I had a lengthy discussion with my investigator (interview) which I’m surprised happened so quickly after I submitted my application. I found it odd that my investigator told me specifically who they will contact of my references. My guess it’s so I can make sure I tell them to look out for a call but I wasn’t expecting that?
They ask a weird question too and that is if you know anyone who wouldn’t recommend you. I think we all have had people that love us, like us and absolutely hate us. For example I had a bad relationship with my ex spouse but I don’t think she would even be so foolish as to think that I wouldn’t be loyal to the US. As far as I know she wouldn’t deny that unless it was nefarious. It seems so subjective. Like if they interview and ask her and she says she would never recommend that fool for a clearance (I can’t read her mind). Was wondering if someone could weigh in?
We are literally given a script and asking if there is anyone who would not recommend you is on the script. Also, many times, when we call your references they think we are a scam, so if they are expecting a call and know it’s ok to talk to us it makes it so much easier to get the coverage.
Thanks for the reply. When I got interviewed she also did something else odd. The SF-86 says to fill out any education over the last 10 years so that’s what I did. I only included my grad school as that fell in the range. She said this was a mistake and I should have also put my undergrad degree although that ended 12 years ago. I followed instructions but am now confused. Is this some unspoken thing?
Question 12 deals with education. 12 (a) asks if you have attended any schools in the last 10 years. 12(b) asks if you received any degrees or diplomas over 10 years ago. So yes, the investigator should have asked about additional degrees/diplomas (including high school if you were over 18 at the time of graduation). It’s a common error to not list degrees/diplomas over 10 years ago.
I am always amazed by the number of people who do not read through the questionnaire carefully and follow all directions. I interview some very smart people who seriously suck at their security questions.
Have you attended any schools in the last 10 years? Yes or No
Have you received a degree or diploma more than 10 years ago? Yes or No
Pretty straight forward.
This IS grammatically correct. The other way to state that would be “Did you receive a degree or diploma more than 10 years ago?” which is incorrect. “Did you receive” is used to ask about a specific time and action, while “have you received” is used to ask about someone’s entire life. Since this question is asking about all degrees and diplomas and not just one instance, “Have you received” is correct.
Even the best grammatical sentences can be totally confusing for a majority of readers. Most of the sentences/grammar on the SF-86 are written at a very high level on the flesh/kinkaid readability level. If you want people to understand and fill out correctly you need to simplify. KISS “List all college/university degrees you have ever received” would be a great simplistic question to start off with. That’s the information that is the most important.
It doesn’t help that the wording has changed over the years (been doing this for close to 20 years so…) At some point Subjects were only required to list highest degree earned. Some folks who have held a clearance for decades believe that they “know” what is being asked without actually reading the questions.
Do they even check on degrees from over 10 years ago? I’m going for secret and she said she needed name and address of university. I asked if she wanted the phone number and she goes oh no that’s long ago. Do they still send that INV form top all of them in spite of it being so long? She didn’t care about the college I started at but didn’t get a degree from.
First timers definitely get their listed degrees verified. If you list of the form that you have 3 degrees from Harvard, MIT, and Stanford and you don’t. It is indicative of character problems and issues.
assumptions and presumptions of what they need to list is definitely problematic. Few people want to admit they don’t have very good reading comprehension but I’ve seen some brilliantly scientific people who fit this category.
We always ask if anyone wouldn’t recommend you so if a person does say no, it helps to have the issue with this individual already discussed and reported. It’s not common but sometimes a former supervisor may say no due to an employment issue or if fired.