Evaluations and Assessments

U.S. Marine Corps

PCN 144 000327 00

MCRP 7-20A.4

Limited Dissemination Control: None

UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

27 January 2023

FOREWORD

Marine Corps Reference Publication 7-20A.4, Evaluations and Assessments, provides guidance

for Marine leaders on how to evaluate and assess unit training. It describes the fundamentals of

evaluation and how leaders at all levels can better evaluate standards-based training. This

publication and the evaluation fundamentals within it complement planning processes described

in Marine Corps Tactical Publication 7-20A, Unit Training Guide, and the preceding Marine

Corps reference publications.

Evaluation is one of the most important steps in unit training management and the Systems

Approach to Training and Education process. During this phase, the commander, or unit leader,

identifies areas of individual and unit training that need more focused attention. The commander

uses standards-based feedback to make cumulative judgments, including the commander’s unit

readiness assessment, concerning the effectiveness of the training plan and the unit’s level of

readiness compared to its mission-essential tasks.

This publication has been prepared for use by Marine Corps leaders at all levels. It reflects a

time-tested training (evaluation) process developed over decades to improve the overall T&R

effort in the Marine Corps. It should be used as a reference for instruction to train leaders how to

conduct evaluations.

Marine Corps Reference Publication 7-20A.4 cancels MCTP 8-10A, Unit Training Management

Guide, dated 25 November 1996, erratum dated 2 May 2016, and change 1, date 4 April 2018; and

MCTP 8-10B, How to Conduct Training, dated 10 August 2005, erratum dated 2 May 2016, and

change 1, dated 4 April 2018.

Reviewed and approved this date.

ERIC R. QUEHL

Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps

Director, Policy and Standards Division, Training and Education Command

Publication Control Number: 146 000327 00

Limited Dissemination Control: None

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

iii

Table of Contents

Chapter 1. Unit Evaluations

Purpose of Evaluation.................................................................................................................. 1-1

Standards-Based Training ........................................................................................................... 1-2

Individual and Collective Training ............................................................................................. 1-3

Individual Training Standards .............................................................................................. 1-3

Collective Training Standards .............................................................................................. 1-3

Quality of a Unit’s Training Program ......................................................................................... 1-3

Effectiveness of Training ............................................................................................................ 1-4

Continual Process ....................................................................................................................... 1-4

Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 1-5

Chapter 2. The Commander’s Assessment

Difference Between Evaluation and Assessment ........................................................................ 2-1

Feedback Data.............................................................................................................................. 2-1

Continual Assessment.................................................................................................................. 2-2

Chapter 3. Evaluation Methodology

Evaluation by Higher Headquarters ............................................................................................ 3-1

Readiness Evaluation .................................................................................................................. 3-2

Chapter 4. Evaluating Training Results

Conduct Debriefs and After-Action Reviews ............................................................................. 4-1

Debrief ........................................................................................................................................ 4-1

After-Action Review ................................................................................................................... 4-2

Causes of Training Failure .......................................................................................................... 4-3

Individual Failure .................................................................................................................. 4-3

Unit Failure ........................................................................................................................... 4-3

Trainer Failure ...................................................................................................................... 4-4

Training Program Failure ...................................................................................................... 4-4

Learning From Failure ................................................................................................................ 4-4

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

Chapter 5. Evaluators

Evaluator Cadre .......................................................................................................................... 5-2

Evaluator Requirements .............................................................................................................. 5-2

Training and Preparation ...................................................................................................... 5-2

Observing .............................................................................................................................. 5-3

Recording .............................................................................................................................. 5-3

Debrief .................................................................................................................................. 5-4

Chapter 6. Implement and Document

Implement ................................................................................................................................... 6-1

Document .................................................................................................................................... 6-2

Appendices

A. Checklist for Conducting Formal Unit Evaluations

B. Training Cadre Organization

C. Evaluator Training

D. Coaching and Critiquing During Evaluator Training

E. Debriefs

F. After-Action Review

Abbreviations and Acronyms

References and Related Publications

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

1-1

CHAPTER 1.

UNIT EVALUATIONS

Marine Corps Reference Publication (MCRP) 7-20A.4, Evaluations and Assessments, is a

reference publication that defines evaluation and assessments as they relate to unit training design

and management. It provides a framework for conducting training evaluations, preparing

evaluators to evaluate training, and establishing standard methods for providing evaluation

feedback to the unit. Practical application of the contents of this publication will provide the

commander with essential information required to make assessments about the training readiness of

the unit and the effectiveness of the training plan in contributing to that readiness. This publication

builds on evaluation concepts introduced in Marine Corps Tactical Publication (MCTP) 7-20A,

Unit Training Guide, and complements the reference publications identified in Figure 1-1.

Figure 1-1. Training Publications Hierarchy.

PURPOSE OF EVALUATION

Training evaluation is an objective summary of quantitative and qualitative data gathered about

the effectiveness of training. The primary purpose of evaluation is to gain understanding of a

unit’s capabilities in order to make informed decisions about the use of training time and resources

for actions to attain readiness and lethality. Training evaluation data helps the commander

U.S. Marine Corps

PCN 144 000050 00

MCRP 1-10.1

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

MCRP

U.S. Marine Corps

PCN 144 000050 00

MCRP 1-10.1

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

MCRP

U.S. Marine Corps

PCN 144 000050 00

MCRP 1-10.1

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

MCRP

U.S. Marine Corps

PCN 144 000050 00

MCRP 1-10.1

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

MCRP

U.S. Marine Corps

PCN 144 000050 00

MCRP 1-10.1

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

MCRP

MCRP 7-20A.1 Training Plan Design

MCRP 7-20A.3 Simulation Training Guide

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

MCRP 7-20A.5 Training Data Management

USMC

PCN 147 000088 00

MCTP 10-10C

U.S. Marine Corps

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: Distribution authorized to U.S. Government agencies

and their contractors; for official use only.

MCTP

MCTP 7-20A Unit Training Guide - Provides philosophical concept (why and

how) for training planning, event and exercise design, and evaluations.

MCRP 7-20A.2 Event and Exercise Design

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

1-2

determine whether training and subsequent sustainment is accomplishing its goals and

contributing to the unit’s mission. It also helps the commander decide how to adjust training and

sustainment for greater effectiveness. Evaluation data enables the commander to judge how well

the training met the unit readiness requirements in accordance with its mission and how well the

Marines mastered the training content. Evaluations reveal valuable information about the training

proficiency of individual Marines, the unit, and the training event; they identify unit readiness

strengths and weaknesses and keep the unit focused on the unit training plan goals and Marine

Corps training and readiness (T&R) standards. Accurate evaluations will help ensure mission

accomplishment through focused analysis of the unit’s strengths and weaknesses, achieving

maximum training benefit and efficient use of resources and time.

Unit commanders must allow sufficient time for coaching, additional practice, and remediation.

After-action reviews (AARs), debriefs, and subsequent coaching enhance the learning that occurs

during training. Failing to allow for coaching and remediation can negate the full potential of

training by reinforcing negative behaviors and actions. During training exercises, and depending

on the severity of the deficiency and tactical nature of the problem, it may be necessary to stop the

training when a deficiency is identified so it can be immediately corrected (coaching). However,

during an evaluation, unless it jeopardizes safety or the entirety of the exercise, the evaluated

exercise should be allowed to continue. Deficiencies are to be annotated and included in the

debrief and AAR (critiquing), allowing the commander to correct them in future training plans.

Commanders should plan appropriate time and resources to allow for remediation.

STANDARDS-BASED TRAINING

Standards-based training is the use of common procedures and uniform operational methods to

create common training objectives across the Marine Corps. As described in MCTP 7-20A,

individual and collective T&R events establish common actions, conditions, and performance

standards for each military occupational specialty (MOS) and unit. All training must conform to

these standards. Using training standards allows Marines and units across the Marine Corps to

train and operate from a common foundational perspective.

A command evaluation program must be designed to evaluate both individual and unit training,

measure the quality of the unit’s training program, and the quality of the training. The unit’s

mission-essential task list (METL) represents the readiness objectives that form the desired

training plan outcome. Individual and collective T&R events represent the means of progressively

attaining each mission-essential task (MET). The effectiveness of training is determined against

the T&R standards evaluated by the training leader and the Marines conducting the training.

Commanders and unit leaders use the T&R standards to design a training plan that achieves MET-

based readiness objectives and evaluate the effectiveness of the unit’s training programs.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

1-3

INDIVIDUAL AND COLLECTIVE TRAINING

Evaluating individual, leader, and unit standards is central to training-related evaluation. It allows

commanders to see how well units and Marines can perform their mission and tasks and how well

resources are used. Commanders can also determine if the training is performed in accordance

with T&R standards. Individual training should be evaluated at every reasonable opportunity

during training to ensure that a Marine’s professional development supports unit mission

requirements. Unit standards are measured against T&R standards mapped directly to the unit

METL. A formal evaluation must be scheduled early enough in the unit’s predeployment

preparation to allow for remediation training. Just as unit training should replicate battlespace

conditions to the greatest extent possible, the evaluation conditions should also seek to replicate

anticipated battlespace conditions. The evaluation should be conducted in a setting simulating

operational conditions to the greatest extent possible to provide feedback on the unit’s home-

station training and to help determine combat readiness. The evaluation feedback is used to shape

future unit training requirements and to provide immediate feedback to shape future training for

units and Marines.

Individual Training Standards

An individual’s ability to perform certain tasks affects the unit’s ability to accomplish its objectives.

Individual training should be evaluated during both individual and unit training events. Individual

training events are measured against individual-level T&R standards in the applicable T&R manual.

These standards must be debriefed at the small-unit leader level every time they are performed.

Collective Training Standards

Results of unit evaluations are used to inform the leader of noted deficiencies and corrections that

need to be made to individual and unit plans. Collective training events are evaluated against

collective T&R-level standards in the applicable T&R manual. Small-unit leader debriefs during

these evolutions shape follow-on AARs and debriefs.

QUALITY OF A UNIT’S TRAINING PROGRAM

The unit training program is continuously assessed to ensure that the overall quality of the training

is achieving its desired intent and is in compliance with command goals and objectives. A

progressive training plan builds from individual to unit training. Individual training can be

considered/conducted during collective training events; unit training should be progressively more

complex and realistic. Home-station training should culminate with a combined arms Marine air-

ground task force exercise, such as the Marine Corps combat readiness evaluation (MCCRE) or

service-level training exercise (SLTE). The purpose of the culminating exercise is to evaluate the

unit against its readiness objectives determined by the unit METL and associated T&R standards.

