Hello folks… I just had an subject interview for my secret clearance… interim was granted. The investigator asked me about bad conduct and disciplinary actions at places I have never worked or heard of before. No explanation given me as to how that info got into my record. Anyone have any ideas?
Newbie investigator maybe? Mixed files? Possible conversation starters to get you talking about places you did work and do have issues? Possibly? Possible initial background checks found a similar named person with issues? You would be amazed how many people have the same first, middle, and last name, date and place of birth. Should be very easy to verify it isn’t you.
Amberbunny: Thank you so much for your input. The investigator was a bit new and seemed a little nervous. I am just spooked and hope any further questions of discrepancies are brought up to me. I have never had any disciplinary actions for anything in my life so it must be a records mix up…which is scary. She did give me a card and said she would contact me for any further clarifications…so fingers crossed. I leave my current job next week and start new one the week after so don’t want anything to screw it up.
FWIW, I’ll share that I ordered my background investigation via FOIA and was amazed at the errors captured from the interviews. It was enough to generate a SOR (hence the reason for the FOIA request). Thankfully, it was recently resolved. Apparently, there’s a process to express concerns on the quality of background investigations by submitting through the Quality Assessment Rating Tool (QART). If your Agency is not a registered user for this tool, you can contact your Agency liaison who will then assist you. I’m in the process of providing my feedback (and evidence of the errors) because I do not want this to come up a an issue for future background checks. Congrats on getting your clearance.
All NBIB investigations go through the QART. This is a tool used by adjudicators not the Subject. If your investigation was identified as not meeting standards by your adjudicator through the QART, the investigation would have been sent back to the investigation provider. The QART is a quality control tool not a retaliatory process.
Investigators report the information they find or sources provided to them.
Errors in your ROI from Sources would not be reported through that tool. The SOR process is used for contractors. This allows the Subject to address and prove any errors.
The last response by backgroundinvestigator is entirely correct. QART is used by agency adjudicators. If there are major discrepancies in the ROI that you feel should be correct you may submit an Amendment of Records request to the NBIB as noted in the below link:
I appreciate everyone’s response. Thank you!. It is helpful to know that there is a process to address potential errors or incorrect information. This is the first time I have been through this process and not familiar with how to make sure inaccurate information about me is not part of the final decision about granting me a secret clearance. I have been given an interim clearance only and start new job next week and concerned now that information gathered from here on out may include inaccuracies that I may not be aware of. One question I have is: Will I be asked about any further inconsistencies during the investigation? Will I have the ability to correct any misinformation before any decisions are made? I am assuming that I will have that opportunity but wanting some experienced assurance if possible.
Thank you all again for your responses.
The usual process for most investigation types is to give the Subject the opportunity to address any developed issues or concerns in a follow up Subject interview.