Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
HUMAN RESOURCESSENIOR LEADERS COURSE
42A
Review the Evaluation Reporting System
LESSON PLAN
Version 2.1
November 2017
U.S. ARMY SOLDIER SUPPORT INSTITUTENoncommissioned Officer Academy
Human Resources Senior Leaders CourseTLO 2.0 – Determine Essential Personnel Services Requirements
ELO 2.3 - Review the Evaluation Reporting System
LESSON PLAN
Lesson Author: AG Branch, ITDDate prepared: January 2013Last update: November 2017
1. SCOPE: Review the Evaluation Reporting System is a 3.5 hour lesson. This lesson interpret the principles of the evaluation reporting system, rating chain qualifications and responsibilities, counseling requirements, types of evaluations, the evaluation reporting system redress program, requirements for completion of evaluation reports, and other Human Resources Command (HRC) policy topics. We will also compare the evaluation reporting system responsibilities of the S-1 and HRC.
Students will reach the following lesson outcomes through assigned readings, actively participating in class, and completing the practical exercises:
Enabled to confidently articulate the principles of the evaluation reporting system.
Enabled to interpret and apply evaluation reporting system policies.
Equipped to advise and teach subordinate HR professionals and Army Leaders on evaluation reporting procedures.
Demonstrate research ability and application of critical thinking.
2. LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
2
ELO 2.3:Action: Review the Evaluation Reporting System
Condition: Senior HR Leaders in a classroom environment working individually and as a member of a small group, using doctrinal and administrative publications, practical exercises, case studies, personal experience, handouts, and discussion with an awareness of the Operational Environment (OE) variables and actors.
Standard: 1. Interpret the principles of the evaluation reporting system.
2. Examine the various components of the evaluation reporting system, including rating chains, counseling, types of reports, and redress program.
3. Compare evaluation reporting system responsibilities of the S-1 and HRC.
4. Review the use of the Evaluation Entry System
Learning Domain: CognitiveLevel of Learning: Analysis
3. STUDENT PREREQUISITE WORK: a. Study Requirements:
Study: DA PAM 623-3, November 2015, Evaluation Reporting System, Chapters 2, 3, 5, and Appendix C (49 pages)
Review: Read: (1) AR 623-3, November 2015, Evaluation Reporting System, Chapters 1,
2, 3, 4 (74 pages) and Appendixes G and H (17 pages)
(2) FM 1-0: April 2014, Chapter 4, paragraphs 4-12 thru 4-17, Evaluation Reports (1page)
(3) ATP 1-0.1, March 2015, S-1 Operations, Appendix D, Evaluation Checklist, page D-8 (1 page)
(4) SA Directive 2013-20 (Assessing Officers and Noncommissioned Officers of Fostering Climates of Dignity and Respect and on Adhering to the Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention Program)
http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/ad2013_20.pdf
Scan: (1) ADP 6-22 August 2012.
(2) Evaluations Systems Homepage
b. Bring to Class: NA.
3
c. Be prepared to discuss in class: (1) HRC evaluation reporting system policies
(2) Differences and similarities between the officer and noncommissioned officer evaluation reporting systems.
(3) Responsibilities, principles of support, and standards of service for the battalion and brigade S-1 for evaluations.
(4) The role of the chain of command in the evaluation reporting system.
(5) Human Resources enabling systems that support the evaluation reporting system (e.g., EES, IWRS).
4. INSTRUCTOR ADDITIONAL READING(S)/MATERIAL: In addition to the student readings listed above, instructors should be well-versed in the evaluation reporting program – specifically AR 623-3 and DA PAM 623-3 and all applicable MILPER messages.
5. TRAINING AIDS, REFERENCES, AND RESOURCES:
This lesson is intended to be facilitated in a small group classroom setting with the ability to project PowerPoint slides. Additional resources are available digitally for students to reference on their laptops without having the need to print.
Appendix A: Assessment PlanAppendix B: Slide Listing
INSTRUCTOR NOTES:
Security Level: This course / lesson will present information that has a Security Classification of: U - Unclassified.
Foreign Disclosure Restrictions: FD1. This training product has been reviewed by the training developers in coordination with the Adjutant General School, Fort Jackson, SC foreign disclosure officer. This training product can be used to instruct international military students from all approved countries without restrictions.
Throughout the lesson discussion seek opportunities to link the ALAs and GLOs with the lesson content through the student’s experiences.
