Policy, mandate, and status of CES eligibility
- The CESB is the governing body of the Career Executive Service and is mandated to promulgate rules, standards, and procedures for the selection of members of the CES (Rule I, Section 1).
- CES eligibility is a qualification for appointment to a position in the CES (Rule I, Section 2).
- CES eligibility is also required among the requirements for original appointment to a CES rank (Rule I, Section 2).
- No person shall be recommended by the CESB to the President for original appointment to a CES rank unless the person has been conferred CES eligibility by the Board (Rule I, Section 2).
- CES eligibility conferred by the Board does not prescribe (Rule VI, Section 1).
CES eligibility eligibility qualification rules
- CES eligibility is conferred only to persons who successfully complete the four-stage CES eligibility examination and meet other requirements prescribed by the Board (Rule VI, Section 1).
- The Board confers CES eligibility through a resolution approved by the majority of its members in a regular or special meeting (Rule VI, Section 1).
- After approval, the applicant becomes a full-fledged CES eligible, the applicant’s name is registered in the CESB’s Roster of CES eligibles, and a certificate of CES eligibility is issued (Rule VI, Section 1).
- The Board informs the CES eligible and the CES eligible’s Department Secretary or Head of Agency about the conferment (Rule VI, Section 2).
- Pendency of a criminal or administrative case does not bar conferment of CES eligibility to a successful applicant unless there is a law to the contrary (Rule VI, Section 3).
Application validity and processing discretion
- Applicants for CES eligibility must make a full disclosure to the Board of any information relevant to the application (Rule I, Section 3).
- If an applicant intentionally made a false statement of material fact or used deception or fraud in connection with the application, the Board shall invalidate the application without prejudice to filing appropriate administrative and/or criminal cases (Rule I, Section 3).
- The Board may discontinue processing an applicant’s CES eligibility application if the applicant is unable to comply with requirements established in any stage of the examination process (Rule I, Section 4).
Four-stage examination structure
- The CES eligibility examination process consists of four stages: (1) CES Written Examination, (2) Assessment Center, (3) Performance Validation, and (4) Board Interview (Rule I, Section 5).
- Each stage has its own eligibility standards, rules, and consequences for failure, retake, non-appearance, and documentation compliance (Rules II–V).
CES Written Examination: admission, filing, fees, results
- The CES Written Examination determines an applicant’s aptitude and competence (Rule II, Section 1).
- Applicants must be Filipino citizens of good moral character and meet admission requirements depending on sector and position history (Rule II, Section 2).
Admission requirements by applicant category
- For Government Sector, Career Service, an applicant must meet either:
- appointed to a CES position or designated in an acting capacity or Officer-in-Charge (OIC) of a CES position for at least six (6) months, or
- appointed or designated to at least a Division Chief (SG 24) position and has at least two (2) years of managerial experience (Rule II, Section 2.1).
- For Government Sector, Non Career Service, a person appointed to a non-career position (coterminous or contractual) may take the CES Written Examination if the person:
- has at least three (3) years managerial experience,
- has served the government for the same period as the application period, and
- occupies a position equivalent to or higher than Division Chief (SG 24) (Rule II, Section 2.2).
- For Private Sector, outstanding men/women outside government may take the Written Examination if the person is either:
- a proprietor performing managerial/supervisory functions for at least three (3) years, or
- an incumbent of a managerial position exercising supervisory functions for at least three (3) years (Rule II, Section 2.3).
- “Managerial/supervisory functions” include directing and approving work outputs, delegating to staff, monitoring and rating performance based on approved targets/plans, and supervising the unit/section/division based on staffing pattern or organizational structure (Rule II, Section 2.3).
- Applicants from the government sector must accomplish, in the application form, a certification by the head of the agency/authorized official; applicants from the private sector must accomplish a certification by the authorized official (Rule II, Section 2.3).
Application form deadline and fee submission
- Applicants must submit a duly accomplished application form (and supporting documents, if any) either personally or through mail, together with the examination fee, to the Secretariat not later than fifteen (15) days before the examination date (Rule II, Section 3).
- If the application is submitted beyond the deadline, it is automatically considered for the next schedule, and the applicant must be informed of the examination schedule (Rule II, Section 3).
- If an applicant submits the application form without required supporting documents or without the examination fee, the application may be temporarily accepted only if the applicant submits the documents or pays the fee before or on the scheduled examination date (Rule II, Section 3).
- No applicant is allowed to take the test without submitting required supporting documents and paying the required examination fee (Rule II, Section 3).
Grounds for disapproval and appeal
- An application is disapproved if:
- the applicant has been dismissed from the service for cause, or
- the applicant has been found guilty by final judgment of a crime involving moral turpitude or other criminal offenses where the penalty carries with it an accessory penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification to hold public office, or
- the applicant has been found guilty of offenses relative to or in connection with the conduct of any government examination (Rule II, Section 4).
