Washington, DC

U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Classification Appeal Decision
Under section 5112 of title 5, United States Code

---

Carlos A. Torrico
Acting Classification Appeals and FLSA Claims
Program Manager
Agency Compliance and Evaluation
Merit System Accountability and Compliance


11/08/2017

---

Date

Introduction

The appellant’s position is currently classified as Social Worker, GS-185-11, but she believes it should be classified at the GS-12 grade level.  The position is assigned to the Behavioral Health Department (BHD), Quentin N. Burdick Memorial Healthcare Facility (facility), Great Plains Area Indian Health Service, Indian Health Service (IHS), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), in Belcourt, North Dakota.  We have accepted and decided this appeal under section 5112 of title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.).

General issues

The appellant raises concerns about the agency’s classification review process.  She alludes to classification inconsistency by submitting portions of advertised GS-12 Social Worker positions in another IHS facility stating in her appeal that she performs more GS-12 duties than the advertised positions.  The appellant also submitted a copy of a GS-12 Social Worker position description (PD).  By law, we must classify positions solely by comparing their duties and responsibilities to OPM position classification standards (PCS) and guidelines (5 U.S.C. 5106, 5107, and 5112).  Since comparison to the PCSs and guidelines is the exclusive method for classifying positions, we cannot compare the appellant’s duties to the limited information included in vacancy announcements as the basis for deciding this appeal.  In adjudicating this appeal, our responsibility is to make our own independent decision on the proper classification of her position.  Because our decision sets aside all previous agency decisions, the agency’s classification review process and the appellant’s concerns regarding her work environment are not germane to this decision.

Like OPM, the appellant’s agency must classify positions based on comparison to OPM standards and guidelines.  The agency also has primary responsibility for ensuring that its positions are classified consistently with OPM appeal decisions.  If the appellant considers her position so similar to higher graded positions at other IHS facilities that they all warrant the same classification, she may pursue the matter by writing to her headquarters agency human resources office.  In doing so, she should specify the precise organizational location, classification, duties, and responsibilities of the positions in question.  If the positions are found to be basically the same as hers, the agency must correct their classification to be consistent with this appeal decision.  Otherwise, the agency should explain to her the differences between her position and the others.

Both the appellant and her supervisor believe the appellant’s current PD of record (number BE9809) is not completely accurate because since April 2017 she has not performed inpatient services including recommending and providing inpatient care.  At that time those duties were permanently assigned to a new Social Worker at the facility.  A PD is the official record of the major duties and responsibilities assigned to a position by an official with the authority to assign work.  A position is the duties and responsibilities that make up the work performed by the employee.  Classification appeal regulations permit OPM to investigate or audit a position and decide an appeal on the basis of the actual duties and responsibilities currently assigned by management and performed by the employee.  An OPM appeal decision classifies a real operating position, and not simply a PD.  Because this decision is based on the work currently assigned by management and performed by the appellant, based on our review we concur that the appellant no longer performs inpatient duties.  Therefore, the appellant’s PD does not meet the standard of adequacy addressed on pages 10-11 of the Introduction, and the agency must revise the PD to reflect our findings.

The appellant mentions the amount of work she performs by stating the grade of her position does not reflect her work with clients.  However, volume of work cannot be considered in determining the grade of a position (see The Classifier’s Handbook,  chapter 5).

Position information

The IHS mission is to provide Federal health services to American Indians and Alaska Natives.  The appellant’s facility is located on the Turtle Mountain Indian Reservation.  Health care is provided mostly to American Indians on the reservation and its surrounding area.  The appellant provides professional social work services and referrals are made by other health providers, parents/guardians, schools, and individuals.

