIONAL REPORTS (1) Complete-the-Record reports are optional. Therefore, the absence of such a report from the OMPF 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. (a) 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: (1) The rated officer will be in or above the zone of consideration for promotion. (2) 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. (3) All other rating chain time minimums apply. (b) For NCOS-a DA Form 2166–9-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: (1) 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. (2) 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. (4) The rated NCO will not have received a previous report for the current duty position at the current organization. (2) Senior rater option reports. For DA Form 67–10 series and DA Form 2166–9, 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: (1) 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. (2) The rater meets the minimum requirements to give a report. (3) The Soldier has not received a report in the preceding 90 calendar days. (4) 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. (3) Sixty-day option reports-When one of the conditions described in Paragraphs 3–40 through 3–43 (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. (4) 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 chapters 4 and 5 will not be explained in detail during this class. However, as professional HR Soldiers, it behooves them to research these chapters on their own time. NOTE: Refer students to DA Pam 623-3, Table 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 , E-5) All previous Memorandum of Input policy is removed in lieu of rendering an evaluation report. SHOW SLIDE 32: 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 (3-18) Unproven derogatory information (3-19) Prohibited comments (3-20) SHOW SLIDE 33: RESTRICTIONS (1) Each report will be an individual stand alone of the rated Soldier for a specific rating period. It will not refer to performance or incidents occurring before or after the period covered or during periods of nonrated time. It will not remark on performance or incidents occurring before or after the period covered. (Para 3-16) There are preparation and processing guidelines and restrictions for evaluation reporting. The parameters are: (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 2166–9, DA Form 1059, or DA Form 1059–1. In preparing their comments, rating officials will convey a precise but detailed evaluation to communicate 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 3-17) (3) Prohibited narratives. The following techniques will not be used: (Para 3-18) (a) Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. (b) Too brief comments, excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. These frequently need to be interpreted by selection boards and career managers. If they are 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 or 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. Rating officials are not authorized any double spacing between performance and potential comments in OERs (parts V, block b and VII, block c). (5) Italics and similar techniques. (6) Italics, bold text, and similar font techniques. (7) Compressed type 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 Soldier'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 writing style (OER only). (10) Inappropriate references to box checks (OERs) (for example, a senior rater may not refer to the box check that would have been given to a rated officer if his or her profile supported it, or characterization of the rated officer as a "top box", "MOST QUALIFIED", "MULTI-STAR POTENTIAL" officer). (11) Specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, "definitely a 6+ Soldier." (4) Unproven derogatory information. No reference will be made to an incomplete investigation (formal or informal) concerning a Soldier. (Para 3-19) (a) References will be made only to actions or investigations that have been processed to completion, adjudicated, and had final action taken before submitting an evaluation report to HQDA. For example, rating officials are not prohibited from commenting on a court-martial (judicial), if completed, but the comments should focus on the behavior that led to the court-martial rather than the court-martial itself. If the rated Soldier is acquitted at a court-martial, or found not guilty at a nonjudicial punishment proceeding under Article 15, UCMJ, comments about the underlying incident will not be included in the evaluation, subject to the following exception. Rating officials will ensure that evaluations document any substantiated findings, in an Army or DoD investigation or inquiry, that a rated Soldier committed an act of sexual harassment or sexual assault; failed to report a sexual harassment or sexual assault; failed to respond to a report of sexual harassment or sexual assault; or retaliated against a person making such a report. (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 cleared. (c) Any verified derogatory information may be entered on an evaluation report. This is true whether the rated Soldier is under investigation, flagged, or awaiting trial. While the fact that a rated Soldier is under investigation or on trial may not be mentioned in an evaluation until the investigation or trial is completed, this does not preclude the rating chain's reference to verified derogatory information. For example, when an interim evaluation report with verified information is made available to a CDR, the verified information may be included in evaluation reports. For all evaluation reports, if previously reported information later proves to be incorrect or erroneous, the Soldier will be notified and advised of the right to appeal the evaluation report in accordance with chapter 4 . (d) Evaluation reports will not be delayed to await the outcome of a trial or investigation unless the rated Soldier has been removed from his or her position and is in a suspended status (see paras 3-54 and 3-55 ). Upon completion of the trial or investigation, processing of evaluation reports will resume. Evaluation reports will be completed when due and will contain what information is verified at the time of the "THRU" date of the evaluation report. (e) For OERs, when previously unverified derogatory information is later verified, an addendum will be prepared and forwarded to HQDA in accordance with paragraphs 3-36 and Rating officials will initiate such an addendum to the OER 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 the completion of the investigation, imposition of punishment, or verification of the information (see DA Pam for instructions on how to prepare an addendum memorandum). (5) Prohibited comments. The use of inappropriate or arbitrary remarks or comments that draw attention to differences relating to race, color, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation, or national origin is prohibited. Subjective evaluation of a rated Soldier will not reflect a rating official's personal bias or prejudice ( AR ). (Para 3-20) (a) When a record of nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is filed in the restricted portion of the AMHRR, or locally under AR 27-10, AR , or AR , rating officials may not comment on the fact that such a rated Soldier received nonjudicial punishment. This does not preclude mentioning the rated Soldier's underlying misconduct, which served as the basis for the nonjudicial punishment. (b) Negative comments about a rated Soldier making protected communications (for example, communications to an Inspector General, member of Congress, a court-martial, or a member of the chain of command designated to receive protected communications, see 10 USC 1034) will not be made in an evaluation report. Such comments could be perceived as a retaliatory action. Service members, in accordance with 10 USC 1034, are not restricted from communicating with these individuals. (c) No remarks about nonrated periods of time, or performance or incidents that occurred before or after the rating period, will be made on an evaluation report except in some illegal activity during a previous reporting period. Reference to the prior rating period may be warranted to explain the reasons for relief (see paras 3-54 and 3-55 ). "Relief for Cause" evaluation reports based on information pertaining to a previous reporting period. For example, a rating official may relieve a Soldier found to be involved the rated Soldier to comply with APFT and body composition standards (see DA Pam ). (2) When the most recent APFT performance or profile data occurred prior to the beginning date of the report, but within 12 months of the "THRU" date. This exception allows (3) When a Soldier assigned to a WTU is assigned under a valid rating chain and receives an evaluation report with a nonrated code "G" (see para 3-34 ). (6) 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.” (Para 3-21) (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.” 