Selection Board feedback (CTN)



Evaluation Writing Guide

The factors for consideration at a CPO Selection Board emphasize “sustained superior performance”. There are many different factors used to evaluate “sustained superior performance” and the following provides insight into those factors.

1. Well documented leadership. Well documented means just that, it is evident to the reader. A Sailor filling the role of a Department/Division/Asst LPO or CPO should have that duty identified initially in Block 29 (primary duty block). Often, Sailors who fill these roles had the position listed as a collateral duty. It’s helpful for the board when the number of personnel led is easily identified. The following are examples:

Div LPO Workcenter 310 LPO-12. Led 15 Sailors performing...

LCPO Acting Admin LCPO-4. Led 10 Sailors and 3 civilians in...

Sailor’s filling leadership positions should have the accomplishments of that leadership documented in Block 43. It is equally important for Sailors not filling LPO/LCPO roles to also have leadership documented. The Sailor may serve in the capacity as Team Leader, Watch Section Supervisor, Workcenter Supervisor or other leadership roles through collateral duties. There is an expectation that the effects/impact of the individual’s leadership (through whatever means) be expressed in Block 43 with impact in relation to mission accomplishment.

Sailors serving as officers within their First Class Petty Officers Association (or other similar organizations) are demonstrating leadership so an officer elected by his/her peer group was viewed as an opportunity for leadership.

Use of action words such as “Led”, “Supervised”, “Managed”, “Organized”, “Implemented” etc. to capture the reader’s attention and explain the action. Keep the fluffy stuff to a minimum and get straight to the point! There is no need to start every bullet with a descriptor such as “Technical Expert” or “Deckplate Leader”. Descriptors waste space and add nothing to the overall quality of the write-up.

2. Subordinate development. The goal of every selection board is to identify the very best Sailors for advancement to Chief Petty Officer and one of the main qualities desired in a Chief is subordinate development. Subordinate development can be closely linked to leadership however it may be categorized differently. Subordinate development can include such items as:

- Sailors selected as SOM/BJOQ/BJOY/JSOQ/JSOY (or any other similar program), meritorious advancement

- Improvements in PFA, retention, advancement rates

- Professional and personal qualifications obtained: primary/secondary warfare, watch station, advanced watch station, industry certifications, etc.

- Participation in off-duty education

- Facilitating Career Development Boards

- Serving as a Mentor

- Awards and special recognition earned

- Facilitating PO Selectee Leadership courses

Subordinate development may also include on-the-job or watch station training that enhances the capability to accomplish the mission.

3. Collateral Duties. Execution and familiarization with collateral duty programs is essential and Chiefs are expected to manage these programs. A diverse Sailor has held a variety of collateral duties and shows willingness to explore outside their prescribed ‘comfort’ zone. Selection boards are interested in how the Sailor executes the collateral duty, not the amount of duties they hold. Boards look at the scope of responsibility for collateral duties in terms of Command, Department, or Division. Obviously, command duties carry the most impact however department level duties for large departments (such as Supply Department onboard an aircraft carrier) was also favorable. Sailors who stuck with the collateral duty(s) they were comfortable with/good at during multiple tours showed limited diversity.

There were some Sailors who chose not to hold collateral duties. Although these Sailors may be particularly good at their jobs they didn’t seek additional responsibilities outside of that while there were other Sailors who worked equally as hard and also successfully executed collateral duties. Consider the board precepts – Fully Qualified and Best Qualified. Bottom-line on collateral duties is that is isn’t the number held; it is the impact the Sailor achieves as a result of their execution and initiative. Holding different collateral duties is better than keeping the same one for long periods or rolling back into the same collateral duty at another assignment. Leadership and subordinate development can be accomplished through a collateral duty.

