The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2023.05.22 CSC Agenda PacketAGENDA CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION PERSONNEL - FIRE — POLICE REGULAR MEETING: 5:15 PM, Conference Room #1 DATE: May 22, 2023 CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: Members present were: Ericka Garcia Yes No Janis Hastings Yes No Josee Saldua-Potvin Yes No Staff: Colleen Chapin Yes No Delaney Tucker Yes No APPROVAL OF MINUTES: moved to approve the April 24, 2023, meeting minutes. seconded the motion. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS: • Rule 8.11 clarification: when can an applicant be made aware of their scores NEW BUSINESS: POLICE: • Approval of the Entry Level Police Officer eligible list MOTION: Second: Carried: FIRE: • Approval of the Fire Logistics Coordinator eligible list MOTION: Second: Carried: • Approval of the Fire Lieutenant eligible list MOTION: Second: Carried: • Approval of the Fire Captain eligible list MOTION: Second: Carried: • Approval of the Fire Battalion Chief eligible list MOTION: Second: Carried: OTHER BUSINESS: • Discussion regarding Rule 9.05 — duration of eligible list What can be released under Rule 8.12 — Pubic Safety Testing materials as an example ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at NEXT MEETING: Monday June 19, 2023, at 5:15 PM, Conference Room #1 MINUTES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION PERSONNEL - FIRE — POLICE CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:23pm DATE: April 24, 2023 ROLL CALL: Members present were: Members absent: Staff: Ericka Garcia, Janis Hastings Josee Saldua-Potvin APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION: Janis Hastings moved to approve the March 20, 2023, meeting minutes. Ericka Garcia seconded the motion. Discussion. The motion carried 2-0. OLD B USINESS. - None NEW BUSINESS: Police: • Approval of the Entry Level Police Officer eligible list. MOTION: Janis Hastings made a motion to approve the Entry Level Police Officer eligible list. Ericka Garcia seconded the motion. Discussion. Carried: 2-0 Fire: ■ None OTHER BUSINESS: • Rule 8.11 clarification: When can an applicant be made aware of their scores o This item was tabled until the May meeting ADJOURNMENT: There was no other business to come before the Commission. The meeting was adjourned at 5:30pm. The next scheduled meeting is Monday, June 19, 2023, at 5:15 pm. Ericka Garcia, Chairperson _ absent Josee Saldua-Potvin, Chairperson Pro-Tem Janis Hastings, Commissioner absent Delaney Tucker, Civil Service Commission Secretary Pro-Tem Notes from April Eligible List Last First Written Score Veteran's Preference Final Score Expiration Date NOTES Gaf6ia 3flseli 85.37014 act 3404024 Other- pasiieR Wilson Nicholas 84.66% 84.66% 4/24/2024 Background 4/27/2023 Ceslmaft Tismm 83 % 93.92% ° ��^�r 4/2024 PQ Covarrubias Marco 83.14% 83.14% 4/24/2024 Background 4/27/2023 Gonzalez -Guzman Erick 81.90% 81.90% 3/20/2024 Background 3/28/2023 Mora Orlando 81.83% 81.83% 3/20/2024 Background 3/28/2023 Ge14ieF f44ei w 84-3"0 o,� n i�4 DQ Hartelius Kevin 80.55% 80.55% 3/20/2024 Background 5/9/2023 Helt Colin 80.30% 80.30% 3/20/2024 Galyear,d R-ym 80.2ig; 90 iM , , M, -; 19-48-a irtv�z� K rekeF Lueas 804-1-% 80.44% , ,�24 u:_e ,-5141� Granados-Cervantes Angel 79.15% 79.15% 9/19/2023 Fernandez Tomas 78.29% 78.29% 10/17/2023 Shanks Caleb 77.60% 77.60% 7/18/2023 Binfet Lauren 77.57% 77.57% 2/21/2024 Cox Jr. Jonathan 77.54% 77.54% 8/15/2023 Denney Brock 76.69% 76.69% 2/21/2024 Morton Mathew 76.54% 76.54% 11/21/2023 Rowell Nicholas 76.54% 76.54% 11/21/2023 Soto Ramiro 75.80% 75.80% 8/15/2023 Torres David 75.26% 75.26% 7/18/2023 Galler John 75.23% 75.23% 9/19/2023 Chimal Axel 74.85% 74.85% 2/21/2024 Perdue Jaden 74.82% 74.82% 11/21/2023 Medellin James 74.19% 74.19% 2/21/2024 Priddy Bryan 74.17% 74.17% 3/20/2024 Hernandez Garcia Royer 73.75% 73.75% 