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 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 There are limited circumstances involving actual and demonstrable effect on the rated individual’s performance or conduct when comments containing reference to a spouse officer.” (7) Participation in the Army Substance Abuse Program or a mental health program a. A rated Soldier who voluntarily enters the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for an alcohol or drug abuse problem that has not been detected by the chain of command will not be penalized by mention of ASAP participation in an evaluation report. This would discourage voluntary entry in ASAP upon self-recognition of the need for help. In those cases where alcohol and drug abuse has resulted in substandard performance and/or disciplinary problems, subsequent voluntary entry in ASAP does not preclude rating officials from recording substandard performance or disciplinary problems on an evaluation report. Rating officials cannot use information derived from ASAP records in their evaluations. Once a Soldier has been identified in an evaluation report as having an alcohol or drug abuse problem based on information obtained independently of ASAP — Voluntary entry into ASAP or successful rehabilitation will be mentioned only as a factor to the rated Soldier's credit. The rating chain should note the status of a rated Soldier's rehabilitation progress or outcome in the current evaluation or in later evaluation reports. the chain of command will not be penalized by mention of this participation in a behavioral health treatment program in an evaluation report. Doing so would discourage self- A rated Soldier who voluntarily seeks mental health counseling or is entered into a mental health care program for behavioral health issues that have not been detected by and treatment. Behavioral health issues include a variety of unusual or inappropriate behaviors that may be associated with post-traumatic stress disorder, mild traumatic brain Soldiers to obtain the necessary assistance for behavioral health issues (see para 3-5b(2)(c) ). This lessens the stigma associated with issues that warrant psychological care referral to obtain assistance from health care professionals when problems exist. In accordance with the Army's behavioral health goals, leaders should support and encourage on information obtained independently of any information from health care personnel- injuries, combat stress or other stress, and/or suicidal thoughts or tendencies. Once a Soldier has been identified in an evaluation report as having mental health issues based mentioned as a factor to the rated Soldier's credit. Voluntary entry into mental health counseling or a mental health care program, or evidence of successful treatment to remedy the original behavioral health issue, will be period during which the Soldier's status improved. (2) The rating chain should note the status of a rated Soldier's behavioral health improvement and/or maintenance of an improved status in the evaluation report covering the NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, Para 3-5 Army wide. (8) Special Interest Items. Army performance objectives have been identified at the highest levels of the Army as areas of special interest regarding officer and NCO leaders Rated Soldiers will include this information in the development of support or counseling forms. investigation (for example, CDR's or commandant's inquiry, AR 15-6 investigation, equal opportunity (EO) investigation, and/or investigations by official military or civil Additionally, AR provides policy for when items will be mentioned in a Soldier's evaluation report when substantiated by a completed command or other official (b) When applicable, rating officials will include rated Soldier performance related to these special interest items in their overall assessment on the evaluation report. authorities). special interest items during the rating period will include such information on evaluation reports. The items in paragraph (2) and those mentioned in paragraphs 3-24 through In accordance with applicable Army guidance, rating officials of Soldiers with substantiated issues or incidents regarding Army performance objectives and/or command 3-27 may be considered. support forms. Special interest item topics are not expected to be reflected on subsequent OERs and NCOERs (except for those defined as being required), but they may be behavioral health goals, support of the EO and EEO programs, and goals for fostering a climate of dignity and respect and supporting the SHARP Program will be included on all (2) Special interest items are not all inclusive. Comments related to safety, individual and unit deployment readiness, energy-informed actions (see para (k)), support of addressed when evaluating the rated officer's or NCO's overall performance and potential. CDRs may establish their own special interest items and performance objectives. (a) Safety. See AR All officers and NCOs will have a safety-related objective or task developed as part of their counseling requirements. (b) Individual and unit deployment readiness. All officers and NCOs will indicate a full understanding of their responsibility to maintain individual and unit deployment readiness as part of their counseling requirements. Leaders must be aware of the deployability status of their subordinates. overall unit performance as part of their initial counseling requirements. Leaders play a key role in decreasing stigma and promoting positive attitudes toward behavioral health (c) Support of behavioral health goals. All officers and NCOs will discuss how their actions in handling Soldiers with behavioral health issues impact the command climate and issues among subordinates. (d) Internal evaluation systems. See AR (e) Contracting and acquisition. See Department of Defense instruction ( DODI ) been made. officials are to comment on any action, behavior or condition that would constitute a reportable matter under Army security regulations and indicate if an appropriate report has (f) Information Security Program. See AR The rating officials will consider and may evaluate the rated Soldier's discharge of any assigned security responsibilities. Rating (g) Natural resources management. See AR (h) Property accountability. See AR (i) Command inspections. See AR (j) Training. A leader's execution of training on prevention of sexual harassment and/or avoidance of sexual misconduct will be included in counseling. decisions with subordinates as part of their counseling requirements. (k) Energy informed actions. See AR All officers and NCOs will discuss responsibilities regarding energy and water impacts and potential conservation measures in all (l) Casualty assistance officer. See AR dignity and respect and eliminating sexual assault and sexual harassment in their units on their support form. (m) Promoting a climate of dignity and respect and eliminating sexual harassment and sexual assault. All officers and NCOs will include objectives for fostering a climate of Section III. (n) Equal Opportunity and Equal Employment Programs. All officers and NCOs will include and discuss objectives for supporting the EO and EEO Programs (see AR ). Comments about marital status and spouse (3-21) Participation in the Army Substance Abuse Program (3-24) Evaluation of special interest items (3-25) AR 623-3, Chapter 3, Section VI

