REVISED INTEGRATED RULES ON THE GRANT OF CAREER EXECUTIVE SERVICE ELIGIBILITY
the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) to serve as the governing body
of the Career Executive Service (CES) and to promulgate rules,
standards and procedures on the selection, classification, compensation
and career development of members of the Career Executive Service;
WHEREAS, Section 8, Paragraph 1 (c) and 2, Chapter 2, Book V of
Executive Order No. 292 expressly provides that the “third level shall
cover positions in the Career Executive Service” and that entrance to
the third level shall be prescribed by the Career Executive Service
Board;”
WHEREAS, Paragraph 5 (a), Article IV, Part III of the Integrated
Reorganization Plan, as approved under P.D. No. 1 provides that “a
person who meets such managerial experience and other requirements and
passes such examinations, as may be prescribed by the Board, shall be
included in the register of career executive eligibles;”
WHEREAS, the Board issued Circular No. 1 dated December 15, 1989
which provides for a four-stage CES eligibility examination process,
namely: Management Aptitude Test-Battery (MATB), Assessment Center;
Board Interview and Performance Validation on-the-job;
WHEREAS, the Board through CESB Resolution No. 459 s. 2002 adopted
the Revised Rules on CES Eligibility, which integrated and/or modified
the guidelines in the four-stage CES eligibility examination process,
namely: Management Aptitude Test-Battery (MATB), Assessment Center;
Board Interview and Performance Validation on-the-job adopted by the
Board through the years;
WHEREAS, the Board and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) through
Resolution No. 05-001 dated July 29, 2005 adopted a Unified Third Level
Examination System also consisting of the same four-stage examination
process where the CSC administers the first stage or the Written
Examination phase;
WHEREAS, the Board, on April 25, 2008 decided through CESB Resolution
No. 736 to conduct the Written Examination and the three other
remaining stages of the CES eligibility examination process in
accordance with law;
WHEREAS, the Civil Service Commission through Resolution No. 08-2226
(Authority of the Commission over Third Level Positions) reaffirmed the
continuing effectivity of CSC Resolution No. 94-2925, dated May 31,
1994 which was circularized in CSC MC No. 21, s. 1994 especially in
classifying other positions which are career in nature; above division
chief level where the duties and responsibilities require the
performance of executive and managerial functions and clarified further
that the third level shall be composed of CES positions as well as those
positions occupied by non-presidential appointees that are above
division chief level and discharging managerial and executive
responsibilities;
WHEREAS, there is a need to further strengthen the existing policies
on the examination process to make it more responsive and practicable,
thus, fulfilling the Board’s mandate to form a continuing pool of
well-selected and development oriented career administrators who shall
provide competent and faithful service in the CES;
NOW, THEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, the Board RESOLVES, as
it is hereby RESOLVED, to adopt the Revised Integrated Rules on the
Grant of Career Executive Service (CES) eligibility;
RULE I
CAREER EXECUTIVE SERVICE ELIGIBILITY
SECTION 1. Mandate of the Board – The Board is the
governing body of the Career Executive Service that is mandated to
promulgate rules, standards and procedures on the selection of members
of the Career Executive Service. It is authorized to confer CES
eligibility.
SECTION 2. Original and Promotional Appointment to CES Rank – The CES eligibility is an appropriate eligibility for appointment to a position in the CES.
CES eligibility shall also be one of the requirements for original appointment to a CES rank.
No person shall be recommended by the Board to the President for
original appointment to a CES rank unless he/she has been conferred CES
eligibility by the Board.
SECTION 3. Grounds for Invalidation of Application for CES Eligibility –
A n applicant for CES eligibility is required to make a full disclosure
to the Board of any information relevant to his/her application for CES
eligibility.
When an applicant is found to have intentionally made any false
statement of material fact or employed any form of deception or fraud in
connection with his/her application for CES eligibility, the Board
shall invalidate such application, without prejudice to the filing of
appropriate administrative and/or criminal case against the applicant
concerned.
SECTION 4. Non-compliance with Requirements – The Board, in
its discretion, reserves the right to discontinue the processing of
application for CES eligibility of an applicant who is unable to comply
with the requirements established in any of the stages of the CES
eligibility examination.
SECTION 5. The CES Eligibility Examination Process – The four-stage CES eligibility examination process shall consist of the following stages:
1st stage : CES Written Examination
2nd stage : Assessment Center
3rd stage : Performance Validation
4th stage : Board Interview
RULE II
CES WRITTEN EXAMINATION
SECTION 1. CES Written Examination – The CES Written Examination is a test given to determine the aptitude and competence of an applicant.
