FY 15 Chief Selection Board

[Tony]

Anyone who wishes to vote, there is a poll going on about the 'new' method of releasing the results. You can throw your vote in know or after the results... http://forum.navyadvancement.com/index.php/topic/733-new-method-of-releasing-advancement-board-results/

[Guest amcreed]

Im sticking with the magic 8-ball theory, lol. Good luck all

That sounds about right! lol.  Well, 5 August is exactly six weeks to the day for the pinning.  My guess is before that date!  If you all didn't know, the pinning is on the 16th this year.....

[Guest]

In response to a few of the postings asking if extra pages were seen by some on their package submissions:

 

Yes, this must be a common occurrence. I only had one page added; maybe a scanned cover page generated when they filed your package/submitted it to board (my guess).

[Guest]

01AUG2014 1245 CDT is my guess

[Guest amcreed]

I want to say they are going to come out early this year.  30 July!

[Guest PSjg78]

I want to say they are going to come out early this year.  30 July!

Im going with last week of July!!!!! NLT 31 July .... Once the FTS results come out (which is rumored between 3 -10 July) we can say another 3-4 weeks for Active DUTY results!!!!

[Tony]

Can someone with the knowledge help out a shipmate with a question? They are in Bagram with limited bandwidth.

 

http://forum.navyadvancement.com/index.php/topic/765-question-about-not-requiring-personnel-to-complete-milreqs-for-po123/

[Tony]

Okay SodiumLeak, give it a try... 

[Guest Goalfocused]

So I was looking through this last discussion and started looking at my numbers. What if my most recent numbers on a transfer eval is:

IND: 4.86

SUM: 4.86

R/S: 0.00

CUM: 0.00

Not sure what the Zero's mean for Reporting Senior and Cumulative Average, any guesses?

 

 

There are 3 averages on your report.

Individual Trait Average your score based off the (1.0 to 5.0) grading scale.

Summary Group Average - the average of all who were rated upon in your summary group. i.e. regular, frocked 

Reporting Senior's Average - this is the average of your reporting senior for all of the Sailors he has evaluated upon in your pay grade in his Naval Career.  NPC keeps stats like that.  As said before,  it distinguishes you on where you stand when coming up for selection boards if you are above the summary/reporting seniors average. It is all numbers to compare you against others to show who is the best of the best or the cream of the crop.

 

One thing you should note is that some reporting seniors grade high and when it becomes too inflated they have to lower the summary group average to readjust their reporting seniors average.  If this happends it should be noted in the block 43 as to why you/group was ranked below his reporting seniors average, or it can be a detractor.  Navigate your PSR, look at history of traits assigned and this will mesh all of what we are saying together.

 

When put together - if your individual trait average is higher than the summary, it is implied you are performing above the group of peers you were rated against. 

[Guest Goalfocused]

Goalfocused,

Because this is a "transfer" evaluation, you are not being ranked against anyone else, both in the reporting senior's category or cumulatively.  4.86 is very good.  Essentially, you are ranked against yourself.  Sometimes though, multiple PO1's transfer within the same month, then the # will increase accordingly.  It would be the average of however many PO1's transferred during said reporting period.  This is when the "1 of 1" changes to "1 of 3, 2 of 3, or 3 of 3" with the write being even more significant, because you are no longer being ranked against yourself.  Usually though, most transfer evals end up being a 1 of 1 as far as block 45 and 46.  If you led/performed admirably enough, block 43 should reflect as such.  Additionally, your Chief or CO can even write/approve your transfer evaluation with a magnificent write encompassing hard facts, command impact, Leadership, Sailorization and other attributes.  My 2 cents.  Like we all have been saying on this forum, never let your foot off the gas when it comes to being a PO1 up for Chief.  It's a crazy race, and sometimes all it takes it that one second you eased up off the gas before the one on your bumper passes you up!

Good luck!

7 more days till show time!

 

Great explanation! Thank you!

[Guest amcreed]

Goalfocused,

Because this is a "transfer" evaluation, you are not being ranked against anyone else, both in the reporting senior's category or cumulatively.  4.86 is very good.  Essentially, you are ranked against yourself.  Sometimes though, multiple PO1's transfer within the same month, then the # will increase accordingly.  It would be the average of however many PO1's transferred during said reporting period.  This is when the "1 of 1" changes to "1 of 3, 2 of 3, or 3 of 3" with the write being even more significant, because you are no longer being ranked against yourself.  Usually though, most transfer evals end up being a 1 of 1 as far as block 45 and 46.  If you led/performed admirably enough, block 43 should reflect as such.  Additionally, your Chief or CO can even write/approve your transfer evaluation with a magnificent write encompassing hard facts, command impact, Leadership, Sailorization and other attributes.  My 2 cents.  Like we all have been saying on this forum, never let your foot off the gas when it comes to being a PO1 up for Chief.  It's a crazy race, and sometimes all it takes it that one second you eased up off the gas before the one on your bumper passes you up!

