Posted on Apr 19, 2014
Please stop telling NCOs that they can't get a 1/1 on their first NCOER
40.5K
42
10
11
11
0
One of my biggest peeves about the NCOER system are people going by some weird metric that you can't get a 1/1 on your first NCOER, or your first NCOER as a SSG, so forth and so on.<div><br></div><div>That NCOER is about the CURRENT rating period. If that NCO is just awesome, then why can't they get a 1/1? Haven't people ever had a SGT that was better than all their SSGs, and so forth? I know I have.</div><div><br></div><div>They don't "need room to grow" (which I've also heard, and I'll address that). You sent them to the board presumably for a reason - you thought they could perform well as a SGT. If it's the "need to grow" thing then you better take a career NCO and give them a 5/5 because how in 10-20 years of being an NCO are they not going to get a 1/1 quickly?</div><div><br></div><div>Why do people say this? Where in the regulation does it say this? Why do people think that someone can't get a 1/1 on their first NCOER?</div><div><br></div><div>All of this being said, if you have seen my other NCOER threads or read my NCOER LPD you know that I think NCOERs are generally over-inflated. So you shouldn't just give a 1/1 because you like the guy. But it drives me nuts to hear "that's good for your first NCOER" or "you can't expect to get a 1/1 on your first NCOER".</div>
Posted in these groups: 
NCOER
Senior Rater
NCOER Senior Rater
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 6
7
7
0
Weak leadership that doesn't articulate HOW to earn certain marks during counseling...if what was required for evaluation marks it was explained during counseling, this should never been an issue.
(7)
(0)
CW2 (Join to see)
If you aren't counseled, you should approach your rater and senior rater and explain the situation.
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
There has been a misconception in the Army for the last decade or more that says that if you DON'T get a 1/1, then you are a sh*tbag NCO.
If you read AR 623-3, you will see that a 1/1 evaluation is given for those who truly excel and outshine ALL OTHER NCOs in the raters' unit. Thus, every NCO CANNOT be a 1/1, otherwise a 1/1 becomes a 3/3 because it's the "new normal."
As a former BN S-1 NCO who has seen and reviewed hundreds of NCOERs, I have seen too many 1/1 evals for NCOs who truly did not deserve them. I have seen 1/1 NCOERs that were "cut & pasted" and even got three of these cut & paste evals on the same day-- same grammatical and typo errors.
If you, as a rater, are giving out 1/1 evals to everyone, then you are doing the NCO and the entire evaluation system a disservice, as you are watering down what a 1/1 stands for.
It's kind of like an economy-- if you keep printing money with nothing to back it, then all that cash is worthless because everyone has it and it has no value.
If a brand new SGT comes in, kicks butt, volunteers, is a PT stud, is an awesome leader, and excels at his/her job, then by all means. But just doing the job is NOT a 1/1-- coming in and doing your job without getting in trouble is a 3/3. If you have new SGTs that are getting 1/1s (honestly) and your experienced SGTs are not, then your "more experienced" SGTs need to get on the ball!
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
I have to agree, if you perform and have true potential to excel in the next grade the soldier should get 1/1.
From my experience my first NCOER was 2/1 and I was rated for 6 months. However, during that rating period I filled the squad leader position for 2 1/2 months until my squad leader arrived to the unit. When it came to my EVAL he gave me what I earned a 2/1. I performed exceptionally well and had the potential to perform in the next higher rank.
From my experience my first NCOER was 2/1 and I was rated for 6 months. However, during that rating period I filled the squad leader position for 2 1/2 months until my squad leader arrived to the unit. When it came to my EVAL he gave me what I earned a 2/1. I performed exceptionally well and had the potential to perform in the next higher rank.
(5)
(0)
4
4
0
Ok, obviously you're correct that anyone can get a 1/1 at anytime. A 1/1 suggests cream of the crop and ready for the next level. A newly promoted NCO at any rank is probably not ready in a year to go to the next level...then again maybe they are.