3/20/2024 Kafton Zacharya 73.68% 73.68% 11/21/2023 Fechner Keith 73.20% 73.20% 8/15/2023 Shirzad Islamuddin 72.90% 72.90% 11/21/2023 Ferraro Steven 72.86% 72.86% 4/24/2024 Oxford Casey 72.23% 72.23% 2/21/2024 Crummett Steven 70.84% 70.84% 7/18/2023 Faleyev Yevgeniy 70.82% 70.82% 2/21/2024 Sallee Trevor 70.09% 70.09% 11/21/2023 Entry Level Police Officer Applicant Scores - May 22, 2023 Last First Written Score Veteran's Preference Final Score Expiration Date Harris-Salangsang Tyler 89.04% 89.04% 5/15/2024 Nielsen Tatum 86.75% 86.75% 5/15/2024 Farley Troy 85.89% 85.89% 5/15/2024 Kirk Jared 85.07% 85.07% 5/15/2024 Wilson Nicholas 84.66% 84.66% 4/24/2024 Covarrubias Marco 83.14% 83.14% 4/24/2024 Ply Aryah 78.81% 5.00% 82.75% 5/15/2024 Gutierrez Agraz Jesus 82.41% 82.41% 5/15/2024 Gonzalez -Guzman Erick 81.90% 81.90% 3/20/2024 Mora Orlando 81.83% 81.83% 3/20/2024 Hartelius Kevin 80.55% 80.55% 3/20/2024 Helt Colin 80.30% 80.30% 3/20/2024 Granados-Cervantes Angel 79.15% 79.15% 9/19/2023 Moore Deric 74.82% 78.56% 5/15/2024 Fernandez Tomas 78.29% 78.29% 10/17/2023 Shanks Caleb 77.60% 77.60% 7/18/2023 Binfet Lauren 77.57% 77.57% 2/21/2024 Cox Jr. Jonathan 77.54% 77.54% 8/15/2023 Denney Brock 76.69% 76.69% 2/21/2024 Morton Mathew 76.54% 76.54% 11/21/2023 Rowell Nicholas 76.54% 76.54% 11/21/2023 Soto Ramiro 75.80% 75.80% 8/15/2023 Sanifer Trenton 75.37% 75.37% 5/15/2024 Torres David 75.26% 75.26% 7/18/2023 Galler John 75.23% 75.23% 9/19/2023 Chimal Axel 74.85% 74.85% 2/21/2024 Perdue Jaden 74.82% 74.82% 11/21/2023 Medellin James 74.19% 74.19% 2/21/2024 Priddy Bryan 74.17% 74.17% 3/20/2024 Hernandez Garcia Royer 73.75% 73.75% 3/20/2024 Kafton Zacharya 73.68% 73.68% 11/21/2023 Fechner Keith 73.20% 73.20% 8/15/2023 Shirzad Islamuddin 72.90% 72.90% 11/21/2023 Ferraro Steven 72.86% 72.86% 4/24/2024 Oxford Casey 72.23% 72.23% 2/21/2024 Crummett Steven 70.84% 70.84% 7/18/2023 Faleyev Yevgeniy 70.82% 70.82% 2/21/2024 Sallee Trevor 70.09% 70.09% 11/21/2023 *Veteran's Preference provided in accordance with RCW 41.04.010 Certified by Pasco Civil Service Commission: May 22, 2023 Delaney Tucker, Civil Service Secretary Pro-Tem Fire Logistics Coordinator - Applicant Scores May 22, 2023 Last First Written Score Oral Board Score Score Veteran's Preference Final Score Ranadey Melanie 77.48 80.80 79.14 10.00% 87.05 Veloz Samuel 75.68 78.80 77.24 10.00% 84.96 Woods Kasee 84.18 81.50 82.84 82.84 Pence Pamela 83.98 78.67 81.32 81.32 Riggle Rhonda 80.05 81.50 80.78 80.78 Force Blake 75.13 78.50 76.81 76.81 Bentley Jenna 79.55 72.67 76.11 76.11 Parada Alejandro 73.18 72.00 72.59 72.59 Certified by the Pasco Civil Service Commission: May 22, 2023 Expiration Date: May 22, 2024 Delaney Tucker, Secretary Pro Tem DID NOT PASS Last First Written Score Oral Board Score June Shane 73.68 41.67 Crnkovich Crista 74.08 6917 Croes Vicki 81.15 66.83 Ramsey Matthew 85.73 64.50 Harwell Keith 82.25 59.00 ** Not posted with "did not pass" section (For CSC only) Fire Lieutenant Promotional Applicant Scores — May 22, 2023 Last First Final Score Easton Tyler 83.10% Bergstrom Cory 76.83 % Wertman Brandon 76.31 % McGrath Raquel 74.00% Pyper Todd 70.55% Certified by Pasco Civil Service Commission: May 22, 2023 Expiration Date: May 22, 2024 Delaney Tucker, Civil Service Secretary Pro Tem DID NOT PASS Last First Score Almanzar Sanchez Shearer Guadalupe Juan Ben 63.83% 57.24% 64.21 % "Not posted with Did not Pass section (For CS Only) Pasco Fire Department April 26, 2023 `-- ------ Lieutenant -' _ _ _._ ___ �- Eiierciseil 1 In Basket with Oral Presentation Candidates*[_____ andidates Dimensions A B C D E F G H Public SaFely, Testing -----i -__-_-_- -� Problem Anai sis 4.00 3.00 2.50 3.7S 446 3.06 2.50 3 50 Decisiveness 3.75 3.25 2.75 4.00 4.00 3.50 2.75 3.26 Paanntn :, Or anizin 4.50 3.25 250 3 5 3, 0 3.50 2,50 3.00 Delegation & Control 4.00 2.50 2.76 4.00 3.50 3.60 2.76 2.50 Discussion Score Onl 16.25 112.00 