@PseudoFed
You made a good point about how robotic the companies make these Investigators with job aids and a “check off the box” type investigation. It definitely pigeons holes the average Investigator into this industry and can make him/her successful as long as that person is willing to meet performance metrics and use the job aids.
There’s so much more to this investigative process than anyone really realizes. We should be reading body language and asking questions a different way if we feel people are holding back or perhaps not being truthful. But what are Investigators told…just to plow through that interview with your head down while ensuring that you covered everything on that job aid instead of really LISTENING to your sources and subjects. There is no Annual training done on investigative techniques or listening techniques for this job any longer. They haven’t taught that in a decade or more since USIS quit having training at three year intervals for their experienced Investigators.
Now with DCSA doing everything by telephone, I believe the investigative product is worse and has been dumbed down.
Long gone are the days when the ole OPM/NBIB now DCSA would throw a temper tantrum and perhaps put you through an integrity investigation if an interview was conducted by telephone. Now they throw a fit if you interview someone in person. Heaven forbid you do that! 
We wouldn’t want to be professional and interview someone in person and perhaps pick up on some non verbal or perhaps get better issue resolution done since we are there in person. Nope…the old NBIB, now DCSA only employed the telephone policy because of their major backlog they had on their hands from 2015-2018. Now that the backlog has gone away to a manageable number (only because of the mandate for Investigators to do interviews by telephone ), you’d think they’d go back to in person interviews to improve the quality of the investigations.
I obviously understand we are operating in a post pandemic environment and telephone/video use has to be an option for those impacted by COVID but we should be back to in person interview after COVID is more controlled and I doubt that happens now that the horse is out of the barn. I believe telephone interviews and video conference interviews are here to stay. Although note to DCSA: not all agencies think this is a good idea that are doing federal background investigations. They still value the in person interview and the uptick in quality you get by an in person interview.
So what am I getting at? this use of telephone/video conference will continue to also drive down pay because now you can really get anyone to do this job and sit behind a telephone and read from scripted questions. The people driving the bus on this…the folks at DCSA and ODNI are the ones that have turned this industry to what it is today. They are the ones that if they truly cared about quality, would ensure they find the best and brightest and most serious and dedicated investigators in this industry and train them and pay them commensurate with providing those types of quality investigations.
A fair and professional wage for an experienced Investigator with 7-10 years or more of experience should not be paid less than $40 to $45.00/hour. Why then are Investigator with that kind of experience still being paid between $21.00 to $27.00 per hour? I would argue those with 15+ years or more of experience should be paid between $50.00 to $60.00 per hour to conduct investigations.
If the federal government wants to get serious about quality then pay Investigator well for the quality investigations they deliver. If most Investigator only knew what these vendors make on a T5, T5R, T4, T3’s, etc. and then what the Investigator is paid for his paltry $200.00 Subject Interview as an IC and even less than that as an hourly Investigator, you’d be astounded and hopefully a little angry and upset. On most investigations (I am not saying all), these vendors are pocketing one thousand to two to three thousand dollars on T5’s and T4’s even after paying their scopers, reviewers, and Investigators. That’s a pretty good return on investment. So why can’t they pay the Investigator (the actual boots on the ground and revenue earners for the company) a professional wage and an extra ten to fifteen dollars per hour more? They’ll still do plenty well on their return on investment and they’ll be able to keep Investigators happy and loyal to the company. But it’s all about greed and wealth. Until that wage determination is set to a higher level (unsure who sets that) this whole post is a moot point.
