What are the basics?

Members of the Mentoring Subcommittee of the PPAC interviewed members of previous promotion boards for advice.

Heterogeneity was found among board members – so future boards could be different than past ones but hopefully this generalization will be helpful.

Promotion board members spend an average of only 3-15 minutes on each officer’s Official Personnel File (eOPF).

Thus, it is essential that officers who are up for promotion present themselves (via their file) as clearly and succinctly as possible.

A few general pearls of wisdom:
• Officers should not have anything missing that they have control over! Omissions are viewed by the board as indication that an officer is not serious about the promotion process.
• The comments from supervisors on the COERs are very important – it is a big   plus if one’s supervisor has written personalized comments for an officer (as   opposed to “cookie cutter” type comments that can be the same for every officer).  Although written comments are only required for “A” scores (that is, highly  negative comments), supervisors should be encouraged to make comments for   all scores.
• Members of the promotion boards are selected from senior officers across all the   agencies, so as to be as representative as possible of the Commisioned Corps – officers should not just listen to persons in their own agency for advice
• It is essential to have good mentors and they need to be proactive in advocating   for an officer
• There appear to be three “tiers” of awards - having none is a bad thing; the usual   officer has some awards; the high level awards (OSM or above) are especially   beneficial
• Mobility isn’t just geographic or programmatic – evidence of upward mobility counts. As an example, if an officer moves from job to job within an agency, or   agency to agency, but never increases their level of responsibility, this will not be   well regarded. On the other hand, an officer may remain working in a single   technical field, but gain increasing responsibility over time, and this can count   towards “mobility”
• “Mismatches” between one’s COERs and other documents can raise a red flag – i.e. if one’s OPF shows a lot of evidence of solicited documents (i.e. letters of   thanks, etc.) but COERs are not great
• Every little thing counts but pay attention to the big issues first – i.e. performance

What aspects of the eOPF are the most important?
• Recent COERs, followed closely by the information in the PIR, were felt to carry most weight. The next most important aspects were the curriculum vitae (CV), Reviewing Officer’s statement (ROS), and Officer’s statement (OS).

What aspects of an officer’s OPF count can count as serious strikes against that officer (i.e. what not to do)?
• It is very important that officers get their files in order!
• Having a missing CV, or one that is not up to date, or one that is presented in a disorganized format
• Missing important documents that the board wants to look at – recent COERs (the entire COER or one of the attachments), ROS, OS, documentation of CME, evidence of board certification

What is most important to the promotion boards (that officers should make sure is documented in their OPFs)?
• One needs to document career progression – that is, increasing responsibility and a broadened scope of work as one’s career progresses
• Showing evidence of taking the initiative, especially in quality projects, is a big plus (and quality is more important than quantity)
• Having a high level award (OSM or above) is looked upon quite favorably
• The higher billet one is in, the better – but there also must be evidence that the officer is doing what they should be doing for the billet they are in (i.e. an officer who is in a research billet should show evidence they are productive at conducting/guiding research)
• Evidence of publishing, as shown in your bibliography, is helpful, as is evidence of being able to wear multiple hats, being flexible, and being a team player
• Make sure the OPF shows evidence of accomplishments – board certifications, MPH, being a fellow in your professional medical academy, playing a leadership role in a professional organization or association

What aspects of an officer’s career may be detrimental towards one’s promotion prospects?
• Given that many aspects (and especially COERs) tend to be very inflated, any negative statement tends to be problematic
• Consistent “C”s on one’s COER
• Evidence of not following the “rules” – e.g. no attempt at meeting deployment readiness requirements
• Too many moves, especially if made without increasing responsibility, can raise suspicion there is a problem

How important is uniform wear?
• Board members varied on the weight they assigned to this issue but also commented that there are many fine officers and it is difficult to draw the line between promotion and non-promotion – so every little bit (including uniform wear) counts

How important is the format of the CV?
- The summary page is critical, given that board members have so little time to look at each OPF – don’t skip doing this!
- Board members felt it was very important to follow a standardized format, as recommended by the PPAC. This allowed them to read files more quickly, and know where to look for information
- Important to be succinct given board members limited time to review OPF

Tips by precept:

PRECEPT 1 (Performance):
• The COER (by far) was felt to be the most important aspect of this precept
• This was followed (in rank order) by CV, ROS, and then awards
• Less emphasis was placed on awards than one might think – board members seemed to recognize that this is often not within an officer’s control
• The ROS all tend to be glowing and inflated – but if praise is faint, this raises a red flag
• Comments on the COERs should be personalized and written for that specific officer (there were some comments, for example, that “all CDC attachment 2s look the same”—this is not helpful to the board)

PRECEPT 2 (Education, training, and professional development)
• Educational degrees, certifications, and credentials were felt to be the most important components of this precept, followed by (in order), public health training, continuing education, and licensure. While it was very rare to for an officer to lack a license, it was a big problem if it wasn’t there
• Having additional degrees (e.g. M.P.H) beyond the M.D. or D.O. degrees were definitely seen as beneficial
• Promotion board members seemed to realize that officers in training programs were special cases – e.g. one could not credit them for a degree that was in progress but they deserved some credit for working toward it. There was also recognition that their job productivity would likely be less during periods of long-term training

PRECEPT 3 (Career progression and potential)
• Assignments and billet were felt to be most important, followed by mobility and collateral duties. Assimilation and awards were ranked the lowest in terms of importance. Awards were not particularly important to the board as part of this precept because awards are already counted towards precept 1.
• Even if one is not in a supervisory billet, one needed to show evidence of performing supervision to get promoted to the senior ranks (this should be shown in the CV, ROS, OS). An 0-4 officer in an 0-6 billet was at an advantage to an 0-4 officer in an 0-5 billet.
• Mobility without increasing responsibility was not sufficient – board members wanted to see increasing responsibility. If this was accompanied by programmatic or geographic mobility, this was a further advantage.
• Showing willingness to serve is beneficial – e.g. volunteering for your agency’s IRB
• Less evidence of mobility was generally felt to be ok for specialists, although there were varied opinions on this point
• TDYs could potentially count towards evidence of mobility – depending on the length of time involved and the level of responsibility assumed during the TDY.

PRECEPT 4 (Characteristics of career officer and service to the Corps)
• Participation in professional organizations was felt (by far) to be the most important item in this precept; assuming a leadership role in such an organization was viewed very favorably
• There was quite varied opinion about the importance of all the other activities, including uniform wear, with the exception that the item “Other PHS activities” (which included aide-de-camp, PHS Color Guard, etc) was not given much importance. Board members commented that they gave less weight to activities such as serving on a PAC since they felt it was somewhat our of officers’ control -- many officers would never have such an opportunity. There was also recognition that there has been limited availability for spaces in recent BOTC courses and that this, at the current time, was somewhat out of an officers control (and so it assumed less weight).

PRECEPT 5 (Readiness)
• Although readiness per se did not seem to make much of a difference to the board’s opinion about an officer, it made all the difference in who got promoted and who did not (i.e. when many officers are close to each other in ranking, 5 points makes a big difference) – so please meet the basic readiness requirements!