Fill Out Your Da 2166 9 1 Template

Filling out the DA Form 2166-9-1, known as the NCO Evaluation Report (SGT), is a critical task for documenting the performance and potential of non-commissioned officers (NCOs) within the U.S. Army. However, several common mistakes can undermine its effectiveness and accuracy. Understanding and avoiding these errors is essential for a thorough and fair evaluation.

One common mistake is neglecting to review the instructions and guidelines found in AR 623-3 and DA PAM 623-3. These documents outline the process and provide critical information on how to properly complete the form. Without this understanding, evaluators may incorrectly fill out sections or miss important details.

Another frequent error is incorrect or incomplete administrative data in Part I. This section captures essential details about the rated NCO, such as name, rank, and unit. Ensuring accuracy in these fields is fundamental because mistakes here can result in processing delays or misidentification.

Evaluators often overlook the importance of the accuracy of dates, such as the DATE OF RANK in Part I and counseling dates in Part III. These dates are not only critical for record accuracy but also influence the evaluation period and the understanding of the NCO's timeline of progression and development.

Failure to correctly identify the reason for submission and non-rated codes in Part I can distort the evaluation's context. These elements offer insights into the NCO's duty performance period and any exceptions that might have affected their duties.

An error that can significantly impact the evaluation's credibility is incomplete or inaccurate entries in the APFT (Army Physical Fitness Test) and height/weight sections in Part IV. This information reflects the NCO's physical readiness, and inaccuracies here can question the thoroughness of the rater's assessment.

Sometimes, raters do not provide specific, objective, and measurable comments in Part IV, where performance, professionalism, attributes, and competencies are evaluated. Vague or generic comments fail to give a clear picture of the NCO's performance and potential, making it challenging to differentiate among NCOs effectively.

A critical oversight is failing to recommend future assignments and developmental opportunities in Part V. This section helps to guide the NCO's career progression by aligning their strengths and potential with suitable roles, thereby fostering professional growth and organizational effectiveness.

Last but not least, neglecting to complete the authentication section correctly, including the signatures and dates from the rater, senior rater, and the reviewed NCO, can invalidate the form or cause administrative delays. This step is vital for ensuring the evaluation's integrity and acknowledgment by all parties.

By being mindful of these common mistakes and taking steps to avoid them, evaluators can ensure they provide a comprehensive, accurate, and fair assessment of NCOs through the DA Form 2166-9-1. This, in turn, supports the professional development of NCOs and the overall mission readiness of the U.S. Army.

In the realm of U.S. Army administration, the DA Form 2166-9-1, known as the NCO Evaluation Report (SGT), is a pivotal document for capturing the performance and potential of non-commissioned officers (NCOs). However, this form does not stand alone. A suite of complementary documents and forms often accompany it, each serving a unique purpose in the evaluation process, career progression, or administrative requirements of Army personnel. Understanding these associated documents can provide a comprehensive view of the organizational and evaluative processes within the military context.

• DA Form 2166-9-2: Similar to the DA Form 2166-9-1 but intended for the evaluation of Staff Sergeants (SSG) through Master Sergeants (MSG). It focuses on leadership, performance, and potential, tailoring the evaluation to the responsibilities and expectations of senior NCO roles.
• DA Form 2166-9-3: This form is designated for the evaluation of Sergeants Major (SGM) through Command Sergeants Major (CSM). It emphasizes strategic leadership qualities, the ability to influence beyond the immediate chain of command, and contributions to large-scale Army objectives.
• DA Form 4187: Known as the Personnel Action form, it is used for a wide array of personnel requests, including reassignments, special duty assignments, reclassifications, and more. This form often accompanies evaluation reports when specific actions regarding the rated NCO's career path are proposed or requested.
• DA Form 31: The Request and Authority for Leave form is critical for documenting official leave. The performance evaluations might indirectly affect leave approvals, especially if there are concerns about an NCO's performance or reliability.
• DA Form 705: The Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard is essential for documenting the physical fitness aspect of an NCO’s performance. Physical readiness is a critical component of the Part IV - Performance Evaluation section of the DA 2166-9-1 form.
• DA Form 5500/5501: These forms, Body Fat Content Worksheets for male and female soldiers, respectively, complement the DA Form 705 and the DA 2166-9-1 when there are concerns about meeting Army physical standards.
• Supporting Memorandums or Letters: Often, additional narrative descriptions or recommendations from commanders, peers, or subordinates that provide context or detail beyond the structured evaluation form are included to give a more comprehensive picture of the NCO’s performance and potential.
• DA Form 4856: The Developmental Counseling Form is crucial for documenting discussions between leaders and their NCOs about performance, expectations, goals, and professional development. These counseling sessions provide content for the evaluation process.
• DA Form 638: The Recommendation for Award form is used to recommend soldiers for awards. Supporting documentation for awards can complement an NCO's evaluation by providing concrete examples of achievements and recognition.