Referred Reports (OER)
A “FAIL” for the APFT in part IV, block a; or a “NO” entry for height and weight. A SR potential evaluation of “Not Qualified” or “Unsatisfactory” in part VI, block a A rater performance evaluation of “Unsatisfactory” in part IV A SR potential evaluation of “Qualified” or “Retain as Colonel” in part VI, block a where the required explanation has derogatory information A rater performance evaluation of “Capable” in part IV where the required explanation has derogatory information Any report with negative remarks; where the required explanation has derogatory information SHOW SLIDE 34: REFERRED REPORTS The following types of reports will be referred to the rated officer by the senior rater for acknowledgment and comment before they are sent to HQDA (see DA Pam 623–3, Para 2–28, for detailed instructions and process for handling referred OER 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. 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. A rater potential evaluation in part IV where the required explanation has derogatory information (for SGP- OERs) A “Relief for Cause” report submitted under the provisions of paragraph 3–54 AR 623-3, Para 3-26, 3-54/55, DA Pam 623-3, Para 2-28 thru 2-30

Referral Process (OER) 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. SHOW SLIDE 35: REFERRAL PROCESS (1 of 3) Reference: DA PAM 623-3, para 2-28 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). 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. 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. 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. 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. Any enclosures to rebuttal comments will be withdrawn and returned to the rated officer when the OER is forwarded to HQDA. 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). PLEASE NOTE: A reasonable suspense date will be given for the rated officer to complete this action (AR 623-3, para 3-28(1)(a).

SHOW SLIDE 36: REFERRAL PROCESS (2 of 3) 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: (1) 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). NOTE: 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. 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. Senior raters will, when possible, refer OERs to the rated officer prior to his or her departure. 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.

