2025 Police Sergeant's Exam Results Update
November 19, 2025 - Posted by Ed Esposito
Author’s note: I put this information together for our students and past students (many of whom are now supervisors) to share some important and factual information regarding the 2025 Police Sergeant Exam results being issued. All of this information is from various NJ CSC documents and the recent past administrations of the police promotional exams by the NJ CSC (as of November 19, 2025). The data does not include make-up examinations, appeals to be inserted on a list or in circumstances where the same jurisdiction may have two lists (i.e. one for Police Sergeant and one for bilingual Police Sergeant).
Obviously, anything can happen. However, the Police Sergeant Exam results are “typically” issued around SIX to NINE months after the exam is administered AND after all of the appeals are resolved. It is still within this timeframe and under the circumstances discussed below, it is reasonable that the results are going to be issued near the ladder part of the “typical” timeframe or perhaps just outside that timeframe.
While preparing for the exam can be a very long and tense process, the reality is – waiting for the results to be issued is no different. For candidates waiting on results, it is very hard to ignore any information that is circulated. I am providing this information in the most comprehensive and detailed manner possible with facts that can be verified and logical inferences clearly stated. There are several components that need to be discussed as issuing results for a competitive examination for thousands of people is a complex undertaking. Please read all of this information and ensure that nothing is taken out of the context in which it is presented.
Determining the total number of candidates is an extremely important aspect of my analysis, so I had to start there. Remember, after each exam, candidates have the right to appeal the exam administration, then conduct a review of the exam and then appeal any of the content of their exam. So, logically, the more candidates there are for each exam, the more time CSC will need to complete all of these tasks.
4,763 police officers were candidates, and were scheduled to take the 2025 police sergeant’s promotional exam administered by the New Jersey Civil Service Commission (NJ CSC) on March 1, 2025. Compare that number to the 3,965 candidates who were on the 2022 eligible lists for the same titles three years ago. As far as the applicant pool for 2025 versus 2022, a total of 164 agencies were tested for the rank of Police Sergeant in 2025 as compared to 170 agencies who were tested in 2022. While we know at this point that the total number of agencies decreased slightly, we will not know how many names will be on the eligible lists until the results from the 2025 exam are released. Regardless, we can conclude that there were a large number of candidates in 2025, just like there were for the 2022 exam.
Unfortunately, the waiting period for the 2025 police sergeant exam results is more complicated than prior years given concerns were raised regarding potential issues with the administration of the exam. Regardless of if we want to hear it or not, usually, very little – if any – information is publicly available while an investigation is underway. Given that the NJ CSC takes many measures to ensure the integrity of the exam administration process and to ensure that exam content is not divulged, it is understandable that any specifics into the investigation regarding the exam administration would not be publicized no matter how many times people asked for information. While some have been critical of the CSC, as law enforcement officers we all know that sensitive details of an investigation are rarely released until after the investigation has been completed. In my humble opinion, I see no difference here under these circumstances and expect a level of confidentiality.
I also want to point out that even in a “normal” testing cycle, the NJ CSC does not just run the Scantron answer sheets through a machine and post the results. As explained above, there are several points where the candidates have the right to appeal and review the exam. In addition, the CSC’s Division of Test Development, Analytics and Administration (TDAA) staff oversee the administration of exams and are also responsible for conducting an analysis of an exam. I merely point this out to stress that the results in 2022, the last time there was a similar size applicant pool, were issued in separate batches: October 19, 2022 (3,165 eligible candidate scores released), November 16, 2022 (505 eligible candidate scores released) and November 23, 2022 (295 eligible candidate scores released). I offer my opinion that the 2025 exam was administered later than the 2022 exam and therefore it is logical to expect the 2025 results to be released later than the 2022 results on that fact alone. Add in time to review and decide examination administration appeals, and that there were over 700 more candidates scheduled for the 2025 exam as compared to the total number of candidates on the 2022 lists, it is also logical to conclude that the results will be released later than the 2022 results.
