# Second interview
**URL:** https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896
**Category:** SECURITY CLEARANCE Q&A
**Created:** [February 14, 2018, 10:26am UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896 "2018-02-14T10:26:47Z")
**Posts on this page:** 11
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@khan007](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/khan007)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2018, 10:26am UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/1 "2018-02-14T10:26:47Z")
I had a Subject Interview 4 weeks ago and now investigator wants to meet with me again to address some more information. Is this usual?
---
### Author:  [@Mr\_gonzo1075](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/Mr_gonzo1075)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2018, 12:06pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/2 "2018-02-14T12:06:15Z")
To the answer to that question…yes because the investigator needs more information on a few things… especially financial or you having a communication of a person outside or ties to the country that we are adversaries with. I wouldn’t be worried they just want to clarify on things before it’s sent to Adjudication.
---
### Author:  [@EdFarmerIII](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/EdFarmerIII)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2018, 2:45pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/3 "2018-02-14T14:45:46Z")
Usual? No. Unusual? No. There is no answer to this. In my case, I was contacted after my interview but everything was resolved with a few phone calls and email. No second interview was required.
While it is possible that something new came up while the BI was finishing up after your interview, it is just as possible that the BI missed something that their reviewer wanted documented better.
It’s not a plus or a minus that you have been asked back.
---
### Author:  [@dave019](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/dave019)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2018, 4:16pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/4 "2018-02-14T16:16:29Z")
The investigator is likely going to confront you with something that was not known or disclosed during 1st interview. Evidently the material discovery is significant enough to warrant a 2nd in person meeting. Good luck.
---
### Author:  [@Smile](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/Smile)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2018, 6:39pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/5 "2018-02-14T18:39:31Z")
As long as you weren’t trying to hide something I believe you will be fine. I had a minor second meeting before because there was a small discrepancy in dates and the reviewer wanted to have all the ducks in the row before adjudication.
---
### Author:  [@dave019](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/dave019)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2018, 6:54pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/6 "2018-02-14T18:54:02Z")
Agree with @Smile, if you aren’t hiding anything no worries
---
### Author:  [@krazyk784](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/krazyk784)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2018, 7:59pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/7 "2018-02-14T19:59:55Z")
Its not uncommon. I was contacted again after my interview. The investigator wanted more information about the job site I worked at.
---
### Author:  [@amberbunny](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/amberbunny)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2018, 9:31pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/8 "2018-02-14T21:31:33Z")
Having 390 cleared people on our contract I do see this happen fairly frequently. Me included. The investigators boss realizes they needed to further scope something or clarify a point made. Be honest, up front and make absolutely certain the investigator is capturing the situation as you describe it. And of course be honest. It is more of an administrative follow up, not an indicator of anything good or bad as Ed said.
---
### Author:  [@sbusquirrel](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/sbusquirrel)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2018, 11:47pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/9 "2018-02-14T23:47:50Z")
Could be the investigator turned their report in and the supervisor or whoever is reviewing it said to clear something up.
Could be that they did some additional checks after the first interview and something did not line up 100% with the information you provided.
Could even be that the case already made it to the adjudicator and that person wants a little more detail.
As the others have noted, a follow-up interview doesnt happen in every case but it is by no means rare.
---
### Author:  [@khan007](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/khan007)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2018, 10:31am UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/10 "2018-02-15T10:31:00Z")
Thank you all for the information.
---
### Author:  [@pawngobbler](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/pawngobbler)
#### Post date: [January 14, 2019, 3:16pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/second-interview/2896/11 "2019-01-14T15:16:27Z")
@khan007 what was the outcome of your second interview?