Need Help with Assessments on an EPR

Maj Matt Hylton — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 13:58:45 -0500

Any advice on this situation would be appreciated. I'm going to keep this as generic as possible. I'm currently reviewing an EPR where I am in the chain, but not the rater/additional rater (I'm a few steps below the Commander).

Case - member has a UIF, multiple LORs/LOCs, verbal counseling, etc. in his PIF for a couple different items. This is reflected by an assessment of "Does Not Meet" in Section III, Area 2 (Standards, Conduct, Character & Military Bearing). The other areas are rated "Above Average" (I think one of those may be generous and am really leaning towards another being a "meets"). For anyone unfamiliar with Air Force EPRs, the other areas are 1 - Primary/Additional Duties; 3 - Fitness; 4 - Training Requirements; 5 - Teamwork/Followership; & 6 - Other Comments.

First I know this should automatically generate a referral EPR, since "Does Not Meet" was marked in one area.
AFI36-2406:
1.10.3. When to Refer a Performance Evaluation. Performance evaluations must be referred when:
1.10.3.3. An evaluator marks "Does Not Meet Standards" in Section III of the EPR.

Another section of the AFI also states:
3.1.8.2. The evaluation becomes a referral evaluation and must be referred IAW paragraph 1.10 if:
3.1.8.2.1. The ratee fails to meet standards in any one of the listed performance assessment factors in Section III, Performance Assessment. Note: A referral EPR may not have an overall assessment of "5".

Flip to the back side of the EPR & the rater/additional rater overall assessments are both an "Average - 3" (out of 5). I really can't see giving an overall rating of average if you received a "Does Not Meet" anywhere on the front of the EPR, but according to the AFI references above, it is allowable (heck, even an "Above Average - 4" is apparently allowable).

Talk me into/out of having a more lengthy discussion with the rater/additional rater about changing the overall assessment on this EPR to a 2 vs. a 3. I don’t think it’s going to fly up my chain as well and plan to advise the rater of that and hopefully save him the time/pain involved if higher ranking members in the chain review/chime in on the matter before the final draft is complete.

Also, I'm not sure how to reflect this on the EPR of the RATER in this case since I am also reviewing his at the same time. It almost calls into question how I should be rating him in leadership if I think he is being too soft on his airman.

Response by SGT Steven Eugene Kuhn MBA made Feb 3 at 2015 2:05 PM

SGT Steven Eugene Kuhn MBA — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 14:05:38 -0500

This is a tough one, all I can say is take the "I think" out of the constellation, take a step back and evaluate as a neutral person, who would not know him...

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Feb 3 at 2015 3:41 PM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 15:41:56 -0500

Maj Matt Hylton, Ok this is a bit tricky, before the new AFI, I have personally seen referral "5" EPRs.

Referral 4 is the current highest rating allowed under the current guidance. Without knowing what the specifics are, it is hard to know what really give you guidance on but here is a fairly good yard stick that works well.

If their "EPR" would be a "5" before whatever is causing it to be a referral happened then it should now be a referral "4" provided that the work level hasn't changed. (adjust the numbers accordingly).

Examples:

Airman Snuffy is an outstanding troop and fail is a "5" but got a DUI and a UIF/Art15. They are now a Referral 4.

TSgt Jones is a so-so NCO and comes to work and does what need to be done. They are a solid "4". They then fail their PT Test. Now they are a Referral 3.

If you want to talk specifics, hit me up via PM here or via the GAL @barksdale.

Response by MSgt Chris Adams made Feb 3 at 2015 6:55 PM

MSgt Chris Adams — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 18:55:54 -0500

First off, it is a referral. That much active administrative punishment to me means a 2. It looks like the appropriate steps were taken to educate him, verbal-->LOC-->LOR-->UIF. Personally, if his inability to meet standards warranted all that paperwork, he probably needs to be discharged.

But if Article 15 and/or admin. discharge are not desired actions, make him re-enlistment ineligible and see if he can finish him term with an honorable. If past experience is any indication, he'll end up kicking himself out.

Response by MSgt Michael Durkee made Feb 4 at 2015 8:15 AM

MSgt Michael Durkee — Wed, 04 Feb 2015 08:15:50 -0500

A referral 3 may be warranted based on his duty performance, a frank discussion with the Rater is definitely in order to determine their intent. Upon talking with the Rater you may be able to get a better feeling for how to address their EPR.