The evaluation should be conducted with enough time that remediation and retraining can be

conducted before a deployment.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

1-4

The evaluation should also assess how training information is passed within the unit, to higher and

lower echelons, and to supporting units. This evaluation results in immediate feedback that should

be used to improve existing training design and management procedures. It may create long-term

changes to programs and shape future command training guidance.

EFFECTIVENESS OF TRAINING

The effectiveness of training is assessed through standards-based evaluations that determine how

well the training audience meets or exceeds the established T&R standard. Evaluations examine

whether training standards were met, whether the training was adequately prepared and

conducted, and how efficiently allocated resources were used. An evaluation results in immediate

feedback to the training leader that helps them review and refine, if necessary, the unit training

plan. Evaluations also serve to shape future command training guidance. When evaluating the

training leader’s conduct of training, the evaluator should review the leader’s presentation,

practice, performance, planning, and preparation. The training leader’s preparation should be

evaluated based on the following indicators observed during the training.

• The leader was proficient, organized, confident, and enthusiastic.

• The leader was given adequate guidance, resources, references, and time to prepare.

• The leader used equipment and support materials effectively.

• The Marines executing training were present with the correct and serviceable weapons,

uniforms, and equipment.

• The Marines possessed requisite preliminary knowledge.

• The training area, site, or facilities were adequately prepared for training to be conducted.

• The training site afforded maximum freedom from distractions.

• The training was METL/T&R standards-based.

Immediate feedback will allow the unit leader to understand what additional training is required to

further develop the proficiency of their Marines. Evaluating the training and training quality will

help leaders shape future command training guidance.

CONTINUAL PROCESS

Evaluating and assessing must be a continual process at all echelons of command. Continual

assessments with regularly scheduled formal evaluations provide leaders with current information

regarding a unit’s state of training readiness to perform designated tasks. Commanders routinely

assess their plans and allocate resources based on their assessment of what their training focus

needs to be to ensure they are mission-focused and that they build toward combat readiness. Higher

headquarters are responsible to evaluate their own training plans and resources and those of

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

1-5

subordinate units to ensure that the plans are synchronized and mutually supporting. Individuals

and units must be routinely evaluated (daily/weekly) as they conduct routine training and/or

perform daily missions. Leaders should never miss an opportunity to conduct, evaluate, and debrief

training. Leaders must routinely evaluate the execution of training and provide feedback to the

chain of command, personnel planning the training, and most importantly those conducting the

training. The quality of training (training plans, process, and instruction) must never be overlooked.

METHODS

The desired methods of conducting evaluations are as follows:

• Intentionally design training to achieve specific outcomes to be evaluated.

• Assess the effectiveness of training continuously; schedule and conduct formal evaluations as

part of the training plan; adjust the training plan as required.

• Evaluate training by using the published T&R event standards.

• Reinforce training with debriefs and AARs.

• Plan for, and conduct, remediation training if necessary.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

2-1

CHAPTER 2.

THE COMMANDER’S ASSESSMENT

The commander’s assessments and formal evaluations work hand-in-hand to ensure that the unit

training is effective. Evaluations are formal, planned benchmarks in a unit’s training plan that

provide valuable, standards-based data to allow the commander to make a quantitative judgment

about the status of the unit’s combat readiness. Assessments are a continuous judgment of whether

the unit has achieved the desired level of proficiency and readiness through training, based on

formal and informal processes of considering all available data and commander’s intuition.

Evaluations are based on the tasks, conditions, and standards articulated in the T&R manuals. The

intent of the T&R manual is to set objective measures that identify mastery of a task.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT

There is an important distinction between evaluation and assessment. Evaluation measures how

well a Marine, leader, or unit performs an individual or collective task. Ground and aviation

T&R manuals designate specific evaluation coded (E-coded) collective training events to be

evaluated. Evaluations are not solely relegated to E-coded events. The unit’s METs comprise

select E-coded events; thus, evaluations from these events are used in the commander’s unit

readiness assessment.

By contrast, assessment is a judgment of the overall effectiveness of a unit or individual’s

capabilities during training or operations. Because an exercise typically includes numerous

individual and collective T&R events, evaluations are made at multiple points. While E-coded

events are the irreducible minimum requirements, commanders must ensure that supporting

(non-E-coded) T&R events are considered and evaluated to ensure the unit is able to perform

to standard.

FEEDBACK DATA

Upon completion of a training event, feedback data is collected and analyzed to help shape the

commander’s unit assessment. This feedback includes ratings that evaluators assign to T&R

events, as well as evaluator comments and AAR inputs. The commander’s assessment of unit

readiness as a result of unit training compares the organization’s current level of training

proficiency with the desired level of combat proficiency. The unit commander and leaders then

determine how to improve future training by considering the following questions:

• What must the unit be able to do?

• What can the unit do now?

• How can shortfalls be corrected, and strengths maintained?

CONTINUAL ASSESSMENT

Between formal evaluations, the commander must continually assess individual and unit training

to determine whether the unit’s training plan will achieve the desired readiness state. The

commander’s assessment compares the unit’s current level of proficiency, identified by observing

training and reviewing all available evaluations, with the desired level of warfighting proficiency.

Training is then remediated and schedules modified as required.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

3-1

CHAPTER 3.

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

Commanders at all levels should base their judgment of individual and unit training proficiency

on both personal observations and standards-based evaluations as articulated in the T&R manual.

In addition to planning responsibilities outlined in MCRP 7-20A.2, Event and Exercise Design,

the exercise director ensures that evaluators are adequately prepared for their task; the exercise

commander ensures evaluation and exercise plans allow the exercise to meet all evaluation criteria

as described in Appendix B. Appendix A provides a checklist for the evaluation cadre to use in

preparation for conducting a formal unit evaluation.

Leaders at all levels continuously assess the training of their Marines and the unit; they must

maintain constant awareness of their Marines’ capabilities so they can lead properly, conduct

mission-focused, standards-based training, and effectively coach and critique during training.

The two types of standards-based evaluations include informal and formal evaluations. Informal

evaluations are the continuous assessments typically performed by the unit and training leaders

within the unit conducting the training. For example, the squad leader continuously assesses the

training status of their squad and the individuals within the squad. Formal evaluations are

conducted at regular planned intervals and typically performed by unit and training leaders outside

the unit conducting the training. Formal evaluations are typically organized and orchestrated by

the next higher echelon. Throughout any evaluation, the evaluator does not influence or interfere

with the execution of the training. Evaluators only record the unit actions and report results.

EVALUATION BY HIGHER HEADQUARTERS

The Marine Corps mandates several kinds of training evaluations at regular intervals. This

allows leadership at various levels to assess Fleet Marine Force readiness and how well Marines

and units are prepared to perform their missions. At the unit-level, leaders use the results to

determine unit strengths and weaknesses and recommend changes to future training. These

evaluations may include:

• MCCRE (see MCO 3501.1_, Marine Corps Combat Readiness Evaluation).

• SLTE (see MCO 3500.11_, Service-level Training Exercise Program).

• Marine Expeditionary Unit Certification Exercise.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

3-2

READINESS EVALUATION

To evaluate the readiness of subordinate leaders, Marines, and units, leaders gather information on

individual and collective proficiency. This information is used as feedback to correct identified

training deficiencies (gaps). Once a gap is identified, the training plan can be modified to address

it. Evaluations also produce information that commanders at all echelons use to coach their

subordinate leaders and better prepare them for their readiness requirements.

Standards-based evaluations generally follow the below sequence:

• Establish the conditions (T&R standards).

• Restate the actions, conditions, and performance standards.

• Observe and evaluate.

• Coach and critique.

• Record the results.

• Report the results.

Evaluations conducted by battalion/squadron and higher echelons should address the following:

• Unit training objectives and the training plan.

• Staff and subordinate unit proficiency.

• Integration and conduct of combined arms and multi-domain training.

• Individual/collective progressive training approach.

• Training that incorporates combat attachments and units in direct or general support.

• Utilization of all available live, virtual, and constructive training enablers.

Evaluations conducted by the company and below should address the following:

• Collective and individual proficiency of the company and subordinate elements.

• Conduct of training and use of resources by trainers within the company.

• Effectiveness of the planning and preparation for the unit’s training.

• Utilization of all available live, virtual, and constructive training enablers.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

4-1

CHAPTER 4.

EVALUATING TRAINING RESULTS

The main purpose of evaluating training is to gain knowledge about whether that training, and the

training plan as a whole, has achieved its combat readiness objectives. Analyzing the training is

intended to considerably improve the effect and outcome of future training.

The exercise director and the tactical exercise commander (TEC) work together to provide an

evaluation of the training results to the unit as soon as possible after completion of the exercise.

Initial training evaluation results come from testing individual and unit training—this is one of the

most important indicators of the success of the training. Debriefs and AARs are important tools for

providing evaluation feedback to the training audience and generating learning as a result of

training.

CONDUCT DEBRIEFS AND AFTER-ACTION REVIEWS

The purpose of debriefs and AARs is to provide feedback based on the evaluators’ observations to

Marines and units about their training performance to ensure that learning occurs. The goal is to

ensure that change occurs and that desired behaviors are produced in future training. Debriefs and

AARs should be discussions between the evaluated Marines or unit and the evaluators to review

what happened, why it happened, and how future performance can be improved. It is important

that units designate time and a location in the training schedule for these feedback mechanisms to

occur (see Appendix F).

Achieving T&R performance standards in training is fundamental to ensuring that learning

occurs, and that key knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSAs) are produced. The leader conducting

training sets the conditions for learning, assesses the readiness of the Marines, and draws out

required corrective KSAs.

DEBRIEF

Immediate feedback is typically provided in informal, verbal debriefs. Event debriefs provide

immediate feedback between the unit and the evaluators. Debriefs should be a discussion between

the unit leadership, unit participants, and the evaluator. The evaluator discusses observations of

the Marines’ tactical and technical proficiencies as well as their cognitive adaptability. Debriefing

is the process of reviewing, analyzing and discussing the performance of a task to facilitate growth

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

4-2

and improvement. The evaluator guides the discussion based on observed performance; the units’

Marines describe their decision-making processes and other conditions that contributed to their

performance. By analyzing and discussing the event, Marine participants solidify tactical

knowledge, engage in group problem solving, and begin the work to improve future performance.

A meaningful debrief is a key component that links effectiveness across a specific learning

continuum—this can include a training plan, syllabus, or entire curriculum. The debrief is also the

venue by which leaders emphasize key learning points and relate them to the learners’ experience,

thereby fostering memorable and effective results.