- The same disapproval grounds apply to MNSA or MPSA degree holders seeking accreditation as equivalent to the CES Written Examination (Rule II, Section 4).
- An applicant whose CES Written Examination application is disapproved may appeal to the Board in writing within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the Secretariat’s decision (Rule II, Section 5).
- The Board en banc’s decision on the appeal is final and executory (Rule II, Section 5).
Passing standards, frequency, and re-taking intervals
- The Board establishes the norms and standards of passing for the CES Written Examination (Rule II, Section 6).
- The CES Written Examination is conducted at least once a year, or as often as necessary, on dates announced by the Board through the Secretariat (Rule II, Section 7).
- If an applicant fails to meet the Board-determined cut-off score, retake intervals are:
- Incumbent of a CES position: six (6) months from the date of the last examination; subsequent retakes require one (1) year interval (Rule II, Section 8.1).
- Non-incumbent of a CES position: one (1) year from the date of the last examination (Rule II, Section 8.2).
Release of results, official notice, rechecking, validity
- Results of the CES Written Examination are released by the Secretariat within thirty (30) days from the examination date (Rule II, Section 9).
- The Secretariat officially announces the results through the Board’s website and official publications, and each applicant is officially notified of the rating (Rule II, Section 9).
- Rechecking of answer sheets is allowed if a written request is submitted to the Secretariat within one hundred twenty (120) days from release of results (Rule II, Section 10).
- Passing grades obtained in the CES Written Examination have no prescriptive period (Rule II, Section 11).
Examination Committee composition and recasting
- The Examination Committee prepares the CES Written Examination and is composed of:
- Chairman: Designated Board Member
- Vice-Chairman: Executive Director
- Member: NUCESO President
- Member: Director for ERAD and PPLD Cluster (ERAD, Chief) (Rule II, Section 12).
- To preserve examination integrity, the Examination Committee is reconstituted monthly or depending on examination frequency (Rule II, Section 12).
Accreditation: MNSA and MPSA equivalence
- Master in National Security Administration (MNSA) and Master in Public Safety Administration (MPSA) degrees from NDCP and PPSC, respectively, are accredited as equivalent to the CES Written Examination if the holder is appointed to at least Division Chief (SG 24) (or its equivalent in government) and has at least three (3) years managerial experience, regardless of career or non-career status (Rule II, Section 13).
- If the holder is appointed to a non-career position, the holder must have served the government for at least three (3) years at the time of application (Rule II, Section 13).
- A degree holder seeking accreditation must submit a written request to the Board, with:
- certified copy of the MNSA/MPSA diploma authorized by NDCP/PPSC officials,
- service record certified by the agency HR/Pers Unit,
- authenticated copy of appointment paper for the present position,
- one (1) 2” x 2” photograph taken not more than six (6) months before filing,
- for Division Chief (SG 24)-level or equivalent: certification from the Personnel/Administrative Officer that supervisory/managerial functions were performed for at least three (3) years and that the applicant supervised/manages staff for at least three (3) years,
- notarized self-certification of no dismissal for cause and no final guilt for crimes involving moral turpitude or other criminal offenses with perpetual absolute disqualification, and no guilt for offenses relative to or connected with conduct of any government examination,
- updated CS Form 212 Personal Data Sheet (Rule II, Section 13.1–13.7).
- After evaluation, the Board informs the holder whether the degree is accredited and whether the holder may proceed to succeeding stages (Rule II, Section 13).
Assessment Center: purpose, passing, retake limits, fees
- The Assessment Center (AC) is a series of simulation exercises that determine capacity to advance to managerial duties and responsibilities and ability to grow and develop in the bureaucracy (Rule III, Section 1).
- The passing mark in the AC is at least “Proficient”; achieving at least Proficient makes the applicant eligible to proceed to Performance Validation (Rule III, Section 2).
- All applicants must undergo the AC, except those serving as assessors in the AC conducted by the Board (Rule III, Section 3).
AC retake schedule and developmental interventions
- An applicant who fails the AC on the first attempt may retake the same only after one (1) year from the AC conduct date (Rule III, Section 4.1).
- If the applicant fails the AC retake, another retake is allowed only after two (2) years from the AC retake date (Rule III, Section 4.2).
- If the applicant does not pass for the third time, the applicant is recommended for developmental interventions (Rule III, Section 4.3).
- After developmental interventions, the applicant may take the AC anew only after three (3) years from the date of the last AC taken and only after completion of the developmental interventions, which must be completed within two (2) years from notice of results of the last AC (Rule III, Section 4.4).
