How to Fill Out and Submit DA Form 2166-9-3: NCOER for CSM/SGM

DA Form 2166-9-3 is the NCO Evaluation Report for Command Sergeants Major and Sergeants Major, and it is completed and submitted entirely through the Evaluation Entry System (EES), the Army’s web-based evaluation portal. The rater drafts the report, the senior rater assesses potential, the rated NCO reviews and signs, and the finished evaluation is transmitted electronically to Headquarters, Department of the Army for permanent filing in the soldier’s record. This article walks through what you need before you open EES, how each part of the form works at the strategic level, the formatting rules that get reports returned, and what to do if something is wrong after the report is accepted.

Make Sure This Is the Right Form

The 2166-9 series has three grade plates. The 2166-9-1 covers Sergeants. The 2166-9-2 covers Staff Sergeants through Master Sergeants and First Sergeants. The 2166-9-3 covers only Command Sergeants Major and Sergeants Major at the strategic level.¹ If you are rating a Master Sergeant or First Sergeant, stop here — you need the 2166-9-2. Everything that follows assumes a CSM or SGM in a strategic-level position where the evaluation focuses on large-organization leadership, institutional influence, and policy-level impact.

Confirm the Report Is Due and That Time Requirements Are Met

Army Regulation 623-3 sets out when an NCOER must be written. The most common trigger is the annual report, due one calendar year after the “thru” date of the last evaluation. A change-of-rater report is required when the rated NCO stops serving under the current rater for any reason. A change-of-duty report is required when the NCO moves to a different principal duty under the same rater. A relief-for-cause report is required when the NCO is formally relieved. An extended annual report covers periods with nonrated time.²

Two optional reports exist as well: a complete-the-record report before an HQDA selection board, and a senior-rater option report when an outgoing senior rater wants to document performance before departing.

Before proceeding, verify the time minimums. The rated NCO must have served at least 90 calendar days in the same position under the same rater during the rating period. The rater needs 90 days of supervision; the senior rater needs 60.² A report that fails these minimums will not be accepted.

What To Have In Front of You Before Opening EES

The rater needs the rated NCO’s DOD ID Number (the SSN is used only when a DOD ID is unavailable), rank, date of rank, branch, MOS, unit information, and the Unit Identification Code.¹ The UIC has to be correct — an incorrect UIC is the most common reason a report fails to merge with the soldier’s personnel file. Confirm the exact rating period dates and account for any nonrated time (school, in-transit, leave of 30 days or more) with the appropriate codes.²

The Support Form and Working Folder

The DA Form 2166-9-1A (NCOER Support Form) is the rated NCO’s working document across the rating period. The rated NCO updates it with accomplishments, training, and civilian education; the rater tracks counseling sessions and the performance objectives set at the start of the cycle. When it’s time to draft the evaluation, the support form is the best single reference for accurate, evidence-backed bullets.

Failure to maintain the support form or complete required counseling will not, by itself, invalidate the evaluation on appeal. What it will do is leave the rater without the concrete examples that make a competitive report.

Alongside the support form, keep a working folder of training certificates, award citations, readiness data, and records of strategic-level contributions — policy implementation, cross-functional coordination, enterprise-level mentorship. At the CSM/SGM level, institutional impact is the evaluation, and vague narrative reads as an absence of it.

Working Through the Form in EES

EES requires a Common Access Card. The system runs real-time validation and flags most errors and missing fields before a report can advance.³

Part I — Administrative Data

Part I captures the rated NCO’s name, DOD ID, rank, date of rank, branch, MOS, unit, station, and UIC.⁴ Verify the UIC against unit organizational documents before moving on.

Part II — Authentication

Part II lists the rating chain: rater, senior rater, and supplementary reviewer if one is required. Each official’s name, DOD ID, rank, position, and organization go here. A supplementary reviewer is required when the senior rater is junior in rank, when all rating officials are civilians or from a sister service, or when someone outside the rating chain directs a relief-for-cause report.⁵ For CSM/SGM reports the senior rater is typically a general officer or senior colonel, so this rarely applies. Verify anyway.

Part III — Duty Description

Part III is the principal duty title, duty MOS code, daily duties and scope, areas of special emphasis, and appointed duties.¹ Write what the NCO actually did during the period, not a generic position description. Capture organizational scope (number of soldiers, geographic footprint, budget) and the NCO’s role in shaping policy, running programs, or advising senior leaders. A vague duty description weakens every narrative that follows.

