Anyone know what’s behind the reasoning for why DCSA is mandating contractors to introduce themselves as a Contract Investigator vs. a Special Investigator after 09/30/22?
Seems like a way to make the contractors job more difficult when dealing with sources and record providers by removing the title of Special Investigator from their contractor workforce which competes and conducts 70% of the national workload work anyways. The general public are already leery of us to begin with and now you hamstring us even more. Contract Investigator vs. Special Investigator = less clout and authority in my opinion. Just another brain dead idea by the folks at OPMNBIBDCSA.
This is not new. The name change is really not an issue. The credentials say “contract investigator”, and people have known for as long as I have been an investigator for the Office of Personnel Management, a special investigator retained by OPM, NBIB, or DCSA, that the majority of the investigators are contractors. I, personally, never experienced any issues getting anyone to cooperate during an investigation regardless of how I identified myself.
You are correct that most people will cooperate with us when we identify ourselves as Contract Investigators. But not all people will cooperate with us based upon us identifying ourselves as contractors. I’ve had several individuals and record providers over the last several years that wouldn’t return calls when I’ve identified myself as a contract investigator with other agencies I do contract work for but when I’ve identified myself as a Special Investigator “retained” by the (such and such agency), I get a much more quicker and professional response from the general public.
We didn’t know about it until we read the new “handbook”.
It is a full 180 from when we were not allowed to identify ourselves as contractors before 2005.
Dont forget the reading verbatim of the Privacy Act nonsense.
Can you tell that DCSAsenior leadership are made up of lawyers instead of security/intelligence professionals?
And the cover sheet on paperwork supposedly even when at your residence. I l live alone but you never know there could a ghost with prying eyes hold up in my house!
This profession is becoming more and more of a joke as the years go by … shame.
DCSA has way too much time on their hands. The bureaucrats making these decisions have never worked a case in their entire lives. The policies they implement are not practicable and are onerous, time consuming, and will do nothing to protect PII and/or sensitive information.
I’ve worked for 2/3 of the big three in the past six months and both of them still used it.
The distinction of Civilian and Contactor is clear no matter what job you do in the federal government. For example, CTR CAC = Green CIV CAC = White. You get an access badge for your worksite, it will clearly mark you as “CONTRACTOR”. E-mail address are the same. “first.last.CIV@” and “first.last.CTR@”.
Good info thanks for sharing.
Why is the cover sheet mostly black? Guess we don’t care about toner costs now that we’ll breeze through ESIs with the removal of so many questions.
I thought thats why we use envelopes. Once my case materials are placed in a secure envelope i will sit the coversheet on top of the envelope…dumb. All you need the coversheet for is your yearly check ride.! Make sure you have it that day.
CUI coversheet is supposed to be purplish - we were issued the “no heavy background color” coversheet instead.
This CUI implementation is crazy. Different offices, doing different things, no one has a clue.
This circus grows tiresome.
It is purplish, but we don’t have color printers. Also making those color coded ESI guides super helpful.
that is why our CUI sheets are white instead of the “blacked out” sheet.
Best part is, this is only Phase One!!
Can’t wait for the sequel!!
Law agencies are already complaining about the CUI cover-sheet using up all their printer ink.