Fill a Valid Da 2166 9 1 Form

What is the DA Form 2166-9-1 used for?

The DA Form 2166-9-1, known as the NCO Evaluation Report (SGT), is used within the United States Army to evaluate non-commissioned officers (NCOs) who hold the rank of Sergeant. It serves as a tool for reviewing and documenting an NCO's performance and potential for future leadership roles. The evaluation covers administrative data, duty performance, leadership capabilities, training and development of subordinates, and overall potential for advancement.

Who needs to fill out the DA Form 2166-9-1?

This form is filled out by the raters and senior raters of the NCO being reviewed. The process involves the direct supervisor (rater) and a senior supervisor (senior rater) providing an assessment. Additionally, a supplementary reviewer may be required in certain situations. The NCO being evaluated is also required to acknowledge the report by signing it, although this does not indicate agreement or disagreement with the contents.

What sections are included in the DA Form 2166-9-1?

The form is divided into several sections including:

• Administrative Data, which records basic information such as name, rank, and unit.
• Authentication, for the signatures of the rater, senior rater, and NCO being evaluated.
• Duty Description, detailing the sergeant's roles and responsibilities.
• Performance Evaluation, Professionalism, Attributes, and Competencies, assessing the NCO's effectiveness in various areas critical to military leadership.
• Overall Potential, where the senior rater evaluates the NCO's future potential compared to others in the same grade.

How is the evaluation in DA Form 2166-9-1 conducted?

The evaluation process involves the rater and senior rater providing a detailed report of the NCO's performance based on observed and measurable behaviors. This includes assessing leadership qualities, duty performance, professional development of the NCO and their ability to develop others, and their overall impact on the unit's mission. Rating officials are encouraged to provide specific examples and to refer to the Army's Leadership Requirements Model as a guideline.

What happens after the DA Form 2166-9-1 is completed?

Once the form is completed and signed by all required parties, it is submitted through the appropriate channels within the Army's Human Resources system. It becomes a part of the NCO's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The evaluations are used for considerations in promotions, assignments, and other professional development opportunities. The NCO has the right to review the completed form and pursue an appeal if they believe the evaluation is inaccurate or unjust.

Filling out the DA Form 2166-9-1, also known as the NCO Evaluation Report for SGT, can be a bit challenging. Common mistakes often stem from rushing through it without paying close attention to detail. Here are eight such errors people frequently make during the process.

One common error is entering incorrect administrative data in Part I. Simple mistakes like misspelling names, or inputting incorrect Social Security Numbers (SSNs) or DOD ID Numbers, can cause significant delays. It's crucial to double-check this information for accuracy.

Another mistake involves the duty description in Part III. Sometimes, individuals provide a vague description or use generic terms that don't accurately reflect the rated NCO's responsibilities and duties. It's essential to be specific and detailed to ensure a fair and accurate evaluation.

Failing to accurately record APFT and height/weight data in Part IVa and IVb is another common oversight. This section requires precise information about the rated NCO's Physical Fitness Test results and compliance with Army Weight Standards. Incorrect entries here can impact the overall evaluation.

Moreover, people often skim over the performance evaluation sections in Part IV, checking boxes without providing supporting comments. This lack of detail does not give a complete picture of the rated NCO's performance and capabilities. Detailed comments are necessary for a fair assessment.

Misunderstanding the rating scale in Part IV can lead to inaccuracies in assessing character, presence, intellect, leadership, development capability, and achievement. It's important to fully understand what each standard means to rate effectively.

Part V is another section prone to errors, particularly in assessing the rated NCO's future potential. Assessments can be overly optimistic or unnecessarily harsh. It is crucial to see this part as not just a reflection of current performance but as a thoughtful consideration of the individual's future roles and capabilities.

Mistakes in the authentication section, Part II, particularly failing to ensure all signatures are collected, can invalidate the form. Every required signature is necessary for the document to be processed and considered complete.

Last but not least, overlooking the counseling dates in Part II can be a critical mistake. These dates are supposed to reflect when the rated NCO was counseled about their performance and expectations. Missing or incorrect counseling dates can reflect poorly on the rating officials and their diligence in the evaluation process.

In summary, while filling out the DA Form 2166-9-1, attention to detail is paramount. From ensuring accuracy in administrative data to providing comprehensive assessments in performance evaluations, every part of the process requires careful consideration. By avoiding these common mistakes, the evaluation will be more accurate and beneficial for all parties involved.

In the realm of military documentation and evaluation, the DA Form 2166-9-1, designed for the NCO Evaluation Report (SGT), is merely a single aspect of a comprehensive evaluative and administrative process. Along with it, various forms and documents are frequently utilized to ensure a detailed assessment and to accommodate various situations that arise during service. These documents serve to provide structured feedback, outline career progression, specify training requirements, and address personal and professional development comprehensively.

