COMPLIANCE REVIEW REPORT 

SIERRA NEVADA CONSERVANCY 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Compliance Review Unit 

State Personnel Board 

June 10, 2016 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1 
Background ..................................................................................................................... 2 
Scope and Methodology .................................................................................................. 2 
Findings and Recommendations ..................................................................................... 3 
Examinations ............................................................................................................. 3 
Appointments ............................................................................................................. 5 
Equal Employment Opportunity ................................................................................. 7 
Mandated Training ..................................................................................................... 8 
Departmental Response .................................................................................................. 9 
SPB Reply ....................................................................................................................... 9 

 

INTRODUCTION 

Established by the California Constitution, the State Personnel Board (the SPB or 
Board) is charged with enforcing and administering the civil service statutes, prescribing 
probationary periods and classifications, adopting regulations, and reviewing 
disciplinary actions and merit-related appeals. The SPB oversees the merit-based 
recruitment and selection process for the hiring of over 200,000 state employees. These 
employees provide critical services to the people of California, including but not limited 
to, protecting life and property, managing emergency operations, providing education, 
promoting the public health, and preserving the environment. The SPB provides 
direction to departments through the Board’s decisions, rules, policies, and consultation. 

Pursuant to Government Code section 18661, the SPB’s Compliance Review Unit 
(CRU) conducts compliance reviews of appointing authority’s personnel practices in five 
areas: examinations, appointments, equal employment opportunity (EEO), personal 
services contracts (PSC’s), and mandated training to ensure compliance with civil 
service laws and board regulations. The purpose of these reviews is to ensure state 
agencies are in compliance with merit related laws, rules, and policies and to identify 
and share best practices identified during the reviews. The SPB conducts these reviews 
on a three-year cycle. 

The CRU may also conduct special investigations in response to a specific request or 
when the SPB obtains information suggesting a potential merit-related violation. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The CRU conducted a routine compliance review of Sierra Nevada Conservancy (SNC) 
personnel practices in the areas of examinations, appointments, EEO, and PSC’s from 
October 1, 2014, through September 30, 2015, and mandated training from November 
1, 2013, through October 31, 2015. The following table summarizes the compliance 
review findings. 

Area 

Finding 

Severity 

Examinations 

Examination Complied with Civil Service 
Laws and Board Rules 

In Compliance 

Appointments 

Probationary Evaluations Were Not Provided 
for All Appointments 

Serious 

Equal Employment 
Opportunity 

Equal Employment Opportunity Program 
Complied with Civil Service Laws and Board 
Rules 

In Compliance 

Area 

Finding 

Severity 

Mandated Training 

Mandated Training Complied with Statutory 
Requirements 

In Compliance 

 

A color-coded system is used to identify the severity of the violations as follows: 

. Red = Very Serious 
. Orange = Serious 
. Yellow = Non-serious or Technical 
. Green = In Compliance 

 
BACKGROUND 

Created in 2004, the SNC is a state agency whose mission is to improve the 
environmental, economic, and social well-being of the Sierra Nevada Region. The SNC 
has awarded over $50 million in grants for projects to protect and enhance the health of 
California’s primary watersheds by improving forest health, remediating mercury 
contamination from abandoned mines, protecting critical natural resources, and 
reducing the risk of catastrophic wildfire. 

The Sierra Nevada Region spans 25 million acres, encompasses all or part of 22 
counties, and runs from the Oregon border on the north to Kern County on the south. 
The Region is the origin of more than 60 percent of California’s developed water supply. 

As of July 1, 2015, the SNC employs approximately 26 full-time and 10 part-time staff. 
The majority of SNC employees work at the Auburn headquarters, with some located in 
three area offices maintained in Mariposa, Bishop, and Quincy. 

SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 

The scope of the compliance review was limited to reviewing SNC examinations, 
appointments, EEO program, and PSC’s from October 1, 2014, through September 30, 
2015, and mandated training from November 1, 2013, through October 31, 2015. The 
primary objective of the review was to determine if SNC personnel practices, policies, 
and procedures complied with state civil service laws and board regulations, and to 
recommend corrective action where deficiencies were identified. 