That being said, I offer some thoughts to ease the concerns for the candidates who are awaiting results. The CSC has many responsibilities, and it takes those responsibilities seriously. The CSC provides an opportunity for candidates to appeal the administration of the exam. Appeals regarding the administration of the exam can relate to a number of topics ranging from a noisy testing atmosphere, the monitor not providing the proper amount of time to take the exam to candidates cheating. The CSC’s administrative code regulates appeals and with respect to appealing the administration of the exam, N.J.A.C. 4A:4-6.4(c) states, “An examination candidate wishing to challenge the manner in which the examination was administered must file an appeal in writing at the examination site on the day of the examination.” (Emphasis added.)
Although the NJ CSC normally takes appeals regarding the administration of the at the exam site on the day of the exam, it does take every allegation of cheating seriously. This is especially important for a police promotional exam given there are law enforcement officers taking the exam and that they have agreed to a pledge regarding the exam. The NJ CSC can disqualify candidates from the exam and can disqualify a candidate for future exams too. So, when they receive an appeal with this type of allegation, they still take steps to review the information they receive even when it is submitted well after the day of the exam. While this ensures that the integrity of the exam is maintained, it does take a considerable amount of time.
With respect to the exam administration appeals that the CSC received, N.J.A.C. 4A:4-6.3 provides that the appellant shall have the burden of proof. Further, the standard that the appellant needs to achieve is normally a preponderance of evidence, meaning that it is more likely true than not true (i.e. more than 50% of the evidence supports their position). The CSC accepted and reviewed exam administration appeals filed outside the required timeframe regarding allegations of potential cheating during the exam administered at the Essex County College and the Camden County College. The CSC determined that it was “disadvantaged when such allegations [were] not timely and promptly reported.” (See CSC Docket Nos. 2025-1849, et al.) The record indicated that these appeals were filed approximately three weeks, and in one instance, approximately two months after the exam was administered. In denying the exam administration appeals, the CSC relied on a past Appellate Division decision where the court observed that “the obvious intent of this 'same-day' appeal process is to immediately identify, address and remedy any deficiencies in the manner in which the competitive examination is being administered." (See Ibid. quoting In the Matter of Kimberlee L. Abate, et al., Docket No. A-4760-01T3 (App. Div. August 18, 2003.) The CSC concluded, “any issue that the appellants had with the test administration, especially one as important as allegations of cheating, needed to be addressed with the test monitor, associate center supervisor, or center supervisor to see if that issue could be addressed at that time.” (See CSC Docket Nos. 2025-1849, et al. Emphasis added.)
Notwithstanding the untimely filing of the exam administration appeals, the CSC still took steps to determine if cheating occurred. First, the CSC determined that “[n]o candidate in any test center brought forth any allegations of cheating at the time of the examination administration.” (Ibid.) Second, “the [CSC] has re-reviewed the rooms monitors' and center supervisors' reports from all test centers.” (Ibid.) Third, the CSC disclosed that “[t]wo additional potential cheating issues arose at separate test centers that were uncovered and documented by room monitors on the test date, TDAA performed analyses of the alleged cheaters in both matters and did not find sufficient evidence to support claims of collusion or cheating.” (Ibid.) Finally, the CSC said, “[o]ther claims of cheating were presented to TDAA from two appointing authorities on March 4 and March 12, 2025, respectively, regarding the alleged cheating of two sets of three candidates who took the examination in Essex County. TDAA thoroughly analyzed the claims and found insufficient evidence to support claims of collusion or cheating. As all of these claims were not presented to the Commission in the form of an appeal from an individual, the Commission cannot make any substantive determination.” (Ibid.)
Therefore, it is logical to conclude that if the CSC is not provided with specifics, it is not in a position at this time to make a decision as an Administrative Agency. However, recall that I already mentioned that the CSC can disqualify candidates from the exam. The CSC was firm in its stance regarding cheating stating, “if further evidence is uncovered, any individual proven to have cheated or in possession of a cell phone, or otherwise violated Civil Service rules or policies, will be, at a minimum, disqualified from this examination and possibly for future examinations by the Commission.” (Ibid.)