SECTION 2. Admission Requirements – An applicant for CES
Written Examination must be a Filipino citizen of good moral character
and meets the following requirements:
2.1 Government Sector, Career Service:
2.1.1 He/She must have been 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; or2.1.2 He/She must have been appointed or designated to at least a
Division Chief position (SG) 24 and has at least two (2) years of
managerial experience.
2.2 Government Sector, Non Career Service One who is appointed to a
non-career position whether under a coterminous or contractual status in
any department or agency of the government may be allowed to take the
CES Written Examination provided:
2.2.1 He/She has at least three (3) years managerial experience;
2.2.2 He/She has served the government for the same period of time of his/her application; and
2.2.3 He/She must have been occupying a position equivalent to or higher than a Division Chief (SG 24).
2.3 Private Sector
Outstanding men/women from outside the government may be allowed to
take the CES Written Examination; provided he/she is any of the
following:
2.3.1 A proprietor who is performing managerial/supervisory functions for at least three (3) years;
2.3.2 A n incumbent of a managerial position exercising supervisory
functions, as defined under these rules, for a minimum period of three
(3) years.
For the purpose of this rules, managerial/supervisory functions
pertains to directing and approving the work outputs of concerned
employees; delegating functions to the staff; monitoring and rating
employees’ performance based on the duly approved performance
targets/plans; and supervising the unit or section/division based on the
staffing pattern or organizational structure.
As such, in the application form, a certification containing
information on the supervisory functions performed by the applicant
shall be accomplished by the head of the agency/authorized official, in
case of applicants from the government sector or authorized official, in
case of those from the private sector.
SECTION 3. Application Form and Examination Fee – An
applicant for CES Written Examination shall be required to submit to the
Secretariat either personally or through mail, a duly accomplished
application form including supporting documents, if there are any, and
the corresponding fee not later than fifteen (15) days before the date
of the examination.
An application form submitted beyond the deadline shall be
automatically considered for the next schedule provided that the
applicant concerned shall be informed of his/her examination schedule.
An applicant who fails to submit to the Secretariat the required
supporting documents or examination fee upon submission of the
application form may be temporarily accepted, provided that the said
applicant submits such documents or pays the corresponding examination
fee before or on the date of the scheduled examination. No applicant
shall be allowed to take the test without submitting the required
supporting documents or payment of the required examination fee.
SECTION 4. Grounds for Disapproval of Application – An application shall be disapproved under any of the following circumstances:
4.1 The applicant has been dismissed from the service for cause;
4.2 The applicant has been found guilty by final judgment of a
crime involving moral turpitude or other criminal offenses where the
penalty imposed by the court carries with it an accessory penalty of
perpetual absolute disqualification to hold public office; and,4.3 The applicant has been found guilty of offenses relative to or
in connection with the conduct of any government examination.
These grounds for disapproval shall also apply to an MNSA or MPSA
degree holder who seeks the accreditation of his/her degree as
equivalent to the CES Written Examination.
SECTION 5. Appeal on the Disapproval of Application – An applicant,
whose application for CES Written Examination has been disapproved, may
appeal to the Board in writing within fifteen (15) days reckoned from
receipt of the Secretariat’s decision disapproving his/her application.
The decision of the Board en banc regarding appeal on the disapproval
of an application for CES eligibility shall be final and executory.
SECTION 6. Standard of Passing – The Board shall establish the norms and standard of passing in the CES Written Examination.
SECTION 7. Frequency of Examination – The CES Written
Examination shall be conducted by the Board through the Secretariat at
least once a year or as often as may be necessary on such dates as may
be announced from time to time.
SECTION 8. Frequency of Taking the Examination- An
applicant who fails to meet the cut-off score as determined by the
Board shall observe the following periods before retaking the
examinations:
SECTION 9. Release of CES Written Examinations Results –
The results of the CES Written Examination shall be released by the
Secretariat within thirty (30) days from the date of the examination.
The results shall be officially announced by the Secretariat through
the Board’s website and official publications. An applicant shall
likewise be officially notified to his/ her rating.
SECTION 10. Rechecking of the Answer Sheet – Rechecking of
the Applicant’s Answer Sheet in the CES Written Examination shall be
allowed. However, a written request must be submitted to the Secretariat
within one hundred twenty (120) days from the release of the
examination results.
SECTION 11. Validity of the Results – There shall be no prescriptive period on the validity of the passing grades obtained in the CES Written Examination.
