How are "no box check" OERs evaluated by promotion boards?

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 08 Oct 2015 05:51:10 -0400

Let's assume the senior rater block check is the one and only important thing that determines promotion v. non-promotion for Army officers. It is fairly clear from the commentary that 3/5 MQ/ACOM is the standard for a decent shot at promotion to LTC (with clear outliers as in any bell curve with presumably folks with 0/5 or BCOMs getting promoted and folks with 5/5 and 4/5 not being promoted) and perhaps more selective for promotion to COL. Best I can tell, the policy of "no block checks" for company grade officers existed from 2004 to 1 Oct 2011. With this year's PZ group being YG99, and assuming most folks receive an OER annually, it seems fairly likely that most YG99 had at least one “no box check” OER in their last 5 OERs, and that some YG99 officers who did any sort of training or education that did not result in an OER (ie, graduate school, ILE, etc, etc, etc) from 2010-2015 likely had two or more “no box check” OERs in their last 5 OERs. For YG00, it seems fairly likely that a lot of folks will have one or more “no box check" OERs in their last 5 OERs, although the numbers would presumably be less than YG99.

So, how do Board members evaluate “no box check” OERs? All the discussion we see about promotion focuses on senior rater box checks and the quasi-requirement that 3/5 puts one in good standing for promotion. If one or more OERs in the last 5 were “no box check,” though, how do Board members read these?

I’d guess that Board members look for stratification in the senior rater comments and rely a bit more on rater comments for these “no box check” OERs.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Oct 8 at 2015 10:33 AM

CAPT Kevin B. — Thu, 08 Oct 2015 10:33:16 -0400

A bit out of my lane having only sat Navy junior/senior boards. For stuff that's common over a period of time, the precepts should cover that with some sort of "not be disadvantaged" clause. Reviewing officers spend some time correlating the boxes, checks, and numbers to the narrative and the calculated reporting senior average over time. We had an "average reset" which meant we had to juggle the before and after result as well. You should be able to go to the promotion web site and read up on prior year precepts and board members. If you know one who'd give you the time of day, a polite question is OK. Whenever there's a change in how things are done, that ripples for 5-10 years or until it isn't relevant anymore. Typically 3/4ths the performance weight is on your current rank vs. prior. Decorations beyond the EOT fruit salad are nice booster shots. Presuming there was no direction to Reporting Seniors to amend priors, then I'd expect "no blockers" to be in good company and likely not harmed.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2015 8:11 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 11 Oct 2015 08:11:32 -0400

The verbiage is important. The ideal verbiage would include "promote BZ.... Top 1 or 2% of officer ever served with. My number 1 or 2 commanders( or whatever other position you have comparatively to your peers).... Place in command now.... Send to SSC (or any other higher education schooling)...."

The verbiage should always Include enumeration compared to peers; promotion potential; school potential; and command or next job potential.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 13 at 2015 5:23 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:23:09 -0400

01 YG Former HRC guy here. You basically have all the facts correct here. The answer based on my experience, comes down to exclusive language. For instance, a comment such as "the best officer I rate, of 5" along with SR comments such as, "one of the two best officers I senior rate, and the best logistician with whom I have served" would be an acom equivalent write up.
Generic language such as "outstanding performance" would be COM quality.
SR is the most valued commentary, and KD positions are viewed more highly than others.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 13 at 2015 10:26 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 13 Oct 2015 22:26:51 -0400

Am a former assignment officer and someone who has sat on a board, I agree with what you have said up to the rely on rater comments for the no block check. Board members will rely on the words used by the senior rater but will also rely on the assessment of the overall flavor of the board. Board members do not count OERs, so it is not as simple as did this guy have three ACOMs, if so, promote. They will look at all of the OERs and score the file accordingly. Now applying some qualitative and quantitative assessments after the board recesses shows that in order for a board file to receive an average score that placed it above the promote cut line, there may need to be at least three above center of mass OERs in the file in to make LTC. But also the issue of when the OERs were received, how long was the rating period, what jobs did the office receive the good reports and which jobs did he earn a vanilla report. All of that goes into the board member assessment. Unfortunately, no block check OERs can carry the same weight as an AER if not stratified with above center of mass type comments. Since most no block check OERs may be the last OERs reviewed in the file (the board members see the most recent first) overall effect is minimal compared to your MAJ OERs, meaning the OER will probably not give you the benefit of the doubt, unless it is clearly an ACOM written report.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 15 at 2015 5:02 AM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 15 Oct 2015 05:02:24 -0400

I would assume that all those who are sitting on the board have had to write No Box Check OERs so they would know the tricks of the trade in evaluating what equates to a box check. The good news is that there are no profiles for those and the write ups could be equivalent to ACOM.

Response by LTC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2015 7:43 AM

LTC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 18 Oct 2015 07:43:59 -0400

Great discussion, I am a YG 94 officer so I have always had the box check, as a Battalion Commander I struggled with getting my profile back in order when I started having to box check LTs again. I participated in a state level board that was run the same way as a retention board for CO grade officers and I have to agree with most of the comments I have already read. An officer's picture is probably the most important part of the file, followed by their ORB. Both can give an impression in just a few seconds. The next thing I looked at were the OERs from the officer's KD assignments, this normally confirmed or denied what I had already thought of when I looked at the photo and ORB. My advise: don't settle for a poor photo, get a good haircut and have someone look over your uniform before hand. Also have a senior officer look over your ORB, they can help by pointing out things you may have overlooked.