NJ Civil Service Navigator

KAREN MCDONALD, CSC Docket No. 2020-1215

NJ Civil Service Commission decision of June 3, 2020, CSC Docket No. 2020-1215: examination eligibility, granted. Karen McDonald appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services which found that she was below the minimum requirements in experience for the promotional examination for Assi

Commission decisions · Meeting of June 3, 2020

Karen McDonald appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services which found that she was below the minimum requirements in experience for the promotional examination for Assistant Administrative Supervisor of Social Work (PC0657A), Atlantic County.

Matter
Examination eligibility
Decided
June 3, 2020, item B-24
Outcome
Granted
Title
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISOR OF SOCIAL WORK
Employer
Atlantic County
Examination
PC0657A
Chair at the time
Deirdre L. Webster Cobb, Chairperson
Official decision
Published by CSC in its monthly archive bundle (B-024 06-03-20.pdf)

Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission directed that this appeal be granted.

Rules this decision applies

The decision

BackgroundKaren McDonald appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that she was below the minimum requirements in experience for the promotional examination for Assistant Administrative Supervisor of Social Work (PC0657A), Atlantic County.

The examination at issue was announced with specific requirements that had to be met as of the closing date of June 21, 2019. The requirements were graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s degree supplemented by a Master’s degree in Social Work, Psychology, Sociology, Guidance and Counseling or other field related to social work or social services. Applicants who did not possess a Bachelor’s degree could substitute experience as indicated on a year for year basis with 30 semester hour credits being equal to one year of experience. Applicants who did not possess the required Master’s degree could substitute one additional year of experience. Applicants were also required to possess three years of social work experience involving gathering social information from clients, determining their needs, and planning and carrying out treatment plans geared to the needs of the individual clients, one year of which shall have been in a supervisory capacity. A total of three employees applied for the subject examination that resulted in a list of two eligibles with an expiration date of October 16, 2020. It is noted that the list was certified, and two permanent appointment were made. As such, the eligible list has been exhausted.

Appellant's argumentThe appellant indicated on her application that she was serving provisionally in the title under test from April 2019 to the closing date, June 2019. She also indicated that she was a Human Services Specialist 4 from March 2014 to March 2019, a Human Services Specialist 3 from April 2012 to February 2014, and a Human Services Specialist 1 and 2 from May 2006 to March 2012. The appellant also listed experience as a Business Manager with Chesterbrook Academy, a Senior Client Specialist/Account Executive with Sun Trust Bank. Agency Services credited the appellant with three months of experience based on her provisional service in the title under test, but determined that the remainder of her experience was not applicable.

On appeal, the appellant clarifies her experience in the Human Services Specialist title series and explains that she developed social service plans for the more difficult cases. Additionally, she highlights her extensive experience gathering information from clients, determining their needs, and developing and carrying out social service plans. Based on her experience, the appellant maintains that she is qualified for the subject examination. Elisabeth D’Ancona, Director of Human Resources, Atlantic County, verifies that the appellant has been gathering information from clients, determining their needs and their eligibility for programs and resources, and carrying out treatment plans to meet their needs since 2006.

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a) provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the promotional examination announcement by the closing date. N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(c) provides that applicants for promotional examinations with open competitive requirements may not use experience gained as a result of out-of-title work to satisfy the requirements for admittance to the examination or for credit in the examination process, unless good cause is shown for an exception. N.J.A.C. 4A:1- 1.2(c) provides that a rule may be relaxed for good cause in a particular circumstance in order to effectuate the purpose of Title 11A, New Jersey Statutes.

CONCLUSION

In the present matter, a review of the documentation demonstrates that initially, Agency Services correctly found that the appellant did not meet the requirements as of the closing date. Primarily performing the duties required to establish eligibility for the title under test would be out-of-title work for incumbents in the Human Services Specialist 4 title. However, the Director of Human Resources has verified that the appellant has performed the required duties since 2006. Additionally, although the appellant’s experience does not precisely mirror the requirements contained in the announcement, the Civil Service Commission (Commission) is satisfied that the totality of her varied levels of performing the more difficult levels of work in the Human Services Specialist title series since 2006 warrants her admission to the subject examination. Additionally, the appellant continues to serve provisionally in the title under test and the eligible list has been exhausted. Accordingly, admitting her to the examination will provide her with the opportunity to obtain permanent status as well as to provide an eligible list to the appointing authority.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be granted, and the appellant’s application be processed for prospective employment opportunities only.

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

About this page

Not an official copy. The decision of record is CSC's monthly archive. The text above was extracted from it and may differ in layout or, rarely, in a character.

Names appear as the Commission published them in its public minutes and decisions, initials where it used initials. This site does not offer a search by a person's name.

The labels are ours. The kind of matter and the outcome are our reading of the minutes; the ACTION text the Commission recorded is quoted verbatim above. A decision applies the rules to its own facts and is not a prediction for any other matter, and nothing here is legal advice.

To report an error on this page, use the contact form.