Now…what is next? Based on all of this information, it is reasonable to infer that the CSC’s TDAA who has the ability to analyze the candidate’s responses to each of the exam questions and make determinations, has done or will do such an evaluation. For example, with all of this data, TDDA can verify how many candidates answered every question correctly. They can determine if there was a question that every candidate answered incorrectly. They can also find out if one testing center had higher scores than another or if a few candidates in the same room had the exact same answers correct and incorrect. In short, there are many ways that the TDDA can examine the data they have to properly investigate, which I have no doubt the CSC would do. This is likely one major aspect of the results taking longer to be issued, but such diligence is necessary even if the exact details of their methods are not disclosed outside the CSC. But to say that nothing is being done simply because you do not know the specifics is just a purely unreasonable position to take, especially in light of how much information the CSC has provided.
After the exam administration appeals, the CSC has to review and make determinations for the candidates that filed appeals on the content of the exam after completing a review of the exam. The time to review the exam and file these appeals was over several months ago. Again, and in fairness to the CSC, the time to properly accept, review and decide each appeal with a level of detail candidates expect and deserve takes time. Add to that, the more appeals that are filed, the more time and resources will be required.
For the 2025 Sergeant’s exam, approximately 100 examination appeals were filed. While exam results are not normally issued until these appeals are decided, the CSC is expected to make their decision for these appeals NEXT WEEK, on November 26, 2025! Although there is no set date when the results will be released, using past exam cycles as an indicator, it is likely to anticipate the results will be released in the near future. This could be as soon as the appeals are decided, or it could take several more weeks depending on if the lists need to be recalculated after the appeals are resolved.
On a final note, please do not forget all the detailed work that must occur to administer a competitive exam to such a large number of people while still ensuring that each candidate’s rights are maintained under the CSC statutes and rules. This is a monumental task, and misinformation only adds to the anticipation and worry that is already within each candidate as they await their results. Imagine if the CSC did not allow appeals or did not take appeals seriously…then candidates would have a much greater concern – and rightfully so. Fortunately, that is not the case and – to be clear – there is no credible information that the NJ CSC is doing anything other than what it has done in the past – allowing candidates the opportunity to appeal and then issue exam results after.
Obviously, anything can happen. However, the Police Sergeant Exam results are “typically” issued around SIX to NINE months after the exam is administered AND after all of the appeals are resolved. It is still within this timeframe and under the circumstances discussed below, it is reasonable that the results are going to be issued near the ladder part of the “typical” timeframe or perhaps just outside that timeframe.
While preparing for the exam can be a very long and tense process, the reality is – waiting for the results to be issued is no different. For candidates waiting on results, it is very hard to ignore any information that is circulated. I am providing this information in the most comprehensive and detailed manner possible with facts that can be verified and logical inferences clearly stated. There are several components that need to be discussed as issuing results for a competitive examination for thousands of people is a complex undertaking. Please read all of this information and ensure that nothing is taken out of the context in which it is presented.
Determining the total number of candidates is an extremely important aspect of my analysis, so I had to start there. Remember, after each exam, candidates have the right to appeal the exam administration, then conduct a review of the exam and then appeal any of the content of their exam. So, logically, the more candidates there are for each exam, the more time CSC will need to complete all of these tasks.
4,763 police officers were candidates, and were scheduled to take the 2025 police sergeant’s promotional exam administered by the New Jersey Civil Service Commission (NJ CSC) on March 1, 2025. Compare that number to the 3,965 candidates who were on the 2022 eligible lists for the same titles three years ago. As far as the applicant pool for 2025 versus 2022, a total of 164 agencies were tested for the rank of Police Sergeant in 2025 as compared to 170 agencies who were tested in 2022. While we know at this point that the total number of agencies decreased slightly, we will not know how many names will be on the eligible lists until the results from the 2025 exam are released. Regardless, we can conclude that there were a large number of candidates in 2025, just like there were for the 2022 exam.