The Army Learning Areas (ALA) are the baseline focal points Soldiers and Army Civilians must possess to prevail in the ambiguous environments that challenge the
4
Army today. The four ALAs are: Army Profession and Leadership; Mission Command; Human Dimension; and Professional Competence. The Army Learning Area taxonomy provides a framework to assist in grouping the General Learning Outcomes. The four Army Learning Areas serve as the framework to catalogue the 14 General Learning Outcomes.
The General Learning Outcomes (GLOs) are essential outcomes resulting from training, education, and experience along a career continuum of learning. There are three primary purposes for the Army General Learning Outcomes. First, they provide trainers and educators a lens into how effective they are in conveying their support material. Second, it assists in improving instructional design and/or training support packages. Finally it places responsibility on training and education proponents to be nested with ALAs.
GLO 4: Soldiers and Army Civilians demonstrate proficiency in mission command leader and commander tasks.
GLO 5: Soldiers and Army Civilians demonstrate proficiency in mission command staff tasks.
GLO 13: Soldiers and Army Civilians support Army policies, programs, and processes.
GLO 14: Soldiers and Army Civilians are technically and tactically competent.
6. CONDUCT OF LESSON:
a. Lesson Timeline:
15 minutes Concrete Experience 15 minutes Publish and Process30 minutes Generalize New Information10 minutes Break30 minutes Generalize New Information10 minutes Break30 minutes Generalize New Information10 minutes Break 15 minutes Develop50 minutes Apply (Practical Exercise)
NOTE: While the main purpose of this lesson is to impart knowledge – it is also intended to get students thinking about how to best manage the evaluation reporting program in their units. There are not many slides in the lesson, but there is great potential for discussion. While topic slides do introduce knowledge for consideration, they are primarily designed to start discussions and constantly engage students, even in the GNI portion. The information covered in this lesson is basic, and even students
5
with no background can prepare for the lesson by completing the reading assignment. There is no reason for anyone to not participate!
Your purpose in this block of instruction is to first help students realize they have a good foundational knowledge of the evaluation reporting program, to facilitate discussion and critical thought of new information, and then to push students to the next level and have them apply their knowledge in the “Apply” phase. Instructors must be thoroughly familiar with the topics and structure of the lesson to properly facilitate a small group. For each topic, ask students “Why is this important – particularly as you prepare for your next assignments?” 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).NOTE: Adjust the Lesson Timeline as necessary to facilitate class schedule, your teaching style, and student learning. You are not bound by any time constraints during any particular phase of the ELM model.
b. Concrete Experience (15 min):
Slide 2: Concrete ExperienceFocus: Concrete Experience
1. View video (3:22).2. Separate class into two groups.3. Click mouse to display group questions.4. Allow each group 10 minutes to develop their responses.5. Have students’ record responses on a white board, butcher-block paper or other means that makes each group’s responses easy to view by all during the Process phase.
http://youtu.be/unmKnS5jPOc
c. Publish and Process (15 min): This phase is student-centered and instructor facilitated.
The “publish” portion is a short discussion on how group members felt during their experience of viewing the video clip. This can be kept short; once the group moves to “process,” they will likely continue to add to “publishing” type information. Do not let the group jump straight to content. When well facilitated, publishing is a good method to
6
relate a discussion of interpersonal communication and group dynamics to the broader topic of leader competencies described in FM 6-22. Questions the instructor may ask to assist in the publishing phase:
What happened? How did you feel about that?
Who had a similar or different experience, and why? Were there any surprises?
What can we learn about the evaluations reporting program in light of this example?
Discussion and questions are directed toward making sense of the data for the individual and the group.
The “processing” phase now allows the group to talk about the data they generated. Discussion and questions are directed toward making sense of the data for the individual and the group. Since the CE question for each group relates to the other, one technique for discussing information may be to go back and forth to see if related items were generated from each group.
Questions the instructor may ask to assist in publishing: (Intent is to push critical thinking. Push students to defend their answers – allow students to hash out ideas).
Why did you put “item X” on this list? What does it mean to you? (This gets at affective learning and how students find the material relevant from their experiences).
Did you find that once you got one idea down, it triggered related ideas? (If yes, have them show examples. This shows the interrelatedness of the materials in a larger process).
Would you say you saw any themes develop in the list? (e.g.,. events vs. processes)
Can you prioritize a list like this? (There may be no right answer to their list, but the more interesting development would be if there was a disagreement between group members. Have them discuss their differences in thought).
After having talked about this, do you think you left anything critical off?
