Has anybody successfully submitted an appeal against a falsified NCOER?

Personally, I think the rater needs to learn how to spell first. The bullets are poorly written and does not explain where the NCO needs improvement, only the incident. The NCOER as a whole does not have any thought process to it and looks like it was slapped together at the last minute. In addition, the rater looked as if he/she wrote the NCOER based on a personal bias and not a professional observation.

I looked at this and I think there is a huge problem - if this person is so bad and has done these things on the reverse side how can the person meet all Army Values with a Yes? This would be the first flag to me. The second is the ALC, why send this Soldier to ALC - process for elimination if so poor. The third would be the counseling - as a senior rater I would like to see ALL the counseling done on the habitual tardiness, the misplaced weapon, the disrespect, etc. The fourth would be the UCMJ that would accompany this - to help rehabilitate the Soldier you need to have strong direction and some strong counseling. Seems that all of this is missing or at least necessary for such an evaluation - I don't know the situation or if it is warranted but these are the flags to me.

If this is even a real NCOER (I have to be suspect given the "insert unit here" on the first page) the wrong on this is astounding. In this day and age, without supporting documentation, and I mean extensive documentation, this won't make it past the S-1. That being said, it almost appears as if this was written by a substandard leader on his way to his new assignment and his last act of screwing a subordinate that he had a grudge against. I have a hard time believing this made it past the 1SG.

With the new system the quartly's are also done online but as far as appeal get with s1 and call hrc

There are too many discrepencies on this. 1SG should have kicked this back quick. Anything negative on an NCOER needs counseling statement to back it up and should have been submitted with it

this soldier would of been better off just copying and pasting generic bullets. at least get examples.

This is one of those thing you want to see the complete story, Who ever put this NCOER, as an example of bad work, needs to complete the information giving, at least right what he has done to help that soldier and the rest of the story of the thing he said bad about the soldier, when thing go on display wrong people tent to take it as they see it. There are a bunch of mistakes, but we need to know the story. While serving the military as an NCO,,, I had my times of bad soldiers that I had to let go, I tried and it was better to just send them home, at the same talking I had soldiers that I requested for them to go to school and promotion as soon as graduating from the academy. Good leaders do everything necessary to help their people. It is simple do the right thing by your soldiers.

Hmmmm

Documentation would be the first thing that I would look for in the form of when / what corrective actions were taken and all of the corresponding information which would include the dates, infractions... etc. This would substantiate both sides, the appealer and the appellate body.


I don't know if this was the original or a reproduction but several things should have raised red flags for whoever read this. They should have known when their counseling dates were or questioned why they weren't added. The Army values don't match the comments, the bullets do not reflect nor give enough information. Substantiation should be a key in any evaluation otherwise nonfactual/falsified information could be presented.

Looks good