Military Evaluations & Signatures

1. Section X: • Slide Purpose: To answer commonly asked questions concerning signatures & military evaluations and eliminate commonly made errors. • Focus: Areas which have been generating questions to the POC office. • Required References: • AR 623-3, Evaluation Reporting System • DA PAM 623-3, Evaluation Reporting Systems • Presentation Assumptions: • That reader will refer back to AR and DA PAM to get exact wording. This slide deck should not become the final reference. Military Evaluations & Signatures

2. AR 623-3: para 3-37.f covers key points of signature policy. Highlights are: • Rating officials sign on same date or in order (i.e., in order rater, intermediate rater, senior rater, reviewer.) • Rated Soldier signs last signifying rated Soldier has seen the completed report, that the administrative information in Section 1 is correct, that APFT and HT/WT information is correct, and that the rating officials are correct. • - Officers: a requirement since 1997 implementation of DA Form 67-9. • NCOs: a specified required since AR 623-3, May 2006. • Signatures may be applied no more than 14 days before THRU date on evaluation. • Evaluations may only be received by HRC on or after the actual THRU date. • Signatures may be mixed: some digital, some ink. • Evals with ink signatures must be mailed to HRC (with exemption.) • Deployed units can ink sign and submit per SOP. • Digital signatures are applied using CAC: Signature Policy

4. Electronic Environment Concern • The regulatory requirement of rated Soldier signing last requires senior raters and reviewers to release an evaluation to a rated Soldier and reduces, what in a paper environment has more, positive control over that evaluation. Specifically: • What if rated Soldier signs and submits evaluation to HRC directly? • What if rated Soldier never returns evaluation? Can senior rater get it back? • How does senior rater ensure rated Soldier signs and returns evaluation when it contains negative information? • How can this process work when the rated Soldier is geographically separated from the senior rater? • Bottom line: • The electronic environment was never meant to avoid or eliminate face-to-face counseling and personal interaction between leaders and subordinates. • Execution of this process within the electronic environment will accommodate rating official needs for accountability & responsibility. • Subsequent slides discuss options for discussion on these points.

5. CAC #1 CAC #2 Document Control in Electronic Environment #1 • Commanders should have a stated unit policy on the process for preparing, adding content, signing, and submitting evaluations. Commanders may direct how evaluations are submitted to HRC. • Senior raters maintain communication with rated Soldiers on processing standards and assess rated individuals against those standards. • Multiple CAC signatures can be applied to a document from one computer and meet intent and requirements of AR 623-3. • Routing documents in My Forms is • what allows complete accountability • and the most positive control. Emailing • documents is an option when AKO • My Forms is not feasible but does • not possess the same control features. • Once routed to the next party, a • document can be recalled if the • recipient has not viewed it.

6. Document Control in Electronic Environment #2 • Anyone who has been routed an original or an information copy of the document in My Forms will have an up-to-date copy of that document in their Tracking section. • Information is the same under either My Forms Inbox or Drafts tab. • Deleting from tracking only deletes tracked information; it does not delete the original document. • Tracking validates the exact owner of the document original. • Tracking reflects if & when the current owner of the original views the evaluation. • They can be contacted by other methods to ensure they understand they are to sign and return it. • This is particularly useful when geographically separated. • Tracking information reflects if & when document has been submitted to HQDA.

7. Completing Evals without Rated Soldier Signatures Bottom line: The rated Soldier is the only signature that can be missing from an evaluation. The senior rater must put an explanation in his/her section. On NCOER answer questions and type explanation (see diagram here.) On OER answer questions and amend the answer (or rewrite) that the form produces (similar to diagram here.)

8. Phantom Rating Official When Submitting OER to HRC: • Sender gets an error message that states… • Sometimes this message is caused by rating officials who didn’t sign the report … • Most of the time this message is a result of empty (blank) space in the intermediate (IR) rater’s section on the OER. Highlighted blue indicates space or text in the Intermediate Rater’s (IR) section. Remove this and the form won’t look for IR signature. To fix: Delete all answers to IR questions, delete all text in IR section, & find blank space by opening dragging mouse (with a left mouse click held down) as if trying to copy what is there. Delete space & left justified curser.

9. Change Line Color to Black Digital Signature in Technicolor? • Digital signatures must be in Black only • Using other colors increases potential the signature won’t transfer correctly to the tiff image (we convert the forms to tiff images before they go to the OMPF) and slows processing to the Soldier’s OMPF To change signature color . . .