Lists like these contain processes that are ongoing, so where do you start?
Why is there not just one list that already has this task figured out? (Conversation could include policy changes, how policy is applied in different situations).
7
Did the CE demonstrate that properly evaluating subordinates will require a plan?
d. Generalize New Information (30 min): Although instructor focused, this lesson is designed for student involvement and discussion.
Slide 3: Learning ObjectiveFocus: Review Learning Objective and Assessment Plan
NOTE: Pacing of the GNI phase relies on student interaction. The intent is for the group to discuss the topics presented, and by expressing the importance of these subjects in terms of their own knowledge and experience, to thereby attach “relevance” to the material. The goal is not to just get through the slides. “Hard data” content varies from topic to topic, and when information is provided, it is mainly to serve as anchor points for discussions requiring more critical thinking. Although there are many questions related to the material that may have “right” answers, facilitators should push students to explain why an answer is “right,” or why one answer may be better than another. Occasionally, students will disagree with you or one another which is great – encourage professional discussion that relies on critical thinking. Learners are more likely to remember these interactions than a bullet on a slide.
Properly administering the evaluations reporting program can be challenging. After completion of this lesson, students should have an idea of where to start, how to sift through the large amounts of information available to them, and how to categorize and prioritize that information for use in problem solving.
8
Slide 4: Evaluation Reporting System (ERS) OverviewFocus: Principles of the Evaluation Reporting System AR 623-3 para 1-7
NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, para 1-8
NOTE: The ERS assesses the quality of Soldiers and determines the selection of future Army leaders and the course of their individual careers. It supports many current Army and Joint personnel management programs. The ERS places. AR 623-3 para 1-8(4)b(1)
NOTE: Instructors should leverage their own experiences and ask pertinent questions pertaining to the slide provided. Potential questions may include:
Does the Evaluation Reporting System work as designed? (i.e. identifies best qualified for promotion)
What are the ERS strengths and weakness?
Are there any improvements that need to be made to the ERS?
Do the officer and enlisted evaluation systems accomplish the same goals?
What are the primary differences between the OER and NCOER systems?
Does one system work better than the other? Why or why not?
What has been your experience with Academic Evaluation Reports (AER)?
Why do many AERs contain “canned” bullets?
Slide 5: ERS Responsibilities
B-1
Focus: Refer students to AR 623-3, paragraph 1-4, as needed
Briefly discuss both responsibilities
NOTE: HRC - is responsible for the effective operation of the ERS. HRC will exercise final review authority on all evaluations reports received at HQDA. (AR 623-3, para 1-4a)(2)Commanders – At all levels will ensure that - (1) A copy of this regulation, or the appropriate Web link to this regulation, is available to the rated Soldier and rating officials.(2) Rating officials are fully qualified to meet their responsibilities.(3) Reports are prepared by the rating officials designated in the published rating scheme.(4) Rating chains correspond as nearly as practical to the chain of command or chain of supervision in a timely manner. (AR 623-3, para 1-4b)
Slide 6: ERS FunctionsFocus: Refer students to AR 623-3, paragraph 1-8c.
Instructor Note: Inform the student that the ERS encompasses the means and methods needed for developing people and leaders. The Army routinely reviews the ERS to ensure that it remains relevant and in support of its goals.
B-1
Facilitate discuss: Asked the student, what do they think changed in today’s Army to make the Army change the evaluation report?
Slide 7: Categories Of EvaluationsFocus: Refer student to AR 623-3 para 1-8a(4)
Briefly discuss:- Mandatory and/or Optional Evals- School Evals- Selection board and personnel
management systems
CATEGORIES OF EVALUATIONS
Under the ERS, a Soldier is evaluated on his or her performance and potential. The ERS consists of two categories of evaluation reports:
(1) Mandatory and/or Optional Evaluations. The applicable evaluation report forms are the DA Form 67–10 series and DA Form 2166–9 series. These evaluations focus on a Soldier’s duty performance, or how well a Soldier performs his or her assigned tasks as related to the Army Leadership Requirements Model. They also focus on potential assessments to include judgments about a Soldier’s ability to perform at the current and higher grade or rank, whether or not a Soldier will be given greater responsibility at the present rank, or retained for further military service.
(2) School evaluations. The applicable evaluation report forms are DA Form 1059 (for military institutions) or DA Form 1059–1 (for civilian institutions). These evaluations focus exclusively on the Soldier’s performance and accomplishments while attending a school or course.
