Download Da 2166 9 1 Form in PDF

Filling out the DA 2166-9-1 form can be tricky. Many people make mistakes that can lead to delays or issues with their evaluations. Here are nine common errors to watch out for.

One mistake is not providing the correct name format in the administrative data section. Ensure you list your name as Last, First, and Middle Initial. Any variation could cause confusion and might delay processing.

Another frequent error involves the Social Security Number (SSN) or DOD ID. Double-check this information. An incorrect number can lead to significant issues, including misidentification.

Many individuals forget to include the rated months in the appropriate section. This is essential for determining the evaluation period. Without this information, the form may not be processed correctly.

Omitting the email address of the rated NCO is also common. This detail is crucial for communication. Make sure to use a valid .gov or .mil address to avoid any complications.

People sometimes neglect to sign the form. The signature of the rater and senior rater is mandatory. Without these signatures, the form is incomplete and cannot be submitted.

Another mistake is failing to provide counseling dates. This section is important for documenting when the rated NCO received feedback. Missing this can create misunderstandings about the evaluation process.

Some individuals do not accurately fill out the performance evaluation sections. Each category requires specific comments. Ensure that you provide detailed feedback to support the ratings.

It’s also common to overlook the overall potential rating for the senior rater. This section is vital for summarizing the NCO's potential compared to peers. Don’t skip it!

Lastly, make sure to review the entire form before submission. Many errors can be caught with a simple double-check. Taking the time to ensure accuracy can save you from future headaches.

When completing the DA Form 2166-9-1, several other documents may be required to ensure a comprehensive evaluation process. These forms and documents provide additional context and information that can enhance the understanding of the rated NCO's performance and potential. Below is a list of commonly used forms and documents that accompany the DA Form 2166-9-1.

• DA Form 4856: This is the Developmental Counseling Form. It is used to document counseling sessions between a supervisor and a soldier. This form helps clarify expectations and provides a record of performance discussions, which can be referenced during evaluations.
• DA Form 1059: The Academic Evaluation Report is utilized to assess a soldier's performance during military training courses. It provides insights into the soldier's capabilities and achievements in a formal educational setting, which can be relevant for overall evaluations.
• DA Form 67-9: This is the Officer Evaluation Report. Although primarily for officers, it may be referenced when evaluating the performance of NCOs who interact closely with officers. It provides a broader context of leadership within the unit.
• DA Form 2166-9-2: This form is used for the evaluation of NCOs in higher ranks (E-6 and above). It may be referenced to ensure consistency in evaluations across different ranks and to provide comparative insights.
• APFT Scorecard: This document records the results of the Army Physical Fitness Test. The scorecard is essential for evaluating the physical readiness of the rated NCO, which is a critical component of their overall performance assessment.
• Height/Weight Record: This document verifies compliance with Army height and weight standards. It is important to include this information to ensure that the rated NCO meets the physical requirements necessary for their role.

Each of these documents plays a vital role in the evaluation process. They provide a well-rounded view of the rated NCO's performance, capabilities, and adherence to Army standards. It is essential to ensure that all relevant documents are accurately completed and submitted alongside the DA Form 2166-9-1 to facilitate a fair and thorough evaluation.

The DA Form 2166-9-1, which is used for evaluating non-commissioned officers (NCOs), shares similarities with the Employee Performance Appraisal Form (EPAP) used in civilian federal employment. Both documents serve as formal assessments of an individual's job performance over a specific period. They include sections for identifying the employee, the period covered, and the evaluator's observations. Just as the DA Form emphasizes military values and competencies, the EPAP focuses on job-related skills and accomplishments. The goal of both forms is to provide a structured way to evaluate performance and guide future development.

Another document akin to the DA Form 2166-9-1 is the Annual Performance Review (APR) commonly used in corporate settings. Like the DA Form, the APR assesses an employee's performance based on predetermined criteria and objectives. Both documents typically require input from multiple reviewers, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation. They also allow for employee feedback, enabling individuals to understand their strengths and areas for improvement. This process fosters professional growth and aligns individual performance with organizational goals.

The Officer Evaluation Report (OER) is yet another document that resembles the DA Form 2166-9-1. Used for commissioned officers, the OER evaluates performance and potential in a structured manner. Both forms require detailed assessments of specific competencies, such as leadership and professionalism. While the DA Form focuses on NCOs, the OER is tailored for officers, reflecting the different roles and responsibilities within the military hierarchy. Both reports aim to inform promotion decisions and career development within the armed forces.

