|
|
CY03 Chief Master Sergeant Evaluation Board
| Source: |
CMSgt, USAF
721 SFS |
|
|
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS BRIEF IS ONE PANEL MEMBER’S OBSERVATIONS AND
DOES NOT REFLECT AN OFFICIAL AIR FORCE OR BOARD SECRETARIAT POSITION.
ADDITIONALLY, OTHER PANEL MEMBERS MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT BASED ON THEIR
EXPERIENCE ON THE BOARD.
- All comments (and most recommendations) are personal observations and not
AFPC or Air
Force policy—not intended to represent the views of the United States Air
Force
- Board consisted of 8 panels each made up of 1 colonel & 2 chiefs with BG Board
President - Board members, “handlers”, recorders & everyone involved briefed
and placed under oath - First one and half days spent training; trial runs,
group (entire board) discussions
-- Standards are determined and
members cautioned on do’s don’ts
-- Started live record scoring afternoon of second day - First product I reviewed in each selection folder was Senior NCO Evaluation
Brief
-- Single sheet lists member’s SNCOA completion, education level,
decorations, DOR, duty title, DAFSC, and TAFMSD—up-front indication of potential
to score among the best
-- Missing CCAF, SNCOA, or no SRI was like a huge red flag with
contrasting question marks
- I was only SF board member and scored records across 10+ AFSCs
-- Need to explain “functional” terms & acronyms or risk devaluations,
faulty assumptions
- Recognition was important as many records were excellent & filled expected
“squares”: “5” EPRs, SNCOA completed, Senior Rater Indorsements, and CCAF
degrees in career field
-- “My number one SMSgt” without even a nomination for awards did not
convince me
-- Some functional awards were very unfamiliar and could have scored
better if explained
- Stratification was important throughout the chain—not just the Senior Rater in
many cases
-- Some strats were almost meaningless: “Best SMSgt worked with in over
26 years”
-- Unsupported starts didn’t work—real numbers were much more helpful
than percentages
- Senior Rater Indorsements should always include highest impact accomplishments
-- All were important, but I placed highest value on Senior Rater
comments
- Decorations were important in whether they were appropriately awarded & at
expected level
-- SMSgt receiving a commendation medal for three-year tour begged
questions be answered
-- MSM, poorly supported by EPR content did not sway me toward a higher
record score
- I viewed extended TOS as “homesteading” only when no job changes—read:
challenges
- Remember: EPRs cover the ten years preceding the promotion eligibility cutoff
date (PECD)
-- I reviewed quite a few EPRs written at TSgt and more than I expected
at SSgt
- Consistent outstanding performance, recognition, professional organization
involvement, and military/community leadership were very obvious in the best &
above average records
-- Recent feats scored but commitment to excellence over a period of time
scored much better
- OBSERVATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS
-- Need to see consistent outstanding accomplishments, a given—without…
-- Outstanding duty performance will not compensate for deficiencies:
PME, CCAF
-- Start serious mentoring/guiding at SrA to build enlisted leaders—not
just promotees
--- “Square filling”, doing just enough to say
you’re involved will show over time
-- Although top EPR is extremely important, remember it’s not a “SNCO of
the Year” board
-- Provide equal opportunity to all, but discriminate between the good
and your best
--- Don’t waste time chasing SRI for those who
haven’t done their best to do their part
-- Take the time to do proper feedback & be completely honest so you can
write the right EPR
-- AFPC/ CC asked that we bring back the same message to junior NCOs and
CGOs
Get involved early with your own career and what’s going into your
records—waiting, or taking passive approach could be to your detriment
|
