Did Not Meet Standard: The Box You Have to Prove

Tier Calibration • Lesson 7 of 7 • 5 min read

DID NOT MEET STANDARD is the only box check on the NCOER that has to be proven with paper. The regulation demands a documented, verified shortfall behind it, prescribes the box and even the bullet text in two situations, and still requires a bullet in the block. A plain Met asks the rater to prove none of that.

// 01The regulation, verbatim

Did not meet standard. Rated NCO fails to meet or maintain the required Army standards and organizational goals of leader competencies and attributes; does not enforce or meet the standard for the unit or those in his or her charge; exhibits or displays minimal or no effort; actions often have a negative effect on the mission, their Soldiers, the unit, and the Army.
DA PAM 623-3 ¶3-11a(1), pp.107-108

Bullet comments are mandatory regardless of the box check rating given (at least one bullet will be entered in each block of c through i).
DA PAM 623-3 para 3-6b, p.96

Any verified derogatory information may be entered on an evaluation report ... No reference will be made to an incomplete investigation.
AR 623-3 ¶3-20a, d

For NCOs who are found with substantiated SHARP, equal opportunity, or EEO complaints resulting from an AR 15-6 investigation or other official investigation by military or civil authorities, a "DID NOT MEET STANDARD" entry will be annotated in part IV, block c. and a bullet comment "does not support SHARP, equal opportunity, and EEO" will be annotated by the rater in part IV block c comments section. Additionally, the senior rater will annotate a bullet comment in part V, block b.
DA PAM 623-3 Table 3-4 (block c, Character), p.97; repeated in Table 3-9, p.110

The rater's overall performance assessment in part IV on NCOERs must reflect "DID NOT MEET STANDARD" or "MET STANDARD." An assessment of "DID NOT MEET STANDARD" is consistent with a relief action and does not need further explanation. However, raters who select "MET STANDARD" must explain their recommendation and reasons in view of the action to relieve.
DA PAM 623-3 ¶3-20g, p.130

An assessment of "DID NOT MEET STANDARD" in previous blocks c through h by the rater results in only an overall performance assessment of "MET STANDARD" or "DID NOT MEET STANDARD" able to be rendered by the rater.
DA PAM 623-3 Table 3-9 (Rater overall performance), p.113

// 02What this means in practice

Every rater eventually faces the bottom box, and it goes wrong in two opposite directions. Some raters check it with nothing behind it but frustration, and the form gets torn apart in review. Others refuse to check it in situations where the regulation already made the decision for them, and file an evaluation that is simply incorrect. Both failures come from not reading what the pamphlet actually requires, so start with the definition.

Read the verbs in ¶3-11a(1): "fails to meet or maintain," "does not enforce," "minimal or no effort," "negative effect." This is not the box for a rough quarter or a personality conflict. It describes a failure against a named standard with a real effect on the mission, the Soldiers, or the unit. One structural note: on the SGT form (DA Form 2166-9-1), blocks c through h offer exactly two choices, Met and Did Not Meet, and the definitions are word for word the same as the four-box SSG-and-above form. The bottom box means the same thing at every grade.

First requirement: checking DID NOT MEET does not excuse you from writing. Bullet comments are mandatory "regardless of the box check rating given," at least one per block, and the standardized rules say bullets support the box checks. A DID NOT MEET box over an empty block or a vague bullet is a self-contradicting form.

Second requirement: receipts. AR 623-3 permits "verified derogatory information" on the report and flatly prohibits any reference to an incomplete investigation. Verified means established fact, not suspicion, and if the AR 15-6 or the inquiry is still open, it does not exist for NCOER purposes. In practice the receipts are your counseling trail: the DA 4856s that named the standard, documented the shortfall when it happened, and recorded the corrective action. If that trail does not exist, you do not have a DID NOT MEET. You have a feeling.

Now the part most raters have never read: there is one situation where neither the box nor the bullet is your call. When an official investigation substantiates a SHARP, equal opportunity, or EEO complaint, the pamphlet prescribes a "DID NOT MEET STANDARD" entry in Character and prescribes the bullet text itself: "does not support SHARP, equal opportunity, and EEO." The senior rater owes a comment in Part V, block b on top. A rater who checks Met in Character over a substantiated finding is not protecting their NCO; they are filing an incorrect evaluation.