- Post-intervention AC retakes are limited to up to two (2) times (Rule III, Section 4.5).
- If the applicant fails the AC for the fifth time, the applicant may undergo the AC only after five (5) years and upon completion of another developmental intervention (Rule III, Section 4.6).
- If the applicant fails the AC for the sixth time, the applicant may take the AC every five (5) years thereafter (Rule III, Section 4.7).
- Scheduling for an AC retake requires payment of an appropriate AC fee (Rule III, Section 4.7).
AC fee rules and consequences for non-attendance or non-completion
- No AC fee is collected from an applicant employed by a government entity covered by the Salary Standardization Law (SSL) on the applicant’s first take; the applicant pays the full prescribed fee on subsequent attempts (Rule III, Section 5.1).
- Applicants from the private sector and applicants from government entities exempt from the SSL pay the full AC fee regardless of first or subsequent attempts (Rule III, Section 5.2).
- If an applicant confirms attendance but does not show up on the scheduled AC date, the AC fee is forfeited by the Board except for justifiable reasons supported accordingly, and the applicant slides to the last slot in the current queue (Rule III, Section 5.3).
- If an applicant does not successfully complete the AC, the AC fee is forfeited and the AC taken is treated as one full take (Rule III, Section 5.3).
Effect of failure to appear (with justifiable reason)
- If an applicant fails to appear on the scheduled AC date without justifiable reason, the applicant may take the AC on another date provided the applicant:
- submits written confirmation of availability for the rescheduled date, and
- reimburses the cost of the previously scheduled AC (Rule III, Section 6).
Documentary requirements after passing AC
- Applicants who successfully pass the AC must submit to the Board within the prescribed period:
- personal data form,
- applicant’s profile,
- organizational chart of office/agency,
- list of immediate superior(s) and subordinates certified by the Personnel Officer/HRMO,
- recent appointment paper and service record,
- detailed information about pending case(s), if any,
- recent performance rating,
- sworn statement of asset and liabilities, and net worth, disclosure of business interests and financial connections, and identification of relatives in government service,
- income tax return (private sector) or joint certification pursuant to Revenue Regulations No. 2-98, as amended by Revenue Regulations No. 3-2002, and employer’s certificate of compensation payment/tax withheld (BIR Form No. 2316); self-employed applicants must also submit annual income tax return (BIR Form No. 1701),
- clearances from the Office of the Ombudsman, Sandiganbayan, Civil Service Commission, and Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC) if the applicant is a presidential appointee (Rule III, Section 7.1–7.10).
Performance Validation: scope, levels, recommendation outcomes
- Performance Validation assesses performance on the job, leadership capacity, and integrity as a public officer or employee, and determines potential as a public manager (Rule IV, Section 1).
- Performance Validation covers three major areas:
- Performance—ability to deliver results and contribute to department/agency goals and outcomes,
- Managerial/Behavioral Competence—effectiveness as manager and leader, including leadership skills and management effectiveness such as planning and organizing, problem solving, decision-making, and delegating and monitoring,
- Integrity—honesty, accountability/transparency in managing office funds/resources, fairness and objectivity, courage, convictions, professionalism in dealing with clients, and overall acceptability/reputation within the organization (Rule IV, Section 1.1–1.3).
Two levels of Performance Validation
- Performance Validation has two levels:
- Rapid Validation Process (RVP) as the first level for all applicants at this stage who do not have any adverse feedback on performance, managerial/behavioral competencies, and integrity; RVP is conducted and completed in one (1) day by interviewing superior(s), peer(s), and subordinate(s),
- In-depth Validation Process (IVP) for applicants depending on the nature, extent, and gravity of adverse feedback (Rule IV, Section 2.1–2.2).
Validator recommendations and deferred/revalidated performance
- Validators may recommend:
- undergoing the In-depth Validation Process,
- proceeding to the next stage,
- deferring the Performance Validation,
- undergoing revalidation of performance on-the-job (Rule IV, Section 3.1–3.4).
- On deferred performance on-the-job validation, the applicant’s performance is revalidated if the applicant fails to meet standards after IVP; the applicant and immediate superior receive feedback and the Board advises the office to provide appropriate developmental intervention (Rule IV, Section 3).
- The Board develops and adopts standards and guidelines for Performance Validation, including administration, processing, and release of results, and includes guidelines on the number and qualification of Validators while establishing a pool of qualified Validators (Rule IV, Section 4).
Applicants who left government service
- For performance validation of an applicant who has left government service:
- If the applicant has been out of government service for one (1) year or less, validation is based on performance in the position held prior to separation,
- If the applicant has been out of government service for more than one (1) year, validation is based on performance in the position occupied at the time of validation, provided residency in that position is at least six (6) months (Rule IV, Section 5.1–5.2).
