Your EER came back with a 7 in Quality of Work, and the supporting comment reads "excellent performance, great attitude, always willing to help." The mark was there. The proof wasn't. That's the USCG EER problem in miniature: a 7 is supposed to show which written standard the member exceeded, and a comment full of adjectives can't do that.

This guide covers how the Enlisted Evaluation Report actually works, when comments are required (and when they're prohibited), and side-by-side weak and strong comments for each factor.

How the USCG EER works

Coast Guard enlisted members are evaluated on the Enlisted Evaluation Report (EER) under COMDTINST M1000.2C, Enlistments, Evaluations, and Advancements. The EER is completed in Direct Access. The paper forms, CG-3788A through CG-3788G, are specific to each paygrade and are optional: they're for units with limited or no access to Direct Access, such as cutters away from homeport, and anything started on a form still has to be entered into Direct Access.

Members are marked from 1 to 7 on competencies grouped into four factors: Military, Performance, Professional Qualities and Leadership. The competencies and their written standards change with paygrade. On the E-5 form (CG-3788C), for example, they are:

Military: Military Bearing; Customs, Courtesies, and Traditions
Performance: Quality of Work; Technical Proficiency; Initiative
Professional Qualities: Decision Making and Problem Solving; Military Readiness; Self-Awareness and Learning; Team Building
Leadership: Respect for Others; Accountability and Responsibility; Influencing Others; Effective Communication

The form also covers conduct, future potential and the advancement recommendation: Ready, Not Ready or Not Recommended.

Every mark is measured against the written standards for the member's paygrade, not against other members, and the manual prohibits any forced distribution. A 4 is the expected level of performance. A 6 means the member met all the standards at the 6 level and exceeded none of them. A 7 means the member met every standard at the 6 level and exceeded at least one.

For members competing in the Servicewide Exam, EER marks in the current paygrade feed the performance factor, worth up to 50 of the 200 points in the final multiple. For active-duty members, the rest comes from the Servicewide Exam (up to 80), time in service (20), time in paygrade (10), medals and awards (10), and sea and surf duty (30). Reserve members don't receive sea or surf duty points.

When comments are required, and when they're not allowed

Comments aren't allowed for every mark. Comments are required:

For any mark of 1, 2, 3 or 7
For future potential, on all members E-4 and above
When a member is not ready or not recommended for advancement
For an unsatisfactory conduct mark

On a final EER, comments must not be entered for marks of 4, 5 or 6, satisfactory conduct, or Ready. So a 6 doesn't get a comment, however good the performance was.

On the forms, each competency comment is limited to two lines, or 220 characters, and future potential comments to 550 characters. Comments can't use gendered pronouns or the member's first or last name, and they can't mention marital or medical status.

Within those limits, the manual asks for specific comments that "paint a succinct picture" of the member's performance, so the reader can see how the member exceeded or failed to meet the standards.

Performance factor

What the comment should show: For a 7 in Quality of Work or Technical Proficiency, the evidence that the member exceeded a 6-level standard. Cases, lives, dollars, boardings, certifications, equipment accountability, maintenance intervals.

Weak (supporting a 7 in Quality of Work):

Performed duties in an outstanding manner; consistently exceeded standards in all assigned tasks. Excellent team player who is always willing to help.

Strong (supporting a 7 in Quality of Work):

As RB-S coxswain, ran 47 SAR cases in FY26 and recovered 6 survivors; kept crew 100% qualified through 4 personnel turnovers with zero training delinquencies.

The weak version describes the member in adjectives and fits any rating. The strong version quantifies the case count, names the life-saving outcome and shows sustained crew readiness, in under 220 characters and without a name or pronoun.

For IT and EM rates

Technical specialties need a different frame. Replace SAR cases with availability, response time and accountability:

Restored 14 Tier II network outages for a 380-person sector, averaging 1.9 hours against an 8-hour standard; zero discrepancies on $230K equipment inventory.

Any technical rate can find equivalents: maintenance deadlines, calibration currency, uptime percentage, patch compliance rate.