SECTION 12. Examination Committee – An Examination
Committee shall be established with the principal function of preparing
the examination to be conducted. The Committee shall consist of the
following:
Chairman: Designated Board Member Vice-Chairman: Executive Director Member: NUCESO President Director for ERAD and PPLD Cluster ERAD, Chief For purposes of preserving the integrity of the CES Written
Examination, the Examination Committee shall be reconstituted monthly or
depending on the frequency of the conduct of examination.
SECTION 13. Accreditation of the MNSA and MPSA Degrees –
The Master in National Security Administration (MNSA) and Master in
Public Safety Administration (MPSA) degrees conferred by the National
Defense College of the Philippines (NDCP) and Philippine Public Safety
College (PPSC), respectively shall be accredited as equivalent to the
CES Written Examination, provided that the holder thereof is an
appointee to at least a division chief level position (SG 24) or its
equivalent in the government, regardless of whether he/she is in the
career or non-career service with at least three (3) years managerial
experience. In case the MNSA or MPSA degree holder is appointed to a
non-career position, he/she should have served the government for at
least three (3) years at the time of the application.
An MNSA or MPSA degree holder, who is interested to accredit his/her
course as equivalent to the CES Written Examination, is required to
submit a written request to the Board for its accreditation. The request
should be accompanied by the following documentary requirements:
13.1 Copy of the MNSA/MPSA diploma duly certified by an authorized Official/s of the NDCP and PPSC;
13.2 Service Record duly certified by the agency HR Department/Personnel Unit where the Official is currently assigned;
13.3 Copy of the appointment paper of his/her present position duly authenticated by the Personnel/Administrative Officer;
13.4 One 2” x 2” photograph taken not more than six (6) months before the filing of the application;
13.5 For one who is appointed to a Division Chief (SG 24) level
position or its equivalent whether in the career or non-career service, a
certification issued by the Personnel/Administrative Officer that
he/she has been performing supervisory/managerial functions (i.e.
directing and approving work outputs of employees; delegating functions
to the staff; monitoring and rating employees’ performance based on
duly approved performance targets; and supervising the unit/division
based on the staffing pattern/organizational structure), and
supervising/managing a number of staff for at least three (3) years
shall be required;13.6 Notarized self-certification that he/she has not been
dismissed from the service for cause or found guilty by final judgment
of a crime involving moral turpitude or other criminal offenses where
the penalty imposed by the court carries with it an accessory penalty of
perpetual absolute disqualification to hold public office or found
guilty of offenses relative to or in connection with the conduct of any
government examination;13.7 Updated Personal Data Sheet (CS Form 212)
After the appropriate evaluation, the Official concerned shall be
informed whether his/her MNSA/MPSA degree can be accredited as
equivalent to the CES Written Examination and whether he/she shall be
qualified to proceed to the succeeding stages of the CES eligibility
examination process.
RULE III
ASSESSMENT CENTER
SECTION 1. Assessment Center – The Assessment Center (AC)
is a series of simulation exercises designed to determine whether the
applicant has the capacity to advance to managerial duties and
responsibilities and the ability to grow and develop in the bureaucracy.
SECTION 2. Passing Mark – The passing mark in the
AC shall be at least “Proficient”. An applicant, who obtains a rating
of at least “Proficient” in the Assessment Center, shall be eligible to
proceed to the Performance Validation – the next stage of the CES
eligibility examination process.
SECTION 3. No Exemption Policy – Except for those serving
as Assessors in the AC conducted by the Board, all other applicants,
irrespective of position or circumstance, shall be required to undergo
the AC.
SECTION 4. Assessment Center Retake – The following are the rules on AC retake:
4.1 An applicant who did not pass the AC for the first time shall
be allowed to retake the same only after one (1) year reckoned from the
date of conduct of the AC.4.2 An applicant who is unable to pass the retake shall be allowed
another retake but only after two (2) years reckoned from the date of
the AC retake.4.3 An applicant who did not pass the AC for the third time shall be recommended to undergo developmental interventions.
4.4 The said applicant shall be allowed to take the AC anew only
after three years from the date of the last AC taken, and only after
completion of the developmental interventions. The developmental
intervention should be completed within two (2) years from notice of the
results of the last AC taken.4.5 The AC retake after the developmental intervention shall be up to two (2) times only.
4.6 If, however, an applicant is unable to pass the AC for the
fifth time, he/she shall be allowed to undergo the AC only after five
(5) years and upon completion of another developmental intervention.4.7 An applicant who is unable to pass the AC for the sixth time shall be allowed to take the AC every five years thereafter.