Also a rater and a senior rater are going to compare that NCO among soldiers in the same grade...a newly promoted E5 is not going to be cream of the crop compared to 10 E5's that have been E5's for 2-3 years.
I've gotten a fair share of 1/1's and more 2/1's then that. 2/1 just says your doing great and with a little more work you are going to be a superstar at that rank and position.
The aforementioned state that you can't get a 1/1 right away or you shouldn't expect it isn't in a regulation, it's to let soldiers know that they need to work for it and it's not going to be passed out like candy. NCOERs are supposed to be a true evaluation of a soldier if they are good but compared to their peers they aren't stellar why would I give them a 1/1 because they are good for them. Nothing wrong with a 2/1, just makes me work harder!
Also a rater and a senior rater are going to compare that NCO among soldiers in the same grade...a newly promoted E5 is not going to be cream of the crop compared to 10 E5's that have been E5's for 2-3 years.
I've gotten a fair share of 1/1's and more 2/1's then that. 2/1 just says your doing great and with a little more work you are going to be a superstar at that rank and position.
The aforementioned state that you can't get a 1/1 right away or you shouldn't expect it isn't in a regulation, it's to let soldiers know that they need to work for it and it's not going to be passed out like candy. NCOERs are supposed to be a true evaluation of a soldier if they are good but compared to their peers they aren't stellar why would I give them a 1/1 because they are good for them. Nothing wrong with a 2/1, just makes me work harder!
(4)
(0)
CW2 (Join to see)
I mostly disagree, sorry. <div><br></div><div>1. Your statement about a newly promoted SGT not being better than some with 2-3 years in grade is patently false. I have had a TON of newly promoted SGTs that were better than seasoned SSGs and way better than their peers. I don't see how you can make that blanket statement and have it apple to all new SGTs. That's what I was trying to get across. That's like saying "this guy can't possibly be ready for SFC because he only has X years in the Army". </div><div><br></div><div>2. They may not necessarily be able to go after just a year but all of the performance blocks are suggestions for promotion. Just because you give someone a one doesn't mean they will immediately get promoted. So if you have a SGT filling a SSG billet better than some of his SSG peers, you're gonna give him a two because he "can't possibly" be ready? I like to rate on actual performance. I don't think time in grade has a lick to do with it. </div><div><br></div><div>And of course you aren't going to give them a 1/1 if they are worse than their peers but I'm talking about people making the blanket statement that someone can't possibly be a 1/1 on their first NCOER without evaluating anything except their time in grade. </div>
(4)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Its all about quality, and it is up to the Rater and Senior Rater to be able to distinguish what is considered among the best as opposed to who is just fully capable. If they cant tell the difference without fluffing someone up versus knowing your NCOs, counseling them quarterly on what expectations and properly documenting their strengths and weaknesses they have of them, they should be in that rating chain in the first place.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I watched a PFC in my battalion reach the rank of Staff Sergeant. As soon as he attained the rank of Sergeant he was sent to WLC, where he was awarded the Distinguished Leader Award. He also won our Battalion and placed second at our Brigade NCO of the Year competition. He was then sent to attend the promotion board for Staff Sergeant, Secondary Zone, and passed. If he cannot get a 1/1 on his NCOER, being in our backbone for less than several years then I guess he's trying too hard (Of course, I am being facetious). He also made the by name list for the month of June so I am very eager to see him progress even further as a potential SAMC candidate!
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I have always disagreed with that logic. There is a reason why the NCOER has "thru date" on it. The evaluation is based on your performance as NCO from the "from date" to the "thru date". If the NCO was deserving of a 1/1 there is no reason to give him less than the rating that he deserved.
I had a SGM tell me the same thing. My rater fixed this issue by asking the newly promoted SGM, if he would a get 2/1 based on it being his first NCOER as a SGM. Issue solved!
I had a SGM tell me the same thing. My rater fixed this issue by asking the newly promoted SGM, if he would a get 2/1 based on it being his first NCOER as a SGM. Issue solved!
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google