The debrief targets the T&R event or performance standards to assess whether training objectives

have been attained and promote competency and capacity growth over time. Debriefs focused on

T&R standards capture the essence of the learning continuum of the training event. Debriefs at the

small-unit level allow junior officers and enlisted leaders to demonstrate, coach, and mentor their

Marines on “what right looks like” and avoid future training mishaps. Furthermore, debriefs

enable Marines to directly participate in their own learning while fostering esprit de corps,

meaningful readiness, and improved lethality. Debriefs based on T&R standards foster reflection

regarding how to better achieve the standard in future training—when the learning or training

context is changed, even if the standard was met.

Debriefing requires a skilled facilitator to maximize the learning benefit for Marines, and these

skills should be consistently developed and reinforced at the lowest levels of leadership. All

Marines must learn how to conduct a debrief. Marines should actively seek this responsibility

given appropriate guidance, experience, and preparation. As Marines grow in experience, ability,

and level of responsibility, they can master the ability to facilitate learning by honing their

debriefing skills—ultimately conducting evaluations at events such as MCCRE, SLTE, or

advanced MOS courses. Regardless of training event type or participant scope, all debriefs must

focus on the mission, commander’s intent, and the T&R and performance standards.

Debriefs provide the training audience with valuable information so they understand what and

how well they performed during the training event. Evaluators can then make comments and

recommendations to help the unit shape future training (see Appendix F).

AFTER-ACTION REVIEW

An AAR is a formal critique conducted by unit leadership with evaluators and event controllers (as

necessary) at the end of training exercises. It is based on observations made by the leaders,

Marines, and evaluators during training planning and execution. An AAR should be conducted at

all levels and center on the unit training objectives, defined by the METL and T&R events

conducted during the event, and the unit’s ability to achieve the standards associated with those

events. The evaluators drive the discussion and address best practices and trends that affected unit

performance based on the evaluators’ observations and data from event debriefs (see Appendix G).

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

4-3

Each AAR topic includes a recommendation to sustain observed practices and procedures, or

ways to improve practices and procedures that resulted in detrimental performance. Findings and

recommendations identified in the AAR shape the commander’s T&R assessments in the Defense

Readiness Reporting System. Leaders also use this information to shape future training to improve

individual and unit performance, develop qualified trainers, and improve the quality of training.

Evaluation results may affect unit training goals as well as training guidance and standing

operating procedures (SOP). Marine Corps-wide evaluation results may affect changes to

doctrine, equipment, force structure, literature, and training aids. Appendix F provides a basic

guide to building an AAR.

CAUSES OF TRAINING FAILURE

Training is a leadership competency. All Marine leaders must master the techniques of how to

properly design, develop, conduct and evaluate unit training. The most difficult part of the

evaluation phase is to correctly identify the cause of a training problem identified in the AAR.

Unit leaders must be attuned to the many potential causes of training failure so they can make the

appropriate correction to the training and conduct effective training remediation. The training

evaluation report and feedback from Marines provide information on possible causes of training

problems. Usually, failure during performance can be attributed to one of the following factors:

• Individual failure.

• Unit failure.

• Trainer failure.

• Training program failure.

Individual Failure

One possible cause for failure is the inability of a Marine to perform certain tasks required to

accomplish the objective. The Marine may have a skill deficiency or may have misunderstood

directions. Marines unable to identify why they fell short of meeting the standard may lack of

sufficient knowledge; Marines able to identify why they fell short may indicate a skill deficiency.

An excellent training leader will help Marines assess themselves and draw out their own the

points of failure and corrective actions.

Other possible causes for individual failure are lack of motivation or personal stress. Some Marines

do not pay attention, fall asleep during the activities or events, allow personal problems to affect

their priorities, or just do not have the correct attitude. For example, a Marine going through a

divorce may have been distracted during instruction for applying the proper windage or elevation

hold after zeroing the weapon and, as a result, never fully understood the procedure. Training

failures may have nothing to do with the training itself; they may be attributed to the Marine.

Unit Failure

Unit failure can be caused by lack of coordination as a unit, leading to substandard

performance. If an aviation crash crew cannot work smoothly to rescue the pilot, they need

further training as a team.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

4-4

Team failure can also be caused by the substandard performance of an individual on the team. If

the driver of a crash vehicle does not choose the correct firefighting agent, the pilot may not be

successfully rescued.

Unit failure may be caused by a lack of leadership. The team will not perform to standard if the

team leader cannot understand the intent of the training, is unable to make decisions quickly, or is

unable to communicate decisions clearly.

Trainer Failure

If the trainer does not have sufficient knowledge about the subject matter to teach it, his/her lack

of knowledge could cause the students’ performance failure. This frequently occurs during a

shortage of qualified personnel or if one trainer must fill in for another trainer without enough

time to prepare. If the trainer does not have an appropriate amount of knowledge to teach the

subject, Marines will not be trained properly.

Some trainers are knowledgeable in the subject matter but lack proper instructional techniques;

subsequently they may be unable to provide proper instruction. Good instructors know there is

more to the art of instruction than simply regurgitating information. There may also be instances

where trainers lack motivation. A trainer’s lack of motivation can seriously degrade the training of

individuals and units. Ultimately, the trainer must be intimately familiar with and comfortable

delivering the training materials. The trainer must devote requisite time toward preparation to

ensure the training is conducted effectively.

Training Program Failure

Marines may fail because of inadequate training. Deficiencies in training materials are a common

cause of failure. Marines cannot be expected to pass training proficiency evaluations if important

information is poorly planned, omitted, inaccurate or poorly communicated. To determine

whether a training program failure exists, trainers must ask the following questions:

• How was the instruction given?

• How were evaluations conducted?

• Were all required resources available?

• Were all instructional personnel present and sufficient in numbers?

• Was the evaluation conducted in a reasonable time after instruction or training was conducted?

LEARNING FROM FAILURE

A properly conducted evaluation should provide the leader with the information necessary to

make changes in training that will improve the effectiveness of the unit. A well-organized and

standards-based evaluation of training benefits enhances learning for participants. Evaluations

also ensure that limited training resources and time are used wisely. The use of debriefs or a

properly conducted and formatted AAR will provide the unit with the information needed to

modify or create future training events/exercises (see Appendix F).

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

5-1

CHAPTER 5.

EVALUATORS

The commander must select qualified evaluators and train them to ensure standardization of

evaluative data. For a formal evaluation, evaluator selection and training may be delegated to an

exercise director. This data is then used by the commander to assess/adjust the unit training plan.

The Marine Corps also uses training data to determine unit readiness and ensure Fleet Marine

Force training is properly supported and resourced. Evaluators are responsible to observe the

performance of the unit being evaluated, maintain the flow of the evaluation exercise, record the

evaluation of the unit’s performance, and debrief the evaluation.

Evaluator training is usually conducted by the senior evaluator, together with the exercise director

responsible for conducting the exercise evaluation. Additional guidance for evaluators may also

be appropriate and should be issued by the exercise commander or the commander’s

representative prior to the start of the evaluation. Appendix C provides guidance for conducting

evaluator training.

To evaluate training effectively, evaluators must—

• Establish/follow procedures for evaluating individual and unit performance.

• Be provided the tasks and understand the standards they will evaluate.

• Understand their critique and AAR responsibilities.

• Know who is in charge of the evaluation team, who is on the team, and what the individual

taskings are.

Evaluators must also—

• Be equal (or senior) in rank and position to the leader(s) being evaluated; unit commanders

should evaluate unit commanders, company commanders and platoon leaders should evaluate

platoon leaders, etc.

• Be proficient in the tasks evaluated.

• Use the same movement techniques as the unit(s) being evaluated.

• Be familiar with the tactics and SOPs of the unit(s) being evaluated.

• Wear the same uniform as the evaluated unit(s).

• Know how to conduct a debrief and an AAR.

• Know how, and when, to coach and critique (see Appendix D).

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

5-2

EVALUATOR CADRE

Informal (internal) evaluations are performed by leaders of the unit conducting the training; these

are either scheduled or unscheduled (conducted as time is available). Formal evaluations, such as

SLTE or MCCRE, are performed by evaluators sourced from outside the unit that is being

evaluated. External evaluations are typically conducted by the next higher echelon, peer (adjacent)

unit leaders, or a designated evaluation agency.

The evaluator cadre consists of those Marines selected by the exercise director to control,

evaluate, and debrief the training. External subject matter experts are requested from adjacent

units and higher headquarters based on experience or certifications to augment the evaluator cadre

when T&R standards require specific expertise, such as joint tactical air controller evaluators or

command and control systems operators.

Evaluators must be tactically and technically proficient in the tasks they evaluate. Evaluators

should come from similar units and have current or previous experience in the same duty positions

as the personnel they will evaluate. Ideally, evaluators will have held an equivalent operational

billet and have previous evaluation experience. An assignment to evaluate a unit allows evaluators

to gain valuable experience and helps broaden the evaluator’s experience base. Evaluators must

also be proficient in training and evaluation techniques and must be provided all pertinent

information about the unit to be evaluated.

The evaluator cadre should include an adequate amount of personnel, assorted ranks, and various

MOSs to support multi-echelon training. Evaluator success relies on early identification and

preparation. Evaluator training should be conducted as early in the training cycle as possible to

take advantage of experienced personnel prior to their transfer out of the unit. Appendix B

outlines the organization of the evaluation cadre.

EVALUATOR REQUIREMENTS

Training and Preparation

The exercise commander and exercise director establish the organization of the evaluator cadre

and procedures for evaluating individual and unit performance. Based on the local environment,

weather, or other factors, the exercise director and senior evaluator may provide additional

guidance for evaluators prior to the start of the evaluation. Evaluator success relies on early

identification and preparation. Evaluator training should be conducted as early in the training

cycle as possible. Units should schedule training events as necessary to ensure a sufficient number

of unit evaluators are available. Training support centers are available to help units with initial

instruction and to teach, coach, and mentor during execution of evaluator duties.

Leveling is conducted to familiarize evaluators with the evaluation plan. The senior evaluator

ensures all evaluators have a clear understanding on the conduct of the evaluation. Leveling will

provide each evaluator with necessary resources, a brief or explanation of the training event, and

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

5-3

an opportunity to gain a better understanding of the evaluation plan methodology. Evaluators

should be provided sufficient time to review references, T&R standards, unit SOPs, and

evaluation forms.

