candidate have the right to challenge or protest all kinds of actions and procedures throughout the personnel selection process. they have to process rights.

we need to bring in subject matter experts, supervisor incumbents to sit down and a rate of these tests. we look at how frequently they are performed, how critical they are in terms of the knowledge, skills, and abilities. we are focusing on those skills and abilities that truly differentiate a superior worker from a marginal worker. we need to have the supervisors tell us what that is. this is important have supervisl us what that is. this is important because we have candidates say, this is not

my job. would you do on your job, much of that you have learned on your job. it would not be fair to test people on those things you have learned on your job. the test may look a little different from what someone might expect we have spent quite a bit of time doing calculations to determine what the most important knowledge, skills, and abilities what awaits our that will be assigned to those instruments to those specific knowledge, skills, and abilities of, whether we will rank people on the basis of their scores, or if we are just going to pass/fail kind of situation. and it's clear that we need to document all of that information

because we basically need to show a rational relationship between what is required on the job between the intermediary and these things. we're back to this diagram where we are showing the faces. the top tier is it basically all of the analysis. we look at the job specification, which is the official classification and we say, lo and behold, the job analysis does not align perfectly with the job description we have heard from the subject matter experts, the incumbents and the supervisors, that workers are required to do these duties and these are not

reflected in the job specification. we now need to update our job specification. or are subject me say to is to note the minimal requirements. there are no longer appropriate. we want three years of experience doing this or we want a specific educational degree or what have you. that means we need to revise the job specification. it means we need to post the specification and that begins the first point where people can challenge what we are doing. if they have a problem with the duties that we have changed, revised from law or minimum requirements, this can slowdown the process for a long time frame. assuming things are fine and dandy, that is when we move on to the job. that is where we basically outlined everything for the applicant. we tell them the minimum

requirements that they need to participate. these are the test procedures that you are going to have to go through. the list is going to be active for expiries of time. this is the certification ruled that we are -- 4 x -- for x p eriod of time. this is the certification world that we need. once we start working on the exam -- and the development of the exam, the time that is required is dependent on the type that we are going to use. the most time-consuming process is going to be developing a new instrument from scratch. the analyst is not really familiar with the technical aspects of the job. they must rely on the expertise of incumbents and supervisors to note jet -- know the job.

they may actually help develop the test items. they may participate in the rating criteria they may determine the gas and who fails. it is back and forth between analyst and subject matter experts. somewhere along that time frame we have collected the applications and we have compared the applications to the minimum required. those who do not meet the minimal requirements, we notify them that they have been rejected. they are ineligible. and then we have another point of protest. if they wish to challenge, there is a back-and-forth process.

now that we have established who is eligible to principate in the selection process we schedule the candidates. and that usually means giving notice. there is less time and that is really not fair to the applicants. then we administer the test and then we allow the applicants to challenge the test in the way that we have administered it. it could be all kinds of protests like the room was to gold, noise outside, that kind of thing. -- was too cold, noise outside, that kind of thing. and then in our scoring we consider those weeds that i talked about and then we factor in -- those weights that i

talked about and then we factor in city employees to get extra points added into their examinations court. as many as 60 points. if you are a veteran you can get 35 extra points for being a disabled veterans -- and in for a disabled veteran, the 70. we notify the candidates of the results and a half an opportunity to come in and many times inspect the examination. at a minimum, they get to inspect how they were scored to ensure that the record accurately. and if they were not have read -- are not happy with that, there's another point of protest to challenge that. as you can see, there are many different faces in the process. there are many points at which the process can get bogged down at different -- for different reasons. brecht's is there a minimum --

>> is there a minimum amount of time required to respond to process? >> not for each face. except for the announcement timeframe. we want to have the announcement of for the minimum of five days. -- the announcement up for the minimum of five days. the referral process, we need to get the referral of. in the case of the physician based testing, we have a 30 day time frame to issue the referral.

which brings me to our two major testing programs in the city. we have been ppt program. these are basically examinations that are done primarily by individual departments under delegation orders. they have the authority to announce an examination and administer an examination. then we have the class based testing, which generally dhr is responsible for. the class-based test, usually involves a test for the title is used in multiple departments throughout the city. it is a large-scaled kind of thing. when we do a job analysis, we are not doing a job analysis that focuses in one department. we are bringing in subject- matter experts to reflect what is one classification in all departments. the scale is much larger. but the testing process is the

-- is a little longer than the position-based process. no one of these criteria is exclusive. but a number of these may factor into the decision. generally, if we're focusing on a specific position in an apartment, then we would go for the pdt -- pbt. and if there are lots of positions that fill that cause vision, that we will do the class-based test. if there is an urgent need to fill, the pbt process is much faster. usually, we have large kennedy populations, in the hundreds of thousands, it is usually a class-based examination.