The Relief for Cause NCOER inverts the burden the same way. Under ¶3-20g, a DID NOT MEET overall "is consistent with a relief action and does not need further explanation." The box that has to be defended on an RFC is Met: check that on a Soldier who was just relieved and you owe the form a written explanation of how both things are true. The regulation does the arguing for the honest box and demands paperwork for the generous one.

Know the knock-on effects before you check anything. One DID NOT MEET anywhere in blocks c through h caps the overall assessment at Met or Did Not Meet; Exceeded and Far Exceeded are off the table. When the rater indicates Did Not Meet Standard in the overall performance and the senior rater marks Not Qualified, AR 623-3 waives the successive and broadening assignment entries entirely. And unlike an OER, an NCOER is not a referred report: there is no formal referral packet giving the Soldier a suspense to respond before processing, because the rated NCO's review happens at signature. The due process an NCO actually gets is the counseling that happened, or did not happen, during the rating period.

Now contrast all of that with the box directly above it. Met standard, per ¶3-11a(2), is the NCO who "successfully achieves and maintains" the standard, takes "appropriate initiative," produces "a positive impact," at a level "considered normal and typically demonstrated by a majority of NCOs of the same grade." Met carries none of DID NOT MEET's burdens. No counseling-trail requirement, no verified-derogatory rule, no prescribed comments, no caps, no explanation owed. It is the regulation's own description of doing the job, and it needs no defense.

One last guardrail protects Soldiers from local inflation of the bottom box: an NCO who meets the Army minimum fitness standard but misses a tougher unit standard cannot be given DID NOT MEET in Presence on that basis alone. The box measures the Army standard, not the unit's ambitions.

// 03Worked examples

Worked example · Did Not Meet

What not to write. A rater is frustrated with an NCO and reaches for adjectives instead of documentation.

o is a poor NCO who displays a bad attitude and lacks the motivation to improve

Present tense, no standard named, no event, no dates, no corrective action. This is a character attack, and it puts the rater's judgment on trial instead of the NCO's performance. Nothing here is checkable, so nothing here supports the box.

Worked example · Did Not Meet

What the box actually needs. Same NCO, but the rater documented the shortfall when it happened and counseled in writing.

o failed to conduct monthly counseling for four assigned Soldiers over two consecutive quarters despite written corrective guidance on DA 4856; section missed two MEDPROS suspenses

A named standard, a time-bound shortfall, documented corrective action, and the effect on the section. Past tense, zero adjectives, every clause checkable against the counseling trail. This is a bullet that supports the box check the way para 3-6b requires.

// 04What most get wrong

The first mistake is treating DID NOT MEET as a character verdict instead of a documentation exercise. The bullet that attacks the person ("poor NCO," "bad attitude") fails twice: it names no standard, so it cannot support the box check, and it reads as bias, which invites scrutiny of the rater instead of the rated NCO. The regulation's definition is built on verbs about standards and effects, not on adjectives about personality.

The second mistake runs the other direction: dodging the box when the regulation already made the call. A substantiated SHARP, EO, or EEO finding mandates the DID NOT MEET entry in Character and prescribes the bullet text. On a Relief for Cause report, DID NOT MEET needs no further explanation; it is Met that must be explained in view of the relief. Checking the generous box in either situation is not loyalty, it is an incorrect report.

The corrective takeaway: the bottom box is won or lost months before the form exists. Counsel in writing when the shortfall happens, name the standard, record the corrective action, and never reference anything still under investigation. If the trail exists, the bullet writes itself in past tense with checkable clauses. If it does not exist, be honest about what you actually have, because the form cannot document a feeling.

// 05Regulations cited in this lesson

DA PAM 623-3 ¶3-11a(1), pp.107-108
DA PAM 623-3 para 3-6b, p.96
AR 623-3 ¶3-20a, d
DA PAM 623-3 Table 3-4 (block c, Character), p.97; repeated in Table 3-9, p.110
DA PAM 623-3 ¶3-20g, p.130
DA PAM 623-3 Table 3-9 (Rater overall performance), p.113

// 06More in Tier Calibration

The facts behind a good bullet get written down in February, not remembered in November. The free Accomplishment Log keeps them.

Get the free log

Writing one right now? Open BulletForge.

← All Academy lessons