Evaluations: What Doctrine Really Says.

The Army evaluation system is intended to make or break careers. Doctrine is very clear about this. AR 600-23 (The Evaluation Reporting System), says very clearly in paragraph 1-8(a)2:

(2) The ERS identifies Soldiers who are best qualified for promotion and assignment to positions of greater responsibility. The ERS also identifies Soldiers who will be kept on active status , retained in grade, or eliminated from military service.

If you don't take your evaluations and those of your subordinates seriously, everything about your career is in jeopardy.

Both Department of The Army and State (for National Guard Soldiers) use Evaluations as the primary (sometimes only) source for deciding promotions, command selections, school attendance and other placements. Many a Soldier has been told “it’s your career, you manage it” when discussing responsibilities for getting evaluations completed. While there is truth to that, completing ratings is, by regulation, the responsibility of raters and senior raters.

But who has what responsibilities, and what are the requirements? AR 600-23 (The Evaluation Reporting System) paragraph 1-4(b) outlines a lot of responsibilities. Some select snippets from 1-4(b) with emphasis on a couple of points added in italics:

1-4(b). Commanders and commandants at all levels, and the Chief, National Guard Bureau (NGB) will ensure that—

(3) Reports are prepared and completed by the rating officials designated in the published rating scheme.

(4) Rating chains correspond as nearly as practicable to the chain of command or chain of supervision in a timely manner and do not promote an elevation of the rating chain beyond the senior rater's ability to have adequate knowledge of each Soldier’s performance and potential, in order to provide an elevated assessment protection for a specific group, commonly referred to as “pooling”. Pooling runs counter to the intent of the ERS and is prohibited. Senior raters must evaluate and identify their best Soldiers based on performance and potential, regardless of the particular position they occupy.

(5) Rating schemes for Soldiers receiving OERs and NCOERs show the rated Soldier’s name, indicate the effective date for each designated rating official, and are published within the unit and made accessible, either manually or electronically, to each rated Soldier and each member of the rating chain. Any changes to rating schemes will also be published and distributed. No changes may be retroactive[…]

(6) For the Army National Guard (ARNG) (not Active Guard Reserve (AGR) or full-time National Guard duty), official rating schemes are published by name, should include duty position, and be posted in the unit so all Soldiers are familiar with their rating chain. The published rating schemes will include the effective date of each of the rating officials in the rating chain. The rating scheme for all ARNG or AGR Soldiers will be by name.

(7) Rating officials give timely counseling to subordinates on professionalism and job performance, encouraging self-improvement, when needed. [Editors note: Support forms have space dedicated to documenting such counselings].

(8) Each rating official personally knows how the subordinates whom they evaluate performed during the rating period.

(11) Each rated Soldier is provided a copy of their rater’s and senior rater’s support forms (or equivalent) at the beginning of the rating period and their completed evaluation report at the end of the rating period (does not apply for students receiving AERs).

(14) Local submission procedures support senior raters’ responsibility (OER and NCOER) and schools’ responsibility (AERs) to ensure that completed evaluation reports arrive at HQDA no later than 90 days after the “Thru” date of the evaluation report, or as stipulated in a military personnel (MILPER) message announcing an HQDA-level selection board […].

So, the big take-aways from 1-4(b)

· Rating chains correspond as nearly as practicable to the chain of command or chain of supervision

· Pooling runs counter to the intent of the ERS and is prohibited.

· Each rated Soldier is provided a copy of their rater’s and senior rater’s support forms (or equivalent) at the beginning of the rating period and their completed evaluation report at the end of the rating period

· Rating schemes show the rated Soldier’s name, indicate the effective date for each designated rating official, and are published within the unit and made accessible.

· The rating scheme for all ARNG or AGR Soldiers will be by name.

· Each rated Soldier is provided a copy of their rater’s and senior rater’s support forms at the beginning of the rating period

· Evals need to be submitted to HQDA within 90 days of the thru date.

Want to evaluate evaluation doctrine deeper? Read AR 600-23 here.