-- windt we have -- when we have large candidate populations, and hundreds of thousands, it is usually a class-based examination. >> when you're talking about city-wide activities to fill a particular class, here we are concerned particularly about migration. is there any class or specific city-wide activity that your department is plugging into around reversing the out migration? >> no, i'm not following you there. but i think the reference for the citywide hiring is really what we're trying to say, that the classification is used for multiple departments and their hiring into these positions. brecht's -- >> multiple departments are not responding at all to the out migration.

>> how does that relate to this? gregg's hiring. trying to get people -- >> hiring. it tried to get people spread out of diverse backgrounds. brecht's we have a number of programs. outreach, you are talking about outreach. we have programs where we are trying to do is lower the minimum requirements as low as we can possibly go so there is an artificial barrier. we have the apprentice programs. human served -- human services has a number of job training programs. we're trying to use those as a substitute for a minimum meeting of requirements. >> that is good to hear. >> ok, the next slide compares the two different programs.

the position-based testing started around 2006. there's a whole set of civil service rules that define this program. its intent was to speed the selection process, and in particular, the large number of provisional employees that existed at that time the goal is to -- at that time. the goal is to have a list within 60 days that is adopted. the next item -- the class-based test we have a 10-day minimum window for opposing an announcement whereas in the position-based test we have a five-day minimum. when they come in to inspect their papers to see whether

there were scored correctly, there is a five day longer time frame for the selection of the class-based vs three days for the position-based testing program. i mentioned 30 days for the referral classification for the class-based. the class-based testing, candidates can appeal anything and it goes to the service commission. and the position based program, many can be addressed at the hr directors level. we do not have to have that extra time. and the timeframe you can appeal is much more restrictive for the position-based program. when we issue a class-based list, we issue a draft list if you will. that is to give the candidates an opportunity to look at everything. if there is an error or we scored something improperly and something is wrong, we will make

that fixed before we addition -- officially adopt the list. we go straight to adopting the lists. there are other characteristics and i do not think we need to go into that. twice we have gone to the commission as speak to the process. as i mentioned, there's a 60-day roll -- gold built into the rules. -- there is a 60-day gold built into the rules. if you look at this chart, the right hand column -- and by the way, this chart is dealing with the last fiscal year and the first half of this fiscal year. if you look at the top row for

position-based tests, we did 333 position-based test in 2011. they represent about 70% of all examinations. we were able to achieve an average time frame of about 42 days. that is from the announcement closing to the adoption of the list. the first half of this year it is a little higher. it is 54 days. but we still have another 60 days. by comparison, if you look at the class-based testing program, it is a 90-day timeframe on average for the first half of this first -- of this fiscal year. there is a difference in the timeliness, or how quickly you can get the list adopted between these two programs. that concludes my portion of the presentation. i will be happy to answer any

questions if you have them. >> just for clarification, the average number of days, you said that is from the start of the announcement of the exam? rex the closing of the announcement. the last -- >> the closing of the announcement. the last day they can file an application. examiners and analysts are held responsible for these time frames. it is a production environment, in a way. we monitor these announcements. and sometimes we get very few applicants who apply. we will extend the announcement, maybe two or three weeks. that is outside the control of the analysts. we do not want to make the analyst responsible for something outside their control. we start from the moment the announcement is closed. >> commissioner? >> thank you for that

presentation. it gives as good insight into the world you live in and the protocols that you have. thank you. brecht's -- >> i get the task of wrapping everything up for you and talking about where we are. currently we're going into the future. before i do that, i want to mention that for the past five or so years, the department of human resources has been working on reforming the civil service system. we are very fortunate to have technical experts on our team, -- our team. our goal has been to address the departments in terms of qualifying individuals to come to work for the city, and the transparency and the merit based selection processes. as you heard from my colleagues, the system is rigid in many respects in terms of ensuring we provide open, transparent

opportunities for anyone interested in working for the city. on the other hand, we understand the expectations that departments have in terms of qualifying individuals to fill vacant positions in the city. i want to address a couple of comments that were made as questions. i hope that we can set the context correctly for what we're doing in the future. the position-based test component that mr. crouse identified is a civil service response to what was and out of control provisional hiring program. i'm not sure if any of you are familiar, but at one point in the city of many years ago, due to the lack of eligible lists available to fill current vacancies, departments were making provisional appointments. provisional appointments require that the appointment was the opportunity, go through some selection, merit-based process to identify a provisional employee. the provisional employee could