NOTE: The time period covered by AERs is counted as nonrated time on OERs and NCOERs covering the same period.
(3) Selection boards and personnel management systems will be used to evaluate a Soldier’s entire career and his or her personnel file. Evaluation reports are single time-and-place evaluations, all of which are considered when preparing evaluations.
Slide 8: Evaluation Entry System (EES)
B-1
Focus:
Briefly Cover
Slide 9: Evaluation Entry System (EES) HomepageFocus:
Briefly Cover
Slide 10: SEXUAL HARASSMENT/ASSAULT RESPONSE AND PREVENTION PROGRAM AND EVALUATIONS
B-1
Focus: Para 2-12 The Rater will- AR 623-3 para 2-12j
Instructor NOTE: Ensure the students understand that All Officers and NCOs will include goals and objectives to help eliminate sexual harassment and assault. The OER Support Form (or its equivalent) and NCOER Counseling and Support Form must be annotated with goal and objective adherence to SHARP Program. Soldiers attending military service schools, civilian education, medical, or industrial institutions, goals and objectives will be establish during the students’ initial counseling
The rater will assess the rated officer or NCO on how well they adhered to the SHARP Program and any significant actions or contributions the rated officer or NCO made:
(1) Promoting the personal and professional development of his or her subordinates(2) Ensuring the fair, respectful treatment of assigned personnel(3) Establishing a workplace and overall command climate that fosters dignity and respect for all members of the group
Assessments should also identify, as appropriate, any failures by the officer or NCO to foster a climate of dignity, respect and adherence to the SHARP Program.
Raters and senior raters will document any substantiated finding on the officers’ DA Form 67-10 series, NCOs’ DA Form 2166-9, DA Form 1059 and DA Form 1059-1 such as:
(1) Committing an act of sexual harassment or sexual assault(2) Failing to report a sexual harassment or assault(3) Failing to respond to a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault(4) Retaliating against a person making a complaint or report of sexual harassment or sexual assault.
Slide 11: Rules for Designating Rating Chain
B-1
Focus: Refer students to AR 623-3 para 2-5 thru 2-8
Instructor NOTES: Refer students to the AR 623-3.
Facilitate discuss: Inquire the follow questions in the discussion. Who can / can’t serve in the position?What is the time requirements?What are the restrictions?
Instructor NOTES: Point out to the student that: ALL NCOER senior raters will be the immediate supervisor of the rater and designated as the rated NOC’s senior rater for a minimum period of 60 calendar days (see chap 3 section VII and IX)
Supplementary reviewer OERs is mandatory when no uniformed Army designated rating official for the rated officers. Supplementary reviewer for NCOERs is 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.
Slide 12: Rating Chain Responsibilities
B-1
NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, paragraphs 2-12 thru 2-16.
NOTE: For additional information and specific instructions, refer students to DA Pam 623–3, as needed.
Instructor NOTES: Refer students to the above references. Briefly discuss slide. Instructor NOTES: Ensure that the student understand AR 623-3 and DA PAM 623-3 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.Memorandum of Input is no longer used in lieu of rendering an evaluation report (throughout the regulation) reference the Summary of Changes. A Soldier who is attached to an organization pending compassionate reassignment remains responsible to the parent unit and will not receive an evaluation from the attached organization. A memorandum of input in this case is mandatory (Table 3-1) and Appendix E (medical officers)
Slide 13: Rating Chain DevelopmentFocus: Refer students to AR 623-3, Chapter 2, para 2-2 and 2-3.
Refer student to AR 623-3 para 2-19 and 2-20
Instructor NOTES: Explain to the students that rating chains are established by Commanders, Commandants and leaders of an organization and maintained by rating officials.
B-1
Instructor NOTES: Briefly cover the following notes:
Officer rating chains consist of the rated officer, the rater, and the senior rater and in some instances a supplementary reviewer. The senior rater accomplishes the final rating chain review. (AR 623-3 para 2-3)f(1)(a) (1) For specialty branches (Chaplain Corps, JAGC, and AMEDD), dual supervisory situations, and situations in which the rater’s immediate supervisor would be the logical senior rater, but does not meet senior rater eligibility requirements as outlined in table 2–1, a rated officer’s rating chain may involve another level of supervision; or dual supervision and assigned different duties by two qualified but separate chains of command or chains of supervision throughout the entire rating period. In these situations, an intermediate rater is designated as a technical expert in the chain of command between the rater and senior rater (see para 2–6). (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 623-3 for further guidance. (3) Special rules governing the rating officials for officers under dual supervision; officers serving in the Chaplain’s Corps, the Judge Advocate General’s Corps (JAGC), or the Army Medical Department (AMEDD); and professors of military science are addressed in paragraphs 2–21 thru 2–23. NCO rating chains consist of the rated NCO, the rater, the senior rater, and in some instances a supplementary reviewer (See paragraph 2-3 & 2-8 for further information on supplementary reviewers). The supplementary reviewer will be a SGM, CSM, warrant officer, or officer in the direct line of supervision and senior in pay grade or date of rank to the senior rater. NCO rating chains will not include an intermediate rater.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 2-19 of AR 623-3. (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.Slide 14: Calculating Unrated Time (1 of 2)
B-1
Focus: Calculating unrated time.
