Promotion and PRF Information

[ThreeHoler]

Still on the rack and stack excel sheet I just got from the boss. So.. not really solving anything.

Too bad the instructions that came with the in-zone notice specifically forbids senior raters from using any locally produced rack and stack sheet.

[Guest ThatGuy]

Dude I appreciate what you are saying but we are talking past each other. Go to the AFPC website and you will see that AFPC no longer takes request for records reviews or As Met packages. All records are in PRDA, that is correct. But if you go look you will also see your Promotion board selection folder. This is the folder that meets or has met the board. Go check it out through AMS. How you access your promotion record all changed in the last year or so. But, all of your TRs meet the board. Go check again and you will see that this is correct. Too bad that Chuck took his post down since he can corroborate this info.

I am not asking anyone to take my word for any of this...as I said before go to PRDA, pull your promotion board selection folder and you will see what meets or has met the board. This is different from searching for all your OPRs or decs or whatever document. It is a separate folder that is the folder that meets the promotion board. This info is all available on the AFPC website. I said it in the last post and will say it again, go check for yourself.

ETA: the folder is titled by the board identifier, IIRC. (e.g. P05xxx)

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

Thanks for explaining to us how to view the material the board will see online. I passed this information on to a friend and he visited the PRDA on the portal like myself. Not sure why prior service medals were included but oh well. And they duplicated an air medal citation.

[panchbarnes]

Question for the folks who have served on the promotion board.

With the new computerized process of reviewing and scoring records, do you have more/enough time to review each person's documents and look for the whole person concept and job performance history? Or is still the method of DP/P piles, and then look for strats/DGs to score the Ps? The old school folks are always saying the reviewers don't have the time to review the documents in depth, DPs/strats/DGs are pretty much what they rely on to score.

Thanks.

Btw, the old mindset of box checking is alive and well in the FGO world (especially non-rated ops/support AFSCs). Until those folks are gone, I don't expect much change to the stratification process.

Edited November 2, 2014 by PanchBarnes

[17D_guy]

Too bad the instructions that came with the in-zone notice specifically forbids senior raters from using any locally produced rack and stack sheet.

I'm not up for a board. Just noticed it. Where do I find those instructions?

[Dupe]

Too bad the instructions that came with the in-zone notice specifically forbids senior raters from using any locally produced rack and stack sheet

Except that there's no way to tell if a SR is using a rack-and-stack sheet. I suspect that most still are. Mine certainly is.

[ThreeHoler]

Except that there's no way to tell if a SR is using a rack-and-stack sheet. I suspect that most still are. Mine certainly is.

Agreed. Pointing out that SR and those below them are happy to violate direction from CSAF and SECAF.

[theat6bisasham]

Question for the folks who have served on the promotion board.

With the new computerized process of reviewing and scoring records, do you have more/enough time to review each person's documents and look for the whole person concept and job performance history? Or is still the method of DP/P piles, and then look for strats/DGs to score the Ps? The old school folks are always saying the reviewers don't have the time to review the documents in depth, DPs/strats/DGs are pretty much what they rely on to score.

Thanks.

Btw, the old mindset of box checking is alive and well in the FGO world (especially non-rated ops/support AFSCs). Until those folks are gone, I don't expect much change to the stratification process.

This isn't how it works at all...i've served as a lacky shuffling folders on the board. It's not separated into Dp/P piles at all. The 2 computer screens give you lots of time to read the records. The O6's on the board read read and read some more...it's just different HOW and WHAT they focus their reading on. Some dudes might focus on this while others that...combat hours, vs flunked out of UPT, vs DG at SOS...different folks focus differently....don't forget you have a room full of 30+ O-6s representing the entire air force - so 15% women, 8% asian, 75% line, 47 % pilot, etc etc.....if you don't get a fair shake, then it just wasn't meant to be.

[Bender]

Agreed. Pointing out that SR and those below them are happy to violate direction from CSAF and SECAF.

It's a great thing to say that it's being done wrong and telling people to stop doing it wrong...that is only part of the solution though, there must be some guidance when the "right way" isn't readily apparent.