Calibration is conducted after evaluators have a foundational understanding of the plan. The

senior evaluator ensures evaluators base their evaluations in a consistent manner for the training

event or exercise. The use of a vignette or mental model allows evaluators to practice recording

evaluation results. Calibration provides evaluators with a common look or example using

scenarios, followed by an explanation and discussion of the linkage between the initial

performance rating by evaluators and actual performance observed. The goal of calibration is to

provide a baseline evaluator cadre’s perspective to ensure accurate reflection of performance

throughout the evaluation.

Observing

To effectively observe unit performance, the evaluator must—

• Determine the T&R standards to be evaluated.

• Be proficient in the tasks to be evaluated.

• Be familiar with the tactical and field SOPs for the units being evaluated.

Evaluators familiarize themselves with unit mission, METs, and T&R tasks and associated tasks

to be evaluated. Understanding the unit SOPs and schemes of maneuver ensures evaluators are in

the best physical location to safely observe the unit performing the task. Evaluators must not be a

distraction during the unit’s performance.

Evaluation forms guide evaluators as they observe a task being executed. Evaluators’ familiarity

with these forms, proficiency in the tasks, and operational and evaluation experience amplify their

ability to observe and evaluate unit performance of the T&R event tasks and subcomponents.

Recording

To effectively record an evaluation, the evaluator must—

• Be familiar with the evaluation procedures.

• Be familiar with the evaluation tools.

• Be familiar with information technology systems used to record and manage evaluation data.

Evaluators must understand the rating scales for evaluating unit performance. The evaluator

training must ensure that the evaluators are familiar with the meaning behind each point on the

scale and able to objectively measure unit performance (see Appendix E).

Evaluators must also capture key details in a word picture that provides sufficient context to

explain the rating for the task. Key details include contextual factors (location, weather, time,

terrain) and information revealed during debriefs that impact the unit’s task execution and justifies

the evaluation score.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

5-4

Training completion is only recorded in the training management system if the T&R standard is

achieved. When the standard is not achieved, the training leader recommends remediation training

to facilitate standard attainment after a sufficient period of student reflection and retraining. The

completion of a training event must never be recorded until the T&R standard is achieved during a

training period designed for that purpose. Just because training was conducted does not mean that

required levels of mastery were attained.

Debrief

The purpose of the debrief is to provide immediate feedback to the unit about their performance.

To effectively debrief the evaluation, the evaluator must—

• Understand their critique and AAR responsibilities.

• Communicate evaluation topics in terms of observation (what happened), description (why it

happened), and recommendation (how to improve future performance) in comparison to

T&R standards.

Debriefs provide immediate feedback from the evaluators to the unit. Debriefs should be a

discussion between the unit’s Marines and the evaluator. The evaluator guides the discussion

based on observed performance; the unit’s Marines describe their decision-making processes and

other conditions that contributed to their performance.

Debriefs provide evaluators with valuable information to make an informed rating of event

performance. Evaluators can then make comments and recommendations to help the unit

continue improving.

An AAR is typically conducted at the end of the training exercise between the unit leadership,

evaluators, and event controllers (as necessary). The AAR topics should address best practices and

trends that affected unit performance based on the evaluators’ observations and data from event

debriefs. Appendix F provides sample AAR procedures.

Each AAR topic includes a recommendation to sustain observed practices and procedures, or

ways to improve practices and procedures that resulted in substandard performance.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

6-1

CHAPTER 6.

IMPLEMENT AND DOCUMENT

To this point, this publication has described planning for training. The planning phases (analyze,

design, and develop) set the foundation for conducting training and for individual Marines and the

unit to achieve the desired levels of readiness. This preparation requires significant time, energy,

and coordination from and between the unit and external agencies to ensure the training

effectively and efficiently prepares the unit to achieve its readiness benchmarks. The implement

phase, complemented by processes to document individual and unit training, puts these well-

crafted plans into action.

IMPLEMENT

The commander’s confirmation brief marks the transition from planning phases (analyze, design,

and develop) to execution of the training event or exercise. The exercise designer transitions to a

support role in the tactical exercise control group (TECG). The planning cell transitions to

executing support plans, specifically in staging resources and personnel.

Unit leaders ensure their Marines are prepared to execute the training. Marines receive safety

briefs, are familiarized with unit SOPs, and conduct drills. Leaders brief their Marines on the

training to ensure the Marines understand what will occur and what is expected of them. Before

briefing their Marines on what will be expected of them, unit leaders and training leaders must be

proficient in and thoroughly understand the tasks expected of the unit, and be prepared to lead the

Marines through the execution. Before beginning a training event or exercise, Marines should

understand the training purpose and conditions, applicable tasks and standards, and the anticipated

or desired outcome of the training. Briefs should also include a general concept of operations,

equipment and gear requirements, resources for individual pre-execution preparation, and any

logistical or administrative constraints.

Conducting the event or exercise involves providing the training to the participants and evaluating

performance relative to the training objectives. The event or exercise is conducted in accordance

with the schedule, including staff exercises, unit exercises, field training exercises, drills, and

individual training. Trainers and leaders brief Marines prior to conducting individual drills, or at the

start of each day for a unit exercise. As necessary, the unit may conduct war games or rehearse to

validate their planning. Debriefs are conducted immediately following execution of drills or at the

end of each day for unit exercises. Both briefs and debriefs should focus on the desired standards

for the event or period discussed. As required, the unit remediates training to correct deficiencies.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

6-2

DOCUMENT

Documenting training outcomes, including both the training and performance evaluations, is

critical to the progression of individual Marines and the unit, as explained in MCRP 7-20A.5,

Training Data Management. Documenting outcomes ensures individual Marines and units receive

timely feedback about their training event or exercise performance. Documentation formats, such

as performance evaluation checklists (PECLs) and AARs are common formal methods of

recording training outcomes and lessons learned throughout the training continuum. Units also

record their planning by creating support plans, letters of instruction, confirmation briefs, and risk

assessments. As training progresses, units return to these documents to identify causes of training

gaps or deficiencies, draw upon best practices, and improve their future unit-training management

practices. The unit commander uses the total picture of evaluation feedback, event documentation,

and personal observations to assess the unit’s readiness and the effectiveness of the training.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

A-1

APPENDIX A.

CHECKLIST FOR CONDUCTING

FORMAL UNIT EVALUATIONS

This enclosure contains an evaluation checklist to be used in the preparation for, and conduct of, a

unit training evaluation utilizing the Marine Corps T&R Program. It is designed to provide the

evaluator team a library of potential tasks that may be conducted to ensure effective and

standardized training evaluations. The evaluator is encouraged to use this checklist as a

recommendation of things to consider when evaluating the unit. The situation dictates; not all items

on this checklist apply to every exercise. The evaluator is cautioned not to use the checklist with a

rote “check the box” mentality. Although intended for use with formal evaluations, the general

guidelines provided below can be used by unit leaders when conducting informal evaluations.

REQUIRE TASKS IN EVALUATION

Plan and Prepare for Evaluation

Subordinate commanders/staff members perform required actions at the direction and under

supervision of the exercise commander. Tasks to consider include the following:

• Deploying units are scheduled for formal evaluation at the proper point in their pre-

deployment training cycle.

• The responsible command for the conduct of the evaluation publishes a tentative evaluation

schedule by fiscal year.

• An evaluation exercise director is designated for each evaluation.

• Evaluation purpose and objectives align with the unit mission and METL and then published.

• Coordination with internal and external commands or agencies is affected as required.

• Letter of instruction (LOI) is published by the exercise director delineating responsibilities of

the various elements participating in the evaluation.

• Tactical exercise commander and a staff TECG are designated to operate as the central

control agency for the evaluation.

• Evaluators are selected and assigned.

• Exercise scenario is prescribed by the exercise director to accomplish the evaluation

objectives as prescribed in the LOI.

• Required training areas, airspace, aggressor forces, and other necessary support for the

evaluation are identified and scheduled.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

A-2

• Exercise planning conferences are conducted to develop the detailed exercise scenario.

 Scenario includes events that will ensure all collective training events identified in the LOI

are fully evaluated.

 The TEC and TECG develop, coordinate, and manage a master events list which meets the

evaluation requirements of the LOI.

• Appropriate evaluator training is planned, organized, and conducted.

• Evaluators attend evaluator training conducted under the cognizance of the exercise director.

 Evaluators know what tasks they are responsible for evaluating.

 Evaluators have reviewed doctrinal references for respective tasks and have familiarized

themselves with unit SOPs.

 Evaluators demonstrate a clear understanding of the exercise scenario.

 Evaluators provided required collective training events with fully developed performance

evaluation checklists.

 Evaluators understand interrelated actions required in their roles as evaluators, umpires,

and controllers.

Evaluation Letter of Instruction

The LOI addresses the following items:

• Unit(s) to be evaluated.

• Unit METs/METL events to be evaluated.

• Evaluation dates and times.

• Identification of the TEC.

• Unit(s) identified to provide the TECG staffing.

• Unit(s) identified to provide aggressor support and type/amount of support.

• Identification of the senior evaluator.

• Unit(s) identified to provide evaluator support and the amount of support required.

• Task organization of the evaluated unit, as required.

• Unit(s)/agency(ies) tasked to provide other types of support (i.e., communications, motor

transportation, aviation).

• Coordinating instructions, to include schedule for evaluator training, evaluators debrief, and

evaluated unit debrief.

• Operational risk management.

Conduct Post-Evaluation Actions

Subordinate commanders/staff members perform required actions at the direction and under the

supervision of the exercise commander.

• Evaluation data from individual evaluators is compiled, consolidated, and analyzed.

• Consolidated evaluation results are reviewed and analyzed at the evaluator debrief.

• Detailed debrief is prepared and provided to the evaluated unit/unit commander.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

A-3

• Evaluation report is prepared and forwarded with a copy of evaluation LOI to the exercise

director in a timely manner.

• Information copies of the evaluation report are distributed to the headquarters of all attached

supporting elements also evaluated during the exercise.

• Evaluation report is reviewed, endorsed, and forwarded to the appropriate commander

(evaluated unit, major subordinate element, major subordinate command and Marine

expeditionary force [MEF]) within 15 working days of completing the evaluation.

• Training deficiencies identified through the evaluation are utilized as a basis for training

remediation and training plan modification by the unit commander to improve unit T&R.

• Training discrepancies are corrected at the lowest possible level in the chain of command.

• Implications or issues for respective T&R manual identified to Commanding General,

Training and Education Command.

• Implications or issues for respective doctrinal shortfalls identified to Commanding General,

Training and Education Command.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

B-1

APPENDIX B.

TRAINING CADRE ORGANIZATION

The following are the critical positions charged with forming and conducting a formal evaluation:

• Exercise commander.