NOTE: Work through examples, as necessary to ensure students are able to calculate unrated 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 here (Figure 3–1, AR 623-3).
Slide 15: Calculating Unrated Time (2 of 2)Focus: Extended annual reports
NOTE: Work through several examples, as necessary to ensure students are able to calculate unrated time. Note that extended annual reports are not that common.
B-1
Slide 16: Types of Evaluation ReportsFocus: Types of evaluations reports
NOTE: Refer students to AR 623-3, paragraph 3-2c, as needed.
There are two types of reports: mandatory and optional. These are further divided into a 90-day minimum rating period and other-than-90-day-minimum requirement. To determine if a Soldier meets the minimum calendar day requirements to receive a report, nonrated periods occurring during the rating period are deducted from the total number of days served in the same position under the same rater. NOTE: Explain to students that the method to determine rating periods will be discussed in greater detail in a subsequent learning activity.
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); including Supervisor Evaluations while TDY, SD, or TCS (paragraph 3-44). (6) Officer failing selection for promotion (paragraph 3-46). Mandatory reports with other than a 90-day minimum include- (1) Initial Tour of Extended Active Duty (paragraph 3-52). (2) Funded Legal Education Program (FLEP) Officers participating in on-the-job training (paragraph 3-51)
B-1
(3) Human Resources Command (HRC) Directed (paragraph 3-53). (4) Relief for Cause (paragraph 3-54).(5) Release from Active Duty Service (U.S. Army Reserve and Army National Guard only) (paragraph 3-47).
NOTE: USE EXAMPLE IN AR 623-3 para 3-59: 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.
Slide 17: Restrictions Focus: AR 623-3 Section VI
Instructor NOTES: Ensure that the student understand the Prohibited narratives below. Solicited a response to the following:
There are preparation and processing guidelines and restrictions for evaluation reporting. The perimeters are: (1) Each report will be an independent evaluation of the rated Soldier for a specific rating period. It will not refer to prior or subsequent reports. It will not remark on performance or incidents occurring before or after the period covered (para 3-20).
(a) What are some Relief-for-Cause reports 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-1
(b) When the most recent APFT performance or profile data occurred prior to the beginning date of the report? This exception is allowed in order to comply with APFT and height and weight requirements. (2) Comments will not exceed the space provided on DA Form 67–10 series, DA Form 2166–8, DA Form 1059, or DA Form 1059–1. In preparing their comments, rating officials will convey a precise but detailed evaluation to convey a meaningful description of an officer’s performance and potential. In this manner, both Army selection boards and career managers are given the needed information on which to base a decision. (para 3-21). (3) Prohibited narratives. The following techniques will not be used (para 3-20). (4) Unproven derogatory information. No reference will be made to an incomplete investigation (formal or informal) concerning a Soldier. (5) Any verified derogatory information may be entered on an evaluation. This is true whether the rated Soldier is under investigation, flagged, or awaiting trial. While the fact that a rated individual is under investigation or trial may not be mentioned in an evaluation until the investigation or trial is completed, this does not preclude the rating chain’s use of verified derogatory information. For example, when an interim report with verified information is made available to a commander, the verified information may be included in an OER, NCOER, or AER. For all reports, if previously reported information later prove to be incorrect or erroneous, the Soldier will be notified and advised of the right to appeal the report in accordance with chapter 6. (6) Prohibited comments. The use of inappropriate or arbitrary remarks or comments that draws attention to differences relating to race, color, religion, gender, age or national origin is prohibited. Subjective evaluation will not reflect a rating official’s personal bias or prejudice (para 3-20). (7) Comments about marital status and spouse. Any evaluation comments, favorable or unfavorable, will not be based solely on a rated Soldier’s marital status. For example, statements such as the following will not permitted: “LTC Doe and his wife make a fine command team” or “As a bachelor, MSG Doe can quickly react to this unit’s contingency missions.” (8) Special Interest Items that can be mentioned in a Soldier’s evaluation report, when substantiated by a completed command or other official investigation:
(a) Involvement in a driving under the influence charge. (b) Physical or mental Incapacitation.