• DA Form 2166-9-2: This is the NCO Evaluation Report for Staff Sergeants to First Sergeants/Master Sergeants. It’s similar to the DA 2166-9-1 but designed for higher ranks, focusing on leadership roles.
• DA Form 2166-9-3: Specifically for Sergeants Major, this form addresses evaluation criteria tailored to the pinnacle of enlisted career paths, emphasizing strategic leadership competencies.
• DA Form 705: The Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard, utilized to record the physical fitness test results, is essential for part IV of the DA 2166-9-1, where physical fitness assessment is documented.
• DA Form 5500/5501: Body Fat Content Worksheet (Male/Female), necessary when soldiers do not meet Army Weight Control standards and as a complement to the fitness data in the DA 2166-9-1.
• DA Form 4856: Developmental Counseling Form, used alongside evaluations to document counseling sessions that cover performance and professional growth.
• DA Form 4187: Personnel Action Form, employed for a myriad of personnel actions that might affect the evaluation process, such as duty reassignments or requests for training.
• DA Form 638: Recommendation for Award, used to recommend soldiers for awards, directly influencing evaluations by documenting achievements and commendable service.
• DA Form 1059: Service School Academic Evaluation Report, capturing a soldier's performance during formal military training, pivotal for career development and progression.
• DA Form 3349: Physical Profile, documenting any physical limitations that could affect a soldier’s duty performance, important for the evaluation process to ensure fair assessment.
• DA Form 268: Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG), which can affect the evaluation process by indicating disciplinary or administrative actions pending against a soldier.

Each of these documents plays a crucial role in the holistic appraisal and management of a soldier’s career, working in concert with the DA Form 2166-9-1 to paint a full picture of an individual's military performance, potential, and career trajectory. Utilizing these forms effectively ensures a comprehensive approach to personnel management and development within the Armed Forces.

The DA Form 2166-9-1, known as the NCO Evaluation Report for Sergeants, has similarities with other evaluation and performance documents used across different U.S. military branches and federal agencies. One such document is the Officer Evaluation Report (OER), utilized within the Army to assess the performance and potential of commissioned officers. Both forms share a foundational purpose: to provide structured and formal feedback, highlight areas of strength, identify opportunities for improvement, and guide career development. The structure delineates administrative data, rater and senior rater assessments, and includes a review of the subject's adherence to standards and values.

The Navy's Fitness Report (FITREP) serves a parallel function for evaluating the performance of Navy officers. Similar to the DA Form 2166-9-1, the FITREP focuses on professional attributes, leadership qualities, mission accomplishment, and future potential. Both documents require evaluators to make tough distinctions between high performers, ensuring only the most capable individuals are recommended for promotion and critical assignments. This process underlines the importance of a fair, objective, and comprehensive review to personnel management and leadership development within the services.

The Air Force also utilizes a Performance Report, specifically the Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for its non-commissioned officers (NCOs). Similar to the DA 2166-9-1 form, the EPR captures detailed information regarding an individual's duties, performance, and professional development. Both forms are crucial for decisions related to promotions, future assignments, and professional growth, reflecting the individual's contributions and capabilities in service to their respective branch.

The Department of Defense's Civilian Performance Appraisal form is another document with a similar purpose but is tailored for civilian employees within the Department of Defense. Like the DA 2166-9-1, it aims to evaluate job performance, set goals, and identify development needs. Both documents are integral to professional development, with a focus on achieving mission objectives and rewarding efficiency and effectiveness in roles. However, the civilian form adapts the evaluation process to the context of civilian employment within the military framework.

Furthermore, the Coast Guard's Employee Review (EER) foreshadows the Army's approach with DA Form 2166-9-1 in evaluating its enlisted personnel. Both systems emphasize leadership abilities, professionalism, and mission accomplishment among their ranks. The inclusion of specific performance metrics and the requirement for both self-assessment and supervisor evaluation mirror the Army's method of ensuring a comprehensive review of its service members' contributions and competencies.

The Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Appraisal form, utilized for high-level civilian leaders within the federal government, echoes the principles underpining the DA 2166-9-1, though it is tailored for a distinct audience. Like the DA form, the SES appraisal focuses on leadership qualities, achievement of results, and the ability to meet organizational goals. Both forms are essential tools in fostering a culture of excellence and accountability within their respective spheres.

Last, the Performance Appraisal Review (PAR) used by various federal civilian agencies shares the goal of advancing organizational objectives through individual assessment, similar to the DA 2166-9-1 form. While the context and specific criteria may differ, both processes are designed to evaluate performance, provide feedback, and identify areas for growth. They underscore the importance of aligning individual contributions with broader mission goals, irrespective of the military or civilian context.