Good luck!

7 more days till show time!

I'm not trying to be offensive in this post, but I do want to clear up some miss information.  First off, you are only ever ranked against another person in a transfer eval if they require an eval on the same ending date.  Aka, you both transfer on the same date.  As perBUPERSINST 1610.10C dated 20 APR 2011, Summary groups were formerly known as comparison groups. Enlisted summary groups generally consist of all members in the same pay grade (regardless of rating) and same promotion status, who receive the same type of report, from the same reporting senior, on the same ending date.  Also, on everyone of my transfer evals, my reporting senior has a an R/S and CUM.  I don't know this for sure, but I would guess that they are zeros because you were the first report in him establishing his CUM.  4.86 is a pretty high CUM to start out with for a reporting Senior.  I would say that means you are doing awesome!  Again, Summary group/ranking I'm 100% on that it has to be the same day, not just within the month.  I am just guessing the the R/S and CUM, but keep in mind all of mine have reports and an average. 

[Guest amcreed]

Indeed,

Sometimes though, personnel do transfer on the exact same day, and I have seen # 1 of 2 transfer evaluations before.  And cumulative and summary averages are not always necessarily present on transfer evals; i.e 0 for R/S and CUM.  It does vary based on if it was a transfer eval when you were an E5 vice E6 and the reporting period.

Thanks for the clarification!

I had a guy that picked the same day to transfer as me and the chain said he would get a 2 of 2 MP if he did.  He changed his date!  The joke is on me though because he is already a Chief and I'm still waiting.  So, since I was confused and didn't know I looked it up.  According to NPC, the cumulative average is the lifetime average of accepted reports that they were the reporting senior on for that paygrade.  Meaning, they will have different CUMs for E-5, E-6, E-7, E-8, O-1, ect.  The R/S is the number of reports used to calculate the CUM.  In reading that, it leads me to believe, that if the R/S is 0 and the CUM is 0, that reporting senior has never had an accepted report for the evaluated members paygrade.   

[Guest amcreed]

I was in a similar situation as you last year. I was enroute when the board convened, due to the nature of RDC "C" the board probably won't give you credit for being an RDC simply because you haven't graduated yet. If you have any questions about the duty feel free to PM me.

 

It's not a point thing, it's a mentality thing.  I have plenty of points to make it to the crunch zone.  From there it's all about the way my package gets briefed and the confidence level they have in my success.  When they brief your package, they can brief any and everything.  I'm sure it won't hurt to say, look he has done all of his, and is enroute to try his hand at RTC.  Yeah, I'd be interested to hear what you think about it over there.

 

[Guest FTS(PS)]

It's not a point thing, it's a mentality thing.  I have plenty of points to make it to the crunch zone.  From there it's all about the way my package gets briefed and the confidence level they have in my success.  When they brief your package, they can brief any and everything.  I'm sure it won't hurt to say, look he has done all of his, and is enroute to try his hand at RTC.  Yeah, I'd be interested to hear what you think about it over there.

 

I don't think that it will count too much...if at all....the board is based off of sustained superior performance....and you have not performed at that command yet...There is no guarantee to them that you will pass the school...and if you do, that you will succeed once you start pushing.....Now if you were a reservist on the other hand...lol....youd be a shoe in

[Guest ewith1999]

I don't think that it will count too much...if at all....the board is based off of sustained superior performance....and you have not performed at that command yet...There is no guarantee to them that you will pass the school...and if you do, that you will succeed once you start pushing.....Now if you were a reservist on the other hand...lol....youd be a shoe in

LOL

[Guest amcreed]

I don't think that it will count too much...if at all....the board is based off of sustained superior performance....and you have not performed at that command yet...There is no guarantee to them that you will pass the school...and if you do, that you will succeed once you start pushing.....Now if you were a reservist on the other hand...lol....youd be a shoe in

 

The crazy part about the board is, personal opinion does play a factor.  You never know how someone is going to feel about a certain qual, duty station, nec, position, ect.  Ducks pick ducks.  Meaning people choose people that are like them.  Think about that.