Each document plays a specific role in the Army's organizational and evaluative ecosystem, impacting NCOs' careers and development. Whether it's providing detailed narratives, documenting physical fitness, or recommending awards, these forms collectively ensure a holistic approach to evaluating and managing the professional journey of the Army's non-commissioned officers. Understanding the purpose and interrelation of these documents enhances the administrative efficiency and the personal development of NCOs within the structured and performance-oriented framework of the U.S. Army.

One document similar to the DA Form 2166-9-1 is the Officer Evaluation Report (OER), used within the U.S. Army to evaluate officers' performance and potential. Both forms are integral to the Army’s Evaluation Reporting System, guiding decisions on promotions, assignments, and professional development. However, the DA Form 2166-9-1 focuses on non-commissioned officers (NCOs), while the OER targets commissioned officers. They share structural similarities, including sections for administrative data, performance evaluation, and the assessment of future potential, ensuring a comprehensive review of military personnel’s capabilities and achievements.

Another related document is the Navy Fitness Report (FITREP), used for evaluating naval officers' performance. Comparable to the DA Form 2166-9-1, the FITREP includes sections for personal and professional data, duty performance evaluation, and recommendations for future assignments. Both forms play a critical role in career progression, focusing on leadership qualities, professional expertise, and the ability to achieve mission objectives. The emphasis on performance metrics and the impact on promotions and assignments underline the significance of these evaluations in military personnel management.

The Air Force Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) serves a similar function for assessing enlisted airmen, paralleling the DA Form 2166-9-1's use for Army NCOs. Both documents detail the service member's duties, responsibilities, and performance over the evaluation period, highlighting achievements and identifying areas for improvement. The EPR and the DA 2166-9-1 contribute to decisions on promotions, special assignments, and professional development opportunities, reflecting the military's investment in a merit-based evaluation system.

The Civilian Performance Appraisal Form is used by various branches of the U.S. military to evaluate civilian employees. Although it assesses civilian rather than military personnel, it resembles the DA Form 2166-9-1 in structure and intent. Both forms outline objectives, performance assessments, and future goals to ensure alignment with organizational priorities. The focus on clear standards and measurable achievements underscores the comprehensive approach to evaluating contribution and potential across the military environment.

The Marine Corps Fitness Report (FITREP) for evaluating the performance of Marine officers shares several similarities with the DA Form 2166-9-1. It not only assesses performance based on duties and responsibilities but also considers leadership qualities, professional competence, and potential for future assignments. Both documents impact personnel decisions such as promotions and assignments, emphasizing the importance of leadership and mission accomplishment in military career progression.

The Coast Guard Officer Evaluation Report (OER) closely mirrors the DA Form 2166-9-1 in its aim to provide a consistent assessment of officers' performance and potential. It gathers data on leadership, professional skills, and missions’ accomplishment, which is essential for career development decisions. Although tailored to the unique operations and objectives of the Coast Guard, the overarching goal of facilitating organized review and feedback is shared with the Army's evaluation process for NCOs.

The Army Developmental Counseling Form (DA Form 4856) complements the DA Form 2166-9-1 by providing a structured framework for NCOs and other Army personnel to receive feedback and guidance. While the DA 4856 is more focused on individual counseling sessions, it closely relates to the evaluation process by highlighting areas of strength and improvement, setting the stage for professional growth and enhanced performance that will be formally evaluated in the DA 2166-9-1.

Lastly, the Individual Training Record, used across military branches, though not a direct evaluation form, supports the objectives of the DA Form 2166-9-1 by documenting the training and qualifications of service members. This record informs parts of the evaluation process by providing evidence of professional development and skill acquisition that are crucial for comprehensive performance assessment and career advancement decisions within the military structure.

When dealing with the DA 2166 9 1 Form, which serves as the NCO Evaluation Report for sergeants, accurate and considerate completion of the form is paramount. Below are lists highlighting the things you should and shouldn't do to ensure the form is completed effectively and respectfully.

