ALCGENL 017/21 - ENLISTED EVALUATION SYSTEM (EES) CY20 REVIEW

R 021944Z FEB 21
FM COMCOGARD PSC WASHINGTON DC
TO ALCGENL

ALCGENL 017/21
SUBJ: ENLISTED EVALUATION SYSTEM (EES) CY20 REVIEW
A. Enlistments, Evaluations, and Advancements, COMDTINST M1000.2 (series)
B. Enlisted Evaluation System Procedures Manual, PSCINST M1611.2 (series)
C. Performance, Training and Education Manual, COMDTINST M1500.10 (series)
1. This message outlines information, best practices, and guidance to assist
unit rating chains and enlisted personnel with Enlisted Evaluation System (EES)
administration. Evaluations are a critical part of Coast Guard talent management. CG PSC-EPM-3
is fully staffed with nine active duty military members and three civilians responsible
for the health of the EES, including the review and validation of over 71,000 Enlisted
Evaluation Report (EERs) submitted annually for 38,000 active duty and reserve enlisted members.
CG PSC-EPM-3 Reviewed 88.3% of all command-approved EERs for adherence to policy and
completed 26 unit-level training events in CY20. Further, CG PSC-EPM-3 supported enlisted advancements,
assignments, and separations with the most accurate and up-to-date enlisted evaluation
information possible, including preparing material for 20 enlisted boards and panels. Due to the
impact EERs have on a members career, including a members eligibility for the Service Wide Exam (SWE),
CG PSC-EPM-3 strives to minimize EERs that are late, contain administrative errors, or lack
sufficient comments.
2. Ref (A) was updated in February 2020. Notable changes related to the EES are
below:
a. Comment Sufficiency on EERs: Refs (A) and (B) require all EERs to include
sufficient comments for marks of 1, 2, 3 or 7, Future Potential, Advancement Potential of Not
Ready or Not Recommended, and Unsatisfactory Conduct.
b. The regular E-8 EER marking cycle was shifted to February for active duty
members, but remains November for reserve members.
3. CG PSC-EPM-3 reviewed over 63,000 EERs in CY20 including 100 percent of E-5
and above EERs. 22.0 percent were returned for correction for non-compliance with policy. Further,
all paygrades experienced a rise (25-50 percent) in overdue marks. Marks are considered overdue when
they are not submitted to CG PSC-EPM-3 within 30 days after the end of the applicable marking period.
Local rating officials are encouraged to implement measures to eliminate administrative errors, improve
the quality of comments, and ensure timely completion of EERs. The following are some best practices
and guidance:
a. Prohibited/Unauthorized Comments Guidance: Comments must not be entered for
marks of 4, 5, 6, Satisfactory Conduct, or a Ready Advancement Potential. When comments are
required, they must not (1) Include pregnancy of the member or of family members, (2) Place emphasis
on race, gender, religion, or ethnic background, (3) Place emphasis on third parties by mentioning
name, race, religion, or ethnic background, (4) Include members first or last name, (5) Include gender
identifiable pronouns, (6) Reference members marital or family status, or (7) Include performance
conducted outside of the observation period. Inclusion of prohibited and unauthorized comments are
the most common reason for EER returns.
b. Authorized Approving Official Guidance: The Approving Official must be a Coast Guard officer,
Officer in Charge, or Coast Guard civilian who is the official supervisor of the Marking Official. If
necessary, the Approving Official can fill the role of the Marking Official. Table 2-2 Enlisted Employee
Review Rating Chain of Ref (B) details which position is authorized to be an Approving Official for each
type of unit. For O-6 Commands only: The Approving Official may be delegated to the
Deputy/XO, Department Head, Division Officer/Chief, or Branch/Command Staff Chiefs. This delegation is
limited to O-6/O-5 for EERs for all paygrades, or to O-4 for E-6 and below EERs only. Approving Official
authorization may not be delegated below the grade of O-4.
c. Not Ready or Not Recommended Guidance: Per Ref (A), Not Ready shall be used if the member is performing
satisfactorily but has not completed requirements for the next pay grade or, in the view of the Approving
Official, is not yet ready to carry out the duties and responsibilities of the next higher grade.
The comments must outline a pathway to a positive recommendation for advancement, to include specific
requirements such as EPQ/RPQ, EPME 2.0, or rating competency code (e.g. if member is a BMC, they must
have the Officer in Charge (OIC) competency in order to be marked Ready for E-8). Vague comments
such as practical factors not completed are insufficient. Required time in grade/service must not be
considered when determining overall eligibility for advancement. Not Recommended is typically, but not
always, punitive in nature. If a service member is being processed for discharge it must be stated. The
rating chain is required to list the specific criteria the member failed to meet and outline a pathway
to a positive recommendation for advancement. A member need not be awarded NJP in order to be marked Not
Recommended based on documented poor performance, lack of maturity, or inability to secure trust and
confidence of the rating chain to perform at the next higher pay grade. No other eligibility requirements
for advancement should be considered for members in paygrade E-1 through E-3 (e.g. a non-rate
should not be marked as Not Ready or Not Recommended for the sole reason of not being Boat Crew and/or
Boarding Team qualified). IAW Ref (C), a CO/OIC Shall not impose local unit requirements hindering placement
on members chosen Class A School waiting list." At this time, the completion of Chief Petty Officer
Academy (CPOA) is considered an advancement requirement rather than a testing requirement and should not be
considered for advancement potential for E-6s and E-7s. Further, members should not be marked as Not Ready
or Not Recommended due to the sole reason of Medical status, pending Retirement/RELAD without official
orders, and/or placement on weight probation.