 

[Guest FTS(PS)]

The crazy part about the board is, personal opinion does play a factor.  You never know how someone is going to feel about a certain qual, duty station, nec, position, ect.  Ducks pick ducks.  Meaning people choose people that are like them.  Think about that.

 

Very true and now that you say it I can see how that can happen.......but, with that being said.....that is why they have more than one individual score a record.  And why they still have to fight it out in the tank in front of the President.....Ones personal opinion can only go so far.

[Guest amcreed]

Very true and now that you say it I can see how that can happen.......but, with that being said.....that is why they have more than one individual score a record.  And why they still have to fight it out in the tank in front of the President.....Ones personal opinion can only go so far.

I'm not saying some schmuck that doesn't have a record that scores well is going to get selected, but with these boards, depending on who sits them, one board could think you are the top of the top and the next wouldn't even select you.  Just based on what the see as sustained superior performance.  Especially because the precepts have gotten even more vague.  I'm told it's a very fair process, but the board members opinion of your record is what gets you selected.  What does sustained superior performance mean to them?  Think of it this way, I have had my record scored by probably 10 Senior and Master Chiefs this year.  There was pretty much no agreement on what my strongest eval.  Some said my older ones were far better than the most recent ones, some said my most recent read like an eval of someone that would get selected for Chief(and he just sat the board).  He also said, it comes down to the 8 Master/Senior Chiefs in the room.  Ducks choose ducks.

[Guest amcreed]

Very true and now that you say it I can see how that can happen.......but, with that being said.....that is why they have more than one individual score a record.  And why they still have to fight it out in the tank in front of the President.....Ones personal opinion can only go so far.

Oh, they only approve the slates in the tank.  Basically, the board members come out with the slate, from what they have fought out, put it up, if nothing is crazy glaringly wrong it gets voted, a majority rules and it gets moved on.  The president does review the slates though.  When it comes down to it, it's about 8 folks that select you for Chief.  The rest just agree on the whole list.

[Guest NukeET1FCFL]

Interesting discussion about what the board actually looks at the past few days. I think ultimately you will make it if you have done everything that you can and then somebody sees that, and most importantly recognizes that as something they want to see in a Chief.

As far as a date goes I'm sticking with August 1st. With a drop dead date of the 4th.

I imagine I'll make it this year for a couple of reasons. A) my family is coming to visit me in Hawaii the week after the results are likely to be out, which means I will be stupid busy with all of the training that will be happening that first couple of weeks. B) it would be just enough of a link in my plans that I would choose to stay in Hawaii for another few years versus retiring in 928 days.

[Guest amcreed]

A perfect example of personal opinion: I spoke with someone in my rate that sat the board last year and he said because I didn't requalify Chief of the Watch that I was toast. While others have said that because I had qualified it previously that I was good. This same MC told a NAVET that he wouldn't get selected for the same reason even though he has his ANAV NEC.

It's all about the stars aligning and having the right people at the board for your package.  I know we have all looked at that list and have been puzzled by some of the names on it before.  Obviously, the board saw something in their evals/package that made them decide they should be a Chief. 

[Guest amcreed]

 As I'm sure most everyone here can attest it is frustrating when you think you are doing everything right and it's just not your time. I will admit however during my last sea tour I didn't even think or really care about advancing, I was focused on my sailors both in my division and just around me and making sure they were taken care of and advancing.

True and that is leadership right there.  Your Sailor's individual successes ultimately make you successful.  It gives me no great pleasure than watching my Sailors advance and be recognized.  It's just a great thing and reaffirms that I am doing the right thing for them.

[Guest]

 As I'm sure most everyone here can attest it is frustrating when you think you are doing everything right and it's just not your time. I will admit however during my last sea tour I didn't even think or really care about advancing, I was focused on my sailors both in my division and just around me and making sure they were taken care of and advancing.

I have to agree. My main focus was having my people advance. Out of 7 people up during the March 2011, 5 advanced. 2 3rds, 2 2nds, and 1 1st class. All on the same cycle and that was pretty darn good for STGs.  We kicked the Navy's average that cycle.  The 2 that didn't advance...1 advanced the next cycle and one got put out (problem child). 

[Guest amcreed]

I get your point, but IMO, your wording may suggest something else to some others who may be reading this. It does say something about a sailor is they're given orders to a training command. But, you really can't read too far into it without any quantifiable data.

