104-Administrative Fundamentals Flashcards
Navy Performance Evaluation/Fitness- Overall
-The development of EVALs must be a team effort.
-The objective is to develop a better evaluation than could be achieved by any single member of the team.
-The rater, senior rater, and reporting senior must work together to ensure consistent interpretation and application of Navy standards.
-In some cases, reports can be developed in a single cooperative effort.
-Where a division of effort is required, the rater should first collect input from the member, the primary and collateral duty supervisors, the duty section leader, etc.
-The rater will then review the member’s performance, assign trait grades using the performance standards, propose career recommendations, and as a minimum, draft a justifying comment for each 1.0 grade and any other comments on performance.
-The senior rater will review the rater’s trait grades and career recommendations, expand the comments if necessary, and propose a promotion recommendation.
-The reporting senior shall ensure the EVAL standards have been respected, and will determine the final distribution of promotion recommendations within the member’s summary group using command-directed procedures where applicable.
-The smooth report will then be prepared and signed by all members of the team.
Reporting Senior
-COs and officers in charge (OICs) are reporting seniors by virtue of their command authority.
-They may submit properly authorized FITREPs, CHIEFEVALs, and EVALs on any member who has reported to them for duty, whether junior or senior to them in grade.
-The term “commanding officer” is inclusive of all Services and their civilian equivalents within the U.S. Federal Government.
-OICs are reporting seniors if they are in charge of commissioned or established activities listed in the Standard Navy Distribution List.
-When a member is assigned to a non-U.S. Government activity, the reporting senior is the member’s U.S. administrative commander unless another reporting senior is assigned by order or directive.
-A member in this category may receive a letter-type report from the non-U.S. Government activity for attachment to a FITREP, CHIEFEVAL, or EVAL.
Delegated Reporting Seniors
-Delegation of reporting senior authority is an actual transfer of that authority, and not merely an authorization to sign “By direction.”
-For this reason, delegation is held to the highest level consistent with effective observation of performance, and the CO’s oversight responsibilities are carefully defined.
-For specific direction concerning delegated reporting seniors, refer to BUPERINST 1610.10D, enclosure (2), chapter 2.
Immediate Superiors in Command (ISICs)
An immediate superior in command (ISIC) is a reporting senior for assigned COs and is authorized to assume the reporting senior authority of a subordinate CO whose capacity to act as a reporting senior becomes impaired.
Enlisted Officer in Charge (OIC)
-An enlisted OIC in the grade of E9 and civilians in command positions who hold the grade of GS-9 through GS-12 may sign reports on E5 and below.
-A chief petty officer (CPO) or senior chief petty officer (SCPO) may sign reports on personnel E4 and below only.
-GS-13 or equivalent may sign reports for E1 to E9.
-Reporting senior authority for enlisted OICs in the grade of E7 and E8 may be delegated to sign E5 reports with the prior written approval of NAVPERSCOM (PERS-32).
-All other reports will be signed by a senior in the chain of command having authority to report on the member concerned.
Enlisted Reporting Seniors
-Chief Petty Officers (E7-E9) may act as reporting seniors for members in the grades of E4 and below only.
-The next senior officer in the chain of command having reporting authority for the members concerned must sign all other reports
Raters and Senior Raters
-EVALs on personnel E6 and below should contain the signatures of a rater and senior rater.
-The signature of the reporting senior is required.
-This ensures that Navy’s senior enlisted and junior officer supervisors are properly included in the enlisted EVAL process.
-The rater for personnel E1-E4 can be an E6 or civilian equivalent (GS-5).
-For personnel E5-E6, the rater should be a Navy CPO whenever possible, but if none is available within the command, the rater may be a military or civilian supervisor who is an E7 equivalent (GS-6) or higher.
-Typically, the senior rater will be the member’s division officer or department head.
-The senior rater may be omitted where the reporting senior is the rater’s immediate supervisor.
Performance Counseling
-Counseling methods are up to the commanding officer. It is the CO’s program.
-Performance counseling must be provided at the mid-point of the periodic report cycle, and when the report is signed.