Things You Should Do:

• Verify all administrative data in Part I for accuracy, including the correct spelling of the name, SSN or DOD ID number, rank, and unit information.
• Ensure the rating period covered is accurate and corresponds to the actual time the NCO was under evaluation.
• Discuss the form with the rated NCO, including duties, responsibilities, and performance expectations to provide clarity and guidance.
• Provide specific, measurable instances of the rated NCO's performance, supporting either the met or did not meet standards assessment.
• Check that all mandatory fields, including APFT status and body composition data, are filled out in accordance with Army regulations.
• Review the form for completeness and correctness before submission, ensuring signatures and counseling dates are in place.

Things You Shouldn't Do:

• Leave any section incomplete, especially the administrative data or the performance evaluation sections, as this could delay processing.
• Use vague language or generalities when describing the NCO's performance; specificity is crucial for a fair evaluation.
• Forget to document the rated NCO's acknowledgement of the report by ensuring they sign and date the form, verifying they have seen it.
• Ignore the requirement for supplementary reviewer comments and signature if applicable, as this is a critical part of the evaluation process.
• Submit the form without discussing it with the rated NCO, as feedback is essential for their development and understanding of the evaluation.
• Overlook the appeals process and the NCO's right to respond if they disagree with the evaluation, ensuring they are informed of their rights.

Adhering to these guidelines will help in the meticulous completion of the DA 2166 9 1 Form, contributing to a transparent, fair, and helpful evaluation process for both the rater and the rated NCO. It's about acknowledging the importance of the evaluation in career development, moreover, understanding the role it plays in fostering professional growth within the Army's ranks.

Misconceptions about the DA Form 2166-9-1, the NCO Evaluation Report (SGT), are common and can lead to confusion and errors in its completion and usage. It's important to clarify these misunderstandings to ensure evaluations are conducted accurately and fairly. Here are eight common misconceptions:

1. It's only a formality and doesn't impact a soldier's career: This form plays a crucial role in a soldier’s career progression, offering a detailed record of performance and potential which can greatly impact promotions and assignments.

2. Any soldier can fill out the form: Only designated raters and senior raters who have directly supervised the soldier can provide evaluations on this form, ensuring that assessments are informed and accurate.

3. The more enclosures, the better: While including relevant enclosures can provide context, overloading the report with unnecessary attachments can dilute the effectiveness of the evaluation. It's important to be concise and relevant.

4. Soldier’s agreement with the evaluation is required for submission: A soldier's signature verifies the accuracy of certain administrative data and acknowledges they have seen the report but does not indicate agreement with the evaluation's content.

5. Status codes and non-rated codes are interchangeable: Status codes and non-rated codes serve different purposes. Non-rated codes explain periods when the soldier was not evaluated, while status codes provide current administrative data.

6. The form is only for negative feedback: The DA Form 2166-9-1 is designed to provide a balanced view of the soldier’s performance, including strengths, achievements, and areas for improvement. Positive performance should be highlighted just as much as developmental areas.

7. Every section must be filled with extensive comments: Comments should be meaningful and relevant to the soldier’s performance and potential. Providing quality over quantity in feedback is more impactful and useful for the soldier’s development.

8. Physical fitness and body composition do not significantly impact the evaluation: Part IV of the form addresses these components, emphasizing the Army's holistic approach to evaluation. Failure to meet standards in these areas can significantly impact the overall assessment.

Understanding these misconceptions is the first step toward accurate and fair evaluations of soldiers’ performances and potentials, ensuring that each member is recognized appropriately for their contributions and areas for growth.

Understanding the DA Form 2166-9-1, which is used for the Non-Commissioned Officer Evaluation Report (SGT), is crucial for accurately documenting the performance and potential of sergeants in the U.S. Army. Here are four key takeaways to ensure the form is filled out correctly and effectively:

• The form is divided into several parts, each requiring specific information about the rated NCO, from administrative data to detailed performance evaluations. It's important to accurately complete each section to provide a comprehensive view of the NCO's abilities, potential, and areas for improvement.
• Part I focuses on administrative data and includes basic information such as name, rank, and unit. This section is straightforward but fundamental, as it ensures the evaluation is properly attributed to the right individual.
• In Part IV, the rater is tasked with assessing the NCO's performance in areas such as professionalism, attributes, competencies, and physical fitness. It's essential for raters to be objective and provide specific comments that support their assessments, as this part significantly influences career progression and development opportunities for the NCO.
• The senior rater's evaluation in Part V characterizes the NCO’s potential in comparison with peers. This includes selecting a potential category and recommending future assignments. This section provides valuable insight into the NCO’s future roles and opportunities for advancement, making it crucial for senior raters to consider their assessments thoroughly.

Overall, meticulous attention to detail and objective assessment are vital when completing the DA Form 2166-9-1. This ensures fair and accurate representation of the NCO’s performance and potential, contributing positively to their career progression.