110.50 115.50 115.25 114.00 110.50 112.25__- - - -- - ---_ - Exercise #1- 2 C---i ' Briefing Role Candidates; - Play --- -Crew ----------- Dimensions Oral Communication A US B 4.4b C 2.60 D 3.70 E 4.86 F 340 G 3.50 H_-� 3.50 Inter emonalInsight Judgment Decisiveness 3.50 3.70 3.65 4.40 4.50 4.30 2.50 2.50 2.60 3.70 3480 3.70 4.50 4,50 4.50 4.20 3.9-0 3.70 3.40 &$0 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.80 Discussion Score Only 14.50 17.60 110.10 14.95 18.00 16.50 13.90 14.30 _ Exercise#� �Emplo 3 �----v-- �_J _ ee Meetin Role Pla -(CandidatesCandidates I Dimensions -- - - -- A B C D E F G H Ora,IComm_unication 3:00 3.50 4.60 4.00 4.50 4.60 3.00 4.00 Interpersonal Insiht 2.50 3.50 4.75 4.00 4.76 5.00 2.50 4.00 Problem Analysis 2.50 3.60 4.75 4.50 4.56 4.25 2.50 3.26 Jud ment 2.75 3.50 6.00 4.50 4.50 3.00 2.50 3.50 Discussion Score Only10.75 14.00 19.00 17.00 18.25 16.75 10.50 14.75 - i I Exercise _._.._ Dimensions 4---T-- Fire Tactical ICandidatesi ._F A B C D E F G H Judgment 3.75 4.60 3.00 3.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 Decisiveness 3.76 4.50 2.76 3.50 4.26 2.50 3.00 2.60 Planning & Organizing 3.75 4.60 3.00 3.60 3.60 3.00 2.50 2.50 Delegation & Control 3.75 4.50 2.50 3.60 3.60 3.26 2.75 2.50 Discussion Score On! 15.00 18.00 11.25 14.00 16.26 12.25 11.25 10.00 Candidate's Raw Scores Dimensions A B I C D E F G H Oral Communication 3.33 3.95 1 3.55 3.88 4.50 4.10 3.26 3.75 Interpersonal Insiht 3.06 3.95 3.63 3.85 4.63 4.60 2:95 3.75 Problem Analysis 3.25 3.26 3.63 4.13 4.38 3.88 2.60 3.38 Judgment 3.40 4.17 3.60 3.93 4.33 3A7 3.00 3.17 Decisiveness 1 3.42 4.02 2.67 3.73 4.26 3.23 3.08 3.18 ! Plannin & Or anizin 4.13 3.88 2.76 3.63 3.50 3.25 2.60 I 1 - Delegation & Control 3.88 3.50 2.63. 3.75 3.60 3.38 2.75 �22.�48 Total Raw Score 24.69 26.71 22.34 26.89 29.08 25.90 20.03 Candidate's Weighted Scores raw x wei ht - 70% Level for comparison Dimensions A B C D E F G H Weight _{ Oral Communication 3.33 3.96 3.55 3.88 4.50 4.10 3.25 3.75 1.00 3.50 Interpersonal Insiht 3.00 3.95 3.63 3.86 4.63 4.60 2.96 3.75 1.00 3.50 Problem AWysls 3.25 3.25 3.63 4.13 4.38 3.88 2.50 3.38 1.00 3.50 Judgment 3.40 4.17 3.60 3.93 4.33 3A7 3.00 3.17 1.00 3.50 Decisiveness 3.72 4.02 2.67 3.73 4.25 3.23 3.08 3.18 1.00 3.50 ! Planning & Organizing 4.13 3.88 2.76 3.63 3.60 3.25 2.50 2,75 1.00 3.50 Delegation & Control 3.88 3.5012.63 3.75 3.50 3.38 2.75 2.50 1.00 3.50 --� Total Score 24.69 26.71 22.34 26.89 29.08 25.90 20.03 22.48 35.00 1 24.5 _ -- - i Candidate's Name ID Score Percentage Todd Pyper A 24.69 70.55% Brandon Wertman B 26.71 76.31% Manny Almanzar C 22.34 63.83% Cory Bergstrom D 126.89 76.83% Tyler Easton E 29.08 83.10% Raquel McGrath F 25.90 74.00% Juan Sanchez G 20.03 67.24% Ben Shearer H 22.48 64.21% Fire Captain Promotional Applicant Scores — May 22, 2023 Last First Final Score Jones Trevor 84.40% Wenger Ronnie 77.63% Ellingson Tyler 72.81 % Certified by Pasco Civil Service Commission: May 22, 2023 Expiration Date: May 22, 2024 Delaney Tucker, Civil Service Secretary Pro Tem DID NOT PASS Last First Score Taylor Patrick 67.40% Knutson Derek 61.82% Roybal Andre 61.79% "Not posted with Did not Pass section (For CS Only) ' Pasco Fire Department April27 2023 -- -_� ---_ ___.--- --._ __----__-_-- Public Safety; ' Fire Captain Toiling -- __ Exercise #I - ; In Basket with Oral Presentation _ ICandidatesi Dimensions A B C D E F Problem Anal ,sis 400 3,50 4.00 250 3.50 4 25 Decisiveness 3.75 4.00 3.50 2.50 3.75 4.00 Planning & O- aniz n 356 3,50 3.75 _60 &60 4 _ Delegation &Control 4.50 3.50 3.50 2.50 3.75 4.00 Discussion Score On!15.75 14.50 114.75 110.00 114.50 116.75 1 _ - Exercise # 2 _ Crew Briefing Role Playj_ _ Candidates Dimensions A B C D E F Oral Communication 3.60 4.50 3.60 3.50 2.50 4.50 Interpersonal Insight 3.90 4.50 3.40 4.00 2.60 4.70 Judgment 3.50 4.50 3.50 4.00 3.00 4.70 1 Decisiveness 3.50 4.50 4.00 3.70 2.60 4.50 Discussion Score Only 14.50 118.00 14A0 115.20 110.50 118.401 Exercise #i . 