-The counselor will be a supervisor who participates in the member’s EVAL or FITREP preparation.
-Commanding officers will guide the counseling program and monitor counselor performance and results.
-The objectives are to provide feedback to the member, and to motivate and assist improvement.
-Performance counseling starts with a fair assessment of the member’s performance and capabilities, to which the member contributes.
-It identifies the member’s strengths and motivates their further improvement.
-It also addresses important weaknesses, but should not dwell on unimportant ones.
-It should avoid personality and concentrate on performance.
-The FITREP and EVAL forms are used as counseling worksheets, and must be signed by the counselor and member.
-Counselors may use the tick marks next to each performance standard, and/or assign tentative trait grades, and may write comments.
-Under no circumstances should a future promotion recommendation be promised during counseling.
There are three types of reports:
Regular Reports, Concurrent Reports, Operational Commander Reports
Regular Reports
-Regular reports are the foundation of the performance record and must be submitted periodically per the schedule in table 1, and on other occasions specified in the EVALMAN.
-They must cover, day-for-day, all naval service on active duty or inactive drilling Reserve duty, except for enlisted initial entry training and other limited circumstances.
-Prior to submitting regular reports, efforts should be made to determine the ending date of the previous report, if any, to ensure regular report continuity is maintained.
Concurrent Reports
-Concurrent reports provide a record of significant performance for active duty (ACDU) and Full Time Support (FTS) members fulfilling additional duty (ADDU) or temporary additional duty (TEMADD) orders; and for Reservists supporting the ACDU and/or their designated cross-assigned billet assignment.
-They are optional unless directed by higher authority, and may not be submitted by anyone in the regular reporting senior’s direct chain of command.
-A Concurrent report must be countersigned by the regular reporting senior, who may also make it the Regular report for the period concerned if continuity is maintained with the previous regular or regular/concurrent report.
-Refer to EVALMAN, chapter 4 for detailed requirements.
Operational Commander Reports
-Operational Commander reports are optional, and may only be submitted on COs or OICs as observed by their operational commanders who are not also their regular reporting seniors.
-Refer to EVALMAN, chapter 5 for detailed requirements.
Report Blocks 1-52
Administrative Blocks
The administrative blocks, blocks 1, 3-19, blocks 22-26, block 44 (FITREP/CHIEFEVAL) or 48 (EVAL), identify the report, define the context in which it was received, and make it more informative to detailers and selection boards.
- They also permit computerized compliance audits by NAVPERSCOM to assure fairness to all members and reporting seniors.
-Each command should have a quality review procedure for FITREPs, CHIEFEVALs, and EVALs, paying very close attention to ensure the correct member and reporting senior’s social security number (SSN) are accurate.
-NAVPERSCOM’s automated data file will not accept incorrect name and SSN entries for the member, and reports may then have to be returned to the reporting senior for correction.
-However, after acceptance to the Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), the correction of an incorrect reporting senior’s SSN requires the submission of supplemental material to correct the discrepancy, and the automated data files are not adjusted.
-For specific directions concerning supplementary material, refer to chapter 15. NAVFIT 98A, the FITREP and EVAL form-filler computer application program, will prevent many incorrect entries.
Guidance on Trait Grades
-The meanings of the trait grades are printed on the form, along with representative performance standards.
-The 5.0 trait grade is reserved for performance that is far above standards and is notable for its exemplary or leadership quality.
-The 1.0 trait grade means generally poor performance that is not improving, or unsatisfactory performance with respect to a single standard.
-For the majority of Sailors, most of the trait grades should be in the 2.0 to 4.0 range.
-Arbitrarily “two-blocking” the trait grades will be detrimental for two reasons.
-First, the reporting senior’s summary group and cumulative trait grade averages will be available to detailers and selection boards for comparison purposes.
-Second, it will be difficult for the reporting senior to allocate promotion recommendations if everyone’s trait grades are the same.
-Definitions are stated relative to both performance in that trait and promotability with respect to that trait.
Superstar Performance – 5.0
Could be promoted two pay grades, and still be a standout in this trait