Samantha Sanborn, CSC Docket No. 2022-987

BackgroundSamantha Sanborn appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that she did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Human Services Specialist 1 (PC4466C), Camden County Board of Social Services.

The subject examination had a September 21, 2021 closing date. The education requirement was 60 college credits. Applicants who did not possess the required education could have substituted experience involving any combination of the following for the education requirement on a year for year basis, with 30 semester credits being equal to one year of experience: Securing/verifying information and making determinations or recommendation relating to eligibility or qualifications of applicants for loans, insurance, credit, employability, and/or job training services, or entitlements to cash awards, financial benefits or adjustment and settlement of insurance claims; investigations involving the collection of facts and information by observing conditions, examining records, interviewing individuals, and preparing investigative reports of findings; or investigating, establishing, and/or enforcing support obligations in a welfare board or agency, court system, or related agency. A total of 11 employees applied for the subject examination and four were admitted. The test has not yet been scheduled.

On the appellant’s application she indicated that she possessed 30 college credits. She also indicated that she was a Senior Receptionist from March 2017 to the September 21, 2021, closing date and an Administrative Assistant for Cooper University Health Care from October 2007 to March 2017. Agency Services credited the appellant with having one year of experience based on her 30 college credits, but determined per the substitution clause for education, that she lacked one year of experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant asserts that as a Senior Receptionist for the past four and one-half years, she secured and verified information, determined eligibility for expedited benefits, interviewed individuals who applied for benefits and referred clients to agencies for additional assistance. Further, as an Administrative Assistant for Cooper University Hospital for nearly 10 years, she presents that she secured and verified patient information, obtained approvals from insurance companies for surgeries, oversaw payroll duties for several employees, examined records, prepared daily reports for the State’s registrar, and maintained charts/files for nearly 3,000 patients. Additionally, the appellant submits a letter from the Administrator, Navigation Desk and Call Center in support of her appeal.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a) provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the promotional announcement by the closing date.

N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(c) provides that, except when permitted for good cause, 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.

N.J.A.C. 4A:4-6.3(b) provides that the appellant has the burden of proof in examination appeals.

AnalysisIn this matter, a review of the appellant’s application and appeal indicates that Agency Services correctly determined that she was not eligible for the subject examination. Specifically, as a Senior Receptionist, while the appellant may have secured and verified information, her primary responsibility was not determining eligibility, preparing investigations or investigating, establishing or enforcing support obligations. In order for experience to be considered applicable, it must have as its primary focus full-time responsibilities in the areas required in the announcement. See In the Matter of Bashkim Vlashi (MSB, decided June 9, 2004). Further, even if she performed the above duties as a primary focus, this would be out- of-title work which is generally not acceptable for admittance to promotional examinations with open competitive requirements and the appellant has not submitted a statement from the appointing authority verifying that she primarily performed the required duties out-of-title under N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(c). Additionally, even if she did provide verification, based on the number of applicants admitted to the examination, there would not be good cause to accept the verified out-of-title duties. Similarly, as an Administrative Assistant, there is no indication that her primary duties were in one of the required areas. Accordingly, the appellant has not met her burden of proof in this matter.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that the appeal be denied.

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