Response by Maj Matt Hylton made Feb 4 at 2015 10:59 AM

Maj Matt Hylton — Wed, 04 Feb 2015 10:59:44 -0500

Ended up having a pretty long discussion with my Supt, the rater/additional rater and next Lt Col in my chain about this yesterday.

We all came to the conclusion to give a 2 assessment.

It probably would have been a 4 rating with his current level of performance. We took the stance that the LOC's and LOR's (plus 1 PT test failure in the period) would have taken him down to a 3. The final LOR (for the same infraction as a previous LOC and LOR) got him on a UIF as well. That took him down to a 2.

I don't think the kid is a dirtbag, but it took MULTIPLE levels of counseling to finally get him to realize he needed to stop screwing up.

This is his first EPR after tech school, so it's probably not a career killer, but he definitely won't make SSgt the first go around even if he turns it all around and gets 5's on his next EPRs.

This was the rater's first time supervising and first EPR he's written, so he was initially trying not to be too harsh on the airman.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 11:36 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 11:36:46 -0400

Realize that a 2 EPR does not take him out of the running, because a referral EPR makes him ineligible to test, so with the new system its only his EPRs since he was eligible to test that count, so the 2 may never see the light of day.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 1:06 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 13:06:04 -0400

An overall 3 should effectively end his career, which in my opinion is well past due.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 3:51 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 15:51:23 -0400

As a personnelist I agree with the majority of the comments...;however, no one can force or improperly pressure the rater to change his/her rating. The additional rater or commander can disagree and document it per the Afi but the rating is the raters decision (for epr points it is the additional raters number that counts anyway).

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 5:31 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 17:31:17 -0400

I'm prior enlisted and know that you have to balance the senior enlisted expectations with your officer chain of command. Your rater may not have leadership issues, but may have a SNCO expecting some "softness." It's frustrating when you see things one way, but everyone else has a different perspective. SNCOs may have a greater depth and breadth and want to "temper" the rating based on other enlisted in the career field. You may be looking at the individual, possibly comparing to his peers in the unit. The top SNCOs maybe looking from a MAJCOM or career field-wide perspective. Give the rater your feedback and ask for his in return. It may be that he agrees with you, but is stuck between your assessment and pressure from some MSgt - Chief.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 5:56 PM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 17:56:48 -0400

I don't see how this is all that tough. A "2" is appropriate with the outlined paperwork...Average "3" Airmen do not require this much paperwork to keep behavior in line with standards. I don't have the EPR in front of me but I believe "2" Airmen "need improvement", definitely appropriate here. My advice, write the "2" to send a message to both the Amn and your squadron...Amn talk and the will quickly learn that leadership believes and is not scared to hold folks accountable...BTW, make sure your Shirt is involved. I would also be prepared to go with NJP, you guys are very close to this step on the progressive discipline continuum. Lastly, the Enlisted Force Structure says jr. Amn most conform to military life (paraphrasing)...if supervision and the chain is actively involved, the "2" EPR is the appropriate reflection of performance or lack there of. VR,

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 6:15 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 18:15:13 -0400

Under the old EPR system I would say a referral 3, but under the new quota system, definitely a 2.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 8:18 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 20:18:11 -0400

Totally understand your concerns. At the same time you can not make anyone change their ratings, you can recommend but that's all you can do.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2015 9:55 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 09:55:07 -0400

This is how we got into an inflated EPR system to begin with. If every Airman is a 3, the top performers are 4, and the best of the best are 5, then a UIF, referal markings on the front should merrit a 2 overall.