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 37: REFERRAL PROCESS (3 of 3) 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. 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. If the OER is changed but still requires referral, the OER must again be referred to the rated officer for acknowledgment and new comments. 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 38: REFERRAL PROCESS (3 of 3) 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. 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. If the OER is changed but still requires referral, the OER must again be referred to the rated officer for acknowledgment and new comments. Only the latest acknowledgment and comments (if submitted) will be forwarded to HQDA with the completed OER. 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 The Soldier or another party can file an appeal of an evaluation report that he or she feels is unjust The 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 39: EVALUATION REDRESS PROGRAM The Evaluation Redress Program consists of several elements at various levels of command (for example., field, HRC, DCS, 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. (1) The first program element is the communication process fostered by the DA Form A and DA Form A , which affords the rated officer or NCO a forum for establishing duty requirements and a discussion of actual accomplishments (see chap 3, sec II , and DA Pam ). (2) A second element is the various regulatory requirements, such as each evaluation report standing on its own without reference to facts or events occurring prior or subsequent to the rating period (Para 3-16 ) and the prohibition against command influence on rating officials during the preparation of evaluation reports (see Para 1-11 and DA Pam ). (3) The Evaluation Redress Program includes (in this order) (Para 4-1d): The Commander’s or Commandant’s Inquiry 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 AR 623-3, Chapter 4, Section I

LSA 4 Check on Learning 1. How do you determine the 90 day minimum rating requirement for an annual report? 2. Memorandum of Input is optional for all evaluations. a. True b. False 3. Match the type of report with the definition: a. Annual b. Extended Annual c. Change of Rater d. Change of Duty e. Senior Rater Option 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 still 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 nonrated time SHOW SLIDE 40: CHECK ON LEARNING How do you determine the 90 day minimum rating requirement for an annual 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. Memorandum of Input is optional for all evaluations. a. True b. False Match the type of report to the definition: Annual 5 Extended Annual 1 Change of Rater 4 Change of Duty 2 Senior Rater Option 3

Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs)
DA Form DA Form DA Form DA Form SHOW SLIDE 42: OFFICER EVALUATION REPORTS (OERS) Learning Step/Activity 5. Define Forms Used for Evaluations Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:36 Time of Instruction: 40 mins

Company Grade Form Page 1
Administrative data remains consistent with the old OER (DA Form 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 43: COMPANY GRADE FORM PAGE 1 Here 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. -The Company Grade Evaluation will be used for 2LTs through CPT and WO1s through CW2. You will 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. -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. -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. -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”. -The Rater’s comment block will allow for up to “four” lines of narrative text as is pertains to “PERFORMANCE” only. Up to 4 lines of text

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 44: RATER ASSESSMENT COMPANY GRADE FORM PAGE 2 -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 doctrine. -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.” -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. -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.” 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

Field Grade Form Page 1 Administrative
Data remains consist 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 45: FIELD GRADE FORM PAGE 1 This slide shows what page 1 of the Field Grade Form looks like. -The administrative data in the top third of the form is the same as the Company Grade Report. 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. 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.

Rater Assessment: Field Grade Form Page 2
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 46: RATER ASSESSMENT: FIELD GRADE FROM PAGE 2 -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) 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. -The Rater’s “EXCELS” box check is the only constrained box. It is limited to 49% or less. 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. -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. 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

Rater Recommended Assignments
(Field Grade and Strategic Level) Field Grade Plate- Rater Recommended Strategic Grade Plate- Rater Recommended SHOW SLIDE 47: RATER RECOMMENDED ASSIGNMENTS -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.

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 48: 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. Unclassified

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 49: STRATEGIC REPORT (COL) PAGE 2 Because the math will change, Senior Raters of Colonels, will have their COL profile re-start on 1 Apr 14 for reports rendered using the They will then be given a credit of 5 in “Retain as Colonels” which will allow immediate recognition of top performers. -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. -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). -There is a 3rd box, “Retain as Colonel” which is equivalent to a Center of Mass. Cumulative percentage must remain below 50%

Strategic Report (BG) 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 Officers Army Military Human Resource Record SHOW SLIDE 50: STRATEGIC REPORT (BG) REPORT 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 OMPF. Unclassified

OER Possible Combinations
EXCELS X MOST QUALIFIED PROFICIENT HIGHLY QUALIFIED CAPABLE QUALIFIED UNSAT NOT QUALIFIED EXCLLS 16 TOTAL POSSIBLE COMBINATIONS PROFICIENT / HIGHLY QUALIFIED = THE NORM WATCH FOR MISMATCHED RATINGS 7 VERSIONS OF REFERRED REPORTS SHOW SLIDE 51: OER POSSIBLE COMBINATIONS