An applicant shall only be scheduled for a retake upon payment of an appropriate AC fee.
SECTION 5. Assessment Center Fee – The following rules shall apply on the AC fee:
5.1 No fee shall be collected from an applicant, who is employed by
a government entity covered by the Salary Standardization Law (SSL) on
his/her first take but shall pay the full amount of the prescribed fee
on his/her subsequent attempt.5.2 An applicant from the private sec tor and from a government
entity, which is exempted from the Salary Standardization Law (SSL),
shall be required to pay the full amount of the AC fee regardless of
whether it is his/her first or subsequent attempts.5.3 The AC fee paid by an applicant who confirmed attendance but
did not show up on the scheduled date of AC conduct shall be forfeited
by the Board except for justifiable reasons and supported accordingly.
In addition, he/she will slide down to the last slot of the current
queue.
The AC fee paid by an applicant who did not successfully complete the
AC shall be forfeited by the Board and the AC taken shall be treated as
one full take.
SECTION 6. Effect of Failure to Appear on the Scheduled Date of the Assessment Center –
An applicant, who fails to appear on the scheduled date of the AC
without justifiable reason, shall be allowed to undergo the same on
another date, provided that he/ she shall submit a written confirmation
of availability on the re-scheduled date of AC and only upon
reimbursement of the cost of the previously scheduled AC.
SECTION 7. Submission of Documentary Requirements – An
applicant who successfully passed the AC is required to submit to the
Board within the prescribed period the following documentary
requirements;
7.1 Personal Data Form;
7.2 Applicant’s Profile;
7.3 Organizational Chart of the applicant’s office or agency;
7.4 List of immediate superior/s and subordinates as certified by the Personnel Officer/HRMO;
7.5 Recent Appointment paper and Service Record;
7.6 Detailed information about the pending case/s, if any;
7.7 Recent Performance Rating;
7.8 Sworn Statement of Asset and Liabilities, and Net Worth,
Disclosure of Business Interests and Financial Connections and
Identification of Relatives in the Government Service;
7.9 Income Tax Return (for candidates from the private sector) or
the Joint Certification (for candidates from the government sector),
which is issued 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). In case the
applicant is self-employed, he/she is also required to submit an Annual
Income Tax Return for the Self-employed (BIR Form No. 1701).
7.10 Clearances from the following Offices:7.10.1 Office of the Ombudsman;
7.10.2 Sandiganbayan;
7.10.3 Civil Service Commission
7.10.4 Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC), if presidential appointee.
RULE IV
PERFORMANCE VALIDATION
SECTION 1. Performance Validation – A Performance
Validation is a process that facilitates the assessment of the
applicant’s performance on the job, leadership capacity and integrity as
a public officer or employee. It further ascertains the applicant’s
potential as a public manager.
The following are the three (3) major areas covered in the conduct of the performance validation:
1.1 Performance – pertains to the ability of the applicant to
deliver results and contribute to his/her department/agency goals and
identified outcomes.1.2 Managerial/Behavioral Competence – refers to the effectiveness
of an applicant as a manager and leader of his/her unit/office. These
includes leadership skills, noting that Career Executive Service
Officers (CESOs) occupy senior positions that require higher
responsibilities for leading others and managerial effectiveness which
measures core management skills such as planning and organizing, problem
solving, decision-making, and delegating and monitoring.1.3 Integrity – focuses on how an applicant can demonstrate
honesty, sense of account- ability/transparency including the
responsibility for managing office funds/resources. This also determines
the applicant’s sense of fairness and objectivity, courage, convictions
and professionalism in dealing with clients, as well as the overall
acceptability/reputation of the applicant within his/her organization.
SECTION 2. Two (2) Levels of Performance Validation – Performance Validation has two (2) levels, which are as follows:
2.1 Rapid Validation Process ( RVP) – constitutes the first level
of performance validation covering all applicants for CES eligibility
who have reached the Performance Validation stage and do not have any
adverse feedback on performance, managerial/behavioral competencies and
integrity. The RVP shall be conducted and completed in one (1) day by
interviewing the applicant’s superior/s, peer/s and subordinates.2.2 In-depth Validation Process (IVP) – is a focused, more
intensive and longer performance validation, depending on the nature,
extent and gravity of adverse feedback of information on the applicant’s
performance, managerial/behavioral competencies and integrity.
