The Rating Chain
Three different leaders write three different views of you, and the regulation is explicit about which view each one gets to write. Knowing the split tells you what you can and cannot say in each block.
// 01The three roles
The rater is your direct supervisor — the person who watched you work day to day. Their job is performance assessment. What did you actually do? What were the results? What boxes get checked because of what happened?
The senior rater is one step up — usually two levels removed from where you operate. They did not watch every moment, but they got enough exposure to assess your potential — whether the demonstrated performance suggests you can handle the next role, the next school, the next responsibility level.
The reviewer (the third role on OERs, less universally on NCOERs) is a quality-control function. They are not writing new content. They are checking that the rater and senior rater are not contradicting each other, that nothing prohibited slipped in, that the box checks support each other.
// 02Why the split matters
The regulation reserves potential commentary to the senior rater on purpose. Past performance is observable. Future potential is judgment. The Army wants different people doing those two jobs because they require different kinds of information.
A rater who has seen the NCO every day is qualified to describe what happened. A senior rater who has seen the NCO across multiple operating contexts and observed how the NCO handles increasing responsibility is qualified to judge whether the NCO can handle the next step. Conflating the two muddies the report.
"For OERs and NCOERs, rater comments are specific to performance-based assessments. Intermediate raters (OER only) may comment on both performance and potential when writing assessments. Potential comments are reserved for senior raters on both OERs and NCOERs."
AR 623-3 ¶1-40c
Checkpoint
Which role can comment on both performance and potential per ¶1-40c?
The verbatim text says "Intermediate raters (OER only) may comment on both performance and potential." Note that this exception applies to OERs, not NCOERs. On the NCOER, rater = performance, senior rater = potential.
// 03What this means when you write a self-input
When you write a self-input or talk to your rater about content, anchor everything in observable past performance. That is what your rater can use. Save the "what is next" framing for the senior rater conversation.
A self-input that reads like a list of past actions ("Led X, built Y, mentored Z") helps the rater. A self-input that reads like a wish list ("Want to attend X school, ready for Y role") helps the senior rater. Both can be true at the same time, but they go to different people for different purposes.
Checkpoint
You want to tell your rater you're ready to attend the Master Leader Course. What is the best way to surface that?
School and assignment recommendations are potential statements. They belong with the senior rater, not in a rater bullet. The third option keeps each rating official in their lane.
// 04Worked examples
Worked example · Far Exceeded
A SSG completed the brigade EXEVAL and his squad scored highest in the brigade.
Led squad to highest score in brigade EXEVAL; zero discrepancies on the 47-task evaluation, sustained through the post-EXEVAL inspection.
Pure past performance. Specific action ("led squad"), quantified result ("highest score"), enduring effect ("sustained through inspection"). The rater is firmly in their lane. The senior rater would separately write the potential commentary ("Promote ahead of peers; select for Drill Sergeant").
Worked example · Did Not Meet
Same SSG. The rater wanted to praise his potential.
Has the talent and drive to be a future First Sergeant.
"Has the talent... to be a future First Sergeant" is potential language. The bullet describes nothing the NCO did during the rating period. It is the senior rater's commentary misplaced into the rater block. A board reading the report sees the contradiction and downgrades the entire report's credibility.
// 05Practice: name the tier
Read each bullet, decide the tier it honestly supports, then check the answer underneath.
Answer · Far Exceeded
Performed extraordinarily as the platoon's training NCO; consistently built and ran training calendars across all four rating-period quarters; calendar adopted as brigade template.
Markers: extraordinary performance; consistent initiative; enduring effect
"Performed extraordinarily" is Marker 1. "Consistently across all four quarters" is Marker 2. "Adopted as brigade template" is Marker 3. Three markers — strong Far Exceeded.
Answer · Did Not Meet
Shows promise as the unit's next senior squad leader.
"Shows promise" is potential language reserved to senior raters per AR 623-3 ¶1-40c. The rater cannot use this; rewrite as past action ("Filled in as senior squad leader for 32 days during PSG R&R; zero deficiencies on the inspection") and the bullet works.
Answer · Exceeded
Promoted to E-6 ahead of peers based on consistent leadership across the rating period; ran the company NCOPD every quarter without rater oversight.
Markers: often take disciplined initiative; immediate impact
"Promote ahead of peers" is allowed recommendation language when anchored in past action (running NCOPD every quarter). "Consistent leadership across the rating period" + "every quarter without rater oversight" hit Exceeded markers.
Answer · Did Not Meet
Will be a strong company First Sergeant when given the opportunity.
"Will be" is future-tense potential. The rater cannot project future roles in their block. Senior rater territory.
Answer · Far Exceeded
Built and ran the brigade's first cross-MOS NCOPD program, mentoring eleven NCOs across three companies, three earned NCOPD instructor certification; program in use at division.
Markers: extraordinary performance; leadership multiplier; enduring effect
First cross-MOS program is extraordinary. Eleven NCOs / three earned instructor cert is the multiplier. Program in use at division is enduring effect. Three markers.
// 06What most get wrong
The most common conflation: a junior NCO sees the senior rater talking about potential and assumes the rater bullets should hint at the same. They shouldn't. A rater bullet that drifts into potential language ("ready for the next level," "would excel as a platoon sergeant") forces the rater out of their lane. Boards notice.
The rewrite move: every rater bullet should end in a way you can point to and say "this happened." If you have to imagine the future to defend the bullet, you wrote a senior-rater bullet by accident. Rewrite it to anchor in a specific action you completed during the rating period.
// 07Regulations cited in this lesson
- AR 623-3 ¶1-40c
// 08More in Foundations
The facts behind a good bullet get written down in February, not remembered in November. The free Accomplishment Log keeps them.
Get the free logWriting one right now? Open BulletForge.