3 �------- _------- - --- i ---- -- -----------excise �-- L _1_-._ _ ----------- _- iEmployee Meeting with Writing - ,Candidates Dimensions A. I B C D E F- Oral Communication 3.50 4.75 3.30 3.00 3.30 3.40 Written Communication 4.00 4.00 3.40 3.50 3.50 3.45 1 Interpersonal Insiht 4.00 4.70 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 Problem Analysis 3.50 4.25 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.30 Discussion Score Only,15.00 17.70 12.70 112.50 113.80 13.15 1 ! Exercise #. .� _1____._.., s_..... _�. .._ ....._.. ... ._. .. .. I 1 i iFire Tactical 'Candidates; Dimensions A B C D E F _ Jud n'ment.. 3.00 4.60 3.10 2.90 2.50 3.68 _ Decisiveness 3.25 4.65 3.65 2.76 2.60 3.75 f Planning &Organizing 3.00 4.00 2.95 2.76 2.55 3.50 Delegation & Control 3.26 4.46 2.76 2.84 2.60 3.51 _ Discussion Score Only12.50 17.70 112.35 111.24 110.05 114.44 111II Candidate's Raw Scores i Dimensions A I B I C I D I E F Oral Communication 3.55 4.63 3.40 3.25 2.90 3.95 _ _ - Written Communication 4.00 4.00 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.46 Interpersonal Insight 3.95 4.60 3.20 3.50 3.25 3.85 Problem Analysis 3.75 3.88 3.50 2.76 3.25 3.78 Judgment 3.25 4.55 3.30 3AS 2.75 4.19 Decisiveness 3.50 4.38 3.68 2.98 2.92 4.08 Planning & Organizing 3.26 3.75 3.35 2.63 3.03 4.00 _ Delegation & Control 3.88 3.98 3.13 2.67 3.13 3.76 - Total Raw Score 29.13 33.76 26.96 24.73 24.72 31.05 1 I I - 70% Level for Candidate's Weighted Scores raw x weight) comparison Dimensions A B C D E F Weight Oral Communication } 3.66 4.63 3.40 3.25 2.90 3.95 1.00 3.50 _ Written Communication 4.00 4.00 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.45 1.00 3.50 _ 1 Interpersonal Insiht 3.95 4.60 3.20 3.60 3.25 3.85 1.00 3.50 Problem Analysis 3.76 3.88 3.50 2.75 3.25 3.78 1.00 3.50 Judgment 3.26 4.55 3.30 3A5 2.75 4.19 1.00 3.50 Decisiveness 3.60 4.38 3.68 2.98 2.92 4.08 1.00 3.50 _ Planning & Organizing 3.25 3.75 3.35 2.63 3.03 4.00 1.00 3.50 Delegation & Control 3.88 3.98 3.13 2.67 3.13 3.76 too 3.50 Total Score 29.13 33.76 26.96 24.73 24.72 31.06 40.00 28 Candidate's Name ID Score Percentage Tyler Ellingson A 29.13 72.81% Trevor Jones B 33.76 84AO% 1 Patrick Taylor C 26.96 67.40% Derek Knutson D 24.73 61.82% Andre Ro bal E 24.72 61.79% Ronnie Wenger F 31.051 77.63% Fire Battalion Chief Promotional Applicant Scores — May 22, 2023 Last First Final Score Maier Michael 86.12% Nelson Matthew 83.76% Mortensen Chris 80.99% Certified by Pasco Civil Service Commission: May 22, 2023 Expiration Date: May 22, 2024 Delaney Tucker, Civil Service Secretary Pro Tem DID NOT PASS Last First "Not posted with Did not Pass section (For CS Only) .. Pasco Fire Department 25, 2023 _ Battalion Chief Promotional Process Assessor: Crowle _ Candidates Dimensions A B C Oral_A Wririen Communication � 4.00 4:50 4.50 Interpersonal Insight & Emotional Intelligence 4.00 4.60 4.50 Command Judgment 3.60 4.26 3.75 Decisiveness 3.50 1 4.76 3.76 Planning & Organizing 3.,50 1 4.76 4.00 Discussion Score Only 18.50 1 22.75 20.50 0.00 Assessor: Dimensions VanBeek Candidates A B C Oral, & Written Communication 4.00 4.10 3.50 Interpersonal Insight & Emotional Intelli ence 4.26 4.26 3.60 C:omrnand Judgment 3.50 4.2i; 3.60 Decisiveness 3.50 4.00 3.26 ,Plapping & OrganizingOrganizIng 3.99 1 3.75 4.00 Discussion Score Only 19.24 1 20.35 17.85 0.00 Assessor: I Bates _ Dimensions Candidates A B C 4.70 Oral & Written Communication - 4.80 4.50 Interpersonal Insight & Emotional Intelligence 4.25 4.50 4.80 Command Judgment 4.00 4.00 4.60 Decisiveness 4.00 4.25 4.60 Planning & Organizing 4.50 4.55 4.50' Discussion Score Only 21.55 21.80 23.20 0.00 Assessor: Dimensions Baird _ Candidates A B 4.50 Oral & Written Communication 4.50 4.00 Interpersonal Insight & Emotional Intelligence 4.25 4.30 4.40 Command Judgment 3.60 3.90 4.35 