While describing collateral duty accomplishments in Block 43, be sure to not let those accomplishments over shadow the mission. Make sure to highlight the most important items. A Sailor whose Block 43 mostly describes performance in a collateral duty makes a board wonder what the Sailor actually did with their primary job(s). Here are some examples of major collateral duties:

- Warfare Program Coordinator

- DAPA

- CMEO

- UPC

- SAPR

- CFL

- MWR

- CFS

- CACO

- ADAMS Facilitator

- CTT

- CAT

- Suicide Prevention

- Mentorship

- Duty Section Leader

4. Technical Performance. Evaluations must document how well the Sailor performs at his/her job and how their accomplishments contributed to the success of the command in execution of its mission, tasks and functions. Boards expect to see how effectively each Sailor performed at their primary duty, particularly the demonstration of technical proficiency. Each community asks a lot of their Chiefs, not to just be good leaders but also technical experts in their rate. When making recommendations for selection, a board considers documented technical achievements. The expectation is that Sailors demonstrate both their abilities to lead as well as operate in challenging technical environments.

5. Rankings. Competitive, numerical rankings within a summary group are helpful! Some evaluations are written with a Sailor assigned an EP promotion recommendation but do not have an assigned numerical rank. Numerical rankings also help a board see progression within the peer group and therefore ranking within the MP group is important and strongly encouraged. My recommendation is to numerically rank all Sailors at or above the summary group average.

There may be occasions when the individual’s numerical ranking does not equal to the size of the summary group. If the Sailor is being ranked competitively under the same Reporting Senior who manages multiple UICs, the use of soft breakouts is highly encouraged. Soft breakouts are useful for personnel assigned to Joint commands. For example:

Ranks #2 of 7 and #4 of 145 across three UICs.

(Where Summary Group size is 1 of 1) Ranks #1 of 23 multiservice personnel assigned to my staff.

Soft breakouts are helpful for a Sailor’s transfer evaluation, especially if the Sailor transfers prior to the periodic report. The soft breakout provides a board a measure of where the Sailor would have ranked if available for the periodic report. For example:

If competitively ranked, would easily be my #2 of 30 outstanding First Class Petty Officers.

6. Rotation. Follow the appropriate sea/shore or CONUS/OCONUS rotation as prescribed. Special programs that cause an expected ‘break’ in rotation are not considered negatively. For example, Cryptologists assigned to programs such as MECAP/MESAP/ION Operator/Trainer are expected to break normal rotation due to program requirements and this is understood by the board.

7. Command/Community Involvement. This category is similar to paragraph 3, Collateral Duties. Given the circumstance and assignment, leadership can be a bi-product of a Sailor’s command/community involvement. Involvement in command and/or community events should not over shadow mission related accomplishments. Collateral duties may not be available for each Sailor so command/community involvement is another way for the Sailor to seek additional responsibilities.

8. Education. Document pursuit of or completed education, professional development courses, certifications, etc. in the evaluation (Block 44). There are a number of Sailors who have completed a college degree(s) and/or who hold industry certifications. These should be documented in the Sailor’s record. As with collateral duties and command/community involvement, Sailors who perform particularly well at their primary jobs but didn’t take the opportunity to pursue education or professional development while others in their peer group did was again a consideration of Fully Qualified vs. Best Qualified for selection.

9. Cats & Dogs

a. One tour/evaluation wonders. A quick review of a Sailor’s record will usually show whether or not the Sailor has performed consistently. Exceptional performance during one reporting cycle or at one duty station does not show sustained superior performance. Similarly, an Individual Augmentee assignment is not a silver bullet for selection. Also keep in mind that just because a Sailor was ranked higher than another in one command’s evaluation cycle doesn’t mean the Sailor had a stronger, overall better record than the other. Again, sustained superior performance over a period of time, not a one hit wonder!

b. Action, benefit, results. Constructing good evaluation bullets is very important. Good bullets focus on the action, state the benefits of the actions and quantify the results. Don’t waste time writing fluffy statements about how great/wonderful a Sailor is without telling the board why. Focus efforts to ensure the impact is made and is evident to the reader. Here are some examples of action, benefit, results style bullets:

Action: Led 8 Sailors during rescue/repair detachment of

Sun King 601 following an engine fire.