Sounds like an easy situation to me, member is a 2.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2015 10:08 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 10:08:51 -0400

The short answer is is isn't YOUR assessment to make, sir, it's the rater's. You can disagree with all day long but at the end of the day it isn't up to you. NO ONE should be influencing the rater's rating. No one should even be talking to him about changing his rating. The additional rater and the CC can non-concur, but there should not be any dialogue with the rater about his rating. Also, as an officer that isn't in the rating chain, how do you even have visibility? It should go rater, additional rater, maybe the section super (which I disagree with as well but some units do this), First Sergeant, squadron super, commander. Unless there is an officer directly in the chain, no officer should even see it other than the commander. Just like an officer's report shouldn't go through the squadron super.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2015 11:10 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 11:10:03 -0400

I understand my previous comment was likely not well-received so not that I'm back at my desk,
AFI 36-2406, para 1.5.1.2.3: For AB through TSgt, no more than two evaluators (the rater and additional rater) will evaluate the ratee's performance.
Paragraph 1.6 lists the responsibilities of the only people in the chain that should be involved with an EPR/OPR. 1.6.1: Commander, 1.6.2: General Evaluator/Reviewer (general evaluators/reviewers do administrative reviews only), 1.6.3: Rater, 1.6.5: Additional Rater, 1.6.5: Reviewer/Senior Rater/Final Evaluator (only applies to SNCOs and officers), 1.6.6: First Sergeant, 1.6.7: Unit Commander (the ONLY person listed in the chain that has the duty to return an evaluation for reconsideration), 1.6.8 Functional Examiner, Acquisition Examiner, and Air Force Advisor, 1.6.9: Ratee then it's the base MPS, MAJCOM, and up.

I completely understand wanting to make sure our people are rated fairly and that we aren't inflate reports. I also agree 100% with the rating of a 2. My only issue was how it was all handled. Far too many people were involved in the process that simply had no business being involved. If the airmen went to EO with a complaint the meeting that was had to change the rating would be enough to get the EPR removed if everyone involved was honest and said that the rater had submitted the ratee as a 3, not a 2.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2015 12:55 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 12:55:12 -0400

It almost sounds to me that this A1C is TRYING to get a discharge. We had a similar AB that made Airman then made it back to AB. Plenty of time being late, lying to an NCO/Section Commander/1SGT, repeatedly not meeting basic standards. Multiple Verbal counseling sessions, 3 page MFR, LOC, LOA, LOR, UIF, LOR, Art15, Art 15 Discharge. Having worked with him as his trainer and what not (never officially his rater but relied upon similarly). He couldn't accomplish basic tasks his peers came in and quickly learned, didn't take advice or direction at all. I left the organization prior to his UIF and beyond but stayed in contact to try to help him remove his head from his rectum as well help the other new airmen ( Airman of Qtr, Airman of Year, Accepted to the Academy, and 1 other that was kind of just there). From this experience his actions and performance showed he did not want to be in the AF although his words said he did. Me and another NCO sat down with him to try and get to the bottom of his behavior and even asked him if he actually wanted to be in, or if it wasn't how he thought it would be and wanted to move on with it and that we could work with him and leadership and help him with whatever direction he wanted to go. Talking with his (our ratoer/supervisor) MSgt he would have clearly been a 2. I hope this may be helpful as we are also an Acquisition unit and had a similar troop.

Like others have said talk with the rater to see where he is coming from and just by talking and letting him know that you have his back on whatever decision he feels to rate this young airman. I know if I have the top cover from my leadership on these decisions and they explain their positions and I can take from their experience it would make me feel way more confident. But I personally would feel with the amount of paperwork and disciplinary action and how far down he/she is on the line of acceptability that it would definitely warrant a 2 on the EPR. Good luck and hopefully your SrA realizes that he/she is not giving the rating but the A1C is only earning it.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 25 at 2015 9:32 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 25 Jun 2015 09:32:53 -0400

Sir, I don't envy your position. It's hard enough as a direct supervisor to summarize your airman's life into an EPR, seeing every day the struggles they've overcome, the exceptional performance, the hiccups... and trying to cram that into an AF Form with "action, impact and result!"
From what I've seen as an NCO, the most important factor that seems to be easily overlooked is CONSISTENCY! If you want to be involved in the process, be involved with everyone whose EPR is in your chain. Talk to all of the raters if you have questions, comments or concerns about why they rated the way they did, and keep the same standards regardless of the inevitable popularity contest that arises when you have similar scenarios, but one airman is better liked in their shop.
Lastly, I think it's a mistake to perpetuate the "one mistake and you're done" mentality. Generally speaking of course, I knew some great Chiefs and leaders when I initially joined who made some pretty sizable mistakes (that would have ended their careers earlier on these days), but they had that as a tool to relate with the up and coming airmen and mentor them into productive members of the service.