The appellant provides intensive outpatient professional social work services in a unit of the BHD.  She uses a wide range of social work skills in dealing with serious and complicated cases involving psycho-social and environmental problems where significant interventions are needed.  She conducts individual, family, and group therapy in highly difficult situations focusing on problems which may be high risk in nature, e.g., suicidal behavior, multi-problem families, and dual diagnosis.  New client assignments are distributed to her and other staff members during weekly staff meetings, as needed.  The appellant observes each new client during a clinical interview to detect the need for further testing, e.g., a Primary Care provider is consulted if she observes signs of severe depression.  She also identifies, evaluates, and interprets the patient’s history to include social, environmental, housing, and occupational factors which affect the client’s health and treatment needs.  The appellant develops a treatment plan and provides therapy and counselling to each client.  She also provides assistance with referrals to facility, tribal, and community resources.  The appellant works under the general supervision of the Human Services Program Director/Clinical Psychologist at the installation.  She keeps the supervisor informed on progress of work, and is available for consultation on substantive problems.  The appellant independently handles most of her caseload.

The appellant is a member of the Smoking Cessation Task Force.  She meets on a monthly basis with the tribal board members, which includes representatives from such tribal programs as drug and alcohol, police, and safety/sanitation.  They develop smoke-free policies for presentation to the tribal council.  If a policy is approved, it becomes law and is applicable throughout the reservation.

Twice a year the appellant, along with seven other facility staff members, participates in providing Nurturing Parenting Training.  The training takes place once a week for sixteen weeks and the state Child Abuse Prevention Program provides funding.  Approximately 10 to 20 families are referred by the state child welfare program to receive the training.  During each session, the appellant presents a new nurturing parenting skill and the other staff members meet with the children.

In reaching our classification decision, we have carefully reviewed all information provided by the appellant and her agency including her official PD which, although not completely accurate, we have incorporated by reference into this decision.  In addition, to help decide the appeal we conducted separate telephone interviews with the appellant and her supervisor.

Series, title, and standard determination

The agency classified the appellant’s position in the Social Work Series, GS-185, titling it Social Worker, and the appellant does not disagree.  We concur with the agency’s title and series determination.  Positions in the GS-185 series are evaluated by reference to the grading criteria in the Social Work position classification standard (PCS).  Our evaluation of the grade level of the appellant’s position follows.

Grade determination

The GS-185 standard uses two basic elements to define assignment characteristics, assignment content, and supervisory control.  Two basic variables that affect the grade levels of positions are (1) the character of the caseload and (2) the freedom of practice characteristic of performance.  The first refers to the difficulty of problems present in the assignment and the degree of professional skill and judgment required by the social work decisions and the services they involve.  The second reflects the recognition of the social worker’s competence through decreased supervisory control that allows independent performance of work.  These variables are considered in concert when making grade level determinations.

At the GS-11 level, social work assignments involve intensive social work services requiring the exercise of mature professional judgment and the flexible use of a wide range of social work skills.  This level represents performance of services in serious and complicated cases with demonstrated effectiveness based on sufficient training and experience to require a minimum of supervisory control and guidance, and permit independent exercise of authoritative judgment.  GS-11 social workers carry full professional responsibility and use highly developed professional skills for cases presenting a wide range of psycho-social and environmental problems with no limitations as to the difficulty of services that would be performed.  Illustrative of such difficult cases are situations involving sociopathic personalities and family groups who react to their circumstances with impulsive behavior that may be self-destructive or depredatory.  At this level, social workers make independent professional decisions and recommendations for agency actions that can have serious impact on the life of the person served, e.g., separating members of families, approving adoptive parents and placement of children, placing delinquents in protective custody, and recommending placement of patients in nursing homes.

GS-11 social workers actively participate in program planning and in the development and maintenance of public understanding and sound working relationships with local agencies and community resources.  At this level, social workers evaluate and advise medical staff of social factors relating to illness; have responsibility for social work aspects of integrated treatment programs; and furnish continuing social work services to patients and their families while they are learning to live with illness or disability of a family member.  Also included at this level are assignments involving responsibility for providing continuing social work services at field locations without a supervisor available for consultation.  Such assignments typically involve travel in an assigned territory and/or require extensive coordination of services with a wide range of residents of various communities such as local lawyers, physicians, and public officials, and with local social agencies.