When filling out the DA 2166-9-1 form, certain practices should be followed to ensure accuracy and completeness of the evaluation report. Below are key do's and don'ts to keep in mind:

• Do double-check personal information for accuracy, such as name, DOD ID No., and SSN, to avoid any discrepancies.
• Don't rush through the process. Take your time to thoughtfully evaluate each section, particularly when assessing performance and competencies.
• Do ensure that the counseling dates are correctly entered and that they align with the reporting period mentioned in the form.
• Don’t leave any mandatory fields blank, especially those requiring an assessment of whether standards were met. If a section is not applicable, ensure to follow the form's instructions on how to indicate that.
• Do provide specific examples in the comments sections to support your ratings, especially for areas that did not meet the standard.
• Don't forget to review the privacy act statement and understand the implications of the information you're providing.
• Do verify the APFT (Army Physical Fitness Test) and height/weight sections are accurately filled out, including passing or failing remarks. These are critical components of the form.
• Don’t sign the form until you’ve reviewed all parts, ensuring everything is correct and complete. Remember, your signature verifies the accuracy of all entered information.

Many individuals, particularly those new to the leadership roles within the U.S. Army, harbor misconceptions about the DA Form 2166-9-1, often referred to as the NCO Evaluation Report for Sergeants. Understanding the purpose and the process of this evaluation form is crucial for accurate and effective performance appraisal. Here are five common misconceptions explained:

• Only negative performance gets reported. Unlike the belief that the form only serves to document poor performance, its primary aim is to provide a comprehensive evaluation of an NCO's overall performance and potential, highlighting both strengths and areas for improvement.
• It's solely for administrative use. While the form does contain administrative data, its utility extends beyond mere record-keeping. It plays a crucial role in career development by identifying professional growth areas and future leadership opportunities for the evaluated NCO.
• Ratings are subjective and can't be contested. Although the evaluation involves subjective assessments by the rater and senior rater, the Army has an appeals process in place. This process allows NCOs to contest their evaluations if they believe them to be unfair or inaccurate, ensuring a measure of objectivity and fairness.
• Performance in all areas must meet the highest standards. While striving for excellence is encouraged, the form allows for variability in performance across different competencies. Ratified NCOs are evaluated on a scale, understanding that individuals may excel in some areas while having growth opportunities in others.
• Signature implies agreement with the evaluation. An NCO's signature on the form does not indicate agreement with the ratings or comments but acknowledges that the NCO has reviewed the document and that the administrative data is accurate. Awareness of the appeals process is also acknowledged through the signature.

Clearing up these misconceptions is essential for the fair and effective use of the DA Form 2166-9-1, benefiting both the evaluators and the NCOs under evaluation. Understanding the form's purpose and process encourages a more transparent and developmental approach to performance appraisal within the Army.

When engaging with the DA Form 2166-9-1, it's imperative to understand its purpose as well as the importance of accurate and thoughtful completion. Below are key takeaways to guide you through the process:

• Understand the Purpose: The DA Form 2166-9-1 is used for the evaluation of noncommissioned officers in the rank of Sergeant (SGT). It's a critical component of career development, providing feedback on performance and potential.
• Know the Contents: This form consists of several parts, including Administrative Data, Authentication, Duty Description, and Performance Evaluation.
• Privacy Act Statement: Prior to filling out the form, be aware of the Privacy Act of 1974. This act protects the personal information of individuals, and the form's handling should comply with these guidelines.
• Part I - Administrative Data: Accuracy in this section is crucial. It includes personal and professional information such as name, rank, and unit. Double-check all entries for correctness.
• Part II - Authentication: This section requires the signature of the rater, senior rater, and supplementary reviewer, if applicable. It serves to authenticate the information provided in the evaluation.
• Part III - Duty Description: It is vital to precisely describe the rated NCO's principal duty title, daily responsibilities, and areas of special emphasis. Accurate descriptions aid in fair assessment.
• Part IV - Performance Evaluation: This segment evaluates the NCO's attributes and competencies, including character, leadership, and achievement. Be objective and provide supporting comments for each rating.
• Required Signatures: The form mandates the signatures of both the rater and the rated NCO. The rated NCO's signature confirms that they have reviewed the administrative data and understand the appeals process.
• Counseling Dates: Record all counseling dates. Consistent counseling is crucial for NCO development, and this section highlights the frequency and regularity of such engagements.
• Part V - Senior Rater Overall Potential: This section assesses the NCO's future potential. The senior rater must make a thoughtful determination based on the NCO's performance and potential assignments.
• Appeals Process Awareness: Being aware of the appeals process as outlined in AR 623-3 is important. If there are disagreements with the evaluation, the rated NCO should know how to proceed.

Accomplishing the DA Form 2166-9-1 with diligence and attention to detail can significantly impact an NCO's career trajectory. It serves not only as a record of past performance but also as a blueprint for future growth.