Unfortunately, the waiting period for the 2025 police sergeant exam results is more complicated than prior years given concerns were raised regarding potential issues with the administration of the exam. Regardless of if we want to hear it or not, usually, very little – if any – information is publicly available while an investigation is underway. Given that the NJ CSC takes many measures to ensure the integrity of the exam administration process and to ensure that exam content is not divulged, it is understandable that any specifics into the investigation regarding the exam administration would not be publicized no matter how many times people asked for information. While some have been critical of the CSC, as law enforcement officers we all know that sensitive details of an investigation are rarely released until after the investigation has been completed. In my humble opinion, I see no difference here under these circumstances and expect a level of confidentiality.
I also want to point out that even in a “normal” testing cycle, the NJ CSC does not just run the Scantron answer sheets through a machine and post the results. As explained above, there are several points where the candidates have the right to appeal and review the exam. In addition, the CSC’s Division of Test Development, Analytics and Administration (TDAA) staff oversee the administration of exams and are also responsible for conducting an analysis of an exam. I merely point this out to stress that the results in 2022, the last time there was a similar size applicant pool, were issued in separate batches: October 19, 2022 (3,165 eligible candidate scores released), November 16, 2022 (505 eligible candidate scores released) and November 23, 2022 (295 eligible candidate scores released). I offer my opinion that the 2025 exam was administered later than the 2022 exam and therefore it is logical to expect the 2025 results to be released later than the 2022 results on that fact alone. Add in time to review and decide examination administration appeals, and that there were over 700 more candidates scheduled for the 2025 exam as compared to the total number of candidates on the 2022 lists, it is also logical to conclude that the results will be released later than the 2022 results.
That being said, I offer some thoughts to ease the concerns for the candidates who are awaiting results. The CSC has many responsibilities, and it takes those responsibilities seriously. The CSC provides an opportunity for candidates to appeal the administration of the exam. Appeals regarding the administration of the exam can relate to a number of topics ranging from a noisy testing atmosphere, the monitor not providing the proper amount of time to take the exam to candidates cheating. The CSC’s administrative code regulates appeals and with respect to appealing the administration of the exam, N.J.A.C. 4A:4-6.4(c) states, “An examination candidate wishing to challenge the manner in which the examination was administered must file an appeal in writing at the examination site on the day of the examination.” (Emphasis added.)
Although the NJ CSC normally takes appeals regarding the administration of the at the exam site on the day of the exam, it does take every allegation of cheating seriously. This is especially important for a police promotional exam given there are law enforcement officers taking the exam and that they have agreed to a pledge regarding the exam. The NJ CSC can disqualify candidates from the exam and can disqualify a candidate for future exams too. So, when they receive an appeal with this type of allegation, they still take steps to review the information they receive even when it is submitted well after the day of the exam. While this ensures that the integrity of the exam is maintained, it does take a considerable amount of time.
With respect to the exam administration appeals that the CSC received, N.J.A.C. 4A:4-6.3 provides that the appellant shall have the burden of proof. Further, the standard that the appellant needs to achieve is normally a preponderance of evidence, meaning that it is more likely true than not true (i.e. more than 50% of the evidence supports their position). The CSC accepted and reviewed exam administration appeals filed outside the required timeframe regarding allegations of potential cheating during the exam administered at the Essex County College and the Camden County College. The CSC determined that it was “disadvantaged when such allegations [were] not timely and promptly reported.” (See CSC Docket Nos. 2025-1849, et al.) The record indicated that these appeals were filed approximately three weeks, and in one instance, approximately two months after the exam was administered. In denying the exam administration appeals, the CSC relied on a past Appellate Division decision where the court observed that “the obvious intent of this 'same-day' appeal process is to immediately identify, address and remedy any deficiencies in the manner in which the competitive examination is being administered." (See Ibid. quoting In the Matter of Kimberlee L. Abate, et al., Docket No. A-4760-01T3 (App. Div. August 18, 2003.) The CSC concluded, “any issue that the appellants had with the test administration, especially one as important as allegations of cheating, needed to be addressed with the test monitor, associate center supervisor, or center supervisor to see if that issue could be addressed at that time.” (See CSC Docket Nos. 2025-1849, et al. Emphasis added.)
