Supreme Court E-Library
Information At Your Fingertips

  View printer friendly version

WHEREAS, Presidential Decree No. 1 dated September 24, 1972, created 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; or

2.1.2 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:

8.1 For an incumbent of a CES position :		Six (6) months reckoned from the date of his/ her last examination. For succeeding retakes thereafter, he/she shall observe the one (1) year interval requirement.
8.2 For non-incumbent of a CES position:		One (1) year reckoned from the date of his/her last examination.

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