SECTION 3. Validator’s Recommendation – A Validator may submit any of the following recommendations:
3.1 Undergo the In-depth Validation Process;
3.2 Proceed to the next stage of the CES eligibility examination process;
3.3 Defer the conduct of the Performance Validation; and
3.4 Undergo the revalidation of performance on-the-job.
The validation of the applicant’s performance on-the-job is deferred
in view of the reasons provided in the guidelines to be adopted by the
Board.
The applicant’s performance on-the-job is revalidated in case he/she
failed to meet the standards set by the Board after the conduct of the
In-depth Validation Process. The applicant and his/her immediate
superior shall then be given appropriate feedback of the result of the
conduct of the Performance Validation. The Office of the applicant shall
be advised by the Board to provide an appropriate developmental
intervention to the applicant concerned.
SECTION 4. Standards and Guidelines in the Conduct of Performance Validation –
The Board shall develop and adopt a set of standards and guidelines in
the conduct of Performance Validation including the administration of
the Performance Validation stage and the processing and release of
results.
It shall also provide a set of guidelines on the number and
qualification of the Validator. A pool of qualified Validators shall
also be established by the Board.
SECTION 5. Performance Validation on an Applicant Who Has Left Government Service – The Performance Validation on an applicant who has left government service shall be done in the following manner;
5.1 The performance validation of an applicant, who has been out of
government service for one (1) year or less, shall be conducted based on
his/her performance in the position he/she held prior to his/her
separation from government service.5.2 The performance validation of an applicant who has been out of
government service for more than one (1) year shall be conducted based
on his/her performance in the position he/she is occupying at the time
of the performance validation, provided he/she has established residency
in the said position for at least six (6) months.
RULE V
BOARD INTERVIEW
SECTION 1. Board Interview – The Board Interview is an
interview conducted by a member of the Board or a panel of Board
members. It is conducted to determine and assess the applicant’s
confidence, creativity, self worth and outlook on his/her work and the
bureaucracy and opportunity to give feedback to the applicant in his/her
performance on the three (3) previous stages he/she underwent.
SECTION 2. Board Interviewer’s Recommendation – After an interview is conducted, the Board Interviewer should recommend any of the following:
2.1 To confer CES eligibility;
2.2 To undergo a Panel Interview;
2.3 To defer conferment of CES Eligibility; and
2.4 Not to confer CES eligibility.
SECTION 3. Panel Interview – In case the Board Interviewer
has doubts on the managerial capabilities and potentials, leadership
qualities, office accomplishments and performance and integrity of an
applicant, he/she may recommend that an applicant be subjected to a
Panel Interview.
There shall be a Panel of Board Interviewers which is composed of
three (3) Board members appointed by the CESB Chairperson primarily
tasked to deliberate and decide on the issues submitted before them for
consideration. The said Panel of Board Interviewers shall elect among
themselves a Chairperson.
The majority of the members of the Panel of Board Interviewers shall
decide within thirty (30) days from receipt of the findings of the Board
Interviewer whether to affirm or reverse the decision of the Board
Interviewer.
The decision of the Panel of the Board Interviewees shall be automatically submitted to the Board en banc for review and deliberation. The decision of the Board en banc shall be final and executory. No request for reconsideration or appeal shall be entertained by the Board.
RULE VI
CONFERMENT OF CAREER EXECUTIVE SERVICE ELIGIBILITY
SECTION 1. Conferment of CES Eligibility – ACES
eligibility shall be conferred to any person who is able to successfully
complete the four-stage CES eligibility examination and meet such other
requirements as may be prescribed by the Board.
The CES eligibility shall be conferred by the Board through a
resolution approved by the majority of its members in a regular or
special meeting.
Upon approval of the resolution, the applicant is considered a
full-fledged CES eligible and his/her name shall be registered in the
Board’s Roster of CES eligibles and a corresponding certificate of CES
eligibility shall be issued in testimony of his/her newly acquired
qualification. The CES eligibility conferred by the Board shall not
prescribe.
SECTION 2. Formal Notice of Conferment of CES Eligibility –
The Board shall inform the CES eligible and his/her Department
Secretary or Head of Agency of his/her conferment of CES eligibility.
SECTION 3. Effect of Pending Case on Conferment of CES Eligibility –
Pendency of a criminal/administrative case shall not constitute a bar
to the conferment of CES eligibility to a successful applicant, unless
there is a law to the contrary.
SECTION 4. Performance Rating – An applicant for CES
Eligibility is required to obtain a performance rating of at least “
Very Satisfactory” under the Career Executive Service Performance
Evaluation System (CESPES) or its equivalent performance rating tool for
the year immediately preceding the conferment of CES eligibility.