A cross-section of SNC examinations and appointments were selected for review to 
ensure that samples of various examinations and appointment types, classifications, 
and levels were reviewed. The CRU examined the documentation that the SNC 
provided, which included examination bulletins, scoring results, notice of personnel 

action (NOPA) forms, vacancy postings, application screening criteria, hiring interview 
rating criteria, certification lists, transfer movement worksheets, employment history 
records, correspondence, and probation reports. 

The review of the SNC EEO program included examining written EEO policies and 
procedures; the EEO Officer’s role, duties, and reporting relationship; the internal 
discrimination complaint process; the upward mobility program; the reasonable 
accommodation program; the discrimination complaint process; and the Disability 
Advisory Committee (DAC). 

The SNC had no PSC’s that were subject to Department of General Services (DGS) 
approval and thus our procedural review.1 

1 If an employee organization requests the SPB to review any personal services contract during the SPB 
compliance review period or prior to the completion of the final compliance review report, the SPB will not 
audit the contract. Instead, the SPB will review the contract pursuant to its statutory and regulatory 
process. In this instance, none of the reviewed PSC’s were challenged. 

 

In addition, the SNC’s mandated training was reviewed to ensure all employees 
required to file statements of economic interest were provided ethics training, and that 
all supervisors were provided supervisory and sexual harassment training within 
statutory timelines. 

The SNC declined to have an exit conference. The CRU received and carefully 
reviewed the SNC’s written response on June 3, 2016, which is attached to this final 
compliance review report. 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

Examinations 

Examinations to establish an eligible list must be competitive and of such character as 
fairly to test and determine the qualifications, fitness, and ability of competitors to 
perform the duties of the class of position for which he or she seeks appointment. (Gov. 
Code, § 18930.) Examinations may be assembled or unassembled, written or oral, or in 
the form of a demonstration of skills, or any combination of those tests. (Ibid.) The 
Board establishes minimum qualifications (MQ’s) for determining the fitness and 
qualifications of employees for each class of position and for applicants for 
examinations. (Gov. Code, § 18931.) Within a reasonable time before the scheduled 
date for the examination, the designated appointing power shall announce or advertise 

the examination for the establishment of eligible lists. (Gov. Code, § 18933, subd. (a).) 
The advertisement shall contain such information as the date and place of the 
examination and the nature of the MQ’s. (Ibid.) Every applicant for examination shall file 
an application in the office of the department or a designated appointing power as 
directed by the examination announcement. (Gov. Code, § 18934.) Generally, the final 
earned rating of each person competing in any examination is to be determined by the 
weighted average of the earned ratings on all phases of the examination. (Gov. Code, § 
18936.) Each competitor shall be notified in writing of the results of the examination 
when the employment list resulting from the examination is established. (Gov. Code, § 
18938.5.) 

During the period under review, the SNC conducted one examination. The CRU 
reviewed this examination, which is listed below: 

Classification 

Exam Type 

Exam 
Components 

Final File 
Date 

No. of 
Applications 

Assistant Executive 
Officer 

Career 
Executive 
Assignment 
(CEA) 

Statement Of 
Qualifications 
(SOQ’s)2 

2/4/2015 

23 

2 In a statement of qualifications (SOQ’s) examination, applicants submit a written summary of their 
qualifications and experience related to a published list of desired qualifications. Raters, typically subject 
matter experts, evaluate the responses according to a predetermined rating scale designed to assess 
their ability to perform in a job classification, assign scores and rank the competitors in a list. 

FINDING NO. 1 – Examination Complied with Civil Service Laws and Board 
Rules 

 

The SNC administered a CEA examination in order to create an information list from 
which to make appointments. The SNC published and distributed examination bulletins 
containing the required information for the examination. Applications received by the 
SNC were accepted prior to the final filing date and were thereafter properly assessed 
to determine whether applicants met the minimum qualifications for admittance to the 
examination. After all phases of the examination process were completed, the score of 
each competitor was computed, and a list of eligible candidates was established. The 
examination results listed the names of all successful competitors arranged in order of 
the score received by rank. Competitors were then notified of their final scores. 

