Here is a made-up example to show how a selection panel might grade the evidence in your self-assessment using the skills and abilities framework (JSAF).
Strong example (Grade B)
Skill and ability – dealing with information
- Assimilates and organises pertinent information quickly.
- Identifies with clarity relevant issues of fact and law for decision.
- Reaches clearly reasoned, logical and concise decisions that weigh up relevant considerations.
- Demonstrates sound judgement and an appropriate level of decisiveness.
“I received a case for a prosecution decision, of a young autistic woman accused of assault. The police had also done welfare checks and on two occasions she had kicked an officer. I carefully considered the paperwork, including the complaints, medical notes, mental health reports and relevant guidance. I organised and weighed up information from thousands of pages, sorting it by key issue. Importantly, in one mental health report, I found a reference to kicking being one of her stims for self-calming. I made a decision using the gravity matrix (a triage tool to consider out-of-court disposal of a case), recommending to the police that a caution would be the appropriate action. The police response was abrupt and irritated; they said I was completely wrong and that there should be a prosecution. I carefully reviewed my initial decision to check for errors but found nothing wrong in my reasoning. Nonetheless, I took time to further explain my decision. Later I received a call from a senior officer asking me to reconsider; I refused as I was confident with my decision. The police then wrote to me, copying in my line management, stating that they would only agree with my view if forced to at court. We proceeded to several court hearings but ultimately the police withdrew the case. Afterwards I reviewed my actions and made some changes to the way I explain my decisions, to increase clarity.”
How the panel assess applications
Here are example notes of how a selection panel might assess the evidence above. They show what makes a strong application.
| Sentences from the example | Panel analysis |
| “I received a case for a prosecution decision, of a young autistic woman accused of assault. The police had also done welfare checks and on two occasions she had kicked an officer.” | This sets out the background to the example, clearly and succinctly. To achieve the highest grade, the candidate could have clarified who the accusations of assault came from – was it only the police or was there another complainant? |
| “I carefully considered the paperwork, including the complaints, medical notes, mental health reports and relevant guidance. I organised and weighed up information from thousands of pages, sorting it by key issue. Importantly, in one mental health report, I found a reference to kicking being one of her stims for self-calming. PQ includes problem solving but the candidate was ultimately unable to solve the problem and work with the client. Again, it is unclear which part of PQ the candidate is trying to evidence in this final sentence.” | This sets out clearly what the candidate did, in line with the first two bullet points of Dealing With Information. It explains the assimilation and organisation process and highlights the candidate finding a key piece of evidence. The candidate gives helpful specifics such as the volume of information analysed, though they did not say how long they spent on the analysis or specify exactly what they weighed up. |
| “I made a decision using the gravity matrix (a triage tool to consider out-of-court disposal of a case), recommending to the police that a caution would be the appropriate action.” | This explains the candidate’s decision-making process, in line with the third bullet point of Dealing With Information. The candidate briefly explains what a gravity matrix is, which is helpful for lay panel members. |
| “The police response was abrupt and irritated; they said I was completely wrong and that there should be a prosecution. I carefully reviewed my initial decision to check for errors but found nothing wrong in my reasoning. Nonetheless, I took time to further explain my decision. Later I received a call from a senior officer asking me to reconsider; I refused as I was confident with my decision. The police then wrote to me, copying in my line management, stating that they would only agree with my view if forced to at court. We proceeded to several court hearings but ultimately the police withdrew the case.” | This section covers the third and fourth bullet points of Dealing With Information, specifically decision-making and judgement. It explains the candidate’s actions clearly. It shows the candidate was decisive, since after review, they stood by their decision. It shows sound judgement as the police withdrew the case. It also shows that this situation was challenging and complex (which is important to get the higher grades of A and B), as the candidate’s decision was questioned and later escalated to their line management. |
| “Afterwards I reviewed my actions and made some changes to the way I explain my decisions, to increase clarity.” | This shows that the candidate reflected on, and learned from, their actions. Whilst not strictly part of Dealing With Information, this indicates learning and improvement, so is a positive way to end an example. |
In summary:
- This example is clearly relevant to Dealing With Information.
- It clearly sets out what the candidate did and how they did it.
- The example shows challenge and complexity, which is needed to achieve a B (strong) or A (outstanding) grade.
- This example would likely be graded as B (strong evidence) by the panel. There were some omissions, highlighted in the comments above, which explain why it doesn’t meet the A (outstanding) level of evidence.
The example above is just to help you understand how a panel would find (or fail to find) evidence. Copying them and changing a few words to make it personal to you will not guarantee a high grade. It is much better to create your own examples from scratch, using these tips.
More help with an example of a weak self-assessment.