Glenn Gaston, CSC Docket No. 2022-3164

BackgroundGlenn Gaston, Sr., appeals his score for on the essay portion of the examination for Police Captain (PM4059C), Union City. It is noted that the appellant passed the examination with a final average of 81.510 and ranks sixth on the resultant eligible list.

This was a two-part examination consisting of a multiple-choice portion and an essay portion. The examination content was based on a comprehensive job analysis. Senior command personnel from police departments, called Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), helped determine acceptable responses based upon the stimulus material presented to the candidates, and they scored the performances. In the essay portion of the examination, candidates were presented with a scenario, and were directed to respond to all four parts. Eight candidates appear on the eligible list, which has not yet been certified. On a scale of 1 to 5, the appellant scored a 4 for the technical supervision/problem solving/decision making component.

CONCLUSION

The scenario involved receipt of a call regarding a young man having an overdose. Part A indicates that the candidate opts to report to the residence as it is that of the Police Chief who is away on vacation and the caller was the Chief’s daughter. The question asked for actions to be taken, or ensure are taken, while at the residence. The assessor indicated that the appellant missed the opportunity to administer NARCAN to Ben, the young man. The appellant provides a list of actions he took and argues that he did not have to administer NARCAN as Ben did not exhibit primary symptoms of an opioid overdose. He states that the symptoms were only vomiting and body tremors, but not a complete loss of consciousness or difficulty breathing.

In reply, as noted above, the SMEs determined acceptable responses based upon the stimulus material presented to the candidates, and they determined that administering NARCAN to Ben was an important action to take. There was enough information in the scenario to require candidates to treat Ben as though he was overdosing, and not to assess whether he was overdosing or just experiencing an opioid high. Ben had been snorting heroin, and was experiencing tremors and had vomited several times. Tremors and vomiting are signs of an overdose, and the caller indicated that Ben was experiencing an overdose. Viewed holistically, the appellant’s presentation warrants a score of 4, but he missed further actions to enhance his score.

A thorough review of appellant’s submissions and the test materials indicates that the decision below is amply supported by the record, and appellant has failed to meet his burden of proof in this matter.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be denied.

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