At the GS-11 level, social workers independently give interpretations of case histories to other professionals or persons involved in the case and make recommendations that can be relied on for soundness of judgment and maturity of insight on problem cases.  The supervisor is kept informed of the progress of the work and is available for consultation on substantive problems.  GS-11 social workers are accountable for identifying problems that should be brought to the attention of the supervisor, and for taking the initiative in determining when the supervisor should be consulted.  However, a lack of immediate or direct supervision does not result in delegation of responsibility for the effect or results of difficult decisions and services, or for program responsibility.

At the GS-12 grade level, social worker positions are of two general types: (1) supervisory positions that include full technical and administrative responsibility for the accomplishment of the work of a unit of three or more subordinate professional workers when the base level of the unit fully meets the GS-11 grade level as defined in the GS-185 PCS, and (2) positions which are classified at this level in recognition of program responsibilities which are significant enough to justify the GS-12 grade with or without the presence of professional subordinates.

Illustrative of positions of the second type are those of social workers in charge of the social work program at a separate installation or organizational component where they are responsible for development and maintenance of professional standards of service, initiating and effecting changes in methods that will promote efficient practice, and coordination of social work services with other programs of service to the same group of clients.  They typically represent the social work program at conferences and in contacts with other agencies and the public.  Work is subject to regulation and procedural direction from the program directors in the central office of the agency and to the local management control of the directors of the institution, such as a clinic or correctional institution.  Another illustration of the second type describes social workers responsible for serving various beneficiary groups scattered over a large geographical area when assignments include direct social work practice in cases with complex problems, developing and coordinating procedures for the use of community services by related and satellite staffs, etc.

Basic responsibility for a program of social work services does not justify classification at grade GS-12 unless there is substantial accountability for program effectiveness, modification of service patterns, and promoting acceptance of the social work function.  As distinguished from positions at grade GS-11 which are responsible for providing continuing social work services at a field location, positions classified at grade GS-12 on the basis of program responsibilities characteristically combine program development and evaluation with service functions.

The appellant’s position meets the GS-11 level.  Like this level, her position operates with wide latitude and independent professional judgment in providing social work services to clients with a broad range of psycho-social and environmental problems.  Similar to GS-11 social workers, she administers all social work aspects of integrated treatment for outpatient clients associated with the BHD at the facility.  These clients suffer from mental illnesses such as schizophrenia, anxiety, depression, and phobias.  The appellant conducts needs assessments on her clients to include the need for further testing and provides therapy and counseling.  She develops comprehensive treatment plans, establishes resource identification and referrals, and identifies and makes recommendations for additional social support needs.  The appellant educates clients on using coping skills to deal with stressful situations.  Like the GS-11 level, she seeks supervisory guidance infrequently, and then only on substantive problems or decisions of a precedent-setting nature.

The appellant’s position does not meet the GS-12 level.  Unlike this level, her duties do not include supervisory or program responsibilities characteristic of that level.  The appellant states in her appeal that she has program responsibility because her supervisor and other staff members are located in a different building.  However, our fact-finding disclosed the appellant’s supervisor exercises program responsibility.  While the appellant as a GS-11 provides continuing social work services, her supervisor is accountable for the human services program (HSP) at the facility, including responsibility for planning, organizing, directing, controlling, and evaluating the program.  In contrast to the GS-12 level, the appellant’s decision-making authority and program responsibility are limited to her assigned clients and do not extend outward to the overall HSP.  Her supervisor is the decision-making authority for developing and maintaining professional standards of service and effecting changes that will promote efficient practice and coordination of social work services with other programs furnishing client services. 

Decision

The appellant’s position is properly classified as Social Worker, GS-185-11.

Back to Top