Leadership factor

What the comment should show: For a 7 in Influencing Others or Accountability and Responsibility, the gap the member found and filled, or the people the member developed. Qualifications and advancement outcomes count here.

Weak (supporting a 7 in Influencing Others):

Strong leader who mentors junior members and is always available to help the team. Well-respected throughout the unit.

Strong (supporting a 7 in Influencing Others):

As unit training petty officer, built a 6-week qualification plan that cut time-to-qualify from 14 weeks to 8; plan adopted as unit standard.

"Well-respected throughout the unit" gives the approving official nothing to confirm a 7 with. The strong version names the problem, what the member did and a measurable result.

For Maritime Enforcement Specialists (ME rate)

Boarding team training produces outcomes that are easy to count:

Led boarding team qualification for 12 members during a 90-day deployment; all 12 qualified on schedule with no remedial training.

Every member who qualifies is a citable data point.

Professional Qualities factor

What the comment should show: For a 7 in Team Building or Decision Making and Problem Solving, how the member made the team stronger or solved a problem that wasn't routine. Coverage, cross-training and carrying extra load during a manning shortage fit here.

Weak (supporting a 7 in Team Building):

Great team player; always willing to assist shipmates and supervisors.

Strong (supporting a 7 in Team Building):

Covered vacant MK3 billet for 38 days during an underway manning shortage; qualified as small boat engineer in the first week and stood all engineering watches.

"Always willing to assist" could be on any EER. Covering an engineering billet and qualifying within a week is specific.

Future potential

Future potential comments are required for every member E-4 and above, and they get more room: up to 550 characters on the forms. Use them to describe potential for future leadership responsibility, including special, independent or command cadre assignments. They aren't a substitute for a command endorsement for those assignments.

Weak:

Has unlimited potential and will be an asset wherever assigned.

Strong:

Ready for independent duty now. Has led a boat crew through 47 SAR cases and trained a unit's qualification pipeline; recommend assignment as a coxswain trainer or to a station supervisory billet after advancement to E-6.

The strong version points to evidence and names the next role.

Common USCG EER mistakes

Writing comments for 4s, 5s and 6s. On a final EER, comments for those marks are prohibited. Put the effort into the marks that require comments and into future potential.

Comments that don't support the mark. A 7 means the member exceeded at least one 6-level standard. If the comment doesn't show which one, the approving official can send it back for more justification.

Ranking instead of measuring. EER marks compare the member with the written standards for the paygrade, not with other members. A comparison can add context, but it doesn't substitute for showing which standard was exceeded.

Names and pronouns. Comments can't use the member's first or last name or gendered pronouns. Start with the action: "Ran 47 SAR cases..."

Running over the limit. Two lines, 220 characters per competency on the forms. Cut adjectives first; keep numbers and outcomes.

Copying from last year. If the comment looks like last period's EER with the dates changed, a sharp approving official will notice.

What to do with a quiet rating period

Not every marking period produces six rescue cases and two process improvements. That's fine: a 4 is the expected level, and marks of 4 through 6 need no comment at all. For members who did exceed a standard in a quieter period:

Training and certification wins are always available. Did the member complete a required school ahead of schedule, or earn a qualification that wasn't required for the billet? That can support a 7 in Self-Awareness and Learning or Technical Proficiency, and it's quantifiable.

Coverage and TAD count. "TAD to Air Station Cape Cod for 21 days" is neutral. "TAD to Air Station Cape Cod for 21 days; qualified as hoist spotter within 72 hours and supported 4 live hoists" shows something exceeded.

Write the EER the record deserves

The USCG is a small service, and records follow members for years. Comments are limited, so the ones the manual requires have to carry the weight: specific action, specific result, and a clear link to the standard the member exceeded or missed.

If you want a starting point, RapidEPR generates Coast Guard EER comments: drop in what actually happened, pick the USCG EER format, and get a draft in seconds. Check it against COMDTINST M1000.2C and the written standards for the member's paygrade before it goes into Direct Access. The same writing principles in strong military evaluation bullets across all branches apply: specific action, specific result.

Get started free →

Coast Guard EER Bullet Examples for Every Section