I have heard a few people in management and several posters on this blog opine that continuous evaluation (CE) will actually result in more work for the field. From what I know about it, I just don’t see this happening.
Let’s take a sample of 200 people who are up for TS renewal after 5-6 years of successfully holding a TS clearance. They fill out their SF-86 and 100 of them list flag level issues. Ok, they aren’t eligible for CE and they get an ESI, employment sources get interviewed, law checks get done, no change to the workload for those 100 people.
The other 100 people fill out their SF-86’s, list no flag level issues, and they are placed in CE. That results in the loss of 100 ESI’s to the field, 200 (at a minimum) employment sources, and some level of law checks that would have been conducted in the field. From my experience working with cleared people, a very small percentage experience flag level issues after they have been cleared. But for the sake of argument, let’s say that 25% of these people failed to list flag issues on their SF-86 and CE discovers 100% of these omissions. And let’s say that another 25% experience a flag level issue within the next 5-6 years that CE discovers. So we have 50 of these 100 people that need some sort of follow up under CE. First of all, do we even know what the follow up will be? Will it be a TESI assigned to the field? Or will their command/organization do some sort of investigation that is then sent to the CAF? If I remember correctly, prior to CE when a cleared person got in trouble, it did not generate any type of work for FI’s in the field, it was investigated by the owning organization. Do we have any reason to believe that has changed?
But for the sake of argument, let’s say that the process for these discovered flag issues will be for an FI to do a TESI on these 50 people. Some of the flags will require general source interviews. Let’s say 100% of the issues in this scenario require two sources, so now we need 100 source interviews.
The bottom line is we now have 50 TESI’s and 100 source interviews (and likely some law and court checks) to be worked in the field. Without CE, we would have had 100 ESI’s and about 200 source interviews (and who knows how many field conducted law checks). How is this growing the workload??? Note also that with the current guidelines, a good portion of the 50 TESI’s would likely be done over the phone by FI’s in another geographic area.
If I’m missing something, someone please clue me in.