a. Evaluation Reporting System overview.
(1)
The Evaluation Reporting System encompasses the means and methods needed for developing people and leaders. An effective Evaluation Reporting System involves the execution of leadership, the establishment of a rating relationship with personal interaction, the conduct of developmental counseling and reviews, and the determination of critical assessments. The Army routinely reviews the Evaluation Reporting System to ensure that it remains relevant and in support of its goals.
(2)
The Evaluation Reporting System identifies Soldiers who are best qualified for promotion and assignment to positions of greater responsibility. The Evaluation Reporting System also identifies Soldiers who will be kept on active status , retained in grade, or eliminated from military service.
(3)
The Evaluation Reporting System combines major elements of counseling, assessment, documentation, and integration with other personnel functions to meet the needs of the Army, rating officials, and rated Soldiers in their current environments. Its basic foundation—to evaluate today’s Soldiers to select and develop tomorrow’s leaders—will remain consistent.
(a)
Rating officials assess a Soldier’s performance and potential against the standards of the Army Leadership Requirements Model containing attributes and competencies, the organization’s mission, and a particular set of duties, responsibilities, tasks, and objectives using a series of box checks, narratives, bullet comments, and evaluation report rating techniques (see ADP/ADRP 6–22). The intent of the Evaluation Reporting System is to drive rated Soldiers to meet or exceed the standards. While standards or techniques may change, the Evaluation Reporting System will continue to be the most accurate and effective assessment tool and development system possible. It will accomplish its mission of developing people and leaders.
(b)
All members of the rating chain, to include the rated Soldier, should participate in relationships necessary to facilitate the leadership, involvement, and developmental counseling needed for an effective Evaluation Reporting System.
(4)
Under the Evaluation Reporting System, a Soldier is evaluated on their performance and potential. The Evaluation Reporting System 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 their assigned tasks as related to the Army Leadership Requirements Model (see ADP/ADRP 6–22). 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 a Soldier will be given greater responsibility at the present rank, or whether a Soldier will be retained for further military service. Assessments of performance and potential by rating officials are extremely important factors when determining an individual’s potential for leadership compared to their peers.
(b)
School evaluations. The applicable evaluation report forms are DA Form 1059 and DA Form 1059–2 (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. For resident students in courses greater than two weeks, the time period covered by a DA Form 1059 or DA Form 1059–2 producing school will be counted as nonrated time on the OER or NCOER that covers the same period. Some instances exist for Soldiers enrolled in nonresident courses who may receive an AER assessment for the nonresident course as the same period of time of an OER or NCOER. In these nonresident course instances, the AER assessment period will not be counted as nonrated time for any due OER or NCOER. Comments pertaining to academic performance during the nonresident course will only be used on the DA Form 1059 or DA Form 1059–2 and will not be included in OERs or NCOERs.
(c)
Additional information. Selection boards and personnel management systems will be used to evaluate a Soldier’s entire career and their personnel file. Evaluation reports capture rating officials’ single time-and-place assessments. When preparing assessments, keep in mind the Soldier’s leadership potential compared with their peers; the Army’s ever-changing requirements for Soldiers with certain backgrounds, experiences, and expertise; and the Soldier’s qualifications as a leader based on demonstrated skills, specialized training, military and civilian schooling, and/or other unique skills required by the Army. The size of the Army and its leader corps is limited by law in terms of strength by grade, and the Army limits the number of selections and assignments that can be made.
b. Evaluation Reporting System principles.
(1)
The Evaluation Reporting System 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 Evaluation Reporting System places emphasis on the senior and/or subordinate communication process; the characteristics of evaluation reports ensure that leaders’ specialties are considered along with the specialty requirements of their duty positions when they are evaluated.
(2)
The Evaluation Reporting System is a multifunctional system that allows the rater to give shape and direction to the rated Soldier’s daily performance; provides a chain of command or chain of supervision assessment of an individual Soldier’s performance and potential for promotion, schooling, and successive assignments; and permits the entire evaluation reporting process to be reviewed.
c. Evaluation Reporting System functions.
