What guidance should a Commanding Officer follow in regard to enlisted evaluation reports?

The guidance that a Commanding Officer should follow regarding enlisted evaluation reports is to adhere to regulatory requirements and objective standards. This approach ensures that evaluations are fair, consistent, and based on established criteria, which is essential for maintaining the integrity of the evaluation process. Regulatory requirements provide the framework for how evaluations should be conducted, including timelines and the criteria that should be used, ensuring accountability and standardization across the board.

Following objective standards helps to eliminate biases and fosters a more transparent evaluation process. This means that evaluations are based on performance, conduct, and other measurable factors rather than subjective opinions. By adhering to these guidelines, a Commanding Officer can contribute to a culture of professionalism and meritocracy, where enlisted members are evaluated on their true competencies and contributions to the mission.

The other choices do not provide the comprehensive and principled framework that is essential for conducting effective evaluations. Evaluations should not be completed solely after promotions or restricted to being written only by senior personnel, as this could skew the assessment of a service member's performance. Additionally, limiting evaluations to a specific timeframe, such as once every six months, may not reflect the dynamic nature of a service member's performance and achievements, which could necessitate more frequent assessments.