work for the city for no more than three years. and within that three-year window, the department of human resources would have to establish an examination to test that individual again in order for them to become permanent in the position. what we found in the civil service reform program is that the department of human resources kept chasing its tail in terms of an example and that was not future-focused to identify the needs for future needs of the apartments, but really, cleaning up the provisional employees who, by charter, we're going to expire from their positions. the position-based testing program gave departments an opportunity to develop position- specific examinations that were designed to be done more quickly and yet transparently in terms of with the merit system. special conditions, talking about issues related to language, i think the commissioner had a question about bilingual speaking

individuals. both the special conditions and the certification role that mr. cote talked about, i request -- those requests are bedded very carefully to ensure that they meet the -- are vetted very carefully to ensure that they meet the requirements. one thing that we failed to mention is that all of these requests are publicly posted. we can -- we wanted to point out that while the department makes legitimate requests, the department of human resources vets. oftentimes it is not as simple as, yes let's move forward. we need final approval oftentimes to move forward. the apartment with a new

positions in the budget. you heard about the process in which all of the budget approvals need to take place in order for the position to be identified it is rare -- to be identified. it is rare to have a full fte identified. with a. fte in the budget cycle -- with a partial fte in the budget cycle, it can be three or four months into the fiscal year. by the time the department with any regrets, we're halfway through the fiscal year before there is an opportunity to address it. the last thing i want to say about these exams is that it is our -- our intent to provide department's access to eligible lists not meet their needs. we knew there was a number of classifications specific to dbi where there were not eligible

lists. that takes me to my slide. we have identified the following clauses that are here for you that will be done through a position-based testing program. it is an expedited process. i want to make sure that i do not overstate our role. that is, this will be available from our perspective in all of these causes by september. it does not mean we will wait until september to post list. we have a very seasoned analyst dedicated to doing nothing but make the job analysis work. our hope is by september, barring any unforeseen appeals that mr. crouse pointed out in the process that we do not get to control, not lists will be available for the department to -- lists will be available for the apartment to go through certification for individuals to

fill those positions. i think pamela is like to talk to you about where they are currently. we have made significant progress. i think you will be pleased when you hear from the department about how many positions are on the verge of or are the have been offered. there are 17 positions currently under consideration. that means the eligible list has been deferred to the department. again, dhr will prioritize the following exams in order to get this to -- lists established to fill those positions. you have any questions about any part of the presentation? >> i probably will hold my comments until the end and we can hear the other testimony. i might have a question for you, related to timing.

>> the part of building inspection. -- the department of building inspection. i want to make a few remarks and then i will tell you all sorts of good news. >> i am from the mayor's budget office and i wanted to thank you for having this hearing this morning. i want to reiterate our commitment to working with the department to fill the positions the mayor is committed to, to make sure there are enough positions available for the department to continue operations. one thing that we have to do as well is to make sure that apartments stays within their budgets throughout the year. it is a dual role that we play. we have to advocate for the department, but also do our job with the citywide picture.

that is what we continue to do throughout the year. the department is very active and vigilant in their requisitions, more so than other departments. they're doing a great job to make sure that is always on our radar. i'm happy to answer any questions as well. >> commissioner? rex first, i want to thank human-resources and everybody -- >> first, i want to thank human- resources anybody who came. but i think the reason this was put on the agenda is because the main complaints the department gets is our ability to deliver permit. and also, complaints from tenants. both sides of the inspection services and things like that. what this commission noticed was

that we have a lot of unfilled vacancies. one of the things that i think that was raised in the commission, i think some of that has been resolved. we have the ability to bring back some retirees. with all respect to how long civil service takes and the rose you guys have to follow, we know we cannot change that -- the rules you guys have to follow, we know we cannot change that. it is just the way it is. in the mayor's office we say, we know bringing back retirees may not be the most fiscally prudent thing, and it may not even be the most popular and we do not want to do it. but rather than let the permit said, look, it used to take as a month and now it is only taking us to weeks. you should be happy. and they are not. we would like to hire permanent

and higher quickly. -- hire quickly. that is why this stuff has happened. if we can do that, especially because this department generates funds. that is based on the premise that we can generate those permits and things like that. one of the things we want to make sure the city knows is that we are balancing. we want to hire as quickly as possible, but if we cannot, can we then bring back some retirees to clear some of the backlog? and we need everyone to understand why we are doing that. >> thank you for coming here this morning.