Without disagreeing with what's been posted here, but what is the solution if you can't locally convene boards or eventually rack and stack off of discretely comparable metrics?

How does a squadron level list generated by genuine meritocracy (that alone requires hundreds of hours of devoted performance review) get combined into one that can stand against a senior rater's allocation?

If a senior rater was to push guidance to align the lower level reviews, the line seemingly gets crossed on convening a board (if executed as disjointed as it would be).

Does the work product from the lower level reviews push data (highlighted ROPs, push lines, PRFs, etc.) that forms the input to the next level review until the senior rater's staff is working over the whole lot conducting a genuine performance level review that dismisses/aligns with CSAF guidance?

I've never met someone that appreciates being told something is wrong while blatantly acknowledging there isn't clearly a better way of doing it.

I don't even know what we're talking about here to be honest,

Bendy

Edited November 3, 2014 by Bender

[panchbarnes]

This isn't how it works at all...i've served as a lacky shuffling folders on the board. It's not separated into Dp/P piles at all. The 2 computer screens give you lots of time to read the records. The O6's on the board read read and read some more...it's just different HOW and WHAT they focus their reading on. Some dudes might focus on this while others that...combat hours, vs flunked out of UPT, vs DG at SOS...different folks focus differently....don't forget you have a room full of 30+ O-6s representing the entire air force - so 15% women, 8% asian, 75% line, 47 % pilot, etc etc.....if you don't get a fair shake, then it just wasn't meant to be.

Thanks for the explanation. The DP/P piles method is what is advertised to the CGOs when paper records were still around. This method is probably still being taught at SOS during the PRF exercise. Even with the computerized scoring system, SOS and some O-6s want you to believe that the reviewers don't have the time to review each package in-depth, and that most people rely on the DPs/strats/DGs in order to get thru all the packages within the allotted time.

Edited November 3, 2014 by PanchBarnes

[Danger41]

Thanks for the explanation. The DP/P piles method is what is advertised to the CGOs when paper records were still around. This method is probably still being taught at SOS during the PRF exercise. Even with the computerized scoring system, SOS and some O-6s want you to believe that the reviewers don't have the time to review each package in-depth, and that most people rely on the DPs/strats/DGs in order to get thru all the packages within the allotted time.

Not that it matters, but as of a few classes ago SOS does show the process how it goes now with the computer screens and all of that. I got the impression they were trying to move away from the "1 minute review" thing. I learned a good bit about how the process actually works in those lessons.

[go_cubbies22]

For the Majors board, what % of people get strats in the push line? Is it a standard number or does it vary by Senior Rater? If you don't get a strat, are your chances of school select slim to none? Thanks

[AlphaMikeFoxtrot]

For the Majors board, what % of people get strats in the push line? Is it a standard number or does it vary by Senior Rater? If you don't get a strat, are your chances of school select slim to none? Thanks

It's typically top 20%. This does change from Wing to Wing, but that's generally the standard. That also coincides with the typical selection for school. It's not impossible to get school as a select, but it's not likely.

[Champ Kind]

If you don't get a strat, are your chances of school select slim to none? Thanks

Correct. I'd say a realistic number is ~top 10% of eligibles coming from your SR to be realistically competitive for IDE at the board.

[panchbarnes]

What about subsequent looks for a school slot. What's that based on?

[Bender]

What about subsequent looks for a school slot. What's that based on?

Might be easier to answer what it isn't based on...

Bendy

[AlphaMikeFoxtrot]

What about subsequent looks for a school slot. What's that based on?

My understanding is it's DT vectors and your subsequent Wing push.

[Dupe]

What about subsequent looks for a school slot. What's that based on?

Luck and timing.