Decisiveness 4.00 4.15 4.20 Planning & Organizing 4.45 4.50 4.35 Discussion Score Only 20.80 20.85 21.80 0.00 I I Assessor: Vaught _�-- Candidates Dimensions A B C Oral & Written Communication 4.40 4.60 4.00 Interpersonal Insight & Emotional Intelligence 4.20 4.40 4.65 Command Judgment 4.15 4.00 4.70 Decisiveness 4.00 4.40 4.00 Plannin & Organizing 4.40 4.60 4.09 Discussion Score Only,21.15 21.90 21.35 0.00 Candidate's Raw Scores Dimensions A B C D Oral & Written Communication 4.34 4.34 4.24 IfIDIV101 Interpersonal Insight & Emotional 1 4.19 4.30 4.39 #DIVIOt Command Judgment 3.75 4.08 413 #DIVIA! Decisiveness &80 4.31 3..96 ANVIO1 Planning & Organizing 4.17 4.41 4,17 #DIVIOI Total Raw Score 20.25 21.53 20.94 #DIVIOI i Candidate's Name ID score Percentage Chris Mortensen A 20.25 80.99% Michael Maier B 21.53 86.12% Matthew Nelson C 20.94 83.76% RULE 9: ELIGIBLE LISTS 9.01 Eligible List Created 9.02 Order of Names on Eligible List 9.03 Tie Scores 9.04 Disclosure of Names of Eligibles 9.05 Duration of Eligible List 9.055 Selective Certification List 9.06 Integrated Eligibility List 9.07 Canvass of Eligible List 9.08 Rejection of Eligible - Dropped from List 9.09 Effect of Appeals 9.10 Continuous Testing Eligibility List 9.11 Continuous Testing Defined 9.12 Certification Continuous Testing 9.13 Additional Continuous Testing 9.14 Removal of Names Continuous Testing 9.01 ELIGIBLE LIST CREATED. The Secretary and Chief Examiner shall promulgate an eligible list resulting from examinations, as provided for in Rule 8. A separate eligible list or lists for lateral entry may be promulgated at the request of the appointing authority and approval of the Commission. [AMENDED 81863 9.02 ORDER OF NAMES ON ELIGIBLE LIST. The names of applicants who pass an examination shall be entered upon the eligible list for the class in order of standing in a competitive examination, including veteran's credit or other applicable credits, and without preference as to priority of time of examination. 9.03 TIE SCORES. Whenever two or more applicants in a competitive examination have the same final grade, priority shall be determined by highest grade on -most heavily weighted part of the examination. 9.04 DISCLOSURE OF NAMES OF ELIGIBLES. The eligible list, including the names and final scores of all those who passed the examination, shall be open to public inspection. 9.05 DURATION OF ELIGIBLE LIST. An eligible list shall be in effect for one year from the date of certification by the Civil Service Commission, unless it is extended (see below) or superseded as provided by CSR 9.06. Before the expiration of an eligible list, the Commission may extend the period of eligibility for one year at a time for all eligibles who still meet the announced qualifications for the position and who are available for employment. [AMENDED 2/88] [AMENDED 11/10] An eligible list which has been extended shall be terminated automatically upon certification of an eligible list from a new examination for the class. [AMENDED 11/10] Pasco Civil Service Commission Rules and Regulations Amended March 2023 29 An eligible who has been in the active service of the armed forces of the United States during part or all of the effective period of an eligible list shall be entitled to extended eligibility provided that they file a written request for such eligibility with the Commission within 90 days from termination of such service. Such extended eligibility shall be equal to the period to which they were entitled to at the time of entering such service. [AMENDED 1/84] 9.055 "SELECTIVE CERTIFICATION LIST". Upon request of the Appointing Authority to the Secretary/Chief Examiner a list of candidates otherwise eligible shall be provided to the Appointing Authority. The list will identify candidates in rank order, consistent with Rule 9.02, and will only include the candidates who meet the requirements for selective