Board Interview: outcomes, panel, timing, finality
- The Board Interview is conducted by a Board member or panel of Board members to assess confidence, creativity, self-worth, outlook on work and the bureaucracy, and to provide feedback on performance from the previous three stages (Rule V, Section 1).
- The Board Interviewer recommends any of the following after the interview:
- confer CES eligibility,
- undergo a Panel Interview,
- defer conferment of CES eligibility,
- not confer CES eligibility (Rule V, Section 2.1–2.4).
- If the Board Interviewer has doubts on managerial capabilities, leadership qualities, office accomplishments, performance and integrity, the Board Interviewer may recommend a Panel Interview (Rule V, Section 3).
Panel Interview mechanics and decision finality
- A Panel of Board Interviewers consists of three (3) Board members appointed by the CESB Chairperson to deliberate and decide on issues submitted for consideration, and the panel elects a Chairperson among themselves (Rule V, Section 3).
- The majority of the Panel decides within thirty (30) days from receipt of the Board Interviewer’s findings whether to affirm or reverse the Board Interviewer’s decision (Rule V, Section 3).
- The Panel’s decision is automatically submitted to the Board en banc for review and deliberation; the Board en banc decision is final and executory (Rule V, Section 3).
- No request for reconsideration or appeal is entertained by the Board from the Board en banc decision (Rule V, Section 3).
Conferment requirements and performance rating
- CES eligibility is conferred to applicants who complete all four stages and meet other Board requirements (Rule VI, Section 1).
- Eligibility conferment results in registration in the Board roster and issuance of a CES eligibility certificate (Rule VI, Section 1).
- A criminal/administrative case pending does not bar conferment for successful applicants unless a law provides otherwise (Rule VI, Section 3).
- Applicants must obtain a performance rating of at least “Very Satisfactory” under the Career Executive Service Performance Evaluation System (CESPES) or its equivalent for the year immediately preceding conferment (Rule VI, Section 4).
Forfeiture of CES eligibility actions
- CES eligibility may be forfeited not only as a result of adverse judgment in an administrative or criminal case, but also through a separate and independent forfeiture action (Rule VII, Section 1).
- The forfeiture action is governed by rules and regulations issued by the CESB (Rule VII, Section 1).
Transitory provisions and equivalencies
- MATB/Written Examination transitory rules provide that:
- those who qualified for the Supplemental Written Examination (SWE) under the Career Executive Officer Examination (CEOE) process pursuant to Joint CSC CESB Resolution No. 05-001 are considered to have passed the Written Examination if they pass the SWE in the area where they scored lower than the threshold,
- the three (3) year prescriptive period for MATB validity implemented prior to the effectivity of Joint CSC CESB Resolution No. 05-001 is lifted, allowing those who took and passed MATB prior to that effectivity to proceed subject to guidelines,
- no prescriptive period applies for those who took and passed the Written Examination pursuant to Joint CSC/CESB Resolution No. 05-001,
- an applicant occupying a second level position who passed the Written Examination pursuant to Joint CSC/CESB Resolution No. 05-001 but has not satisfied the two (2) year supervisory experience requirement must wait until eligibility to proceed to the Assessment Center,
- MNSA and MPSA degree holders who failed to request accreditation may qualify for accreditation as equivalent to the CES Written Examination (Rule VIII, Section 1.1.1–1.1.5).
- Assessment Center transitory rule allows an applicant qualified to retake under old Board policies but previously not allowed to retake due to CESB Resolution No. 512 s. 2003 (Prescriptive Period for Assessment Center (AC) Re-takers under the Old Policy on AC Re-take) to retake subject to the guidelines (Rule VIII, Section 1.2.1).
- CES Eligibility transitory rules provide that:
- CESB Resolution No. 593 s. 2005 on strict implementation of Board policies on prescriptive periods and strict adherence to deadlines on submission of required documents is repealed,
- the CSC-conferred Career Service Executive Eligibility (CSEE) consisting of two phases—Written Examination and Panel Interview—of a presidential appointee appointed to a CES position is considered equivalent to two CES eligibility stages—Written Examination and Board Interview—so the applicant must complete the remaining stages—Assessment Center and Performance Validation—and comply with other Board requirements for conferment and appointment (Rule VIII, Section 1.3.1–1.3.2).
Separability, repealing, and effectivity operation
- If any portion of the resolution is held invalid, the remaining provisions retain full force and effect as though the invalid portion was not included (Rule IX, Section 1).
- All existing CESB rules and regulations, circulars, and memoranda inconsistent with the resolution are repealed or amended accordingly (Rule IX, Section 2).
- The resolution effectivity is fifteen (15) days after publication in the Official Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation (Rule IX, Section 3).