Fed-Investigator - NoFault did not admit to anything. You misinterpreted what is was referring to when he mentioned “checking boxes”. Example - asking a U.S. citizen if they plan on renewing their U.S. passport when the passport expires in 2028? Seriously? How does one know what they will be doing 9 years in the future? Asking the Subject’s “maturity” at the time of the incident when they are in their 50’s? The “required” issue resolution questions should be to tailored to the “individual” and their situation. Although we ask more questions in addition to the issue resolution (used as a guide), we do deviate away from it as we must ask additional questions; that’s what Investigator’s do. But the examples above "are’ in fact “checking the boxes” and make no sense when we have to ask them when they don’t apply. I was reopened a while back because I didn’t provide a disclaimer for the Subject’s child that was 2 years old, if the 2 year old is affiliated with any foreign governments. Really?? No one should act as if they are at the top of the ivory tower, no reason for pompous responses or insults. We all do the same job and are on the same team; whether you like it or not.
It’s not whining, it’s venting. There is a difference.
Actually, DSCA will not pay the Contracting companies if they breach the contract obligations, which is what I was told. There are articles written (recently) on these very concerns; articles written by lawyers. I place the blame both on those at the DCSA and the companies that are making these decisions; placing FIs in danger. DCSA has to be the one to make the decision that they will not penalize the companies monetarily for placing cases which require in person interviews into pending status. The companies should be fighting for their FIs, going to bat for them, but they don’t and are too concerned with profit.
It’s simple, for cases where we have to conduct in person Subject interviews for T4, T5 with NO C/D level issues, we could perform Source interviews and record checks by fax/telephone, putting ONLY the ESI on hold. For cases with C/D level issues, those cases could be placed into pending status. COVID-19 could be under control in a couple of weeks to a month, maybe even a little more. But there has to be better leadership on both sides of the spectrum.
This is why I always said, Contractors should contract “directly” for DCSA, create a department for Contracting Officers at the federal level who handle Contractors, get rid of the middle man companies that costs the fed gov millions (which may even equal to billions in contracts). Place all Contractors as 1099 for the gov, pay decent fees and we will be good to go.
No one should be meeting in person at this time. Those cases which require in person interviews should be on hold for a bit, until this thing cools down. On one hand you the President and the CDC saying to keep at least “6-feet” away from people and then we are told by our companies, you still have to have in person interviews. Which is it? No one should be put in these position “silver” and “gold” badges alike.
Pompous responses or insults? Lol
Although I’ve heard over and over again how lazy and worthless feds are, I’m not in here bashing contractors.
If you can’t see a difference in producing a quality investigation and checking boxes, then I don’t know what to tell you. It is not a hard concept.
Maybe you weren’t on the telecom? It did happen. Furloughs for Feds and lay offs for contractors unless FSO are staying at work or can submit remotely. Depending on how long this COVID19 situation lasts. The Feds that are getting set up on VTC are having issues. Hopefully the Contract Companies can get VTC working faster. If this lasts, a bunch of cases will be submitted when it’s over and there will be a backlog. The Contractor Calvary will once again come in and save the day!
Exactly the Contractor Cavalry saves the day again cleaning up fed messes.
I guess you failed to read my comment about “checking boxes”, I provided examples.
We are considered “essential” operations under the DoD, which is understandable.
Nothing we can do about it, I guess if we or our family gets sick, we get sick? Our companies have no other choice due to contract obligations. But, ultimately, DSCA has to compromise: T4/T5 and/or C/D level issues put on hold. Although we are considered essential, they can still implement safety measures.
Cases have been unbelievably backlog for the past 20 years that I know of so not sure why they can’t stop work for a couple weeks.
Can anyone tell me if Contracting companies get more money or higher incentives for conducting in-person interview vs. over the phone?
The bottom line is that DCSA needs to take the right steps. As a workforce, we are prime potential spreaders of the virus AND prime teleworkers. We already know how to manage ourselves; there’s no learning curve for working remotely. We’re flexible. We can adapt and adapt back again when things are under control. We go door to door, office to office, eat lunch on the run, gas up all over town, and we know where all the best public restrooms are. We don’t just see the same office mates everyday. We meet different people each day. Many of us love this on-the-go aspect of the job. I do. But when we’re hearing that the next couple of weeks are vital in slowing down the spread to avoid crushing the healthcare system (which impacts more than just COVID19 hospitalizations), it seems utterly irresponsible for a government agency not to respond with a high enough level of precaution. Write in expiration dates to temporary remote/phone protocols. Set aside items that simply cannot be done remotely. But it needs to come from DCSA. It’s in their hands.
Yup. I’m literally embarrassed to call people and ask if they are willing to meet in person. It’s a bad & unprofessional look when everyone else in the world is asking you to stay home and a government representative is asking you to do otherwise.
These companies need to be held accountable for this, they’re causing more harm than good to our nation in mandating fieldwork right now.
If I were still in this field I’d outright refuse. I’d rather not get paid and draw on savings.
According to my CACI manager (verbal only), out West, since we are on a “stay home, work at home” directive, no further in-person attempts will be made. Seems like it is still all about cranking out the reports (doesn’t matter if the ESI was done and the info is all messed up), keep contacting sources and getting records and transmitting. Rather than trying to get a quality investigation just do all of the steps. Writing off will require a lot more verbiage (not all provided). We’ll see if any new work comes down the pipeline???
I agree 100%. I feel silly even asking them.
i spoke with several coworkers who are refusing to go out as well. They said they have families and small children and not putting them in danger. I don;t blame them.
There can’t be much (if any?) work coming into the pipeline? Is it even possible for employees/applicants to fill out their SF85 or SF86 remotely?
All applications can be submitted electronically from anywhere. The only issue is getting fingerprints submitted which requires visiting an enrollment center.
True. I just submitted my SF85P electronically last week and went into the enrollment center the following day for fingerprinting and picture. Yesterday, I received a notice that my credit was pulled via Credit Karma and it was the hiring agency.
Received email stating that we are “essential personnel so we need to continue to make in person attempts” even for the people in State Government issued stay at home orders.