 

There is a precept, which I'm hoping we all reviewed and we know the board members review many times throughout the board. Nowhere will you see the words "personal opinion". No Master Chief that is on the board is going to say "I like instructors, so anyone with the 9502 NEC or orders to an instructor billet automatically goes in this pile". I'm not saying you said that, but its the same neighborhood of thinking. Especially knowing that people get orders modified in transit or get sent to a different code once they report. So, its making alot of assumptions based on orders alone that a board member is going to get points.

 

A quick sea story if you will so you can see where I'm going with this. Some years back, a friend in the same division as me and myself both were screened and selected to go to Naval Submarine School as instructors. We reported within a month from each other and both had orders that ready exactly the same thing. "Instructor Duty". We both reported, went through Basic Instructor Training and upon completion he was assigned to work at a Damage Control Trainer and I ended up being a Military Training Instructor. Others in our same class went on to be formal class instructors, while other did various things such as work at personnel offices, student holding units and etc. I never actually did any formal classroom instructing until I was there for 18 months. Did my eval say that I was an instructor before that? Nope.

 

These Master Chiefs know that these things happen and I think they would be doing a disservice to the process layed out to them to basically give credit for accomplishments not yet completed. I understand RTC is a little different in how people get assigned, but its a very similar concept. What if that outstanding LPO at sea falls flat on his face at being an RDC?  The board is going to look at the quantifiable information in front of them and score your record off of that.

 

Edit: Not to beat a dead horse, but I just reviewed the precepts since I was just having a similar convo with someone.

 

You'll notice anything the board asks for is in the past tense:

"Proven, sustained superior performance"

"Eligibles must have clearly demonstrated leadership"

"consideration to those having completed advanced education"

"Consideration shall be given to the successful accomplishment of major collateral duties"

 

It's written all over the precept that they want documented and proven data, not conjecture

 

I think you are missing the point that I am making.  I am not saying someone will get selected because of orders they will be executing or just because they had instructor duty or was stationed on a big deck/small boy, ect.  It's just a part of a mind set and there isn't any quantifiable data other than what he has done has gotten him screened successfully for this duty.  I fully believe personal opinion does absolutely matter.  Some folks are going to think some jobs are harder than others.  I have been on 6 deployments and I believe precomming a ship was more difficult then deploying.  I had a MC tell me that Precomm duty is a cake walk.  That's mindset right there and opinion.  If he feels that way sitting a board, he is going to score the LPO that deployed better than the LPO that precommed a ship.  They are going off of, 5 maybe 6 evals for, at least in my rating, 350 board eligibles.  The majority of candidates meet those few wickets.  I don't know many people that don't meet those wickets.  So that makes them "fully qualified" as the precept says.  IMHO the "best qualified" comes down those 8 people's opinion in that room hashing it out because the precept is really vague.  I could be totally off, but in speaking with numerous members that have sat the board, that is what they have told me.

 

[Guest amcreed]

The board determines a scoring structure, and at least 2 people score every record. So if you have Masterchiefs on rouge ops giving people points for something they feel is more important, its going to get scored again. I do agree that every person is going to have personal feelings about what duty is harder than what, thats the nature of what we do and its human. The board is setup to take that factor out somewhat. I've been in the shipyard numerous times on submarines and some will say its the most difficult thing a submarine can do. Others will laugh and say a forward deployed SSGN or an SSN is. I'm sure you could say the same for the surface community.

 

 

 

I agree, the precept is vague, but I believe it is because it has to be. From year to year, what the Navy needs for leadership will change and there is no cookie cutter mold for what a Chief will be for any specific rating will be from year to year. All of us have heard the rhetoric "do a, b and c and you'll make Chief!" and then the sailor does that and him, along with the CPO quarters onboard are completely taken by surprise when they dont.  You also have the inverse of "That guy failed a PRT just last year" or "he was a pedestrian, P sailor all of his career and he made chief 1st time up!?!?" We've all seen that. Sometimes you end up having to split hairsand that LPO at sea gets the nod over the LPO at shore. It can happen. I think that discussion will happen in the tank, vice on the scoresheet though. But, we are talking about opinions right now, (or interpretations) based off of gouge and guidance that can be vague at times.

At this point I think we may be debating semantics, as we both have valid points here.

Absolutely.  Once you make the selection and crunch zone which is typically double the quotas, your record is briefed.  They literally argue with each other.  The recorder calls for votes until you have a majority.  It's a fair process and I can't think of a better one.  Just can't wait till I have the majority on my side.