KIMBERLY LIANO, CSC Docket No. 2020-1159

BackgroundKimberly Liano requests reconsideration of the attached Final Administrative Determination of the Civil Service Commission, rendered on September 27, 2019, which upheld the determination that she did not meet the requirements for the promotional examination for Quality Assurance Specialist, Health Services (PS4301K), Department of Human Services. A copy of that decision is attached hereto and incorporated herein.

By way of background, a promotional examination for Quality Assurance Specialist, Health Services (PS4301K) was announced with education and experience requirements which had to be met as of the announced April 23, 2018 closing date. The petitioner filed an application on which she indicated that she possessed a Bachelor’s degree and one month of applicable experience as a provisional Quality Assurance Specialist, Health Services. This is the only position the appellant listed or described on the application she submitted. No supplemental information was submitted before the April 28, 2018 closing date. Consequently, she failed to establish her eligibility for the subject promotional examination.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the petitioner argued that she satisfied the subject requirements and submitted a resume with positions listed that she failed to include with her original application submission by the announced closing date. The appellant further argued that “there were significant technical issues with the website” the evening she completed her application and that she submitted a resume and transcript but that her receipt did “not indicate whether or not the document upload was or was not successful.” Although on appeal the appellant claimed to have experienced “technical difficulties,” none were reported by Agency Services and the Commission notes that out of the 64 who filed on-line applications, 38 were able to establish their eligibility to sit for the subject promotional examination.

In its September 27, 2019 Final Administrative Determination, the Civil Service Commission reviewed petitioner’s original application and the resume submitted with her appeal and concluded that the petitioner’s experience as a Habilitation Plan Coordinator did not rise to the level and scope that required of the subject position, Additionally, the petitioner’s experience as a School Program Coordinator did not involve any applicable responsibilities. Neither of these positions were listed in the petitioner’s original application submission. Consequently, the Commission concluded that the petitioner failed to satisfy the subject requirements.

In her petition for reconsideration, the petitioner submits the same information previously considered by the Commission. In support of her petition, the petitioner also submits an email from CSC Information Support, dated October 4, 2019, indicating that supplemental documentation had been received by the Commission and that her application submission had been successful.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:2-1.6(b) sets forth the standards by which a prior decision may be reconsidered. This rule provides that a party must show that a clear material error has occurred or present new evidence or additional information not presented at the original proceeding which would change the outcome of the case and the reasons that such evidence was not presented at the original proceeding.

NJAC. 4A:4-6.3(b) provides that, except for medical or psychological disqualification appeals, the appellant shall have the burden of proof.

AnalysisIn the instant matter, the record demonstrates that, as of the April 12, 2018 closing date, the petitioner failed to satisfy the subject examination requirements. Although the petitioner claims to have submitted a resume with her original application and presents an email from the Commission stating that additional information was received and that her original application had been submitted successfully, Commission records indicate that the petitioner's supplemental submission consisted of a transcript and a photocopy of her college degree only. No resume was received by the announced closing date. As part of the original review process, the Commission reviewed the resume the petitioner submitted on appeal and concluded that, even had she submitted the resume by the closing date, she still would not have satisfied the subject experience requirements. Accordingly, the Commission finds that the petitioner has failed to satisfy the standard put forth above in N.J.A.C. 4A:2-1.6(b) and finds no basis to disturb its September 27, 2019 Final Administrative Determination.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this request for reconsideration be denied.

ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.