Benefit: Managed removal and replacement of starboard engine, propeller assembly and wing flaps

Results: returning aircraft to FMC 5 days ahead of schedule saving $1.5M in contract labor.

- Led 8 Sailors during rescue/repair detachment of Sun King 601 following an engine fire. Managed removal and replacement of starboard engine, propeller assembly and wing flaps, returning aircraft to FMC 5 days ahead of schedule saving $1.5M in contract labor.

Action: Led 6 assistants revitalizing the squadron's Urinalysis testing program.

Benefit: Improved program's procedural and administrative controls in less than 30 days,

Results: resulting in 100% compliance with testing procedures and enforcing Navy's ZERO tolerance policy

- Led 6 assistants revitalizing the squadron’s Urinalysis testing program. Improved program’s procedural and administrative controls in less than 30 days, resulting in 100% compliance with testing procedures and enforcing Navy’s ZERO tolerance policy.

c. Say what you mean. Do not leave interpretation up to the board. If a Sailor deserves to be advanced to the next highest paygrade, then say it! However, if the Sailor isn’t ready then also say it! Statements like, “IF YOU ONLY PROMOTE ONE ADC, PETTY OFFICER SMITH IS THE ONE! READY NOW FOR IMMEDIATE ADVANCEMENT TO CHIEF PETTY OFFICER!” tells the board the Sailor has received strong command endorsement for selection. If the Sailor declines in performance from one evaluation period to another explain it in Block 43. It is recommended to document PFA failures in Block 43. Don’t send mixed signals to the board and read the evaluation as if you were someone reading it for the first time. If there is possibility for confusion then assume a board will be confused and make sure to clarify it. When putting bullets together, keep like themes together in the same sentence. Don’t write about how the Sailor’s analytical ability enabled successful exploitation of a target and in the very next sentence, same bullet, and talk about their successes as an Assistant Command Fitness Leader.

d. Manage the white space. Effective utilization of white space is always a topic of discussion. Some commands consistently design Block 43 with white space (“opening-blank line-content-blank line-closing”). It is my opinion that if a Rater can’t fill 18 lines for an entire year’s worth of performance then the Sailor probably didn’t do enough. Don’t add excess fluff in order to make the write-up look “full”. A board needs to see the actions, benefits, results. There is no problem leaving white space for Sailors who didn’t do enough. Raters should have the flexibility to fill Block 43 as needed. I would recommend against sacrificing or removing content from the evaluation in order to make white space or for ascetics. Duties and responsibilities in Block 29 need to be explained in Block 43 and failing to highlight a Sailors performance due to command white space ‘policy’ may hurt the Sailor when compared to their peers. Boards typically grade and evaluate a Sailor’s record on content; no credibility can be given to a job or collateral duty if there is no substance to support it.

e. Individual correspondence to the board. Preferably, have someone who’s served on an enlisted selection board review your record and correspondence package you plan to submit. Make sure there are no gaps in evaluation continuity. Gaps and missing documents tell a board the Sailor didn’t take the time to properly and thoroughly review their record. Review your OMPF and ESR. IMPORTANT: If you are going before a selection board and there are significant transactions in your ESR that are not in your OMPF, submit printed copies of the ESR pages with your package to the board. Packages are not required if your record is current. Selection boards see OMPF, PSR and your correspondence. They do not see SMART transcripts, ESR or ETJ.

f. Common Evaluation Weaknesses.

- Adverse matter poorly explained or buried in the write-up

- Missing evaluations.

- Operational tours, no warfare pins, no qualifications

- NJP within the last 5 years

- PFA failures

- No competitive rankings

- Consistently below Reporting Senior’s Cumulative

Average/Summary Group Average

- Promotion recommendation and write-up contradict each

other

- Creative write-ups that do not describe potential for

advancement

- Evaluation concentrates on technical aspects

- No documented leadership

- No collateral duties

- No command involvement

- Guess work in evaluation write-ups

- Opportunity to get a secondary warfare qualification but

didn’t

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download