Over on the main ClearanceJobs.com site our editor Lindy Kyzer presented a few ideas of how she would improve the security clearance process. She also posed the question to our readers as to what some improvements they thought could be made. If you have any ideas or relevant comments, go ahead post them here. You know what they say, two (or more) brains are better than one, so let’s brainstorm!
1 Like
Create a secure public portal so applicants can track the status of their BI/Adjudication without having to call a CSO or investigator every 5 days. Simple status updates should not be classified.
9 Likes
Hold recruiters and security managers accountable. They need training on how the SF85/86 are supposed to be completed. I cannot tell you how many times I get a case with issues and major discrepancies because the recruiter did the case papers for the recruit or the security manager didn’t covey to the applicant on how to complete it. This would speed up the process immensely and some of these cases wouldn’t even make it to the field if they were properly completed. I have wasted so much time because of ignorance or plain laziness.
7 Likes
You make a good point, DCSA/OPM have a metric that holds agencies to have less than a 5% rejection rate for eAPPs submitted. The DoD does not publish what their rate is, but I would guess it is close if not over the 5%. I am aware of some non- DoD agencies who have a less than 1% rejection rate because thye focus on quality versus rushing to get them submitted.
Start a new agency where a they do is security processing No more agencies doing their own.
Decrease the coverage amount needed for jobs worked less than a year and part time college jobs. That coverage seriously slows down the process and college jobs are rarely indicative of anything.
1 Like
Your suggestions sounds logical but will never happen. Too many of the “special” agencies think they are special and will never cede control because they are rightly or wrongly worried about the data of their people being comprimised. OPM got hacked but the special guys think they will never get hacked.
1 Like
Yes! While we’re at it, coverage of “current RESI regardless of length” is absurd when I’ve had people who have only lived there a couple days.
3 Likes
Where do I begin?
First, no more “unadjudicated information” or loss of jurisdiction. This is entirely pointless. The whole concept is that you have a clearance, but you can’t use it. This makes no sense. If the government determines that a individual no longer needs a clearance, then it should be revoked. Instead, this leaves a clearance in limbo where the system shows you have a clearance, but it can’t be used. If someone has a clearance then it should be able to be used, no if, ands, or buts.
Second, employment that should be required to be listed on the SF-86 should not be required for less than 6 months to a year. There is already a time limit for residency such as not having to report a residence that is less than 90 days and did not serve as your mailing address. Many candidates have employment that is less than 6 months because they work summer jobs, find temporary employment, or they are self-employed. The only time this would need to be reported is if the candidate was fired from that job.
Third, guideline E needs to have boundaries. The government will put ANYTHING under guideline E. Case and point, some of the DOHA cases that result in the denial being reversed due to the judge stating that the government had no evidence. Guideline E should be strictly for dishonest conduct during the clearance process and investigation, not because you were “mean” or “rude” to someone.
Forth, cut down the number of polygraphs. The only applicants that should be polygraphed is when there is contradicting information in the background investigation. For example, say an applicant marks “No” to all drug questions on the SF-86. During the investigation, everyone who was interviewed stated they saw the applicant use drugs daily for the entire time they have known them. This is what a polygraph should be used for, not applicants who have no security issues. Some of these applicants are polyed 3 to 4 times and the polygraph step takes months to complete, adding to more processing times and delays.
From what i heard they’re currently working on upgrading the current process.
totaly agree about the polygraphs. They are really quite scientifically pointless for everyone and a time consuming financial burden on all agencies. They should be abolished for all federal employment. I might have some respect for the new administration if DOGE/Musk got rid of them across the board.
5 Likes
Polygraphs shouldn’t be allowed. Period. They are not reliable. This is why they are not admissible in a court of law. From what I have read here, they seem to be used to try to bully people in to reporting things that maybe they didn’t report, and this is done without any suggestion that the person truly didn’t report something. It is just a tactic used to try to get people to admit things under the assumption that people probably all have something to hide. I will never apply for a position with the government that requires a poly even though I have nothing to hide. I refuse to be mistreated by a possible unscrupulous polygraph examiner. I am not saying all examiners are unscrupulous or misuse their position, but it seems many do, or else it is being sanctioned by leadership. Either way, I refuse to participate. I understand three letter agencies do require polygraphs, and if one wants to work for a three letter there is no option. For the DoD though there are many positions at TS SCI even that do not require a poly.
4 Likes
Agreed on that, many people are just naturally anxious when having to answer questions about their personal lives. I know of one case where a Farsi linguist who had TS/SCI w poly in the AF got out and then applied for a civilian position and couldn’t get past the poly twice and job offer was withdrawn. The applicant was totally honest but had PTSD and couldn’t remain calm during the poly.
4 Likes
The security clearance process could be enhanced and streamlined at zero cost (indeed with a lowering of costs) by heeding the advice of the National Research Council and scrapping the polygraph. Make-believe science yields make-believe security.
I think that nobody should be polygraphed for any purpose. Polygraphy is a thoroughly discredited pseudoscience, and it is easily defeated through the use of simple and effective countermeasures that anyone can learn and that polygraph operators cannot detect.
1 Like
I 100% agree on the polygraphs. I also refuse to apply for or consider a position that requires a poly because I am not going to go through that process and be bullied when I have done nothing wrong. I have more self respect than that. The whole poly process is ridiculous!
2 Likes
After holding a top secret clearance for 18 years, I was subjected to a polygraph because some government guy was concerned that about 10 years prior, my family hosted an exchange student from Taiwan. My clearance was not impacted but it caused a lot of grief while that process was ongoing.
1 Like
I lost a job once at Edwards AFB because of the OPM hack. It stopped all special access requests and eventually it lead to my losing of an F35 flight test job because the company and program couldn’t wait on me forever. I should sue the government over that one.
Hi,
I agree and fortunately, my company did a thorough review and caught a couple of issues. I can only but assume you are on the receiving end of clearance requests. I wish you all the best but as others have stated, the cloak of secrecy that you all work in is mind numbing. As requestors, we have lives on hold and waiting for months with no insight is so frustrating. All the best, Scott
I totally agree. In this day and age, there is zero reason why this shouldn’t be the norm. Simply showing the steps involved and progress on completing those steps should be so easy. And the other thing that is frustrating is when you read articles of intentional disclosures and you see the background of the perpetrator, it really makes you question the process to begin with. I had a clearance for 35 years (mostly top secret) that expired over 2 years ago (Thanks Honeywell!). And for some stupid reason, 2 years matters more than being born in a foreign country with ties to our enemies.