B-1
(c) Acts of sexual misconduct, physical, or mental abuse. (d) Criminal Acts reported in official military or civil authorities. (e) Behavior that is inconsistent or detrimental to the good order, conduct and
discipline. (f) Adverse equal opportunity investigations. (g) Acts of reprisal.
(h) Activities or behavior otherwise prohibited by AR 600–20.
Slide 18: Referral Process Focus:
Refer to DA Pam 623–3, para 2–26, for detailed instructions and process for handling referred OER reports.
Refer to DA Pam 623-3, para 2-28. Referral process
NOTE: Rating officials are reminded AR 600-8-2 (Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions) explains procedural requirements for a nontransferable flag for “referred” and “Relief for Cause” evaluation 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). Also refer to DA PAM 623-3 figure 2-6 and 2-7 for examples.
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.
B-1
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).Slide 19: Title Slide
Slide 20: Support FormsNOTE: Refer students to DA Pam 623-3, para 3-1
Briefly Cover: inform students that they will cover more in the breakdown.
NCO Counseling
B-1
The purpose and process of DA Form 2166-9-1A, NCOER Counseling and Support Form, is to contribute to Army-wide professional development by increased emphasis on performance counseling. DA Form 2166-9-1 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.
Slide 21: Counseling Requirements / Support Form Communication ProcessNOTE: Refer Students to AR 623-3 para 3-4
Instructor Notes: Inform the students that 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 2166-9-1A.
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.
Ensure that the student understands 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(4) Find better ways to accomplish the mission.
B-1
Also ensure the student understands IAW AR 623-3, 3-6a(1)a- Officers draft their DA Form 67-10-1A, within the first 30 days of the rating period, using the rater or senior rater DA Forms 67-10-1A 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.
Slide 22: NCOER Support Form – Page 1 Focus: NCOER Support Form Page 1
NOTE: Review with students and facilitate discussion on Parts I thru IV of the NCOER Support Form, as needed.
Instructor NOTES: Point out 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.
In the 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.
Slide 23: NCOER Counseling Support Form
B-1
Focus: NCOER Counseling Support Form Page 2
NOTE: Review with students and facilitate discussion on Parts V thru VI of the NCOER Counseling Support Form, as needed.
Instructor NOTES: Briefly point out the purpose of the NCOER Support Form. Mention that the support 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.
Slide 24: Senior rater Profile CalculationFocus: Briefly explain
Instructor NOTES: Briefly explain that 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%,
B-1
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.
Slide 25: Senior Rater Grade RequirementsFocus:
Refer students to AR 623-3, table 2-1
Instructor NOTE: Briefly cover the change Per AR 623-3, Table 2-1, there is a policy change that updates and clarifies minimum grade requirements to serve as Senior Raters for evaluation reports.
Slide 26: Evaluation Narrative
B-1
Focus:
Briefly cover
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.
Slide 27: DA Form 2166-9 Front Page
B-1
Focus:Briefly DiscussRefer student to DA PAM 623-3 para 3-2 DA Form 2166-9-1
Instructor NOTES: In the discussion mention that 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.)NEXT SLIDE
Slide 28: Direct-level Report (SGT) – Page 2Focus:Briefly DiscussRefer student to DA PAM 623-3 para 3-2 DA Form 2166-9-1
Instructor NOTES: Explain to the students that 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)
B-1
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.
Slide 29: Organizational-levelFocus:Briefly DiscussRefer student to DA PAM 623-3 para 3-2 DA Form 2166-9-2
Instructor NOTES: Explain to the students, 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 performances 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
B-1
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).)
Slide 30: Strategic-level Focus:Briefly DiscussRefer student to DA PAM 623-3 para 3-3 DA Form 2166-9-2
Instructor NOTES: Explain to the students 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.
B-1
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).
Slide 31: Exceeds StandardsFocus:Briefly Discuss
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.
Slide 32: Far Exceeded StandardsFocus:Briefly Discuss
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.
Slide 33: Met Standard
B-1
Focus:Briefly Discuss
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.