certification as described by the Appointing Authority. Selective certification of eligible candidates may be authorized by the Secretary/Chief Examiner when the Appointing Authority demonstrates that the needs of the service require particular skills or expertise. Examples of opportunity for selective certification include particularized training (paramedic; motorcycle), language skills and technology expertise (polygraphy, information/data systems skills). The eligibility list, entitled "Selective Certification List" shall be used by the Appointing Authority in accord with Rules 10.06 and 10.07 toward fulfillment of specified needs in each Department. [REVISEDI/03] 9.06 INTEGRATED ELIGIBILITY LIST. The appointing authority may request the Secretary and Chief Examiner to administer an entry-level examination for any selected classification during any quarter of any calendar year. The Secretary and Chief Examiner shall promulgate an eligible list resulting from any such examination. An applicant whose name is already on an existing eligibility list for the classification may elect to take the new examination or keep their current score for the new eligibility list, if they were last tested within 365 days of the date set for the new examination; PROVIDED, in the event the new examination differs from the examination(s) last given so that in the determination of the Secretary/Chief Examiner the competitive process would be undermined were the scores to be mixed, all applicants must take the new examination to be eligible for placement on the new list. If the election is to re -take the examination, the score that is achieved on the most recent examination (whether higher or lower) shall become the applicant's score on the newly promulgated eligible list. [ADDED 2/883 9.07 CANVASS OF ELIGIBLE LIST. Whenever they believe the needs of the service require, the Secretary and Chief Examiner shall ascertain the availability for employment of persons whose names appear on an eligible list. [RENUMBERED 2/88] 9.08 REJECTION OF ELIGIBLE - DROPPED FROM LIST. The name of any person may be withheld from certification or removed from the eligible list for any of the reasons in Rule 10.03. [RENUMBERED 2-88; AMENDED 1/84] 9.09 EFFECT OF APPEALS. No appeal shall affect the eligible list or an appointment made from a certification made during the pendency of the appeal. When the appeal is Pasco Civil Service Commission Rules and Regulations Amended March 2023 30 8.10 a. VETERAN'S PREFERENCE. Veterans who have passed an examination shall be entitled to credit pursuant to Chapter 41.04 RCW or other law. [AMENDED 1-84] [AMENDED 11/10] b. POLICE RESERVE OFFICER SERVICE CREDIT. Pasco Police Reserve Officers determined to meet the criteria outlined in Pasco Police Department Policy and Washington State law related to Reserve Police Officer, shall receive credit of two and one-half percent (2.5%), per fall year of service, up to a maximum of ten percent (10%). The Chief Examiner shall be the final authority for determining Service Credit. [ADDED 7/151 8.11 PROMULGATION AND NOTIFICATION OF TEST RESULTS. After all parts of an examination have been completed and scored, the Secretary and Chief Examiner shall draft an eligibility list, subject to the approval by the Commission by motion, and an applicant shall be notified: [AMENDED i 1/l0] A. When passing, of their total score, including veteran's credit and/or Reserve Officer service credits and relative standing where applicable, and the days during which they may inspect their papers; or [AMENDED 7/15] B. When failing, of their failure to achieve a passing grade, and the days during which they may inspect their papers, subject to Rule 8.12. [AMENDED 11/10] 8.12 1 NSPECTION OF RATING STANDARDS. The applicants shall be allowed a period of three (3) business days, following the mailing/email date of notification of