Notwithstanding the untimely filing of the exam administration appeals, the CSC still took steps to determine if cheating occurred. First, the CSC determined that “[n]o candidate in any test center brought forth any allegations of cheating at the time of the examination administration.” (Ibid.) Second, “the [CSC] has re-reviewed the rooms monitors' and center supervisors' reports from all test centers.” (Ibid.) Third, the CSC disclosed that “[t]wo additional potential cheating issues arose at separate test centers that were uncovered and documented by room monitors on the test date, TDAA performed analyses of the alleged cheaters in both matters and did not find sufficient evidence to support claims of collusion or cheating.” (Ibid.) Finally, the CSC said, “[o]ther claims of cheating were presented to TDAA from two appointing authorities on March 4 and March 12, 2025, respectively, regarding the alleged cheating of two sets of three candidates who took the examination in Essex County. TDAA thoroughly analyzed the claims and found insufficient evidence to support claims of collusion or cheating. As all of these claims were not presented to the Commission in the form of an appeal from an individual, the Commission cannot make any substantive determination.” (Ibid.)
Therefore, it is logical to conclude that if the CSC is not provided with specifics, it is not in a position at this time to make a decision as an Administrative Agency. However, recall that I already mentioned that the CSC can disqualify candidates from the exam. The CSC was firm in its stance regarding cheating stating, “if further evidence is uncovered, any individual proven to have cheated or in possession of a cell phone, or otherwise violated Civil Service rules or policies, will be, at a minimum, disqualified from this examination and possibly for future examinations by the Commission.” (Ibid.)
Now…what is next? Based on all of this information, it is reasonable to infer that the CSC’s TDAA who has the ability to analyze the candidate’s responses to each of the exam questions and make determinations, has done or will do such an evaluation. For example, with all of this data, TDDA can verify how many candidates answered every question correctly. They can determine if there was a question that every candidate answered incorrectly. They can also find out if one testing center had higher scores than another or if a few candidates in the same room had the exact same answers correct and incorrect. In short, there are many ways that the TDDA can examine the data they have to properly investigate, which I have no doubt the CSC would do. This is likely one major aspect of the results taking longer to be issued, but such diligence is necessary even if the exact details of their methods are not disclosed outside the CSC. But to say that nothing is being done simply because you do not know the specifics is just a purely unreasonable position to take, especially in light of how much information the CSC has provided.
After the exam administration appeals, the CSC has to review and make determinations for the candidates that filed appeals on the content of the exam after completing a review of the exam. The time to review the exam and file these appeals was over several months ago. Again, and in fairness to the CSC, the time to properly accept, review and decide each appeal with a level of detail candidates expect and deserve takes time. Add to that, the more appeals that are filed, the more time and resources will be required.
For the 2025 Sergeant’s exam, approximately 100 examination appeals were filed. While exam results are not normally issued until these appeals are decided, the CSC is expected to make their decision for these appeals NEXT WEEK, on November 26, 2025! Although there is no set date when the results will be released, using past exam cycles as an indicator, it is likely to anticipate the results will be released in the near future. This could be as soon as the appeals are decided, or it could take several more weeks depending on if the lists need to be recalculated after the appeals are resolved.
On a final note, please do not forget all the detailed work that must occur to administer a competitive exam to such a large number of people while still ensuring that each candidate’s rights are maintained under the CSC statutes and rules. This is a monumental task, and misinformation only adds to the anticipation and worry that is already within each candidate as they await their results. Imagine if the CSC did not allow appeals or did not take appeals seriously…then candidates would have a much greater concern – and rightfully so. Fortunately, that is not the case and – to be clear – there is no credible information that the NJ CSC is doing anything other than what it has done in the past – allowing candidates the opportunity to appeal and then issue exam results after.