RULE VII
FORFEITURE OF CES ELIGIBILITY
SECTION 1. Forfeiture of CES Eligibility – In addition to
the forfeiture of eligibility as a result of an adverse judgment in an
administrative/criminal case, the CES eligibility conferred to an
applicant may be the subject of a separate and independent action for
forfeiture. The action for forfeiture of CES eligibility shall be
governed by the rules and regulations to be issued by the CESB.
RULE VIII
TRANSITORY PROVISIONS
SECTION 1. Transitory Provisions – The following are the transitory provisions in the implementation of these rules:
1.1 MATB/ Written Examination:
1.1.1 Those who have qualified for the Supplemental Written
Examination (SWE) under the Career Executive Officer Examination (CEOE)
process pursuant to Joint CSC CESB Resolution No. 05-001 shall be
considered to have passed the Written Examination if they pass the SWE
to be administered by the Civil Service Commission (CSC) on the
particular area of competency where they have obtained a score lower
than the threshold score.
1.1.2 The three (3) year prescriptive period for the validity of the
Management Aptitude Test-Battery (MATB) implemented prior to the
effectivity of Joint CSC CESB Resolution No. 05-001 is hereby lifted.
Hence, those who took and passed the MATB prior to the effectivity of
the afore-stated Joint CSC and CESB resolution may already proceed to
the next stage of the examination process, subject to the conditions set
forth under these guidelines.
1.1.3 No prescriptive period shall be implemented for those who took
and passed the Written Examination pursuant to Joint CSC/CESB Resolution
No. 05-001.
1.1.4 An applicant occupying a second level position who took and
passed the Written Examination pursuant to Joint CSC CESB Resolution No.
05-001 but have not satisfied the two (2) year supervisory experience
requirement shall wait until he/she becomes eligible to proceed to the
Assessment Center.
1.1.5 MNSA and MPSA degree holders, who failed to request for
accreditation of their respective degrees, may already qualify for the
accreditation of their degrees as equivalent to the CES Written
Examination.
1.2 Assessment Center:
1.2.1 An applicant, who is qualified to retake the Assessment Center
under the old policies of the Board but was not allowed to retake the
same in view of the CESB Resolution No. 512 s. 2003 (Prescriptive Period
for Assessment Center (AC) Re-takers under the Old Policy on AC
Re-take) shall be allowed to retake the Assessment Center, subject to
the conditions set forth in these guidelines.
1.3 CES Eligibility:
1.3.1 CESB Resolution No. 593 s. 2005 which provides for a strict
implementation of the Board policies on prescriptive periods and strict
adherence to deadlines on submission of required documents prescribed by
the Board is hereby repealed.
1.3.2 The Career Service Executive Eligibility (CSEE) conferred by
the Civil Service Commission (CSC), which consist of two (2) phases,
namely: Written Examination and Panel Interview, of a presidential
appointee appointed to a CES position shall be considered equivalent to
the two (2) of the four-stage CES eligibility examination process,
namely: Written Examination and Board Interview. Hence, for purposes of
conferment of CES eligibility and appointment to appropriate rank in the
CES, the applicant concerned has to complete the two (2) remaining
stages of the examination process, namely: Assessment Center and
Performance Validation stages and comply with such other requirements as
may be prescribed by the Board.
RULE IX
SEPARABILITY, REPEALING, AND EFFECTIVITY CLAUSES
SECTION 1. Separability Clause – If any section or part of
this resolution shall be held to be invalid, the remaining provisions
shall be given full force and effect as completely as if the part held
invalid had not been included therein.
SECTION 2. Repealing Clause – All existing Career Executive
Service rules and regulations, circulars and memoranda inconsistent
with this resolution are hereby repealed or amended accordingly.
SECTION 3. Effectivity – This resolution shall take effect
fifteen (15) days after publication in the Official Gazette or a
newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines.
Adopted: 10 Feb. 2009
|
(SGD.) BERNARDO P. ABESAMIS
Chairperson |
|
|
(SGD.) MARIA PAZ W. FORONDA
Vice Chair |
|
|
(SGD.) RICARDO L. SALUDO
Member |
(SGD.) ELMOR D. JURIDICO
Member |
|
(SGD.) ANTONIO D. KALAW, JR.
Member |
(SGD.) ROLANDO L. METIN
Member |
|
Attested by:
|
|
|
(SGD.) REGINA C. ANNIBAN
Acting Board Secretary |
|