The CRU found no deficiencies in the examination that the SNC conducted during the 
compliance review period. Accordingly, the SNC fulfilled its responsibilities to administer 
the examination in compliance with civil service laws and board rules. 

Appointments 

In all cases not excepted or exempted by Article VII of the California Constitution, the 
appointing power must fill positions by appointment, including cases of transfers, 
reinstatements, promotions, and demotions in strict accordance with the Civil Service 
Act and Board rules. (Gov. Code, § 19050.) Appointments made from eligible lists, by 
way of transfer, or by way of reinstatement, must be made on the basis of merit and 
fitness, which requires consideration of each individual’s job-related qualifications for a 
position, including his or her knowledge, skills, abilities, experience, and physical and 
mental fitness. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 250, subd. (a).) 

During the compliance review period, the SNC made seven appointments. The CRU 
reviewed all of those appointments, which are listed below: 

Classification 

Appointment Type 

Tenure 

Time Base 

No. of 
Appointments 

Associate 
Governmental 
Program Analyst 

Certification List 

Permanent 

Full Time 

3 

Conservancy Project 
Development Analyst 
II 

Certification List 

Permanent 

Full Time 

1 

Staff Services 
Analyst 

Certification List 

Permanent 

Full Time 

1 

Staff Services 
Manager I 

Certification List 

Permanent 

Full Time 

1 

Assistant Executive 
Officer 

Information List 

CEA 

Full Time 

1 

 

FINDING NO. 2 – Probationary Evaluations Were Not Provided for All 
Appointments 

 

Summary: The SNC did not prepare, complete, and/or retain two required 
probationary reports of performance. 

Classification 

Appointment 
Type 

No. of 
Appointments 

No. of Uncompleted 
Prob. Reports 

Conservancy Project 
Development Analyst II 

Certification List 

1 

2 

 

Criteria: A new probationary period is not required when an employee is 
appointed by reinstatement with a right of return. (Cal. Code Regs., 
tit. 2, § 322, subd. (d)(2).) However, the service of a probationary 
period is required when an employee enters state civil service by 
permanent appointment from an employment list. (Cal. Code Regs., 
tit. 2, § 322, subd. (a).) In addition, unless waived by the appointing 
power, a new probationary period is required when an employee is 
appointed to a position under the following circumstances: (1) 
without a break in service in the same class in which the employee 
has completed the probationary period, but under a different 
appointing power; and (2) without a break in service to a class with 
substantially the same or lower level of duties and responsibilities 
and salary range as a class in which the employee has completed 
the probationary period. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 322, subd. (c)(1) 
& (2).) 

During the probationary period, the appointing power is required to 
evaluate the work and efficiency of a probationer at sufficiently 
frequent intervals to keep the employee adequately informed of 
progress on the job. (Gov. Code, § 19172; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 
599.795.) The appointing power must prepare a written appraisal of 
performance each one-third of the probationary period. (Cal. Code 
Regs., tit. 2, § 599.795.) 

 

Severity: Serious. The probationary period is the final step in the selection 
process to ensure that the individual selected can successfully 
perform the full scope of their job duties. Failing to use the 
probationary period to assist an employee in improving his or her 
performance or terminating the appointment upon determination 
that the appointment is not a good job/person match is unfair to the 
employee and serves to erode the quality of state government. 

Cause: The SNC acknowledges that due to recent turnover in management 
staff, probationary reports were not completed or not completed 
timely. 

Action: It is recommended that within 60 days of the Executive Officer’s 
approval of these findings and recommendations, the SNC submit 
to the CRU a written corrective action plan that addresses how the 
SNC will ensure full compliance from supervisory/managerial staff 
to meet with the probationary requirements of Government Code § 
19172. 