• Exercise director.

• Tactical exercise commander.

• TECG.

• Senior evaluator.

• Evaluators.

A fully staffed training cadre will typically be sourced from outside the evaluated unit to facilitate

exercises for formal evaluation of unit training readiness, such as MCCRE and SLTE. Evaluations

for unit-level training events may only employ a small team of local evaluators to document

event proficiency.

EXERCISE COMMANDER

The MEF commanding general, or their appointee, will designate the exercise commander role

unless this authority is delegated to the respective commander of the division, air wing, or

logistics group or their appointed major subordinate command MCCRE manager. The exercise

commander is responsible for the conduct of a formal evaluation exercise. Responsibilities and

functions of the exercise commander include—

• Designating the unit(s) to be evaluated.

• Establishing schedules and providing resources.

• Designating the exercise director.

• Prescribing exercise objectives and desired T&R events to be evaluated, as appropriate.

• Reviewing and publishing results in the Marine Corps Training Information Management

(MCTIMS) Module.

• Coordinating with commands or agencies external to the Marine Corps and adjacent Marine

Corps commands, as required.

• Implementing quality control over the exercise, to ensure the exercises of subordinate units

are reported as per MCO 3501.1E.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

B-2

EXERCISE DIRECTOR

The exercise director is designated by the exercise commander to prepare for, ensure the conduct

of, and report all evaluations. Responsibilities and functions of the exercise director include—

• Publishing an LOI delineating the master scenario event list (MSEL) events associated with the

unit’s METL to be evaluated, timeframe of the exercise, and responsibilities of various elements

participating in the exercise, remediation, follow-on evaluations, and coordinating instructions.

• Providing a copy of the exercise LOI to the exercise commander at least 15 days prior to the

exercise date.

• Designating the TEC to operate as the exercise control authority for the evaluation.

• Assigning evaluators, to include the senior evaluator, and ensuring evaluator training is

planned and conducted.

• Prescribing the general exercise scenario, taking into account any objectives/scenario events

prescribed by the exercise commander.

• Ensuring the scenario reflects the evaluated unit commander’s training program goals

and objectives.

• Arranging for training areas, airspace, aggressor forces, and other required support.

• Supervising the evaluation as required, compiling and analyzing the data, and submitting the

final report to the exercise commander.

• Keeping the exercise commander apprised of the evaluation.

• Prescribing exercise objectives and desired scenarios, tasks, or events.

• Coordinating with external commands or agencies to support the evaluation, when required.

• Evaluating the execution of exercises based on the unit METs and T&R standards.

• Affecting corrective action for deficiencies identified during the exercise, which are beyond

the subordinate commander’s capability to resolve.

TACTICAL EXERCISE COMMANDER

The TEC is responsible to the exercise director for ensuring the exercise is conducted following the

instructions contained in the published LOI. This reference publication, the MSEL events, and in

support of the unit’s METL and any other directions prescribed by the exercise director. Based on a

review/analysis of information/data provided by the senior evaluator, the TEC identifies trends,

strengths, and weaknesses of the unit’s performance and provides a final report to the exercise

director and unit commander per instructions.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

B-3

TACTICAL EXERCISE CONTROL GROUP

The exercise director will establish a nucleus TECG to provide continuity for evaluations across

the command. The responsibilities and functions of the TECG include—

• Developing a detailed exercise scenario and MSELs that provide exercise objectives and

events prescribed by the EC, exercise director, and LOI.

• Conducting evaluator training.

• Coordinating and controlling actor/agent input and aggressor response to unit action or

inaction in support of the exercise scenario.

• Compiling and analyzing data submitted by individual evaluators, and submitting required

evaluation information to the exercise director.

• Preparing and conducting a detailed exercise debrief for the unit being evaluated and the

exercise director.

Senior Evaluator

The senior evaluator coordinates and supervises all evaluators’ activity during the exercise and

debrief and must be aware of the overall effectiveness of the evaluation, to include scenario

effectiveness and the unit’s performance in the exercise. The senior evaluator compiles the data

sheets from all evaluators at the end of the exercise and conducts the post exercise debrief. Since

tactical scenarios are used at different levels of a unit’s organization at different phases of an

exercise, some MSEL events may be scored more than once. In these instances where a single

MSEL event is evaluated multiple times and when calculating the rating for a given MET, the

senior evaluator will follow the steps outlined in Appendix E.

Evaluators

Individuals selected as evaluators must have MOS credibility and be thoroughly prepared to

evaluate the MSEL events. All echelons of the evaluation exercise structure must make every

effort to assign only the most qualified Marines as evaluators. The number of evaluators is not

prescribed and varies with the size and types of units and the MSEL events to be evaluated.

During exercises involving formal evaluation, evaluators must be prepared to perform one of the

following functions.

Exercise Controller. The controller ensures the exercise proceeds as planned, following the

exercise schedule and scenario design. The evaluators use a combination of prescribed, pre-

planned, and inserted events to control and maintain the flow of the exercise while ensuring the unit

is evaluated in a meaningful manner against all designated MSEL events. They increase or decrease

the tempo of operations and maneuver rates through the use of aggressor maneuver/actions, by

inserting actors/agents and passing intelligence input to cause changes in the plan. They provide

necessary information from the scene of action by voice, radio, or other means when applicable.

Umpire. Umpires resolve any disagreement between the exercise force and aggressor forces. They

determine outcomes and assess casualties by analyzing the relative combat power of the forces

involved through their own judgment and experience or by utilizing the external assets.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

B-4

Training Evaluators. Evaluators apply the prescribed standards to the unit’s performance and

evaluate the level of performance as outlined in Appendix C. Evaluators must possess a complete

and thorough understanding of the MSEL events that are undertaken in the exercise. Evaluators

must review in detail the tasks and standards of the T&R for which they are responsible and must

be aware of when and where in the scenario these standards and tasks are to be evaluated. They

must then determine whether the activity or performance observed fulfills the performance criteria

as stated in the standard.

Evaluator remarks must be written in a manner that assists the unit in building training programs

in the future. Evaluators record their notes on the evaluator handbook, as necessary, to support the

exercise. In assigning marks, evaluators must be closely attuned to the tactical action of the

exercise and scheduled scenario events. The evaluators will evaluate overall performance against

the task, condition, and event components. Evaluators continue this process throughout the

exercise. At the conclusion of the exercise, evaluators review their data and supporting notes to

ensure they are a true reflection of the performance they have observed (see Appendix E).

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

C-1

APPENDIX C.

EVALUATOR TRAINING

Evaluator training removes individual bias and ensures standardization of the evaluation. Each

evaluator must have a complete understanding of the evaluative process and the roles and

functions that evaluators serve. Evaluator training is provided to all evaluators, the exercise

director’s representative, the TEC or appropriate representative, key TECG staff members, officer

in charge of the aggressor force, and representatives from all units participating in the evaluation.

Key items evaluator training addresses are—

• Evaluator preparation timeline.

• Evaluation guidance.

• Background information.

• Resource requirements.

• Evaluator prerequisites.

• Post-evaluation responsibilities.

EVALUATOR PREPARATION

Allowing evaluators appropriate preparation time will ensure a smooth transition through the

significant events of the evaluation. Unprepared evaluators cause significant events to be

improperly evaluated, which results in flawed and inaccurate evaluation data that directly impacts

readiness reporting and the unit training plan. Key preparations include the following:

• Review T&R manuals and any references or checklists provided.

• Gather and prepare equipment and supplies.

• Execute sand table-style evaluations drills to ensure common evaluator baseline.

• Visit training sites, ensuring familiarity of locations.

• Make personal notes to guide evaluation as needed.

• Prepare and coordinate with subordinate evaluators.

Evaluation Guidance

Evaluators are given the purpose of the evaluation, training standards, and specific activities to be

evaluated. Evaluators must be proficient in the standards they are assigned to evaluate.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

C-2

Background Information

Evaluators are provided the following information:

• Scenario developed for exercise.

 Maps with graphics.

 Timeline and sequence of events.

 MSELs and timeline for MSEL injects.

 Evaluator handbook.

• LOI.

• Evaluated unit’s SOPs.

• Control plans.

 List of radio frequencies to be utilized by unit and evaluators.

 Medical/casualty evacuation procedures.

 Range control procedures.

• Guidance for the unit (to be provided at the start of evaluation).

• Instruction on coaching techniques.

• Instruction on conducting a unit debrief.

Resources

Any resources, outside normal day-to-day items, needed for the evaluation should be provided to

the evaluators. Examples include—

• Communications equipment.

• Maps/Global Positioning System.

• Evaluator handbook.

• Food.

• Water.

• Force-on-force electronic control devices.

Evaluator Prerequisites

Marines assigned as evaluators should meet all prerequisites to ensure proficiency in the areas

assigned to evaluate. The exercise director is responsible for assigning the senior evaluator and all

other evaluators and must ensure the right Marines are assigned to conduct the evaluation. This

can only be accomplished by ensuring evaluators meet all prerequisites. Some examples of

prerequisites include—

• Understanding of exercise scenarios with emphasis on major MSEL events and planned

aggressor force actions.

• Knowledge and skills of assigned tasks.

• Evaluator techniques, such as—

 Not interrupting the execution of the task to ask questions.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

C-3

 Not evaluating based on differences between own unit’s SOPs as compared to evaluated

unit’s SOPs.

 Evaluating from a position that does not interrupt the execution of the unit’s task.

• Proper use of coaching/critiquing techniques (see Appendix D).

Post-Evaluation Responsibilities

The evaluator’s responsibilities do not end with the conclusion of the exercise. Evaluators have a

responsibility to the unit as well as the exercise director upon conclusion of the evaluated exercise,

some of those responsibilities are as follows:

• Conduct debriefs with unit leaders.

• Report recorded data to the TEC, who generates a final report to the exercise director and

evaluated unit commander.

• The exercise commander is responsible for collecting and publishing the evaluation results

into the MCTIMS Module (as required).

• The senior evaluator is responsible for collecting all data from evaluators and assisting the

TECG in preparing and conducting an exercise debrief with the unit or unit leadership as

directed by the unit commander. Debriefs must include the exercise director (or

representative), the TEC and key staff members of the TECG, all evaluators, and the

aggressor force commander.

• The TEC and evaluated unit commander also have a responsibility within the debrief to

comment on the validity and effectiveness of the evaluation.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

D-1

APPENDIX D.

