4
4
0
So I was having a discussion at the office about NCOER's and placing APFT scores on them. It seems that we are being told to place all scores on the NCOER now, not just to quantify an excellence block. Seeing as I have a P2 profile and only complete pushups and the walk it doesn't seem right that I will only receive credit for one event vs a Soldier who can score on all three. I can only receive a GO/NO-GO regardless of how fast I can walk.
I know having a P2 shouldn't be a discriminator, but it seems that a lot of leaders (both NCO and officer) have a prejudice against Soldiers who cannot keep up with them do to lingering injuries. And stating, "regardless of P2 limiting profile he was able to..." seems to lead the door open for someone to think that the NCO is broke and can't hang with the young troops - which is true, to an extent.
So, my question here is complicated. Should a PT score be mandatory for the NCOER? Should the alternate events be scored? Should you identify on the NCOER that the NCO holds a P2 profile? Should not being able to perform the 3 event APFT be a discriminator?
Thoughts?
APFT
Profiles
NCOER
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 18
19
19
0
I posted a similar thread now that I am on a perm profile. My solution for one of my high speed SFC who was an amazing walker was I put " o scored 100 points in the pushup and situp events and walked in XX:XX, the fastest walker in the company" and justified an excellent. She also was promoted from SSG to SFC with that NCOER as her last one.
(19)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
yes it justifies this, some of use old farts still exist, in can do the 2.5 walk in 30 miutes or better, my question is can you, the walk in my opinion is tuffer than the run
(3)
(0)
MSG Carolyn Emery
There is much more to the section of the NCOER than just the APFt being the only factor considered to be excellence
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
DA PAM 623-3 states "APFT numerical scores will not be entered". Those instructions are for Part IV, block C of the NCOER. As you can see by the pictures, that includes the section for bullets. It is all one section.
I know, I know, "but CSM so and so said"... I get that a lot, but the regulation states what it states...
I know, I know, "but CSM so and so said"... I get that a lot, but the regulation states what it states...
(8)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
Oh so I just pulled up the updated DA Pam 623-3 and it has been re worded. it now reads "in this block"
—Sample entries are "PASS 20100414," "FAIL 20100507," or "PROFILE 20100302." APFT numerical scores are not formatted entries and
will not be entered for this block.
That is dated 31 March 2014
—Sample entries are "PASS 20100414," "FAIL 20100507," or "PROFILE 20100302." APFT numerical scores are not formatted entries and
will not be entered for this block.
That is dated 31 March 2014
(4)
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
It does indeed now specify block a! Someone at HRC was listening/reading =) Well, there goes that..
(3)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
1SG (Join to see) - From what I have been seeing and hearing, the NCOER is falling more in line with the OER method in that you only really talk about PT score if it is above and beyond (ie 290+ with over a 90 in each event). Otherwise, don't mention it at all.
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
DA Pam 623-3 Table 3-4 says:
"— For Soldiers with permanent profiles who have been cleared to take an alternate APFT, enter “PASS” or “FAIL” for the alternate APFT as prescribed by health care personnel and the date of the APFT. The APFT may include an alternate authorized aerobic event (walk, bike, or swim). No comment about the rated Soldier’s profile is required.
"— For Soldiers with permanent profiles who have been cleared to take an alternate APFT, enter “PASS” or “FAIL” for the alternate APFT as prescribed by health care personnel and the date of the APFT. The APFT may include an alternate authorized aerobic event (walk, bike, or swim). No comment about the rated Soldier’s profile is required.
— For Soldiers with permanent profiles whose profiles prohibit them from taking the APFT, the entry will be left blank and the rater will explain the reason it has been left blank."
I like SFC Jones' example where each event score is noted. This gives a granularity for tracking progress on each event.
As a former NCOER Clerk in a BN S-1, I would opine that if you must put a score on the NCOER, use the "promotion point" score (the scored events + averaged event(s)). This will keep the rated NCO in the same ballpark as other non-profile Soldiers.
(7)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
good post never thought about that but if you were to say grading point wise the walk or anyother alternatives this could be an answer
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
I have a P2 profile against running due to injury, however, I am consistently 7-10 minutes faster than my "required" time. I would like to see a graduated scale, similar to the run, for the walk. This would benefit the Soldiers who are required to perform the walk, as well as the boards who could see that they are infact doing more than the minimum required to pass the walk.
(4)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Agreed. Perhaps if everyone of the same mind suggests this to Big Army, they might change it?
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
I could care less but, I have seen 300 PT stud 1SGs that could not lead themselves out of wet paper bag! But watch as we draw down in the next couple years if you have a profile and can't run, you will be considered a non select for E-8/E-9 promotion boards.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
I think SFC Matthews hit the nail on the head. Just like with anyhting on the NCOER, it's all in how well it is written. Now I'm not saying write something that is not true!! That is a whole other topic.
I personally do feel that PT score should be reflected on the NCOER. Using a technique like SFC Matthews described is great for those on a profile. My personal reason for having them on there is this: In the past the only time a score was on the NCOER was to quantify an excellence. When the board looks at a file and they see a success rating with no score they don't know if that NCO scored 180 or 289. Both are passing and within the Army Standard without being awarded the APFT badge, however the one with the 289 (who persumebly scored 100% on p/u and s/u and missed 90% on the run by 1 point) is now categorized at the same level as the one who did their minimum on p/u and s/u and just got up becsause they feel that the Army standard is all they have to do to be competitive. While the standard is there for a reason, obviously the one who strives to exceed the standard inherintly shows more potential in most leaders eyes. Don't construe my reasoning as me saying that PT score should judge a leaders abilities, that is not what I am saying.
I have had this discussion with many leaders and get mixed emotions about it. I can generally attend a PT test and determine who would be on my side and who wouldn't. Give all you got, and do your best, and be proud to have it put on your "report card" (NCOER). You achieved it! Be proud of it!
(3)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
Well said SFC Gilley, that's what I have been attempting to say all along. Just not as well as you did. Thanks.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
1
1
0
I always maxed my PU & SU so my raters would always put that in there for my PT bullet.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I am in the same boat as you with a P2. For my Soldiers that are NCOs I will put their score only if they are receiving an excellence bullet. Another things that bothers me is Commanders that give incentives for scoring 270 and above with passes. So if i score 80 on my push ups and they give me 60 for each of the other events I only score a 200. I am exceeding the Army Standard but not yet good enough to receive a pass. I know that soon having a disability (injury) will be protected in EO which will make Commanders change their incentive programs for the APFT.
(1)
(0)
SSG Genaro Negrete
It seems to me that the incentive is for scoring a 270, not maxing each event. by that interpretation, no, you didn't earn a pass.
However you slice it, scoring a 270 puts you in at least at or above the 70th percentile in each event. max two sections, then all you need is 70% in the third. by all counts, this would be considered a very fit individual.
However you slice it, scoring a 270 puts you in at least at or above the 70th percentile in each event. max two sections, then all you need is 70% in the third. by all counts, this would be considered a very fit individual.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I do think a PT score should be mandatory for a NCOER because as NCO's we need to be graded on every aspect of being a soldier and NCO but if a NCO has a P2 profile the alternate events should be counted and not used as a discriminatory factor because then you fail that NCO by not giving him his rating so he knows where he lacks besides PT and keep him from improving on his discrepancies, its like not monthly counseling a soldier to keep him up to date on his pros his cons and what he needs to work on and how you think he can improve its not right.
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
Maybe at junior levels, but at E-7-E9, a PT score is not as important as their other leadership qualities.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google