LSA5 Check on Learning Company Grade Evaluations are used for _____________. The rater’s comments addresses the officer’s _________. a. Potential b. Performance c. Potential and Performance d. Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities SHOW SLIDE 52: LSA5 CHECK ON LEARNING Company Grade Evaluations are used for ___________________.. 2LTs through CPT and WO1s through CW2 The rater’s comments addresses the officer’s _________. a. Potential b. Performance c. Potential and Performance d. Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities

Rater and Senior Rater Profile Management
(Officers) SHOW SLIDE 54: RATER AND SENIOR RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT (OFFICERS) Learning Step/Activity 7. Define the Officer Evaluation Reports (OERS) Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:36 Time of Instruction: 45 mins NOTE: LSA 7 was moved before LSA 6 to allow the instructor to discuss managing a senior rater profile before discussing NCOERS.

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 55: RATER PROFILE -This slide covers some of the basic fundamentals of the Rater Managed Profile Technique. -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. -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.) -Profiles are calculated upon receipt at HQDA. -Evaluations are still due to HRC NLT 90 days after thru date on the evaluation. -Raters will have to manage a profile which is a Dash 2 (-2) and monitor it for accuracy. Leaders must share experiences on profile management with junior officers. -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. Mailing an eval is like writing a check. Your bank does not know you have written a check until it arrives get 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 56: 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: 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 57: RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT On this slide you’ll see some of the basic fundamentals of the new Rater Managed Profile Technique for raters of LTCs and below. 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. Of course, 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”. HRC will apply a credit of 3 in “Proficient” once the profile is started. 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. 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. Can unlock but must send a memorandum to HRC requesting so (MILPER Message)

Profile Credit of 3 – By Grade
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 58: PROFILE CREDIT OF 3 – BY GRADE This slide depicts the Rater profile math using the 4 box system. Each grade will receive a credit of 3 in the “Proficient” category. Looking at the first diagram you can see where the rater has been credited with 3 in the “Proficient” category. 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%. 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

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 59: RATER BOX CHECK 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 this 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 60: RATER MANAGED PROFILE LABELING RULES Shown on the slide are the first two of four rules involved with a managed profile technique for those receiving a box check. 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. 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. 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.

Will be available thru Evaluation Entry System Website
Rater Profile Calculator/Tracker Will be available thru Evaluation Entry System Website SHOW SLIDE 61: RATER PROFILE CALCULATOR/TRACKER NOTE: INSTRUCTIONS FOR RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT CALCULATOR 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 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. This is an unofficial worksheet, which may be modified to meet individual needs. Instructions for columns on the worksheet follow: 1. On the correct rank TAB at bottom of sheet, enter the Ratee’s Name, Type, and Date of Evaluation. 2. 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. 3. 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). 4. Enter date due to HRC (forecast 90 days after thru date of evaluation) 5. Enter the actual date completed at HRC (verify in EES). 6. Total EXCELS % calculates number of EXCELS at far right of the sheet (tan), which must maintain less than 50%. POC: OER Profile Policy questions. Evaluation Systems Office, USA HRC, (502) (DSN: 983),