COACHING AND CRITIQUING

DURING EVALUATOR TRAINING

Coaching and critiquing are tools that leaders use to provide feedback during training. In

coaching, leaders make corrections or give additional guidance during the execution or practice of

a task. In critiquing, leaders identify the strong and weak points of a unit’s or team’s performance

after completion of a task. Throughout the performance or practice of a task, leaders constantly

coach and critique Marines to correct their mistakes and to reinforce what they do well. Coaching

and critiquing are particularly important the first time Marines practice a task. Once tasks are

performed correctly, leaders can reduce the amount of coaching and critiquing, but coaching and

critiquing are never eliminated (see table D-1).

During training exercises and depending on the severity of the deficiency and tactical nature of the

problem, it may be necessary to stop the training when a deficiency is identified to immediately

correct it (coaching). However, during an evaluation, unless it jeopardizes safety or the entirety of

the exercise, the evaluated exercise should be allowed to continue. Deficiencies are to be

annotated and included in the debrief and AAR (critiquing) allowing the commander to correct

them during future training plans. Commanders should plan for remediation by forecasting

appropriate resources and time.

COACHING

Coaching is the most powerful tool a commander has to improve the performance of the Marine or

the unit. It permits immediate corrections and prevents the wrong lessons from being learned.

Whereas learning by failure allows Marines to see the consequences of their actions when tasks

are executed incorrectly, coaching is a tool leaders can use to guide and demonstrate to Marines as

Table D-1. Tools for Evaluating Training.

Coaching

(During Execution)

Critiquing

(After Execution)

Corrects errors on the spot Identifies strengths/weaknesses

Provides help when needed Answers critical training questions

Focuses on critical details Indicates any additional practice needed

Prevents negative learning Encourages open discussion/group participation

Improves speed Improves understanding of tasks

Provides immediate feedback Promotes retention

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

D-2

processes are being learned. During step-by-step practice, leaders coach heavily to reduce errors.

Coaches and leaders watch every action performed by Marines, correct mistakes on the spot, and

provide guidance to ensure that Marines, crews, and units learn correctly. This type of formative

feedback is essential to progressive training. It is important to start coaching as soon as Marines

need help and before they become frustrated. While Marines are practicing tasks, leaders use

coaching to focus on fine points that improve speed and quality of performance. Leaders also use

coaching to help Marines perform daily operational jobs and tasks. Coaching emphasizes safety

and security and continues until Marines perform the task correctly. When Marines practice tasks

the right way, they learn the tasks the right way. Leaders must develop solid, effective coaching

skills. To coach effectively, leaders must—

• Be able to perform the tasks themselves.

• Coach the way they would want to be coached; during initial practices, leaders are

understanding and patient.

• Assume that every Marine can improve.

• Become more demanding during advanced practice to ensure that Marines perform their tasks

to standard.

• Provide more detailed coaching as practice focuses on proficiency.

• Provide constructive feedback when signs of confusion or frustration appear.

• Point out the critical cues and reinforce cues as practice progresses to ensure that Marines

have learned the proper skills and actions.

Critiquing

Critiques are discussions that leaders conduct after practice. They are mini-AARs. They bring out

both strengths and weaknesses. Critiques answer three questions that are important to learning:

• What happened?

• Why did it happen?

• How could it have been done better?

Leaders Critique Each Task After it is Practiced

After each critique, Marines practice the task again to reinforce what they learned in the critique.

Critiques are conducted at a logical breakpoint, e.g., right after a platoon has taken the objective,

reorganized, and consolidated. The platoon leader might call a break in the training session and

conduct a critique on the tasks associated with making the hasty attack. Critiques are verbal and

informal, taking only a short time immediately after completion of the task. During critiques,

Marines talk about what they did during the training. As they attempt to answer the three

questions, they correct each other’s understanding of the tasks. The leaders listen to the

discussion, add the appropriate information and comments, reinforce the correct actions taken,

identify incorrect actions, and determine if additional practice is required. If necessary and

possible, leaders conduct more practice immediately after the critique. Such repetition helps

Marines remember what they learned in the critiques. Leaders ensure that Marines correct their

mistakes and then critique the practice again.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

D-3

Critique Leaders

For collective events and missions, subordinate leaders are also critiqued, but never in front of

their Marines. After their private critiques, subordinate leaders help critique the Marines. This

approach has several advantages:

• Leaders maintain credibility with their Marines.

• Subordinate leaders practice their critiquing skills under the supervision of experienced leaders.

• Leaders reinforce their own learning as they pass on corrections to subordinates.

• Leaders and subordinate leaders work in unison, creating a healthy command climate.

Best Practices for Critiques

To be effective, leaders must keep in mind that critiquing—

• Centers on the Marine and the unit.

• Is required if incorrect standards are caused by confusion or lack of understanding.

• Reinforces good performance and corrects deficiencies or weaknesses.

• Is conducted as often as needed.

• Lasts as long as needed to get the points across.

The spirit and tone of the critiques are important. Marines must feel that they can discuss their

performance honestly. Leaders encourage open, honest conversation and encourage all members

of the group to participate. They convince Marines to help themselves and each other by taking

part in the critiques. Critiques consist of three parts: description, analysis, and definition.

Description. Marines should describe both good and bad points in their own words. The

description is limited to facts and avoids discussion of opinions or judgments. Leaders may have

to prompt Marines on some of the details by asking guiding questions. As they talk, Marines are

encouraged to think about their performance, which helps them profit from the review.

Analysis. During a critique, Marines and leaders analyze what they did correctly and what they

did poorly. The analysis concentrates on why performance fell below standards. Discussion

should refer to standards and performance steps in the T&R manual or unit SOP. The analysis

should not over-emphasize mistakes but should reinforce strong points and good performance.

Since much of our training is intended to prepare for war, the analysis identifies the consequences

that would result if these actions had occurred during combat. Knowing why tasks must be

performed a certain way in combat gives Marines more incentive to perform tasks correctly and

gives them a greater sense of responsibility to the team.

Marines should be provided the opportunity to assess their own performance during training and

discover the correct answers themselves. Self-identification of their own faults will increase their

confidence. Even if only one or a few Marines were responsible for shortfalls, sessions should

cover everyone’s performance. Weak performers are critiqued separately. Although personal

embarrassment should be avoided, positive peer pressure is also an effective tool for rapid

improvement, when required.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

D-4

Definition. Any problem identified during the analysis must be defined in detail. Marines should

have enough information to determine what to do differently the next time. Leaders guide the

discussion so that Marines learn how to perform the tasks properly. If Marines develop proper

performance methods themselves, they are more likely to remember the correct method longer,

especially if their leaders confirm their findings.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

E-1

APPENDIX E.

DEBRIEFS

Debriefs must center on the T&R and performance standards to assess whether the training

objective was attained and to promote competency and capacity growth over time. This is

particularly true for prerequisite events and T&R events that have intervals of 90/180/365 days.

Debriefing against the T&R standard fosters reflection for how to achieve the standard better next

time—when the learning or training context has changed—even if the standard was met.

While debriefing is a powerful tool, it requires a skilled facilitator to maximize the learning

benefit for Marines. All Marines must learn how to conduct a debrief and should willingly and

actively seek this responsibility given appropriate guidance, experience, and preparation. A

corporal or sergeant must be able to debrief the other Marines in their team, section, or shop to

progressively grow competency and capacity over time. This should be demonstrated to them by

their staff noncommissioned officers and commanders. As they are promoted and assigned greater

responsibility, they will debrief more Marines in larger units. As Marines grow in experience,

ability, and level of responsibility, they can master the ability to facilitate learning by honing their

debriefing skills, ultimately conducting evaluations at events such as MCCRE and SLTE or

advanced MOS courses. Regardless of training event type or participant scope, all debriefs must

focus on the mission, commander’s intent, and T&R and performance standards.

GUIDELINES FOR DEBRIEFING

Keep Sight of the Big Picture

All Marines involved in an event should help recall the event for the debrief. While the leader

facilitates the learning event, all Marines, including the leader, are training and learning. Tactical

behaviors and decisions that positively or negatively impact the mission, commander’s intent, and

T&R standards need be drawn out. Over time, a debriefer will develop their style and become

proficient at facilitating the natural flow of a debrief to unpack the standards, give corrections, and

help Marines reflect toward similar future events. Debriefers should strive to set the example for

others and develop a professional, consistent style that sets the standard of excellence for the

training audience, peers and other unit leaders.

Create a Safe Learning Environment

Marine Corps training is intense, dangerous, and uniquely stressful. This is particularly true when

being conducted for unit or service evaluation such as MCCRE/SLTE or for an individual who

may be working toward an individual or billet qualification. Leaders must refrain from personal

judgment against Marines based on their performance, and instead determine whether the training

event achieved the standard. The focus of the debrief is on the mission, intent, and standards, not

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

E-2

the participants. Use of tactical callsigns, when applicable, also keeps the team from using

personal names, which can automatically cause defensive barriers to manifest. A debrief exists to

facilitate learning and should always be non-interrogatory.

Timing of the Debrief

Debriefing as soon as possible after the event fosters better recall and enthusiasm among

Marines by keeping them close to the training conducted. A standardized template for

debriefing (figure F-1) also fosters a timely, organized debrief. One should focus on ensuring

learning points are discussed and to determine whether the T&R standards were achieved,

rather than on how long to conduct a debrief.

Engage all Marines

Marines learn in different ways. A skilled debriefer solicits feedback from all participants using

directed questioning. Marines also engage the training in different ways, have different insights,

and different reasons for decisions they make. Drawing on all perspectives ensures every Marine

is provided opportunity to learn and grow. This also sheds light on diverse thinking and problem

solving and exposes these perspectives to other Marines to promote learning and unit cohesion.

Let the Marines Drive the Discussion

Marines should be encouraged to articulate their own experience with the training event. The

experience of the Marines participating in training is what matters, not the training leader. Everyone

is learning and executing together. Getting the Marines to drive the discussion gives them ownership

over their own learning while ensuring they remain fully engaged in the learning process.

Considerations for When Events Do Not Go According to Plan

While Marines in a training environment have likely planned and briefed with the intent of

flawless execution, it must be ingrained in Marines that a perfect squad in the offensive or close

air support sortie does not exist. The tireless pursuit of perfection, however, is the noble endeavor

of every Marine. Because perfection does not exist necessitates debriefing, the debrief fosters

reflection that guides Marines ever closer to the perfection they seek.

When training goes less than perfectly, good training leaders admit their own mistakes first and

assess what they could have done better. This establishes credibility and demonstrates a desire to

improve via a willingness to draw out less-than-perfect performance. It is a key attribute/attitude

among Marines: Know yourself and seek self-improvement.