Equal Employment Opportunity 

Each state agency is responsible for an effective EEO program. (Gov. Code, § 19790.) 
The appointing power for each state agency has the major responsibility for monitoring 
the effectiveness of its EEO program. (Gov. Code, § 19794.) To that end, the appointing 
power must issue a policy statement committed to EEO; issue procedures for filing, 
processing, and resolving discrimination complaints; issue procedures for providing 
equal upward mobility and promotional opportunities; and cooperate with the California 
Department of Human Resources (CalHR) by providing access to all required files, 
documents and data. (Ibid.) In addition, the appointing power must appoint, at the 
managerial level, an EEO Officer, who shall report directly to, and be under the 
supervision of, the director of the department to develop, implement, coordinate, and 
monitor the department’s EEO program. (Gov. Code, § 19795.) 

Because the EEO Officer investigates and ensures proper handling of discrimination, 
sexual harassment and other employee complaints, the position requires separation 
from the regular chain of command, as well as regular and unencumbered access to the 
head of the organization. In a state agency with less than 500 employees, like the SNC, 
the EEO Officer may be the Personnel Officer. 

Each state agency must establish a separate committee of employees who are 
individuals with a disability, or who have an interest in disability issues, to advise the 
head of the agency on issues of concern to employees with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 
19795, subd. (b)(1).) The department must invite all employees to serve on the 
committee and take appropriate steps to ensure that the final committee is comprised of 
members who have disabilities or who have an interest in disability issues. (Gov. Code, 
§ 19795, subd. (b)(2).) 

The CRU reviewed the SNC EEO program that was in effect during the compliance 
review period. 

FINDING NO. 3 – Equal Employment Opportunity Program Complied with Civil 
Service Laws and Board Rules 

 

After reviewing the policies, procedures, and programs necessary for compliance with 
the EEO program’s role and responsibilities according to statutory and regulatory 
guidelines, the CRU determined that the SNC’s EEO program provided employees with 
information and guidance on the EEO process including instructions on how to file 
discrimination claims. Furthermore, the EEO program outlines the roles and 
responsibilities of the EEO Officer, as well as supervisors and managers. The EEO 
Officer, who is at a managerial level, reports directly to the Director of the SNC. In 
addition, the SNC has an established DAC. The SNC also provided evidence of its 
efforts to promote EEO in its hiring and employment practices, to increase its hiring of 
persons with a disability, and to offer upward mobility opportunities for its entry-level 
staff. Accordingly, the SNC EEO program complied with civil service laws and board 
rules. 

Mandated Training 

Each state agency shall offer at least semiannually to each of its filers an orientation 
course on the relevant ethics statutes and regulations that govern the official conduct of 
state officials. New filers must be trained within six months of appointment. (Gov. Code, 
§ 11146.3) 

Each department must provide its new supervisors supervisory training within 12 
months of appointment. (Gov. Code, § 19995.4, subd. (b) and (c.).) The training must 
be a minimum of 80 hours, 40 of which must be structured and given by a qualified 
instructor. The other 40 hours may be done on the job by a higher-level supervisor or 
manager. (Gov. Code, § 19995.4, subd. (b).) 

Additionally, each department must provide its supervisors two hours of sexual 
harassment training every two years. New supervisors must be provided supervisory 
training within six months of appointment. (Gov. Code, § 12950.1, subd. (a).) 

The CRU reviewed the SNC’s mandated training program that was in effect during the 
compliance review period. 

FINDING NO. 4 – Mandated Training Complied with Statutory Requirements 

 

The SNC provided semiannual ethics training to its 29 filers during the two-year 
calendar year period commencing in 2014, and ethics training to its one new filer within 
six months of appointment. The SNC also provided supervisory training to its one new 
supervisor within 12 months of appointment. In addition, the SNC provided sexual 
harassment training to its one new supervisor within six months of appointment, and 
sexual harassment training to its five existing supervisors every two years. Thus, the 
SNC complied with mandated training requirements within statutory timelines. 

DEPARTMENTAL RESPONSE 

The SNC’s response is attached as Attachment 1. 

SPB REPLY 

Based upon the SNC’s written response, the SNC will comply with the CRU 
recommendations and findings and provide the CRU a corrective action plan. 

It is further recommended that the SNC comply with the afore-stated recommendations 
and submit to the CRU a written report of compliance within 60 days of the Executive 
Officer’s approval.