d. The second most common reason EERs are returned is when they are submitted without being set to Approved
status using the Approving Officials EMPLID. Please ensure the EER is set to Approved in the Reviewers Tab
prior to selecting final and submitting in Direct Access.
e. Drug Incident (DI) Guidance: A Discipline EER is required for a member who has a DI with an effective date
of the day of the positive result or the date of the findings. Commands are required to enter a Discipline
EER once a positive drug result is reported to the Command, the member admits to actions constituting a DI,
or an investigation determines the member committed a DI. Commands are encouraged to contact appropriate
CG PSC-EPM branches upon determination of a DI for further guidance.
f. Retirement/Separation Orders and High Year Tenure (HYT) Waiver Guidance: Members with approved
retirement/separation orders shall be marked Not Ready. Members with an approved HYT waiver or a pending
HYT Waiver/retirement/separation request shall be marked Ready unless the member does not meet eligibility
and qualification requirements outlined in Ref (A) or is not yet ready to carry out the duties and
responsibilities of the next higher grade.
g. Service Wide Exam (SWE) EER Guidance: A SWE EER may be completed for the purpose of qualifying a member
for the SWE competition/Master Chief Advancement Panel (MCAP) if the member was not evaluated in the current
pay grade during the evaluation report window and the member is observed for the required minimum time.
SWE EERs must have an effective date on or prior to the SWE Eligibility Date /MCAP Panel Eligibility Date
and must be submitted prior to the published Personal Data Extract correction deadline date to qualify for
an upcoming SWE/MCAP. IAW Ref (A), a SWE EER will not be completed to raise the sum of an individual factor,
change an unsatisfactory conduct mark, change a COs advancement recommendation, or if the members performance
observed at their current unit is less than 92 days for E-5 and below or 184 for E-6 and above. If a member
has not been observed/attached to current unit for the minimum observation period (92/184 days) a SWE EER is prohibited.
h. Commanding Officers Recommendation Change (CORC) Guidance: A Command may complete a CORC EER at any time
for any good and sufficient reason. However, if a Not Recommended was given by a previous Command and the member transfers, the
new Command cannot change the advancement recommendation with a CORC EER and must wait until the next regular marking period.
Comments are prohibited for a Ready advancement recommendation. Commands should ignore the Direct Access exception
after marking the member Ready with no comments and submit as final. CG PSC-EPM-3 is aware of this error and
coordinating with Coast Guard Pay and Personnel Center on a solution.
i. Change/Waiver Request Guidance: Change Request memos must be signed by the Approving Official and all comments
must comply with policy. If a command changes a mark from a 6 to a 7, it must provide the accompanying comments
adhering to the 220 character limit. Waiver Request memos will be adjudicated on a case by case basis. If requesting
to waive a marking period due to non-observation, ensure the absence is captured in Direct Access prior to
submitting the waiver. Commands are encouraged to read the Limited Opportunity to Perform section in Ref (A)
prior to requesting an EER waiver. Change and Waiver Request templates can be found on the CG PSC-EPM-3 Portal Page.
j. EER Timeliness: Completing EERs within the timeframes outlined in Ref (A) ensures timely performance feedback
to members and accurate records for various personnel actions. Chapter 4.B of Ref (A) states that Supervisors shall route
evaluations no later than nine days prior to the period ending date to the Marking Official. Marking Officials shall
route evaluations no later than five days after the period ending date to the Approving Official. Commands shall
ensure members are counseled within 21 days (45 days for reservists) after the end of the period. The evaluation
shall be submitted for finalization to CG PSC-EPM-3 within 30 days after the end of the applicable marking period.
4. EES Training. CG PSC-EPM-3 offers a 45-60 minute virtual training. Training includes various topics, including
an overview of the EES, types of EERs, recent EES changes, current trends, and tips for crafting comments and future
potential. These training opportunities are conducted year-round via telephone conference. If you or your Command
is interested in scheduling EES training, please email CG PSC-EPM-3 at the shared CG PSC-EPM-3 email address listed
below.
5. Additional information and resources regarding the EES can be found on the CG PSC-EPM-3 portal page or by contacting
the CG PSC-EPM-3 shared mailbox at HQS-SMB-CGPSC-EPM-3-Evaluations@uscg.mil.
6. CG PSC-EPM-3 POC:  LCDR Walter Krolman, (202) 795-6388, Walter.C.Krolman@uscg.mil.
7. CAPT J. A. Carter, Chief, Enlisted Personnel Management Division, CGPersonnel Service Center, sends.
8. Internet release authorized.