Sometimes the experience base of the Marine(s) may not be sufficient for them to understand

what went wrong or what they should have done differently. At these times, the training leader

provides corrective action in accordance with SOP, tactical publications, doctrine, etc. The

training leader will also need to determine and make recommendations for re-training until the

standard is achieved.

Use Tools to Facilitate Learning

Record and annotate events whenever possible; playback is key. For example, a pilot and infantry

Marine may both use recordings of flight events or tactical troop movements to play back,

reconstruct, and debrief a mission. Watching events unfold from multiple points of view provides

clarity for recall, triggers discussion, and provides the gateway for reviewing actions, behaviors,

and decisions.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

E-3

A white board and colored markers are useful tools for reconstructing events. They foster the

Marines’ recall and allow them to participate in the debrief by helping the leader draw events as

they happened. Time stamps may be applied to the recreation for key decision points, admin or

tactical breakdown, or particularly well-executed events. These can then be targeted in the debrief

to help the group determine standards attainment.

Sand tables are another useful tool; they recreate three-dimensional landscapes and provide a

bigger picture for participants. Here too, during the recreation of the event, time stamps can be

applied to ensure those moments are covered during the debrief. Training leaders should leverage

key players during large debriefs. During a battalion-level exercise, it may be prudent for the

commander to only solicit key decision points, tactical execution, or other feedback from

company commanders. At the platoon-level, the commander will likely leverage his squad

leaders’ input.

MISSION DEBRIEF KEY ELEMENTS

Figure E-1. Mission Debrief Outline.

Mission Overview

All communities and MOSs differ in various ways, but the mission is universal in Marine Corps

tactical training. To begin every debrief, the training team should review mission tasking,

commander’s intent, and all T&R and performance standards. This allows the team to review why

the training was being conducted and identify the targeted standard of achievement.

T & R Title

Mission overview

1. Review mission tasking

2. Review commander’s intent

3. Review T&R standards/mission performance standards

Safety

Planning factors

Questions from the brief

Admin

Tactical admin

Execution

1. Event recall

2. Key decisions

3. Key actions

4. Tactical actions and their effectiveness

Conclusion

1. Mission success

2. Commander’s intent

3. T&R standards/mission performance standards

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

E-4

Safety

Safety must be a key consideration in planning and executing any training event. Professional

units and leaders who focus on tactical excellence will always consider risks and establish clear

and effective risk mitigations to ensure a tactically sound training evolution. Safety is a

deliberate byproduct of a professionally planned and developed training evolution. In other

words, it is vital for Marines to understand that tactically sound exercise plans are inherently safe

when planned, designed, and developed well and in detail. Safety is the hallmark of tactical

excellence and professionalism.

No training evolution is worth the cost of a life or a major end item of equipment. Marines must

acknowledge and accept responsibility for any and all safety violations or events that nearly or

actually injured personnel or damaged equipment, to include near-catastrophic events, because

every lesson learned today may preclude the loss of life or damage to equipment in a future unit

training evolution. A debrief should be a place where these types of admissions and discussions

can occur without discomfort or fear of reprisal—this approach will reinforce a professional

training culture and build mutual trust and respect among leaders within a unit. Key unit leaders

must be willing to set the example. A debrief is not an investigation or place for laying blame.

Anyone who committed a safety error should be willing to state what took place and what the

result was, as well as what he/she learned from the event. The debrief leader is responsible for

ensuring that these types of issues are handled responsibly and professionally. Examples of such

issues would include a—

• Live fire event—negligent discharge.

• Helicopter low-level flight—evasive maneuver performed to avoid collision with power

lines; power line location was not briefed.

• Near rollover of a 7-ton truck during administrative movement to a training range.

Planning Factors

A brief discussion on planning factors that impacted the event is imperative. For example, if the

T&R event calls for ammunition but ammunition was not available, what did the team do to

continue the training evolution to ensure training could progress? Another example might be for a

simulation event where the team finds that 50 percent of the expected simulator capacity is not

functioning, asking how that impacted the event, what was done to keep the training going, and

what was not possible to get accomplished.

Questions from the Brief

The question element entails a short summary of what was not covered during the brief that led to

confusion during the execution of the event. It is also the place for Marines to speak up and ask

questions that could or should have been clarified during the brief. It is also appropriate to discuss

any changes between what was briefed and what occurred during execution. This will ensure all

participants understand why and how various decisions were made that affected the

implementation of the event.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

E-5

Administration

Discuss any administrative items that impacted the event. Depending on the community/MOS this

could include various items ranging from ammunition allocation and return to vehicle start up

procedures. It should also cover getting to and from the training location and required

communications or procedures involving external agencies. In general, this covers all the basic

procedures that do not involve the tactical employment of personnel and weapon systems.

Tactical Administration

Similar to the administration discussion, tactical administration covers the administrative

requirements for tactical employment.

Execution

Execution is the heart of the debrief and generally warrants most of the focus. It is through

discussion of the execution that Marines understand whether or not they achieved the standard. More

importantly the debrief of the training execution seeks to provide details for three key elements—

• Understanding what was actually taking place during the training event.

• How that understanding, no matter how accurate or inaccurate, led to decisions that were made.

• How decisions became action.

Debriefing that builds understanding and assesses decision making and actions builds Marines’

competency and capacity for out cycling the enemy’s ability to do the same. It is a key concept of

maneuver warfare and, thus, should be a part of every debrief in the training environment.

To build overall understanding of what took place, the team should conduct a recall of the event.

Using either a white board and markers or a sand table are excellent ways to visualize the event in

space and time while providing “time stamps” for key events, such as tactical decisions and

actions. Using tape or audio playback is a great way to have the participants work through the

recall portion of the debrief. Recall helps bring the Marines’ experiences to life for the entire team

and build a more complete understanding of events that occurred. What the left fire team

experienced compared to the right fire team may have been slightly different and it is important

for the team to be able “see” the entire picture of what actually took place. During the recall, a

scribe should annotate key decisions and actions that took place to ensure the team captures all

those events.

With the recall complete, the Marines focus on key decisions that occurred during the event,

paying particular attention to those that affected mission, commander’s intent, safety, and T&R

standards. Marines should describe the decisions they made and what information was used to

make them. The debrief leader should encourage Marines to identify and discuss whether the

decision would have been different based on information revealed during the recall. This is a good

place for Marines to discuss the decision that was made in terms of what was positive about it and

what could have been better.

Regardless of how decision was made, it led to some type of action. Just as with decisions, the

Marines should focus on those actions that impacted the mission, commander’s intent, safety, and

T&R standards. These actions should be dissected against various publications such as unit SOP,

tactical SOP, doctrine, etc. Here the Marines check each other to determine the level of execution

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

E-6

of the actions, whether executed correctly or otherwise. If not conducted to standard, the team

must understand why and determine how it may be improved. This is where the key learning takes

place after the actual execution. This is where training leaders and the Marines themselves

understand if the T&R standard was achieved or not. It also spurs reflection on how to do it better

next time, or if conditions were different, and how lower-level training events are building blocks

for higher level training events.

Conclusion

After the execution portion of the debrief, Marines review the mission success and execution of

commander’s intent. All T&R standards are reviewed by stating whether the standard was achieved

or not. This portion of the debrief is usually brief and simply recaps what has been determined.

An example for 0317-MARK-2007 might sound like the following:

“Sniper, today’s evolution was a mission success, you engaged targets in accordance with the

ground commander’s scheme of maneuver enabling 3/2 to set up blocking positions on the AOR’s

left flank. The T&R standard was to qualify at ranges from 183-823 meters during hours of

complete darkness with 80 percent accuracy. That was achieved, training complete.”

No one should walk away from a debrief without understanding why the mission succeeded or

failed to succeed, why a required task was or was not accomplished, or how to do it better the

next time.

Finally, and particularly if the event did not achieve the standard, end on a positive note. Surely,

something went well and can be used as a catalyst for building upon during re-training evolutions.

DOCUMENTATION

Once the debrief is complete, there are a few required actions by participants. Training forms must

be completed, event completion must be recorded in MCTIMS or Marine Sierra Hotel Aviation

Readiness Program, and completion or recommended re-training must be reported to the

operations department.

Grade Sheet

Grade sheets come in many forms and should be standardized to foster information flow for the

Marines and leaders executing the unit training plan. Training leaders complete the unit’s standard

grade sheet for submission to the Marines’ training records. This provides Marines the ability to

go back to past events and recall trouble spots when the currency requirements come due again or

when performing the same event at a higher level. It also gives the unit a historical basis for

training anomalies that may manifest at some point in the future.

Recording the Event

Unit training leaders and Marines adhere to unit SOPs regarding who records the training event in

MCTIMS/Marine Sierra Hotel Aviation Readiness Program. Only training that meets the T&R

and performance standards is recorded. Particular attention should be given to what T&R event or

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

E-7

events are being conducted. For example, many 6000-level events also chain to lower-level events

and Marines responsible for entering T&R event completion must understand how this works.

While higher coded events are often done at the higher unit level, one must consider that small

unit events are also being executed within these high-order events. Battalion or squadron exercises

require squad-, fire-team-, and crew-level actions that should be counted when event completion

is recorded. This helps maintain currency in 90/180/365 requirements and promotes focused

attention (during the debrief) for these Marines to grow competency and capacity over time by

reviewing how their lower-level individual and collective T&R events impacted larger unit

outcomes.

Informing Operations

The operations section runs the day-to-day actions and events for most units. Thus, operations

must be informed about training conducted and documented. This facilitates the continuous

evaluation of the training plan. Training completion should not be recorded if training was

conducted but did not meet the T&R standard. The training leader is responsible for informing

operations and explain why the standard was not achieved, as well as a recommended course of

action to attain requisite KSAs prior to conducting the event again.

Conclusion

The Marine Corps is required to be ready when the nation is least ready. Marines are closing with

the enemy, gaining and maintaining contact with the enemy, or training. Mission-essential tasks/

METLs provide the desired outcome for the unit training plan. The sum of a series of T&R events

is designed to produce the outcome. Individual and collective T&R events cannot be viewed with

a check-the-box mentality. This means that just because Marines participated in training does not

mean they are trained. The catalyst is leaders, from the fire team leader to the commander,

determining whether the T&R standard was achieved. Therefore, the T&R standard is the

foundation for Marine Corps training readiness when coupled with the other two pillars of

manning and equipment. Only then can a unit declare “we are ready.”

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

F-1

APPENDIX F.

