Enlisted Performance Report
An Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) is an evaluation form used by the United States Air Force. Instructions for constructing an EPR appear in chapter 3 of Air Force Instruction 36-2406: Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems. The EPR replaced the Airman Performance Report (APR) in the late 1980s.
The USAF commissioned officer equivalent is the Officer Performance Report (OPR). The United States Navy equivalent is the Fitness Report (FITREP). The United States Army equivalent is the Enlisted Evaluation Report (EER).
Contents |
[edit] Purpose
- To provide meaningful feedback to individuals on what is expected of them, advice on how well they are meeting those expectations, and advice on how to better meet those expectations.
- To provide a reliable, long-term, cumulative record of performance and potential based on that performance.
- To provide officer central selection boards, senior NCO evaluation boards, the Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS), and other personnel managers sound information to assist in identifying the best qualified enlisted personnel. In WAPS, past EPRs are worth up to 135 points.
[edit] Evaluation
An EPR evaluates the performance of an enlisted member both on and off duty. The period of time covered by the EPR is normally no less than 120 days and no longer than 365 days. A scale of 1 to 5 is used as an overall rating of the member's performance with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest. EPRs are normally written by the member's supervisor with additional input provided by their supervisor's supervisor.
Although the bulk of the evaluation is focused on their duty (job) performance, enlisted members are also evaluated on their off-duty performance in areas such as volunteerism and continuing education. This is arguably the biggest difference between the Air Force EPR and civilian counterparts.
Personnel who have left the Air Force and are seeking jobs in the civilian world will sometimes use EPRs to augment their résumé.
[edit] Stratification statements
Stratification statements can only be used on EPRs for SNCOs who are time-in-grade eligible for senior rater endorsement. Stratification statements on these EPRs may be used by all evaluators endorsing the EPR (immediate rater, additional rater and final evaluator). Stratification statements must be stated in quantitative terms (#1 of 125 MSgts) and will be based on the number of peers (in the same grade as the ratee) assigned within the evaluator’s rating scheme. Stratification statements on all other performance reports, to include CMSgt reports, are strictly prohibited.
[edit] New EPR format
On 12 July 2007 the Air Force announced a major overhaul of the content of the EPR and OPR reports in an effort to decrease the time required to accomplish the report. EPR narrative comments were significantly reduced and performance assessment areas now reflect the increased responsibility Airmen are charged with as they progress in rank. A section on physical fitness was added, with those scoring less than 75 receiving a referral report.[1] Another new feature of the EPR is the ratee's signature as well as the use of digital signatures using the Common Access Card (CAC).[2]
The implementation dates of the new versions were as follows:
- Senior Master Sergeant: Aug. 1, 2007
- Chief Master Sergeant: Aug. 15, 2007
- Airman Basic to Senior Airman: Aug. 15, 2007
- Master Sergeant: Oct. 1, 2007
- Staff Sergeant: Jan. 1, 2008
- Technical Sergeant: Jan. 1, 2008
- Premier Band (3N2X1): April 1, 2008
The format for entries in the Enlisted Performance Report continues to be the "bullet statement format".
[edit] Criticism
The EPR system has come under heavy criticism from all ranks in the Air Force. The primary complaint is that the system has become inflated.[3] While technically the 1 through 5 scale is supposed to award an "average" performer a 3 and the 5 should be reserved for members that are "Truly Among the Best", the practice has been that nearly all personnel receive a 5 unless there are major disciplinary problems. The 2010 SSgt promotion cycle statistics show that the average eligible SrA received 128.79 points from a possible 135 from their EPR ratings, meaning the average eligible tester received one "4" and two "5" ratings.[4] A cause may be that there is no additional guidance on the definition of a truly stellar member, and the deciding factor is most often other portions of WAPS testing, where PERFORMANCE is meant to be rated.
[edit] Examples
- http://www.wantscheck.com/More/OPREPRBulletTools/tabid/87/Default.aspx
- Enlisted Performance Report Information and Examples
[edit] References
- ^ Total person concept: New EPR changes in effect, Airman 1st Class Shane Dunaway, 4th Fighter Wing Public Affairs
- ^ Randolph personnel experts explain new OPR, EPR process, 7/19/2007, Staff Sgt. Lindsey Maurice, 12th Flying Training Wing Public Affairs
- ^ [1]
- ^ http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-100817-008.pdf
[edit] External links
- Air Force Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB through TSgt)
- Air Force Form 911, Senior Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt through CMSgt)
- Air Force Instruction 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems
- Air Force streamlines officer, enlisted evaluation forms, 7/12/2007, Air Force Print News
- One critic of the current EPR proposes an alernate one