Senior Rater Box Check LTC & Below
Part VI is the senior rater’s assessment of the rated officer’s potential. The senior rater makes an assessment of the officer’s potential for promotion to the next higher grade when compared with other officers. In order to maintain a credible profile, the senior rater must have less than 50 percent of the ratings of a rank in the “MOST QUALIFIED” top box. 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 = Current COM SHOW SLIDE 62: SENIOR RATER BOX CHECK LTC & BELOW The senior rater makes an assessment of the rated officer’s overall potential when compared with all other officers of the same rank the senior rater has previously rated or currently has in his or her population. Note. Promotable officers with a “P” after their current rank, serving in an authorized position of the next higher rank, are considered as officers of the next higher rank in making comparative assessments with contemporaries. On “Senior Rater Profile” reports, they will be profiled against the next higher rank. — This potential is evaluated in terms of the majority of officers in the population. If the potential assessment is consistent with the majority of officers in that grade the senior rater will place an “X” in the “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” box. If the rated officer’s potential exceeds that of the majority of officers in the senior rater’s population, the senior rater will place an “X” in the “MOST QUALIFIED” box. (The intent is for the senior rater to use this box to identify the upper third of officers for each rank.) In order to maintain a credible profile, the senior rater must have less than 50 percent of the ratings of a rank in the “MOST QUALIFIED” top box. Fifty percent or more in the “MOST QUALIFIED” top box will result in a “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” label. If the rated officer’s potential is adequate, but beneath the majority of officers in the senior rater’s population for that grade and the senior rater believes the rated officer should be retained for further development, the senior rater will place an “X” in the “QUALIFIED” box. If the rated officer’s potential is below the majority of officers in the senior rater’s population for that grade and the senior rater does not believe the rated officer should be retained, the senior rater will place an “X” in the “NOT QUALIFIED” box. Note. In order to maintain a credible profile, the senior rater must have less than 50 percent of the ratings in the “MOST QUALIFIED” box for a given rank. An DA Form with a “MOST QUALIFIED” rating that causes a senior rater’s profile to have 50 percent or more “MOST QUALIFIED” ratings will be processed with a “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” HQDA electronically generated label; however, it will be charged against the senior rater’s profile as a “MOST QUALIFIED” DA Form if it is unresolved, and a documented senior rater profile misfire will occur. — To ensure maximum rating flexibility when rating populations change or to preclude a “MOST QUALIFIED” top box check from inadvertently profiling as a “HIGHLY QUALIFIED” rating, senior raters need to maintain a “cushion” in the number of “MOST QUALIFIED” ratings given rather than impending to the line at less than 50 percent. This is best accomplished by limiting the “MOST QUALIFIED” top box to no more than one-third of all ratings given for officers of a given rank. — To provide senior raters flexibility when initially establishing a credible “Senior Rater Profile” report, the first single “MOST QUALIFIED” top box report processed against the senior rater’s profile at that grade will generate a “MOST QUALIFIED” label, regardless of the actual profile. All other reports will receive an HQDA electronically generated label that reflects the senior rater’s profile at the time the report is processed. Note: Part VI, block a will not be completed on promotable CW4s serving in an authorized position of the next higher rank and CW5s. An HQDA electronically generated label, which states “No Box Check,” will be placed over the boxes in Part VI, block a. Not Referred

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 masked after promotion to CPT/selection to CW3 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 63: RATER TIPS 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. Reminder: LT reports are masked upon promotion to CPT and WO1 reports masked upon selection to CW3 as these reports are considered developmental. 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. 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 64: SENIOR RATER “RATING PHILOSOPHY” 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. 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. 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. 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 SHOW SLIDE 65: 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. -and- c. 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 66: SENIOR RATER COMMENTS (2 OF 2) 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 67: SENIOR RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT 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. 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%. 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 officers name is not included in your profile numbers and his or her OER was not sent via EES, you may misfire. 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. 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 Office (HQDA-ESO) 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 Requires restart of COL population Senior Rater will receive 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 Two ACOM Boxes Multi-Star limited to 24% of total reports Promote To BG limited to 25 – 49.9% of total reports 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 Note: Combined cumulative percentages of both “MULTI-STAR POTENTIAL” and “PROMOTE TO BG” will not exceed 49% CUMULATIVE % Remains less than 50% SHOW SLIDE 68: SENIOR RATER BOX CHECK COLs Because the math will change, Senior Raters of Colonels, will have their COL profile re-start on 1 Apr 14 for reports rendered using the They will then be given a credit of 5 in “Retain as Colonels” which will allow immediate recognition of top performers. -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. -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). -There is a 3rd box, “Retain as Colonel” which is equivalent to a Center of Mass.

Profile Credit of 5 for Colonel Report
Profile Credit at Implementation After first 5 Reports with Credit After first 10 Reports with Credit 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 Senior Rater Limit: No more than 24% for Multi-Star No more than 25-49% for Promote to BG SHOW SLIDE 69: PROFILE CREDIT OF 5 FOR COLONEL REPORT This slide shows what the math will look like once the Colonel profile has been reset and given a credit of 5 in the “Retain as Colonel” category. -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%. 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, your profile will look like this.

How to Lock the Sr Rater Profile Allows Sr Raters to see their profile
SHOW SLIDE 70: HOW TO LOCK THE SR RATER PROFILE This slide shows a snapshot of what the “Rater” will see within the new Evaluation Entry System. -After entering the Performance block comments , the Rater will select the appropriate overall performance block rating then will have to “lock” that rating. -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. -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.

Senior Rater Profile Calculator WO1-LTC RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT CALCULATOR
SHOW SLIDE 71: W01-LTC RATER PROFILE MANAGEMENT CALCULATOR NOTE: Instructions for Rater Profile Management Calculator 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. 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. This is an unofficial worksheet, which may be modified to meet individual needs. Instructions for columns on the worksheet follow: 1. On the correct rank TAB at bottom of sheet, enter the Ratee’s Name, Type, and Date of Evaluation. 2. 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. 3. 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). 4. Enter date due to HRC (forecast 90 days after thru date of evaluation) 5. Enter the actual date completed at HRC (verify in EES). 6. Total EXCELS % calculates number of EXCELS at far right of the sheet (tan), which must maintain less than 50%. 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 72: 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 MQ box check not supported by the senior rater profile for that grade and labeled by HQDA as center of mass.