Similarly, the Civilian Evaluation Report (CER) is comparable to the DA Form 2166-9-1 in its function of assessing employee performance in government roles. The CER provides a framework for evaluating job performance, highlighting strengths and weaknesses, much like the NCO Evaluation Report. Both documents emphasize the importance of feedback and goal-setting, ensuring that employees understand their contributions to the organization. This alignment of performance expectations helps to foster a productive work environment.

The Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) can also be likened to the DA Form 2166-9-1. A PIP is often used when an employee's performance does not meet expectations. Similar to the evaluation report, it outlines specific areas needing improvement and sets measurable goals. Both documents serve as tools for accountability and development, providing a clear path for employees to enhance their performance. The emphasis on constructive feedback is a common thread between the two forms.

The Fitness Report (FITREP) used by the U.S. Navy bears similarities to the DA Form 2166-9-1 as well. Both documents evaluate the performance of personnel and include sections for comments on leadership, professionalism, and overall effectiveness. The FITREP, like the NCO Evaluation Report, plays a crucial role in determining promotions and career advancement. They both require input from multiple evaluators, ensuring a balanced and fair assessment of the individual’s capabilities.

The Performance Appraisal Document (PAD) used in various organizations also shares characteristics with the DA Form 2166-9-1. The PAD assesses an employee's performance based on specific criteria and includes feedback from supervisors. Like the DA Form, it aims to promote professional development and align individual goals with organizational objectives. Both documents encourage open communication between employees and their evaluators, fostering a culture of continuous improvement.

Lastly, the 360-Degree Feedback form is similar to the DA Form 2166-9-1 in that it gathers input from various sources, including peers, supervisors, and subordinates. This comprehensive approach provides a well-rounded view of an individual’s performance. Both forms focus on critical competencies and personal attributes, aiming to enhance the individual's professional growth. By incorporating multiple perspectives, they help create a more accurate assessment of performance and potential.

When filling out the DA 2166-9-1 form, it’s essential to ensure accuracy and completeness. Here are some important dos and don’ts to keep in mind:

• Do double-check all personal information, including your name and SSN, for accuracy.
• Do ensure that all dates are formatted correctly (YYYYMMDD).
• Do provide a clear and detailed description of your daily duties and responsibilities.
• Do include all required signatures from the rater, senior rater, and supplementary reviewer.
• Do review the completed form for any missing sections before submission.

• Don't leave any sections blank; if a section does not apply, indicate that clearly.
• Don't use informal language or abbreviations that may confuse the reader.
• Don't forget to sign and date the form in the appropriate sections.
• Don't submit the form without verifying that all email addresses are correct.
• Don't rush through the process; take your time to ensure everything is accurate and complete.

Misconceptions about the DA 2166 9 1 form can lead to confusion regarding its purpose and use. Here are five common misconceptions clarified:

• It is only for NCOs with negative evaluations. This form is used for all Non-Commissioned Officers (NCOs) regardless of their performance. It provides a comprehensive evaluation, highlighting both strengths and areas for improvement.
• Only the rater's opinion matters. While the rater's assessment is crucial, the senior rater also plays an important role in evaluating the NCO’s potential. Their input is considered equally significant in the overall evaluation process.
• Signatures indicate agreement with the evaluation. The rated NCO's signature does not mean they agree with the evaluations. It simply confirms that they have seen the report and that the administrative data is correct.
• The form is only for annual evaluations. This form can be used for various evaluations, including initial assessments, quarterly reviews, and special circumstances. Its flexibility allows for timely feedback throughout the year.
• It is not important for career advancement. The DA 2166 9 1 form plays a significant role in career progression. Evaluations can influence promotions, assignments, and other opportunities within the military.

When filling out and using the DA 2166-9-1 form, consider the following key takeaways:

• Accurate Information: Ensure all personal details, such as name, SSN, and rank, are correctly filled in Part I.
• Submission Reasons: Clearly state the reason for submission in the designated section to avoid confusion.
• Rater and Senior Rater Details: Provide complete information for both the rater and senior rater, including signatures and email addresses.
• Performance Evaluation: Assess the rated NCO’s performance across various competencies, ensuring comments are specific and relevant.
• Counseling Dates: Document all counseling dates accurately to reflect the rated NCO's development and progress.
• Supplementary Review: If applicable, include details of any supplementary reviewers, ensuring their input is captured.
• Review Process: The rated NCO should understand that their signature does not indicate agreement but confirms the accuracy of administrative data.