[11F]

For the Majors board, what % of people get strats in the push line? Is it a standard number or does it vary by Senior Rater? If you don't get a strat, are your chances of school select slim to none? Thanks

Anecdotal evidence from a PRF written in 2010 for the Dec-10 Majors board: #5/13 strat on his PRF with a DP was a school select. That's the only hard evidence I have to help answer your question. (It probably didn't hurt that the guy was #1 in his entire SOS class)

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

[tac airlifter]

Anecdotal evidence from a PRF written in 2010 for the Dec-10 Majors board: #5/13 strat on his PRF with a DP was a school select. That's the only hard evidence I have to help answer your question. (It probably didn't hurt that the guy was #1 in his entire SOS class)

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

That's a perfect example of the tomfoolery ASW SOS strats. Unless #1-4 were also selects, it's disheartening to see an SOS strat drive the entire machine. Yet it does. We frequently see guys rated higher by MAJCOM passed over for school slots by folks who are rated lower in every category except SOS.

[zach braff]

I have a bud who was a Senior Rater's #5/11 who got tagged as a select, and I know two others who were SRs' #1/4 & #1/3 who did not. While I'm not much for the over-emphasis on SOS, Liquid was right when he said that strats are important but aren't everything. The bottom line carries a lot of weight, probably more weight than any other strat in the PRF - but it isn't necessarily everything. If it was, why would we even bother with PRFs - the SRs could just rank order everyone and be done.

I recall coming across a slide from a year or two ago entitled "what we value" for promotions that was briefed to a Corona. The items I remember seeing for the O-4 category were (not in any particular order):

- mission accomplishment/results/scope

- combat/deployments

- awards

- combat decorations & decorations

- strats

- IG results/inspections

- DGs

- progression in organizations

- instructor

- PME

- ??? may have been one or two others but those are the ones I recall

Chime in Liquid - does this look fairly close to what boards are looking at in records?

zb

[11F]

In the case of the dude being #1 in his SOS class but being #5/13 on his PRF, I'd like to think the WG/CC knew this guy would be a school select and therefore tried to use his higher strats on others? I don't know how #1-#4 faired on the board though.

[Liquid]

At the Corona last fall, the MAJCOM CCs and CSAF talked about what we value as an AF and what we should value at promotion boards. I helped chop on the input below that was sent to CSAF and HAF A1 from our MAJCOM CC. He sent this in Oct:

"What we value in every officer for promotion (in priority order)

Capt to Major

1. Job performance (AC, IP, EP, WIC, AMU OIC, FLT CC, etc)

2. Leading Airmen both in garrison and deployed

3. Combat deployments, deployed mission commander

4. SOS

5. Additional duties: exec, safety, training, current ops & scheduling, plans, etc. This provides us insight into which officers can master their primary skill set and also handle increased responsibility.

6. Optional: Masters Degree

Major to Lt Col

1. Job performance

2. Leading Airmen both in garrison and deployed

3. Combat deployment mission commander

4. Joint job - GCC, OSD, JS, Inter-agency

5. HQs job- HAF, MAJCOM

6. IDE either in-residence or correspondence

7. Masters degree

Lt Col to Col

1. Job performance

2. Squadron commander

3. Leading Airmen both in-garrison and deployed mission commander

4. Joint job - GCC, OSD, JS, Inter-agency

5. HQs job- HAF, MAJCOM

6. SDE either in-residence or correspondence

7. Masters degree"

Not sure what the response was or if there was one. I've heard the CSAF and A1 are working on the vector and new promotion board guidance. Hopefully this guidance will include masking AAD at O-4 board, MLR and prohibit using it for DP consideration.

[panchbarnes]

Better late than never..

https://www.af.mil/mobile/News/tabid/252/Article/551311/csaf-discusses-advanced-academic-degree-pme-for-officer-promotions.aspx

[zmoney]

Translation: "Quit worrying about this crap. #1: Do your jobs. #2: Spend time with your families (until Colonel)."

[Ravens52]

Better late than never..

https://www.af.mil/mobile/News/tabid/252/Article/551311/csaf-discusses-advanced-academic-degree-pme-for-officer-promotions.aspx

Damn straight! It's good we are starting to get the ball rolling in the right direction... It's going to be even more important to keep it rolling-looking at you Wg/CCs and future leadership.

As mentioned earlier, "be good at your job/do your job", work hard, take care of others, and unfortunately luck, timing, and who you know will help you out.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited November 7, 2014 by Ravens52