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 Example: 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 73: METHODS FOR COMBATING “POOLING” Pooling - Elevating the rating chain beyond the senior rater's ability to know the officer, in an attempt to provide an elevated assessment “. Feedback: Suggestions to combat “pooling” were solicited from 4 Stars only Develop a directive/CSA Sends, which prohibits gaming system by pooling Discourage pooling in regulation; requiring senior raters to brief their senior raters on their rating schemes Talking points: Pooling runs counter to the intent and spirit of the evaluation system Discouraging Pooling will enhance fairness and equity of the system Regulatory guidance as measure to combat pooling will raise visibility in a public forum. 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. 1. 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... 2. 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."

LSA7 Check on Learning 1. Raters have a “credit” of ___ in the ______ box to start their profile. 2. Define a Misfire in your own words. SHOW SLIDE 74: CHECK ON LEARNING Raters have a “credit” of ___ in the ______ box to start their profile. 3/ Proficient Define a Misfire in your own words. 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.

Non-commissioned Officer Evaluation Reports (NCOERs)
DA Form SHOW SLIDE 76: NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICER EVALUATION REPORTS (NCOERS) Learning Step/Activity 6. Define the Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports (NCOERS) Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:36 Time of Instruction: 1 hr NOTE: LSA 7 was moved before LSA 6 to allow the instructor to discuss managing a senior rater profile before discussing NCOERS. The information on senior rater profiles in this LSA is similar to LSA 7.

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 SHOW SLIDE 77: NCOER SUPPORT FORM PAGE 1 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: 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). 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. 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 7 lines of text 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 78: NCOER Counseling Support Form 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.

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 Up to 5 lines of text SHOW SLIDE 79: DA Form Front Page 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. 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). 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 80: Direct-level Report (SGT) – Page 2 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. Rater comments will continue to be in bullet format. 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. 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 81: Direct-level Report (SGT) – Page 2 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. 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. 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. 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

Strategic-level Report (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 82: Strategic-level (CSM/SGM) – Page 2 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. 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 83: 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 (applies to Organizational and Strategic-level NCOERs)
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 84: FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD 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.

Met Standard (applies to all Grade Plates)
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 85: 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 Plates)
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 86: DID NOT MEET STANDARD

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 87: RATER TENDENCY LABEL 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. 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. 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. 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 (applies to 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 88: SENIOR RATER ASSESSMENT 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. 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’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
(5 or less) 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) SHOW SLIDE 89: IMMATURE PROFILE/SMALL POPULATION 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. An immature profile is when the Senior Rater has rendered five (5) or less reports for a particular grade. A small population is when the Senior Rater’s population is three (3) or less for a particular grade. Here is an example of how it works: 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. 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. 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 90: Senior rater Profile Calculation 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. 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 91: SENIOR RATER GRADE REQUIREMENTS 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. 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.

Evaluation Narrative 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 92: EVALUATION NARRATIVE 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. 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. 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.

LSA6 Check on Learning 1. When is a Supplementary Reviewer required? 2. What is the minimum pay grade required for a civilian to senior rate an NCO on the DA Form ? 3. Senior raters manage a constrained profile which is limited to _______ for the top block or “MOST QUALIFIED.” 4. What are the three types of reports in the DA Form series? SHOW SLIDE 93: CHECK ON LEARNING When is a Supplementary Reviewer required? When the Senior Rater is a 1LT and below and in certain situations. What is the minimum pay grade required for a civilian to rate an NCO on the DA Form ? GS9 or equivalent Senior raters manage a constrained profile which is limited to _______ for the top block or “MOST QUALIFIED”. 24% What are the three types of reports in the DA Form series? SGT (Direct Level) SSG through 1SG/MSG (Organizational) CSM/SGM (Strategic)

EVALUATION ENTRY SYSTEM (EES)
SHOW SLIDE 95: EVALUATION ENTRY SYSTEM (EES) Learning Step/Activity 8. Communicate the Evaluation Entry System (EES) and IWRS Method of Instruction: Conference/Discussion Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:36 Time of Instruction: 30 mins

Evaluation Entry System (EES)
EES is the revised web-based tool in development at HRC, which will be used to complete and submit evaluations EES will consolidate 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 96: EVALUATION ENTRY SYSTEM (EES)

Evaluation Entry System (EES)
EES link from HRC Self-Service tools & online applications page SHOW SLIDE 97: EVALUATION ENTRY SYSTEM (EES) EES link from HRC Self-service tools & online applications page.