AFTER-ACTION REVIEW

While a debrief focuses on providing immediate feedback from the evaluator to the unit, the AAR

formalizes lessons learned for presentation to unit leadership at the end of the training exercise, as

well as ensuring the lessons are recorded for later reference. The evaluator first discusses an AAR

with the unit leader alone. The unit leader, assisted by the evaluator, conducts an AAR with the

entire unit. The procedures for both reviews are the same.

SAMPLE AFTER-ACTION REVIEW PROCEDURE

Step 1.Each unit evaluator develops a discussion outline. The discussion outline guides the AAR.

Step 2. The evaluator first reviews the training standards with the unit leader. Next, the

evaluator leads a discussion of the training events, collected from the training schedule, in the

sequence in which they occurred. Graphics and maps help in describing these events. To

conduct an effective pre-AAR, the evaluator—

• Guides the discussion by asking directed questions about specific facts and observations to

draw out decisions and thought processes.

• Discusses not only what took place, but why it happened.

• Guides the discussion so that important tactical lessons surface.

• Relates tactical and mission events to the T&R manual and subsequent results.

• Ensures that alternative and more effective courses of action are explored.

• Avoids detailed examination of events not directly related to major training standards.

• Avoids discussing excuses for poor actions.

• Turns excuses into teaching points and keeps the review positive in nature.

• Covers all events associated with the unit’s training session and evaluation and encourages

the Marines to summarize what took place during training goals.

• Never criticizes the leader; based on the facts presented, the leaders mentally critique themselves.

Step 3. The unit leader reviews the training event with the entire unit. The evaluator moderates

the review. The same procedures are used as in the platoon commander’s AAR, except that the

leader, not the evaluator, conducts the discussion with his or her Marines. The evaluator

maintains a secondary role and serves only to keep the meeting focused on training standards

and to prevent arguments. This procedure strengthens the chain of command and puts the focus

of the review on the unit leader as the primary trainer of the unit. The review focuses on the

unit’s collective T&R standard(s). The evaluator must be careful not to embarrass the unit

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

F-2

leader in front of his troops. The AAR is interactive. Troops learn best when learning from

each other and their leaders. Leaders and evaluators guide that learning. Formal or informal

reviews should be conducted for all training.

Step 4. Upon completion of the AAR, the leader or evaluator prepares an AAR. It contains the

evaluation results and any additional details obtained during the review in a format directed by

the unit SOP. The same basic principles used for developing the discussion outline for the

review apply to the AAR. It must be as detailed as possible. It identifies the causes of both

substandard and proper performance of the task. The AAR is forwarded to the next higher

commander per unit SOP. Information in the AAR is used to plan future training.

Recommendations for Effective After-Action Reviews

To ensure AARs are effective—

• Discussions must not embarrass leaders or Marines but emphasize the positive while

highlighting areas that require improvement or were overlooked.

• Commanders guide the discussion, not by critique or lecture, but by asking questions focused

on facts and observations during task performance that reinforce or fail to align with

published standards or tactical SOPs; they enter the discussion only to sustain the AAR, to get

the discussion back on track, or to bring out new points.

• Participants describe what happened in their own words.

• Thought-provoking questions are prepared to stimulate discussion.

• Discussions identify alternate, and possibly more effective, courses of action.

• Discussions avoid minor events that do not directly relate to the major training objective.

• Participants must not excuse inappropriate actions. They examine why actions were taken and

what alternatives were available.

• Every unit or element that participated in the exercise must be represented at the AAR.

• Actions required to correct training deficiencies brought out during the AAR are incorporated

into the unit-training schedule as soon as possible after the exercise.

Evaluation Guidance

Evaluators are given the purpose of the evaluation, training standards, and specific activities to be

evaluated. Evaluators must be proficient in the standards he/she is assigned to evaluate.

Background Information

Some of the information that would be considered background include—

• Scenario developed for exercise.

• LOI.

• Evaluated unit SOPs.

• Control plans.

• List of radio frequencies to be utilized by unit and evaluators.

• Guidance for the unit (to be passed at start of evaluation).

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

F-3

Resources

Any resources, outside normal day-to-day items, needed for the evaluation should be provided to

the evaluators. Examples include:

• Evaluator handbook.

• Communications equipment.

• Maps/Global Positioning System.

• Exercise significant events schedule.

• Others.

Evaluator Preparation

Allowing evaluators appropriate preparation time will ensure a smooth transition through the

significant events of the evaluation. Unprepared evaluators cause significant events to be under

evaluated, which results in flawed and inaccurate data that directly impacts the unit training plan

and readiness reporting. Key preparations include the following:

• Review T&R manuals and any references or checklists provided.

• Gather and prepare equipment and supplies.

• Execute sand table-style evaluations drills to ensure common evaluator baseline.

• Visit training sites, ensuring familiarity of locations.

• Make personal notes to guide evaluation as needed.

• Prepare and coordinate with subordinate evaluators.

Evaluator Skills Assessment

An assessment of all evaluators should be conducted to ensure proficiency in the areas assigned to

evaluate. The exercise director is responsible for assigning the senior evaluator and all other

evaluators and must ensure the right Marines are assigned the right evaluation tasks. This can only

be accomplished by assessing—

• Understanding of exercise scenarios with emphasis on major TECG events and planned

aggressor force actions.

• Knowledge and skills of assigned tasks.

• Evaluator techniques, such as—

 Not interrupting the execution of the task to ask questions.

 Not comparing own unit’s SOPs to evaluated unit’s SOPs.

 Evaluating from a physical position not to interrupt the execution of the unit’s task.

• Proper use of coaching/critiquing techniques (see Appendix C).

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

F-4

Training Cadre Post-Evaluation Responsibilities

The training cadre’s responsibilities do not end with the conclusion of the exercise. Training cadre

members have a responsibilities to the unit and exercise director upon conclusion of the evaluated

exercise, such as—

• Evaluators report recorded data to the TEC and senior evaluator.

• Evaluators generate and submit a final report to the exercise director and evaluated unit commander.

• The exercise commander collects and publishes evaluation results into the MCTIMS Unit

Training Module (as required).

• The senior evaluator collects all data from evaluators.

• The senior evaluator assists the TECG in preparing and conducting an exercise debrief with

the unit or unit leadership as directed by the unit commander; debriefs must include the

exercise director (or representative), the TEC and key TECG members, all evaluators, and the

aggressor force commander.

• Within the debrief, the TEC and evaluated unit commander comment on the validity and

effectiveness of the evaluation.

Unit Post-Evaluation Responsibilities

Some post-evaluation responsibilities include the following:

• Unit leaders collect and aggregate AARs from lower levels. Fire teams, squad, and section

leaders submit AARs to platoon commanders; platoon commanders submit AARs to

company commanders; company commanders submit AARs to the battalion commander or

S-3; etc. The unit aggregating AARs determines which points will be submitted in accordance

with MCO 3504.1, Marine Corps Lessons Learned Program.

• The unit submits the event AAR in accordance with MCO 3504.1; an AAR template is posted

at the Marine Corps Center for Lessons Learned (MCCLL) website: https://usmc.sharepoint-

mil.us/sites/tecom_mccll.

• Unit AARs will be submitted directly to the MCCLL embedded analysts who will process the

AARs in accordance with local command procedures and submit to the unit higher

headquarters and to the MCCLL; a listing of lessons learned embedded analysts at I MEF, II

MEF, III MEF, and Marine Forces Reserve can be found at the Marine Corps Lessons

Learned Website: https://usmc.sharepoint-mil.us/sites/tecom_mccll.

• For Headquarters, United States Marine Corps and supporting establishment commands not

covered by an embedded lessons learned analyst submit AARs to the email address:

[email protected].

The MCCLL will provide acknowledgment of receipt of the after-action report and provide any

further instructions as necessary; MCCLL will load the after-action report to JLLIS [Joint Lessons

Learned Information System] and MCCLL websites.

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

Glossary-1

GLOSSARY

Abbreviations and Acronyms

AAR .................................................................................................................... after-action review

LOI......................................................................................................................letter of instruction

MCCLL.......................................................................... Marine Corps Center for Lessons Learned

MCO .................................................................................................................. Marine Corps order

MCTIMS................................................Marine Corps Training Information Management System

MCTP...........................................................................................Marine Corps tactical publication

MEF .......................................................................................................Marine expeditionary force

MET ................................................................................................................mission-essential task

METL........................................................................................................mission-essential task list

MOS................................................................................................. military occupational specialty

SOP .....................................................................................................standing operating procedure

T&R ............................................................................................................... training and readiness

The following acronyms pertain to processes and entities specific to this publication series.

E-coded .................................................................................................................. evaluation coded

KSAs.......................................................................................................knowledge, skills, abilities

MCCRE ........................................................................ Marine Corps combat readiness evaluation

MSEL........................................................................................................ master scenario event list

SLTE.................................................................................................Service-level training exercise

TEC...................................................................................................... tactical exercise commander

TECG ................................................................................................ tactical exercise control group

MCRP 7-20A.4 Evaluations and Assessments

References-1

REFERENCES AND RELATED PUBLICATIONS

Joint Issuances

DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

Other Instructions

Navy/Marine Corps Departmental Publication (NAVMC)

1553.1_ Marine Corps Instructional Systems Design/Systems Approach to Training and

Education Handbook

Marine Corps Publications

Marine Corps Supplement to the DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

Marine Corps Doctrinal Publication (MCDP)

7 Learning

Marine Corps Warfighting Publication (MCWP)

5-10 Marine Corps Planning Process

Marine Corps Tactical Publications (MCTPs)

7-20A Unit Training Guide

Marine Corps Reference Publications (MCRPs)

2-10B.1 Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield/Battlespace

7-20A.1 Unit Training Guide

7-20A.2 Event and Exercise Design

7-20A.3 Marine Corps Simulation Training Guide

7-20A.5 Training Data Management

Marine Corps Orders (MCOs)

1553.3_ Unit Training Management Program

3500.11 Service-level Training Exercise Program (SLTE-P)

3501.1_ Marine Corps Combat Readiness Evaluation (MCCRE)

3504.1 Marine Corps Lessons Learned Program

A non-cost copy of this document is available at:

https://www.marines.mil/News/Publications/MCPEL/

This document is a work of the United States Government and the text is in the public domain in

the United States. Subject to the following stipulation, it may be distributed and copied:

• Copyrights to graphics and rights to trademarks/Service marks included in this document are

reserved by original copyright or trademark/Service mark holders or their assignees, and are

used here under a license to the Government and/or other permission.

• The use or appearance of United States Marine Corps publications on a non-Federal

Government website does not imply or constitute Marine Corps endorsement of the

distribution service.