Dogg

Eye witness

For those of you who may not know, the selection board is now conducted like officers boards. This means every record gets in the tank for briefings. No more score sheets and cutoff score to go to the tank. Just FYI.

T minus 17

Good luck to everyone awaiting results especially my FTS/SELRES PSs. Post your results here. For those not selected, do not give up. Every dog has its day.

First car wash is this Saturday!

Looks like this FY18 FTS/SELRES selectee class will be as lucky as my FY14 class- 3 weeks phase 2. Just saying.

Correct. That's why I said "if they qualify"

Packages sent to selection boards get uploaded to your ompf if they qualify. That started a couple of years ago.

The only intel I have gotten so far is that the USS Fitzgerald mishap is the cause of the FTS/SELRES results delay. The flags have been extremely involved with it. However, I would be surprised if results don't show up next week. For AD, expect it by Aug 2 or sooner if we hit 100 pages by July 31st.

Well, it takes a 100 pages for results to be released. Old timers here know that basic fact lol.

The CO with the 4.35 average could ruin some careers with such a high average. Hard to believe a 4.29 will be below the average.

A 1/1 MP typically known as air gap eval could make the board wonder why your CO chose to not award you the EP. This is career ending in Officer fitrep I am told. Not sure how it's treated with enlisted boards especially since your CO still put you above cumulative average. Mixed message to say the least.

SSP doesn't necessarily mean you're at or above average on every eval. What they want to see is upward mobility. Being below average on first eval is normal. You are expected to move above average after your second or third year onboard.

Absolutely, block 41 is just as important. Logically, the write up should match the averages. A CO could lose credibility if they give you a powerful write up but put you below his/her average. A reporting senior that doesn't manage the average well could destroy unintentionally the career of some members. Your average could be 4.29, but still lower than cumulative average, while someone with 3.86 is well above. This could be one of the reasons why a change in the evaluation method is being considered and I agree.

METOC, it all depends on the competition. If you read my post, I said it is good to be at or above summary group and reporting senior cumulative average MOST of the time; not necessarily all the time. The ultimate factor is the ability to show upward movement in your averages. A "P" eval with an above average tells the board that you are in the game, but just got stuck in timing. Anytime a reporting senior places you at or above his/her average, they are telling the selection board that you are qualified for advancement. The reason I wrote this is because a lot of time, some members wonder why they are not selected even though they have numerous EPs especially 1/1s and transfer EPs. Since you are not competing with any one on a 1/1 or transfer eval, the board will look at where you fall in reporting senior's cumulative average. There's a saying that Evals are written sometimes to please members, but the averages are written to the selection board.It's always a good idea to know your reporting senior' average and what it takes to be at or above. When you check on board or any time you have a new CO, ask them. If you are wondering why a lot of members get selected without a single EP, it's because their averages tell the whole story. I can use myself as an example. When I made Chief, my evals were E5: MP, MP, EP(transfer), E6: MP (frocking ), MP, EP. All my averages were at or above.