Slide 34: Did Not Meet StandardFocus:Briefly Discuss
Rated NCO fails to meet or maintain the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes
Slide 35: Rater Tendency Label
B-1
Focus:Briefly Discuss
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.
NOTE: 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.
Slide 36: Senior Rater Assessment (SSG-CSM/SGM)
B-1
Focus: Briefly Discuss
Instructor NOTE: In the discussion work in the example below.
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%)
Slide 37: Immature Profile / Small Population
B-1
Focus:
Briefly explain
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.
Instructor Notes: Briefly explain
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.
B-1
BREAK. Providing the training schedule provides and available time permits this is a good point to provide the students a short break.
Slide 38: Title SlideFocus: Title Slide (nothing to brief)
Slide 39: Counseling Requirements / Support Form Communication ProcessNOTE: Refer Students to AR 623-3 para 3-4
Instructor Notes: Ensure that the student understands 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
B-1
(4) Find better ways to accomplish the mission.
Also ensure the student understands IAW AR 623-3, 3-6a(1)a- Officers draft their DA Form 67-10-1A, within the first 30 days of the rating period, using the rater or senior rater DA Forms 67-10-1A 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.
Slide 40: OER Support FormFocus: Title Slide (nothing to brief)
Officer CounselingAs discussed on the previous slide, use of DA Form 67-10-1A (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 67-10-1A.
Slide 41: OER Support Form - Page 1
B-1
Focus: OER SUPPORT FORM - PAGE 1
NOTE: Review with students and facilitate discussion on Parts I thru V of the OER Support Form, as needed.
Instructor NOTE: Refer students to DA PAM 623-3 para 2-1 and figure 2-1
Slide 42: OER SUPPORT FORM – Back
NOTE: Review with students and facilitate discussion on the various sections of Part V of the OER Support Form, as needed.
NOTE: Reference - Refer students to DA PAM 623-3 para 2-1 and figure 2-1A. Character - B. Presence - C. Intellect - D. Leads - E. Develops -F. Achieves –
Slide 43: Unmasking Of OERs
B-1
Focus: Refer to Army Directive 2015-11 and MILPER 15-036.
Briefly cover:
Per Army Directive 2015-11 and MILPER 15-036 (Unmasking of Army Evaluation Reports), effective immediately U.S. Army Human Resources Command will stop masking OERs and will move previously masked OERs to the performance section of the official Army Military Human Resource Records (AMHRR) file for all Army components.
Slide 44: Evaluation Redress ProgramFocus: Discuss elements of the Evaluation Redress Program Chapter 4.
NOTE: Explain to students that Chapter 4 (Evaluation Redress Program) will not be explained in great detail during this class. However, as professional HR Soldiers and advisors to Soldiers and Commanders, they should research and become familiar with this program.
The Evaluation Redress Program consists of several elements at various levels of command (e.g., field, AHRC, Army G–1, and HQDA). The program is both preventative and corrective, in that it is based upon principles structured to prevent, and provide a remedy for, alleged evaluation injustices or regulatory violations, as well as to correct them once they have occurred.
B-1
The first program element is the communication process fostered by DA Form 2166–9–1A, which affords the rated NCO a forum for establishing duty requirements and a discussion of actual accomplishments.
A second element is the various regulatory requirements, such as each report standing on its own without reference to facts or events occurring prior or subsequent to the rated period (para 3–20); the prohibition against command influence on rating officials during the preparation of reports.
The Evaluation Redress Program includes (in this order):
(1) The Commander’s or Commandant’s Inquiry
(2) The Appeals System
(3) Army Board of Correction of Military Records
Slide 45: Special Branch Rating Chain RequirementsFocus: Refer to AR 623-3, Appendix C (Chaplains) and Appendix D (JAGC Officers) for these Special Branch officers.
Briefly cover
Slide 46: Company Grade Form Page 1
B-1
Focus: DA PAM 623-3 Figure 2-2
Briefly discuss:The Company Grade Evaluation will be used for 2LTs through CPT and WO1s through CW2. 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 it pertains to “PERFORMANCE” only.
Slide 47: Rater Assessment Company Grade Form Page 2
B-1
Focus: DA PAM 623-3 Figure 2-2
DA Form 67-10-1
Instructor NOTES:Inform the students that Page 2 of the Company Grade form is broken down into 6 different areas where the Rater will write up to “four” lines of narrative for the leadership attributes and competencies which align with the Support Form and ARDP 6-22 (Army Leadership) doctrine.
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.