Evaluation Entry System Homepage (EES)
10 most current Evaluations 10 most current Support Forms SHOW SLIDE 98: EVALUATION ENTRY SYSTEM (EES) LANDING PAGE -This slide shows what the Evaluation Entry System landing page looks like when users log into the system. -From this landing page, users can select from a variety of options depending on what they desire to do. Users can create a Support Form, Evaluation, or review their rater and senior rater profile. -Some of the button links will be in development and not yet operational. -On the left you will users will have access to useful links and resources. -On the right users will see recent OER activity associated to that user.

Evaluation Entry System Homepage (EES)
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. Shows all active evaluations related to you, as the Rater, Senior Rater, or Delegate. Shows Rater & Senior Rater Profile; will show Rater Tendency Allows delegates to view Senior Rater profile (if delegated). Allows signature removal if correction or amendment is required SHOW SLIDE 99: EVALUATION ENTRY SYSTEM (EES) LANDING PAGE 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

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 100: 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.

LSA 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 SHOW SLIDE 101: CHECK ON LEARNING Conduct a Check on Learning, poll for questions, and summarize the Learning Activity. 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 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

COMPUTING REPORTING PERIODS, RATED MONTHS AND NON-RATED TIME
SHOW SLIDE 102: COMPUTING REPORTING PERIODS, RATED MONTHS AND NON-RATED TIME Learning Step/Activity 9. 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 Non-rated Time 1 of 3
Step one: Determine the report type: What is the triggering factor that requires an evaluation? (e.g., PCS, Annual, Change of Rater, etc.) Refer to DA PAM, Tables 2-24 and 3-6 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 non-rated periods DA PAM, Tables 2-25 and 3-7 for nonrated codes Subtract all non-rated days 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 103: COMPUTING REPORTING PERIODS, RATED MONTHS AND NON-RATED TIME (1 OR 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 Non-rated Time
SLIDE SHOW 104: NONRATED TIME NOTE: REFERENCE AR 623-3, FIGURE 3-1 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. 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

SFC Craven’s last NCOER ended He received assignment instructions to report to Fort Jackson with a report date of SFC Craven was hospitalized from to SFC Craven will sign out of his unit on Complete Part I, item g-j on SFC Craven’s next NCOER. SHOW SLIDE 105: COMPUTING REPORTING PERIODS, RATED MONTHS AND NON-RATED TIME (2 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 – 26 days / 30 = 11 months (DA PAM, Table 3-6) l. P (DA PAM 623-3, Table 3-17) SHOW SLIDE 106: COMPUTING REPORTING PERIODS, RATED MONTHS AND NON-RATED TIME (2 of 3)

Apply iPERMS Scenario SHOW SLIDE 107: 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.” “Accept” the terms of accessing the system and click “Log in as Yourself.” Click on “Authorized Official” and go to “Lookup Soldier by SSN” 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 108: 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 109: 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)

LSA8 Check on Learning Which of the following is not a benefit of EES
a. Removed multi-pane dashboard to allow users to view data input and forms simultaneously b. Built-in tool to view and manage Rater and Senior Rater profiles c. Provides quick reference to AR and DA PAM 623-3 d. Eliminates accessing multiple systems and consolidates evaluation tools to one system SHOW SLIDE 110: LSA1 CHECK ON LEARNING Which of the following is not a benefit of EES? a. Removes multi-pane dashboard to allow users to view data input and forms simultaneously b. Built-in tool to view and manage Rater and Senior Rater profiles c. Provides quick reference to AR and DA PAM 623-3 d. Eliminates accessing multiple systems and consolidates evaluation tools to one system

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 113: RESTATE TERMINAL LEARNING OBJECTIVE (TLO) Learning Step / Activity 9. Practical Exercise Method of Instruction: Performance Instructor to Student Ratio: 1:32 Time of Instruction: 1 hr Media: Large Group Instruction Learning Step / Activity 10. Practical Exercise Review Time of Instruction: 30 mins Learning Step / Activity 11. Practical Exercise Learning Step / Activity 12. Practical Exercise Review Learning Step / Activity 13. Summary Method of Instruction: Conference / Discussion Time of Instruction: 5 minutes FEEDBACK: NOTE: Feedback is essential to effective learning. Schedule and provide feedback on the evaluation and any information to help answer students' questions about the test. Provide remedial training as needed.

Adjutant General School Administer Evaluations Reporting Program

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Adjutant General School Administer Evaluations Reporting Program"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Adjutant General School Administer Evaluations Reporting Program

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Adjutant General School Administer Evaluations Reporting Program"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback