You Decide: NCOER - An NCO Fails APFT/ABCP During Rated Period

CSM Mike Maynard — Sat, 21 Dec 2013 23:21:56 -0500

You are the Rater and one of your NCOs fails (performance/effort related) either APFT/ABCP during the rated period. Within a few months (before the Thru date) they are able to meet the Army Standard.<div><br></div><div>Are they a "Needs Improvement" for failing?<br></div><div>Are they a "Needs Much Improvement" for failing?</div><div>Are they a "Success" for improving from failure to passing?</div><div>Are they a "Success" because the were in a passing status at the Thru Date?</div><div><br></div><div>There is no regulatory answer - How and where do you annotate the performance, or lack thereof on the NCOER?</div>

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Dec 21 at 2013 11:26 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Sat, 21 Dec 2013 23:26:49 -0500

Success for passing.  I wouldn't say needs improvement for failing because they already improved.

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Dec 22 at 2013 2:07 AM

CW2 Joseph Evans — Sun, 22 Dec 2013 02:07:10 -0500

Success <br>o Improved by 30 points from a 176 to a 206 on their APFT during this rating period.<br>o Improved ABCP reducing BF% by 5%<br><br>Quantified improvement bullet... Leave it to the board members to determine if it represents potential for improvement in the future, or a pattern of inconsistent work ethic.<br>

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2013 2:11 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 22 Dec 2013 02:11:14 -0500

I would have to say needs improvement. Sure the NCO "finally" passed the Army requirements before the rating period ended. That doesn't change the fact that during the rating period they failed. An NCOER is intended to cover the entire rating period. At some point in 12 months they failed to be a physically fit NCO. Some people would say they did improve; I would say the needs improvement would imply next rating period go the whole rating period without failing the standard. It is not about the standard you are meeting on the thru day of your NCOER; it is the standard you uphold the entire rating period.

Response by Jordan Gaudard made Dec 22 at 2013 3:53 AM

Jordan Gaudard — Sun, 22 Dec 2013 03:53:48 -0500

The problem with this question is there is a lot of information missing. Are they a Soldier than consistency fails? Did they go on 30 days of leave and come back and fail? If it was a normal PT test, first time fail I would say Needs improvement. If they fail all the time, Needs much Improvement. If they are generally a good NCO, good at PT but just had an off day, lots of leave, got back from deployment, etc. Success. I do think everyone should get one for free.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2013 6:42 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 22 Dec 2013 06:42:32 -0500

Let's not forget that the NCOER form rates both physical fitness AND military bearing in the same category. I feel that the individual should receive a 'success' as long as it was annotated appropriately, for example: Soldier improved a failing APPT score XX points during rated time achieving a passing score on most recent APFT. I feel this shows improvement while letting anyone who views the NCOER that at one time for some reason said individual was not meeting the basic requirements of being a Soldier. That's just my two cents, CSM.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2013 8:05 AM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 22 Dec 2013 08:05:10 -0500

I speak from ignorance since I have never been involved in the Army rating process; but I feel there are parallels with the Air Force rating method. The differences in opinion that I am reading here is exactly why I always hated the methods I had to use. I require standards to be met 24/7; a failure to meet standards is not acceptable at any time. We will not be the ones to choose when the crisis hits; allowing substandard performance is a risk. I will not allow risk which I can control; all said I make my expectations known immediately upon arrival and my expectations start on the day I give them. I could, at best, give a "needs improvement" level of rating.

Response by SFC Rocky Gannon made Dec 22 at 2013 8:59 AM

SFC Rocky Gannon — Sun, 22 Dec 2013 08:59:35 -0500

Well, I am sure some of you will disagree with me, but that is what makes this forum such a great forum that we can get our points across and have a disagreement.

I would have to give the NCO a needs improvement, the NCOER will show PASS and the Yes in the APFT HT/WT data. I would put a bullet in there improved APFT for 140 to 220 showing that there was improvement during the rating period and also a bullet showing the s/he fail a record APFT during the rating period.

We have to remember that we are as the rater have to ensure that standards are meet during the entire rating period. Not just at the end, or at the 10 month mark as to try and get that success. The report is for the entire 3-12 months of the rating and we have to look at the entire rating period, the whole soldier concept and remember we have to paint the picture for the board, is this person ready to move up to the next level and be our peer, or even our superior?? Standards are set by the Army for people to meet at all time, and come on, we all know that 180, 60 in each even is not that hard of a standard to meet at any given time. It would be no different then someone getting a DUI during the rating period, but then completes ASAP, enrolled in A/A and is now sober for 6 moths during the 12 month rating period, would they get a success or Excellent?

Ok and last thing, and not being a "Cut throat" what if it is you and this person both up for promotion, and you never had a failing PT score, always meet Ht/WT and this person gets promoted because you said, Told the Board, that this person is a standards bearer and they selected him over you, now can you work for that person?

Response by CPT Daniel Walk, M.B.A. made Dec 22 at 2013 9:16 AM

CPT Daniel Walk, M.B.A. — Sun, 22 Dec 2013 09:16:57 -0500

It has to be ambiguous. At the rater and senior rater level, you must be able to consider the total Soldier. Was the failure an abnormality for the NCO? Is his / her performance normally good. What about the performance of subordinates? You can't forget that as an NCO the job is also about training. If he failed one test, while having a respectably high organizational average, then a success may be the best answer.

This is why raters and senior raters must take our system more seriously that we seem to.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2013 11:58 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 22 Dec 2013 23:58:52 -0500

Under Part IVc I would annotate Needs Improvement (some) with a bullet that simply says "failed to maintain the standards IAW AR 600-9 during this rating period"

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Dec 23 at 2013 12:12 AM

SGM Matthew Quick — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 00:12:06 -0500

"Success" because they passed the (most recent) test(s).

The failing action should be documented on the NCOER Support form (at least) and a detailed counseling statement.

If the annotation of a failing test could impact a future NCOER with a "Needs Improvement" and may most likely cause separation or denial of continued service would not provide the motivation to want to overcome, I'm not sure what would.

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Dec 23 at 2013 12:24 AM

CW2 Joseph Evans — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 00:24:17 -0500

One of the situations here correlates to another question that has been asked.
If an NCO/leader fails an APFT/ABCP do you give him time to recover or relieve him?
If you relieve him, there is an accompanying Relief for Cause NCOER/OER based on the APFT/ABCP failure. There will be a needs improvement, at least one no bloc on Army Values and a 3/3 or 4/3 from the senior rater and the Soldier might as well resign or put in a 4187 requesting reassignment before his next rating comes due unless you are targeting for release from the Army.
If you allow him to recover, you are showing compassion and are expecting it to be repaid in kind, whether it is in their leadership style with subordinates or diligence in future tasks assigned to them. How do you/they maintain the standards in their section while they are "recovering" when everyone knows he got a "freebie"? Does the NCO have enough redeeming qualities to have the loyalty of his section while he corrects his deficiency?
Furthermore, if you have two NCOs that have failed, are you applying your decision equitably? Are you firing or retaining both? Are you letting one go while keeping the other? If so, why?
Was the APFT/ABCP administered properly? The CSM's other question regarding a failed APFT where the NCO broke their leg? Is this the failure you are basing a decision to relieve/retain him? or the basis for your annotation on their evaluation?

Rater/Senior Rater/Commander's discretion is always the rule. Does this mean that it is applied equitably across the force? Absolutely not, far from it actually. But when you look at this Soldier, as their leader, do you see them as that 2/1 Soldier in relation to their peers? or are they that 3/3 that needs to move on?

Response by SFC Michael Welker made Dec 23 at 2013 2:08 AM

SFC Michael Welker — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 02:08:38 -0500

If they happen to over come the failure during the rating period you cannot mark them a needs improvement on Apft because he met the standard before the period was over. Simply put by regs he is qualified. Now you should ask yourself is he among the best. Is he on a level playing field with his peers. Certainly not! There are plenty of other areas that you can show where this leader is not exceeding the standards or leading by example. What core values has this NCO forgone to allow themselves to even be put into this situation? What part of the NCO Creed is this NCO not living up too? The NCOER is designed to be challenging. If your are properly assessing your junior NCOs then you are forced to look deep and hard at every section of the evaluation as it truly pertains to this mentor of Soldiers on a daily basis. If like many NCOs you wait until it is due than you have not professionally or justly evaluated this NCO's potential. You do the NCO, your Soldiers and your unit a great disservice. To back up a bit; what led the NCO to this outcome, what enabled them to overcome? What did you do to effect the situation? If you just played lip service and said bad NCO, how can you have even justify a negative rating? Your Soldiers are a reflection of your leadership. "Grandma always practiced preventive medicine," did you?

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2013 3:56 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:56:45 -0500

I am noticing that people keep saying that a guy with a 300 PT that sucks at being an NCO would have a better NCOER than the Soldier that failed one PT test but is the best at every other thing the Army asks of them. I think that is the wrong way to look at it. Sure the 300 PT stud may get an excellence bullet for that but if he sucks at all other things he should get needs improvements in those areas. Being a PT stud should not mean an automatic 1/1. But a pt failure in my mind should mean an automatic needs improvement cause you cant meet the standard.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2013 8:50 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 08:50:28 -0500

Does the panel not have time to read at least the first bullet for each of the 5 areas on the NCOER? If written correctly the top bullet in each of the 5 areas should be the strongest. After reading the first bullet and viewing the overall rating in that category the panel should be able to determine if the bullet correctly reflects the given rating.

Response by SFC Ricardo Ruiz made Dec 23 at 2013 10:14 AM

SFC Ricardo Ruiz — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:14:24 -0500

To the OP per regulation NCO will receive success. I believe the NCOER system must be eliminated. I am sure every NCO In here had seen more than one NCO getting rated way over or under the truth to me that's enough not to let the paper fool the pen.  

Response by MSG Phil Herndon made Dec 23 at 2013 8:51 PM

MSG Phil Herndon — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 20:51:15 -0500

I teach my guys that this is where we are at "rater's choice". It's right to go either way. Assess the character of service and judge the potential for future of the NCO. This is where two people in the same category can be rated differently. A consistently poor performer isn't going to get rated the same way as a guy who just stepped on it once and got his stuff straight.

Response by CSM Stuart C. O'Black made Dec 23 at 2013 9:29 PM

CSM Stuart C. O'Black — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 21:29:51 -0500

<p>This question was raised on a HRC website a few years back and the remark was yes they can receive a success. Like CSM Maynard said - no regulator answer. I have a few opinions below.</p><p><br></p><p>Overall I agree they knew the standard and failed to meet it.</p><p><br></p><p>I think the total Soldier concept matters. What if he was over for just one month but had a 285 APFT score? I had a new NCO show up to my unit and I told the PSG to tape him based on his appearance. He failed and was over but lost 20 lbs in 30 days and was removed from the program. What I did not that he was a competitive body builder in the bulk phase. I know he is the exception but I am brining it up for just that point. I also told him to keep within standards at all times regardless he is still an NCO.</p><p><br></p><p>This brings to mind a second point: </p><p>If we hold the NCO responsible for his APFT/AWCP then why do very few hold them responsible for their Soldiers APFT/ABCP?  I consistently see remarks in reference to increasing APFT scores in the section or having a program that removed or reduced APFT/ABCO Soldiers from the program. If they were in charge when they did well were they not also in charge when they failed?</p><p><br></p><p><br></p><p><br></p><p><br></p><p><br></p><p><br></p>

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2013 9:41 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 21:41:45 -0500

I think in reviewing others responses and alli think that There is no clear cut answer and it is truly a matter of the leader making the judgment call based on the NCOs previous performance. The NCO could earn a success depending on the factors involved and the leaders judgements as well as a needs some improvement. Great food for thought though and another exceptional question that I can take back to my peers and fellow NCOs.

Response by SPC Corbin Doades made Dec 23 at 2013 10:02 PM

SPC Corbin Doades — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 22:02:29 -0500

CSM, I would take into consideration their past APFT/ABCPs. If they have a history of failures then I would say success but needs improvement. If they have a history of passing and this was their first fail, then I would take into account of possibly a bad day or some sort of illness and mark it as success for obtaining a passing status at the Thru Date.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2013 10:05 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 22:05:14 -0500

I would say a "Needs Improvement'. Thus explained: as a Noncommissioned Officer you are the standard bearer, and you are required to maintain yourself in a state of readiness mandated by the Army. You cant sit and counsel soldiers for failing the APFT and ABCP and not expect to be held to the same army standard. Also, as a leader you usually know when an APFT is coming up so that you and your soldiers can prepare. If there is to be any reason why a NCO fails, its because of an injury, but even then you are either on a profile or on recovery and are only limited to a diagnostic APFT.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2013 10:12 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 22:12:09 -0500

NCO meets the standard during their most recent APFT therefor they are rated as a success overall in my opinion. Although the rater could throw a comment in there for how they over came the previous failure, it's easier to just place their overall APFT score of 210 or whatever to convey to their future rating chains their true performance in that block. 

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2013 9:28 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 09:28:01 -0500

Success because they were in a passing status at the thru date.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Dec 24 at 2013 10:37 AM

SSG Robert Burns — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:37:06 -0500

It all depends on what was discussed on the NCOER support form. There are too many factors to consider. Did he fail the APFT because he sprained his ankle on the run, was feeling sick that day? Whatever. Later he corrected his deficiency and was successful.

What if he maxed his APFT earlier in the rating period but later scored a 260. Is this only a success because he didn't max it every time? I think it depends on what you established as a rater before hand. If you say you will receive and excellence if you max your APFT then he did that.

As far as the board is concerned Im not sure it makes a difference. So you have one soldier who scored 185 throughout the entire rating period and you have another who scored a 170 then 240 and 270. Are you saying that soldier needs a needs improvement? I think to the contrary he has shown improvement.

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Dec 24 at 2013 10:42 AM

SFC William Swartz Jr — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:42:49 -0500

I was "taught" and held to what the Soldiers status is/was at the end of the rating period...if they had a passing APFT score or were within reg as far as Ht/Wt and not on the Weight Control program, then they were rated Success. I can see how the individual rater could "go either" way, I think it's how that rater was "taught" by their mentors.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Dec 24 at 2013 11:46 AM

SSG Robert Burns — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 11:46:27 -0500

Just another thought. The NCOER is the RATER's opinion/perception of the rated's performance. If he feels that it needs to improve or if he feels it is successful then that is what he's rated as.

If a soldier goes from failing to maxing in a rating period, his rater may very well interpret that as an Excellence but according to what's being said here most of you would say needs improvement.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2013 8:21 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 20:21:19 -0500

It'd be a needs improvement IMO, CSM. This isn't a junior enlisted we're whipping into shape, this is a NCO, the leader of our Soldiers and I take that one a little more serious. We're the ones dictating the standards to the Soldiers under our care and for us to be out of regulation and a "SUCCESS" is a definite NO GO in my book. I just saw this at a unit I was with. The person now only gets into the standard bc they're being held accountable by an actual person. 1st line leader has completely overlooked their "friend" and you wonder how many people before this let them slide and pencil whip their APFT and H/W?? We (NCOs) have to maintain the standards, else we look like hypocrites and will have a very undisciplined organization.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2013 9:08 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:08:06 -0500

Success for improving. However, as an NCO we are to set and exceed standards if it's a growing trend the NCO has failed in pass it would be needs improvement.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2013 10:00 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Dec 2013 22:00:52 -0500

Why is the NCO so borderline that we are having this discussion, You can
not lead from the middle or rear. We are talking about physical
fitness. This is a daily event that used wisely and with a little creativity
can make your unit the best, while continuing to improve on your own
leadership ability. If his/her Soldiers respect and follow him/her, is
it out of fear, is it because he is cool and doesn't enforce standards, is the
NCO weak and someone else is really leading,
or do we have a domino effect and all the Soldiers he/she is supposed to
be leading think that he/she is the standard.
We should continue to mentor through developmental counseling. I think there are a lot of variables to consider when making a decision that could possibly impact a subordinates career. The impact could not only be promotion, but also continued service. There are many ways to reflect this performance for lack of leadership and/or competence, even if he passed his most recent APFT.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 8:30 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:30:27 -0500

CSM,

My personnel opinion CSM, I would look at the total soldier concept. Did said NCO show remorse and take responsibility for failing or did the NCO place blame on other circumstances. How much effort did they put into passing their next AFPT/ABCP?

Now to my answer if the NCO took responsibility and went the extra mile to pass the next APFT/ABCP I would make them a Success.

If they went the other route I would go with Needs Some Improvement.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 8:45 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:45:12 -0500

<div>I think the PT test should be the least important issue in the rating.  If we want an Army of Moron bodybuilders than use the PT test as most important factor.  If you want well rounded NCOs who will become well rounded 1SGs and CSMs than look at the whole person.</div><div><br></div><div>If He is an outstanding leader who struggles with PT he should be rated as an outstanding NCO.</div><div><br></div><div>How he deals with the issue is a much bigger part than the actual test.</div>

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 2:38 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 14:38:01 -0500

Success because the last APFT during the rating period was a passing score. Giving an NCO a 'Needs Improvement' is a career killer, and if they are truly a good NCO, do we want one stumble to end their career?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 2:59 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 14:59:53 -0500

After reading some of the responses and "question responses" to this thread and even responing to one responder, I have to ask the following questions.

Isn't the NCOER and OVERALL evaluation of performance during the rated period? If it isn't an overall for the period, then why do we not get an NCOER monthly instead of annually? If it is, wouldn't the failure be negated by the "come back"? No? Why not?

just some questions running through my head. Interested in your oinions.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 22 at 2014 10:53 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Jan 2014 22:53:22 -0500

Roger that! If the NCO has met and or exceeded the standard during the rating period after failing to do so in that same period; they deserve a success bullet with comments to justify.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 2 at 2014 11:39 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Feb 2014 11:39:11 -0500

if they 100% are a no-go thoughout the entire rating period, id put "needs improvement".

But going with that, you can tell when you first look at a Soldier if he is gonna be borderline on a APFT, so if you wait till 1 week before their thru date and finally give them an APFT, then your failing as a leader.

But, if you identify the problem in time, and give them time to fix themselves, they sould be fine and id give em a "success".

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 3 at 2014 11:40 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:40:53 -0500

It would depend on why they failed. I had a team leader that usually scores 80 or higher in each event. When PT Test time came around this particular SGT was at the tail end of an illness that had completely drained him. The SGT scored 72 on the pushups, 61 on the sit-ups, and failed the run by 1:07. He waited 30 days, and scored 279. The SGT is an excellent motivator and leader. He was responsible for helping one of our weaker soldiers score a 224. Given that the NCOER is for the whole year, and that this particular SGT is a great asset and a great leader, would it be responsible for me to give him a "Needs Improvement" for failing a PT Test? Absolutely not!

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 3 at 2014 11:58 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:58:45 -0500

To me it depends on the NCOs prior performance in regards to the APFT/ABCP. If the NCO consistently passes both standards and then fails either one of the two test then corrects the deficiency before the end of the rating period then I would give the rated NCO a "Success" because they were in a passing status at the time of their thru date of their NCOER. If the NCO consistently has problems with either than I would give a "Needs Improvement" with a bullet comment that reflects the NCO consistent pass fail in regards to the APFT/ABCP.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Feb 3 at 2014 4:30 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Mon, 03 Feb 2014 16:30:19 -0500

For those who say that the NCO should be reated with "Needs Improvement" what exactly does he need to improve on? In this scenario we stated that he already "improved" by passing the APFT. The rating is for his past performance not future. So if during this rating period he went from failing to passing then he has already improved. He has gone from not meeting the standard to meeting it within a rating period. Meeting the standard is successful.

Whatever you say he needs improvement for, he has already done that by now meeting the standard.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 5 at 2014 8:23 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 05 Feb 2014 08:23:30 -0500

This to me is a cut and dry answer. NCO "Needs Improvement" . This should be the honest evaluation no matter what time or part of the evaluation occured. Any Soldier regardless of rank is required to maintain a fitness standard. An APFT is the tool used to assess the standard. An NCOER is an evaluation of the entire rating period. If a Soldier failed an APFT during the rating period at any time he/she has failed to meet a standard. Okay, if the Soldier has improved during a rating period to finally pass, yes he/she has improved. However, the Soldier improved because the Soldier "Needed Improvement". Also, if the Soldier failed during the evaluation period, it is because the Soldier's physical fitness deteriorated during the evaluation period. If this didn't occur, once again the Soldier would not have failed resulting in the need to improve. When a Soldier maintains a passing APFT score throughout the evaluation period, he/she has "successfully" maintained the standard. Key word here is success.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Feb 8 at 2014 8:22 PM

SSG (ret) William Martin — Sat, 08 Feb 2014 20:22:18 -0500

I have to ask myself, how would I want my NCOER to look with respects of doing things in an ethical and morally manner.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Feb 8 at 2014 9:14 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Sat, 08 Feb 2014 21:14:15 -0500

<span style="color: rgb(77, 77, 77); font-size: 12px;">So if anyone has ever been late to work once during the entire rating period they get a needs improvement under responsibility and accountability? Seems like the same logic to me.</span>

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 9 at 2014 11:23 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Feb 2014 23:23:56 -0500

Great question CSM....To answer you question, I think it can be any of the above. As with this NCO (or Soldier or Officer for that matter), you have to look at more than just this one event.

Was this NCO a substandard performer in everything they do and just happen to pass the AFPT / ABCP this one time, or were they an exceptional performer who happened to have one bad day when they took the APFT / ABCP? How do they perform in every other aspect of their duty performance? Are they constantly leading from the front or running from behind to try and catch up?

When I was a Battery Commander, I like to think I look at the total Soldier / NCO / Officer when making these decisions. Of course, I was blessed with a phenomenal 1SG whom I'm proud to call a friend today that mentored and guided me to do the right thing when faced with these decisions.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 9 at 2014 11:39 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Feb 2014 23:39:50 -0500

Although this is not covered in the regs, the Army does cover this in another way. The simple answer is, it is a success. I use NCOESs as my go to on this one, NCOs who fail the initial may not be eligible for “Commandants List” but they still get a 1059 saying they met course standards. While we should never fail a PT test, I don’t believe in berating someone for having an off day. Having said this there is nothing wrong with counseling an NCO on a 4856 and if they guy is a consistently poor performer in physical fitness giving a needs improvement even if he passed because the NCOER should reflect your performance over the entire rating period and not just one day where you happened to either pass or fail.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 10 at 2014 8:41 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:41:18 -0500

Raters comment on PERFORMANCE. Senior Rater comments on POTENTIAL. Thus, an accurate annotation of this NCO's performance from my perspective would be: "Success" for improving from failure to passing. Whether or not a BOARD reads the bullet has less to do with the most ACCURATE portayal of this NCOs performance during the rating period.

Furthermore, when this individual NCOER is compared against other NCOERs, the pattern becomes apparent.

Response by SSG Ed Mikus made Mar 8 at 2014 7:58 AM

SSG Ed Mikus — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 07:58:53 -0500

As long as the NCO brought their score back to passing i would say they deserve a success but they would have to do a LOT to over shine that in order to not have a bullet about the failure in the eval.

I had an NCO last year fail the APFT, he not only passed his next APFT but before the rating period was over made a 250 and took over the special pops PT program and led 4 others to passing an APFT.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2014 3:53 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:53:56 -0400

Excellent question CSM and I too like Chief's response. Initially, I wanted to say that you mark a needs improvement, but a little further contemplation and I realized that the NCO has improved. I think you have to take into account the NCO's situation as well. As leaders, we have to know what's going on with our soldiers, both personally and professionally. Maybe this NCO was going through a rough patch in their personal life that caused them to temporarily drop their level of performance/effort. Knowing that they were able to overcome that and get back on the right track speaks volumes about their character and perseverance.

Response by CSM Joseph Mitchell made Mar 10 at 2014 4:27 PM

CSM Joseph Mitchell — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:27:35 -0400

It should be a success because the Soldier has a passing status at the completion on the rating period. Your comments should reflect the Soldiers performance such as Soldier failed initial APFT during rating period worked hard during rating period and passed next APFT. It can also be a needs improvement with a similar comment but with more room for the Soldier to appeal the NCOER. I feel the comments hold more weight than what selection is made of needs improvement or success etc. Again like othe rcomments if you are the rater you should know your Soldier.

Response by SSG James Doherty made Mar 11 at 2014 2:52 AM

SSG James Doherty — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 02:52:31 -0400

CSM,

This is a very situational question:

If the NCO in question has recently completed the recovery period from a long in the line of duty injury, i.e. didn't fall down the stairs drunk and break an ankle, and fails only marginally but recovers within the rating period, Success not annotating the previous failure because they recovered and met the standard if not within the allowed recovery period.

If the NCO in question has recently completed the recovery period from a long in the line of duty injury, i.e. didn't fall down the stairs drunk and break an ankle, and fails greatly but recovers within the rating period, Success anotating the previous failure because they met the standard but obviously did nothing to maintain themself during their injured time.

If the NCO has failed entirely on their own accord but meets the standard within the rating period Needs Much Improvement because NCO's are the standard bearers. If you can only meet the standard when the bottom line drops then you have no business progressing in the military and should probably face the QMP to make room for those that do uphold the standards.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2014 9:01 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:01:20 -0400

CSM-

I believe it depends entirely on the situtation behind the failure. If the NCO has recently injured themselves and failed in a large margin, showing that the NCO in question was not keeping up with his or her physical fitness while injured. Lets say they broke their arm, and they only failed the push-ups event, but came back next APFT and nearly maxed. I would see that as a "Success" for not only meetting, but surpassing the standard put before them. Take the same scenario and lets say that NCO fails the sit ups and run event, but passes push-ups. That would get a "Needs Much Improvement" for failure to maintain standard.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 20 at 2014 12:05 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Mar 2014 00:05:39 -0400

CSM, Maybe I look at it a little differently then the others. I would probably make an annotation of needs some improvement. My reasoning is that Soldiers should not be training for an APFT they should always have at a minimum a 180 in their pocket. As a 1SG I encountered a similar situation with regards to a SFC who was on the Over Weight program at the beginning of the rating period but came off prior 5 days before the end of the rating period. As his Rater, I rated him as needs some improvement and the bullet comment explained the rating as well as all his counselings. When reviewed by the CSM and the BN CDR they fully supported my rating and reasoning.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 20 at 2014 12:07 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Dec 2014 00:07:04 -0500

The new rating scheme makes this question easier to answer. I would not put someone who failed a test, even if passed the next test within the period, as one of my 49% greatly exceeds expectations.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 3 at 2015 2:30 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sat, 03 Oct 2015 14:30:56 -0400

Honesty this might not be the right answer, but I would take into consideration his whole body of work. I don't want to ruin a career if their is a lot more potential from the NCO.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2015 5:21 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 17:21:57 -0400

They would be a success for having a passing APFT score in the last 12 months and within the rating period. A passing score no matter when it was passed is none the less, a passing score. Counselings are used to note deficiencies and can determine whether a Soldiers gets promoted or not or flagged or not at the discretion of the senior leadership or commander and based upon the personal track record (so to speak) of the Soldier. I do not think you will find this in any reg (although I could be wrong), but as soon as a Soldier is successful in meeting the standard the flag should be lifted. After all, flags are in place as soon as they fail.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 4 at 2016 3:56 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Feb 2016 15:56:24 -0500

Do they "need" one, or should they get one? I have no problem with a needs improvement for an APFT during the rated period. I have no problem relieving somebody if they can't meet basic standards either.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2016 4:45 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Apr 2016 16:45:00 -0400

Definitely a success; maybe an excellence depending on how much improvement there was.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2016 1:54 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 Apr 2016 13:54:52 -0400

Sorry, I know that this has been discussed a lot over the last few days, but I have one more response. The Physical Fitness and Military Bearing portion of the NCOER isn't strictly dependent upon a person's PT test/score/failure. There are other factors that contribute to that block being rating EXCELLENT/SUCCESS/NEEDS IMPROVEMENT. OK, that was my other 2 cents