Candidate participated in a standardized exam twice

Authority

This investigation was conducted under section 69 of the Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c.22, ss. 12, 13).

Issue

The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether a candidate committed fraud in an external appointment process by completing a standardized exam twice without respecting the 1-year retest waiting period. 

Conclusion

The investigation concluded that the candidate committed fraud by not informing the department that they had applied twice and by completing 2 standardized exams to increase their chances of being successful in the appointment process.

Facts

The investigation request was submitted by a department following a review of candidate exam information in the context of an external advertised appointment process. The review raised concerns of potential cheating on a standardized exam: a candidate appeared to have submitted applications from 2 accounts they created using 2 different email addresses.

Following their applications, invitations to participate in the exam were sent to candidate’s email addresses. The candidate confirmed their participation twice (once from each address) and then received 2 sets of exam access codes.  

During the investigation, the candidate confirmed that they had previously created 2 accounts in the Public Service Resourcing System using 2 distinct email addresses and used both accounts to apply to the appointment process subject to the investigation. The candidate indicated that the practice of submitting 2 applications in appointment processes had been recommended to them to increase the chance of being randomly selected for further assessment.

The candidate confirmed that they took the exam twice, and indicated that they knew about the retest waiting period. The candidacy linked to their first attempt was eliminated from the appointment process as the candidate did not meet the established pass mark. The candidate met the pass mark on their second attempt and was invited to the next assessment steps in the appointment process. They provided contradictory versions of events surrounding the circumstances that led them to take the exam twice and their testimony was not credible or supported by documentary evidence.

The evidence demonstrated, on the balance of probabilities, that the candidate was dishonest when they did not inform the department that they had applied twice and when they participated twice in the standardized exam for the same appointment process. The candidate also knew that the appointment process could be affected by their actions, which provided them 2 opportunities to be successful in the same exam, and which constituted an advantage.

Corrective actions

Following the conclusion of fraud, the Commission ordered that:

• for a period of 2 years, the individual must notify the Public Service Commission of Canada before accepting any position or work within the federal public service
  • failure to do so will result in the revocation of the appointment
• if the individual accepts a position or work in the federal public service within 2 years, they must complete the Values and Ethics Foundations for Employees course offered by the Canada School of Public Service, and then have a discussion with their director
  • failure to do so will lead to the revocation of the appointment

File Number: 23-24-18