examination results, in which each may inspect their answers and the rating standards by which they have been rated during any part of the examination, except that: A. Copyrighted or standardized tests shall not be subject to review. During such inspection, the applicant shall not be allowed to remove copies of any of the test questions or answers from the inspection room where all protests must be completed. [AMENDED 06/22] 8.13 PROTESTS AGAINST RATINGS TO THE SECRETARY AND CHIEF EXAMINER. If the applicant believes that an error has been made, they may, during the final three-day period referred to in the preceding rule, make a protest in writing, stating specifically where they believe the error has been made. Each protest shall be in writing and shall give specific facts and reasons to support the protest. No protest may be made after the three-day period. Upon receipt of a written protest or request for rerating, a review of the protest shall be made by the Secretary and Chief Examiner, who shall pass on all such protests or requests and make necessary correction in grades or rating. 8.14 REPORT ON EXAMINATION. After the expiration of the three-day period and after the Secretary and Chief Examiner has passed on all protests and has corrected any errors, they shall submit a complete report on each examination to the Commission, including a report on Pasco Civil Service Commission Rules and Regulations Amended March 2023 26 Pasco Fire Department April 26, 2023 Lieutenant Assessor's last name: Hendren Exercise # 1 �KGt M f LC Candidate's letter: A In Basket with Oral Presentation Use the Scoring Guidelines and Values to first determine your Individual score (highlight the appropriate number below). Then confer with your panel member to arrive at a consensus score. The consensus score can be ANY number between 2.5 and 5 and can go out two decimal places. Enter the consensus score as your Panel Score. Behavioral Dimensions Individual Score 4 3.5 4 Panel's Score Problem Analysis 4.00 Decisiveness 3.75 Planning & Organizing 4.50 Delegation & Control 4 4.00 Objective words and behaviors (both positive and negative) Problem Analysis knows the functions and procedures of the job _ candidate provided great information but may need improvement becoming decisive appears to be organized and understands what needs to be accomplished Decisiveness Planning & Organizing Delegation & Control Silent leader - aware of his faults Pasco Fire Department April 26, 2023 Lieutenant Exercise # Exercise Name In Basket with Oral Presentation Fxamru Coaching Comments Candidate A Public y Testing Candidate answered questions well and reviewed his notes periodically ensuring he covered everything. Candidate was nervous but was able to push through and get his point across. Candidate made great eye contact throughout the entire interview. Candidate was nervous in the beginning of interview - possibly taking a quick breath prior to entering or being seated may assist with his nerves. candidate did well with all of the top and middle questions but become less towards the bottom end questions. Direct not a lot of filler words. I thought you did well prioritizing tasks and putting a possible call first followed by health and safety of the crew. I could understand your reasoning and justification of your order of priority and felt like you had a good game plan. Overall I think you did well. For the In basket you let 5 minutes on the table and the questions you left 3 min A few things to consider is don't pass up chances to provide corrective feedback to help prevent an issue again. Such with the CO alarm, follow up with the receptionist about making sure this type of call is transferred to 911 vs placed on hold and waiting for a LT. Often when staffing or personnel issues arise it is a good idea to contact the CT or BC to advise them of situations, maybe not a formal report but a heads