COMPLAINT: 2038/2019/MH

Case title: The European Personnel Selection Office and how it assessed a complainant´s talent screener in a selection procedure for the recruitment of EU civil servants in scientific research  

 

Introduction, procedural information and purpose of the inspection of documents  

The Ombudsman’s inquiry team started by outlining the legal framework applicable to meetings and inspections by the Ombudsman. In particular, it informed EPSO that the applicable rules provide that the Ombudsman will not disclose any information or documents identified by EPSO as confidential, neither to the complainant nor to anyone outside the Ombudsman’s office, without EPSO’s prior agreement.^[1]

The inquiry team also explained that the purpose of the meeting and inspection was to receive further information from EPSO on the assessment of the complainant´s education in the talent screener phase of competition EPSO/AD/371/19‐5^[2] for the selection of scientific research administrators (AD7) in the field of scientific knowledge management & communication. In particular, the purpose was to clarify the Selection Board’s reasoning behind the scoring of Question 3 of the talent screener.

As a first step in inquiries concerning EPSO’s decisions to exclude candidates from selection procedures, the Ombudsman organises inspection meetings mainly with a view to obtaining additional information and explanations on the work of Selection Boards, to reassure complainants that all relevant aspects were considered.

Information exchanged and documents inspected 

EPSO explained that the scoring of candidates´ replies to the talent screener questions was carried out based on pre-established criteria set out in the “Criteria for Talent Screener Scoring” for competition EPSO/AD/371/19‐5. This criteria applied to all candidates.

For Question 3 of the talent screener^[3], the complainant scored 0 points.

To receive points for Question 3, candidates had to have an additional diploma in an area different to their main degree. According to the criteria, candidates received 0 points where they had “[no] additional diploma nor specialised post-graduate diploma in a different area from the main degree ...[T]he different areas to be considered are hard sciences (including both formal and natural science) as opposed to social sciences and communication.“

EPSO explained that the complainant’s Bachelor in Journalism (a social science) gave him access to the competition. In reply to Question 3, the complainant had indicated that he has a Masters (MsC) in Knowledge Management and Engineering, and a BsC in Journalism. In the “Education” section of his application form (entry 2), the complainant had described his Masters as being in “Knowledge Management” only. Moreover, the principal subjects he listed in that section related to social sciences (“Digital Television, Media choice and media quality”, his “Thesis: Use of ICTs (Information and Communication Technologies) and media for Disaster Early Warning Systems”, and “Main courses: Knowledge and Media Psychology and Media Hypermedia Production Information Society Information Quality Digital Television Content Research methods in KME”).  In light of this, the Selection Board considered that the complainant’s MsC and BsC were in the same area, namely, social science. He therefore was not able to receive any points for this question.

Conclusion of the inspection of documents / meeting

During the meeting, the Ombudsman’s inquiry team obtained a copy of the following documents:

· Criteria for Talent Screener Scoring EPSO/AD/371/19‐5, Scientific research administrators (AD7) in the field of scientific knowledge management & communication, 21 May 2019 (CONFIDENTIAL);

· The Selection Board’s admission form for candidate N°4477013 in competition EPSO/AD/371/19‐ 5, 11 April 2019 (CONFIDENTIAL); and

· Fiche Jury - Request for review, 10 September 2019 (CONFIDENTIAL).

EPSO identified the above three documents as confidential. This means that no access may be granted to these documents to anyone outside the Ombudsman’s Office.^[4]

Brussels, 7 February 2020

 

Head of Inquiries                                                                                            Case handler

 

[1] Article 4.8 of the European Ombudsman's Implementing Provisions.

[2] https://epso.europa.eu/epsocrs-ref-numbers/epso-ad-371-19-5_en

[3] “Have you obtained a university-level diploma, in addition to the one required to access the competition, in one or more of the scientific domains?”

[4] Article 4.8 of the European Ombudsman's Implementing Provisions.