Slide 48: Field Grade Form Page 1
B-1
Focus: DA PAM 623-3
DA Form 67-10-2 figure 2-3
Instructor NOTES: Briefly discuss:
The administrative data in the top third of the form is the same as the Company Grade Report.
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.
Slide 49: Rater Assessment: Field Grade From Page 2Focus: DA PAM 623-3
DA Form 67-10-2 figure 2-3
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
B-1
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.
Slide 50: Rater Recommended AssignmentsFocus:
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.
This data will assist Assignment and Career Managers in selecting the right officer for the right assignment.
Slide 51: Strategic Report (COL) Page 1
B-1
Focus:
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.
Slide 52: Strategic Report (COL) Page 2Focus:
Because the math will change, Senior Raters of Colonels, had their COL profile restarted on 1 Apr 14 for reports rendered using the 67-10. They were 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
B-1
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.
Slide 53: Strategic Report (BG) ReportFocus:
Instructor NOTES: Draw students attention to the following:
Raters and Senior Raters will comment on both “Character” and “Potential.”
Like the other three evaluation reports, this evaluation report will also be processed through HRC and ultimately to the Officer’s AMHRR.
Slide 54: Officer Rater ProfileFocus:
B-1
Instructor NOTES: 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. Remember, mailing an evaluation is like writing a check. Your bank does not know you have written a check until it arrives and gets deducted.
Slide 55: Rater Managed Profile Labeling RulesFocus:
B-1
Draw student’s attention to the slide:
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 #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.
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.
Slide 56: Example Rater Profile Calculator/TrackerFocus:
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 67-10. This unofficial worksheet should mirror information found on the profile report. It is available thru Evaluation Entry System Website www.evaluations.hrc.army.mil
B-1
Slide 57: W01-LTC Rater Profile Management CalculatorFocus:Briefly Cover
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 67-10. This unofficial worksheet should mirror information found on the profile report. POC: OER Profile Policy questions. Evaluation Systems Office, USA HRC, (502) 613-9019 (DSN: 983), [email protected].
Slide 58: What Is A Misfire?Focus:
Briefly Discuss
NOTE: Ask students if anyone has provided assistance to a senior rater regarding this topic.
B-1
As discussed on the previous slide, a documented misfire is an OER submitted to HQDA with a DA Form 67-10, Part VIa “Most Qualified” box check not supported by the senior rater profile for that grade will be labeled by HQDA as “Highly Qualified.”
Slide 59: Methods for Combating “Pooling”Focus:
Briefly Discuss
Instructor NOTES: Ask students to define “Pooling” and why is it bad?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:1. Pooling runs counter to the intent and spirit of the evaluation system.2. Discouraging Pooling will enhance fairness and equity of the system. 3. 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...
B-1
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."
Description:This activity helps everyone identify the best thoughts and actionable ideas from the session. This Group Practical Exercise will focus on the OER section of the lesson.
Objective: To allow students to reflect on the learning from the session and decide what is most relevant and important for implementation on the job.
Time: 10 minutes
Groups: Break class up into 4 Groups. Have the group identify 1 scribe per group. Identify a group spokesperson using an adult learning model. (i.e. who has the most keys on their key ring)
Materials: Piece of paper and writing instrument
Process: Each group has 20 minutes to analyze the three different reports grade plate evaluations.
Direct Level, Organizational, and Strategic. Identify the differences between the old and new. Each group has 10
minutes to present their analysis to the class.
B-1
Slide 60: Group Practical ExerciseFocus:
Slide 60: Learning ObjectiveFocus:
Appendix ATLO 2.0 – Determine Essential Personnel Services Requirements Module Assessment Plan
B-1
Module AssessmentContribution to
Group WorkWritten
CommunicationOral
CommunicationModule
Post-Assessment TOTAL
30% NA 10% 60% 100%
ELO 2.1 Interpret Military Pay and AllowancesELO 2.2 Review Enlisted Promotions SystemsELO 2.3 Review the Evaluation Reporting SystemELO 2.4 Review the Awards and Decorations ProgramELO 2.5 Integrate Identification Card Processing
Contribution to Group Work. See SLC Contribution to Group Work Rubric for specific grading criteria.
Written Communication. NA.
Oral Communication. See SLC Oral Communication Rubric for specific grading criteria.
Module Post-Assessment. A comprehensive post-assessment consisting of multiple-choice, matching, fill-in-the-blank and ordering questions will be administered via Blackboard Academic Suite upon completion of the module
B-1