ur) in case things escalate. Exercise # 2 Exercise Name Crew Briefing Role Play You addressed all of the concerns that were presented to you. You asked the firefighters for their input/perspective. You were firm when asked by the firefighters why you didn't have their backs (you responded that you do, but that everyone wants to facilitate the same things, and that is safety. Good catch on asking your firefighter if she performed her daily rig inspection to ensure the saw was able to start prior to the fire. You concluded by asking the firefighters if they had anything for you. The tone of the meeting initially became very business -like, and you'll want to be careful how you choose your words to open these types of meetings. You said "this is not a fact-finding mission, and we aren't looking to get anyone in trouble." Immediately that can close off certain people, who question why you even have to say that. You had ideas for how to address each of the outlined issues, but the ideas appeared vague in nature. For example, you said "let's try to make sure we have our gear on" and "let's start running drills next week." Rather than using "let's try" make sure they understand the expectation, and the reasoning behind the expectations. Worts with your crew to identify how you all, collectively, can work and help each other out to meet expectations. You had a solution for each problem that was presented. You considered different reasons for each problem without jumping to conclusions. Slow down and get more information. Allow firefighters to talk. If you give a bit more time, you may discover other issues or problems the firefighters/crew are experiencing. Exercise # 3 txercise Name Employee meeting Role Play Very positive likable tone. Had a good knowledge of how to contact PEER support. When asked about a union rep, don't say "not at this time" and then issue discipline. Address all the issues, so the process isn't dragged on longer than needed. Take the time to fully listen and avoid interrupting individuals.That way all the information can be obtained to make an informed decision on direction. Be more personable on some of the situations and offer appropriate assistance. Your demeanor was warm. You asked a lot of probing questions to engage with the FF as to what might help him address some of the outstanding issues. In addition, getting the FF set up with PEER support right away is effective in making sure it takes place. The FF would have benefited from you going into more detail about the consequences of his actions. Specifically policies, values, laws, etc. Make sure to fully address each issue and identify ones that make be more serious —understand which ones may need to have BC review before any discipline is issued. Clearly articulate the expectations moving forward. Exercise # 4 Exercise Name Fire Tactical Good job communicating your thoughts while enroute. The arrival report was clear and concise. Good communication of your BIG 6 and VTS. Consider splitting teams of 4 to a Team A & B when working at lower acuity fires such as room and contents. Work on communicating 131 & D1 exposures vs. "adjacent buildings." You clearly articulated your pre -arrival thoughts and considerations to the assessors, well done. Good use of C.A.N. reports throughout the incident and communicating completed tactical benchmarks to Dispatch. You demonstrated a "good" command presence and seemed confident in your actions. Great job on requesting a tactical frequency. No tactical reserve was in -place, had the event escalated. No splitting of companies as a force multiplier, you had work to get done, but ran out of companies to complete the work. Be very clear about assignments as opposed to assuming the assignment is clear (example: E2812 was assigned to fire attack, but in this building type, where? With primary search, what occupancy was search to be started)?