Part IV — Performance Evaluation

The rater selects one of four performance ratings and supports the box check with narrative comments:²

Far Exceeded Standard — performance significantly surpassed expectations for the rank and position.
Exceeded Standard — performance went beyond what was required.
Met Standard — performance satisfied all requirements.
Did Not Meet Standard — performance fell short of expectations.

On the 2166-9-3, the assessment centers on large organizations and strategic initiatives, not individual task completion.¹ Each bullet should tie a specific action to a measurable result and its effect on the organization.

Part V — Senior Rater Overall Potential

The senior rater picks one of four potential labels:⁶

Most Qualified — potential exceeds the majority of NCOs in the senior rater’s population; strong potential for early promotion.
Highly Qualified — potential consistent with the majority of NCOs in that grade. This is the most common rating.
Qualified — potential is adequate; retain for further development.
Not Qualified — potential below the majority; not recommended for promotion or retention.

The senior rater then writes narrative comments that compare the NCO to peers and name specific future assignments, schooling, or positions the NCO is ready for. Promotion boards read this section first, so unspecific language here costs more than anywhere else on the form.

Bullet Comment Formatting

DA PAM 623-3 sets strict formatting rules for bullets. Getting these wrong is one of the easiest ways to have a report returned:

Each bullet cannot exceed two lines and should fit on one line when possible. One bullet per line.
Double-space between bullets.
Precede each bullet with a lowercase “o”.
Start with an action verb or a possessive pronoun (his or her). Personal pronouns (he or she) are acceptable inside the bullet. Use past tense for performance during the rating period.
Begin with a lowercase letter unless the first word is a proper noun.
Use any specific example only once across the entire evaluation. If it fits under more than one category, put it where it fits best.

Bullets must support the box check. Weak or generic bullets under a Far Exceeded Standard box read as contradictory to a board. Strong bullets under a Met Standard box read the same way in reverse.

The Senior Rater Profile and the 24% Cap

The Part V rating is constrained by a profile. A senior rater can label no more than 24 percent of the NCOERs on file for a given grade as Most Qualified.⁷ A senior rater still building a profile may label only one of the first four reports at a given grade as Most Qualified.⁶

EES is built to keep the senior rater from breaking the profile. If a Most Qualified report is somehow printed and mailed to HQDA after the senior rater has been notified the profile cannot support it, HRC will process the report but downgrade the rating to Highly Qualified.⁶ Check the profile in EES before committing to a Most Qualified assessment, especially when managing evaluations across multiple grades or organizations.

Signatures and Submission

Digital signatures go in a fixed order. The rater signs first, certifying the duty description and performance assessment. The senior rater signs next, finalizing the potential evaluation. The rated NCO signs last, after reviewing the report for administrative accuracy. That signature confirms the NCO has seen the report and verifies the data in Parts I through IV. It does not indicate agreement with the ratings.¹

Once all signatures are on, the report is transmitted through the Submit to HQDA function in EES.³ The rater and rated NCO can track status through the portal. HQDA reviews the report for regulatory compliance before accepting it, at which point the evaluation becomes a permanent part of the Army Military Human Resource Record and is visible to future promotion boards and selection committees.

If Something Is Wrong After the Report Is Accepted

Errors on accepted NCOERs fall into two categories, with different appeal paths. Administrative errors — incorrect rating period, deviation from the established rating chain, insufficient observation time, wrong height and weight data — go to HRC’s Evaluation Appeals Branch. Substantive errors — allegations of bias, prejudice, inaccurate ratings, or unjust assessments — go to the Army Special Review Board.⁸

For either path the burden falls on the appellant, who must provide clear and convincing evidence of a material error, inaccuracy, or injustice. Minor administrative mistakes rarely invalidate an entire evaluation, and appeals resting only on missed counseling almost never succeed without additional evidence of injustice.⁸ Appeals must be submitted within three years of the report’s completion date.⁹

1
U.S. Army Human Resources Command. DA Form 2166-9 Series Module 3 NCOER Support Form and Grade Plate NCOER
2
Department of the Army. Army Regulation 623-3 Evaluation Reporting System
3
U.S. Army Human Resources Command. Evaluation Systems Homepage
4
United States Army Publishing Directorate. DA Form 2166-9-3 NCO Evaluation Report CSM SGM
5
U.S. Army Human Resources Command. Module 1 NCOER Overview
6
U.S. Army Human Resources Command. Policy Updates Module 2
7
U.S. Army Human Resources Command. Profiling
8
Army.mil. NCOER and OER Appeal
9
U.S. Army Human Resources Command. Guide for Preparation of Officer and NCO Evaluation Report Appeals