(1)
The primary function of the Evaluation Reporting System is to provide information to HQDA for use in making personnel management decisions. Components of this information include the following:
(a)
Evaluation reports, which must be thoughtful and fair appraisals of Soldiers’ abilities, based on personally observed performance and potential. Each evaluation report must be accurate and complete to ensure that sound personnel management decisions can be made and that a rated Soldier’s potential can be fully developed. Evaluation reports that are incomplete or fail to provide a realistic and objective evaluation make personnel management decisions increasingly difficult.
(b)
Indoctrination of the Army Leadership Requirements Model and basic Soldier responsibilities to strengthen the Army’s ability to meet future professional challenges. The continued use of the Army Leadership Requirements Model and Soldier responsibilities as evaluation criteria provides and reinforces a professional focus for rating officials’ evaluation of performance (see ADP/ADRP 6–22).
(c)
An appraisal philosophy that recognizes a single evaluation report will not normally determine a Soldier’s Army career (“whole file” concept) and emphasizes continuous professional development and growth, will best serve the Army and the rated Soldier.
(d)
Rating chains’ views of performance and/or 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, sergeant major (SGM)/CSM designation, and overall qualitative management.
(2)
The secondary function of the Evaluation Reporting System is to encourage leader professional development and enhance mission accomplishment through sound senior and/or subordinate relationships that stress the importance of setting standards and giving direction to subordinate officer and NCO leaders. Properly used, the Evaluation Reporting System can be a powerful leadership and management tool for the rating chain.
(a)
Senior and/or subordinate communication through performance counseling is necessary to maintain high professional standards and is the key to an effective Evaluation Reporting System. Such communication contributes greatly to Armywide improved performance and professional development.
(b)
Use of required support forms by rating officials while counseling provides the basis for performance counseling. Evaluation reports give the rated Soldier formal recognition for their duty performance; calibrate a measurement of their professional values and personal traits; and assess their potential for promotion, specialized schooling, command, and/or positions of greater responsibility.
d. Evaluation Reporting System process.
(1)
Officers and their rating officials will use the DA Form 67–10 series (OER), DA Form 67–10–1A, and the electronically generated Rater and Senior Rater Profile reports, as applicable. The term “officer” refers to both commissioned officers and warrant officers, unless otherwise specified. However, rating chains will recognize the basic differences between commissioned and warrant officers when evaluating performance and potential. Appendix B describes these differences and gives the policies and instruction unique to warrant officer evaluations.
(2)
NCOs and their appropriate rating officials will use DA Form 2166–9 series (NCOER), DA Form 2166–9–1A, and the electronically generated Rater Tendency and Senior Rater Profile reports, as applicable. For corporals (CPLs), no NCOER will be prepared, only the DA Form 2166–9–1A will be used.
(3)
During the rating period, support forms and counseling sessions will aid the preparation of a final evaluation report.
(a)
The evaluation process actually starts before the rating period, when the rated Soldier’s rating chain is established by the commander, commandant, or leader of an organization, and approved by the next higher commander, commandant, or leader of an organization for two-star level commands (or equivalent organizations) and below. The AER rating chains will be established by the commandant or dean of the appropriate school or unit administration office with oversight to ensure adequate evaluation of a rated Soldier and/or student.
(b)
The rater will ensure that the rated officer or rated NCO receives a copy of the rater’s and senior rater’s support forms. These documents will provide the rated Soldier essential rating chain direction and focus to aid in developing their support form. A face-to-face discussion of duties, responsibilities, and objectives between the rater and the rated Soldier assists in drafting the initial support form(s).
e. Initial counseling.
Counseling will be conducted within 30 days after the beginning of the rating period, and quarterly thereafter, for NCOs, WO1s, chief warrant officers two (CW2s), lieutenants (LTs) (includes first lieutenants (1LTs) and second lieutenants (2LTs)), and captains (CPTs). Counseling for all other grades will be on an as-needed basis. It is helpful to develop a duty description for the Soldier and identify major performance objectives to accomplish during the rating period. Counseling will also be used to guide the rated Soldier’s performance during the early part of the rating period. Use of the appropriate support form for grades WO1 through colonel (COL) and NCOs is mandatory and required in conjunction with counseling.
f. Rating chain and form processing.
Support forms and evaluation reports will reflect the rating officials published in the official rating scheme (see para 2–3). DA Pam 623–3 explains what information is required for each form and how rating officials can accomplish the process from the initial performance counseling to the submission of a complete and accurate evaluation report to HQDA.