Return to Article: OPM set to absorb Defense security clearance agency
-
10025
After reading all the bickering between both the DSS and OPM crowd, I am no longer wondering about the troubles in the system. I am a DOD warfighter (active duty military for those that don't understand the term warfighter). I have been patiently waiting now for about 28 months for my SSBI to be completed, so I can get back to fighting our nation's battles. My investigation has to this point been lost and re-submitted three times with DSS first and now with OPM...and the saga just continues. From my perspective the system is just broken...Period! How about all you special agents or whomever remember who your customers are and work together to fix the problems, so people like me (your customers) can get through it and back to what I am in the military for in the first place...To defend our great nation.
-
8400
From the user level. I waited 400 days to obtain a DSS-DISCO TS/SSBI to work as a contract investigator. Now I find out it is worthless because it is not an OPM clearance and I cannot work on the new OPM contract. Since I have been previously cleared by USINSCOM and DIA it sure makes one wonder what is going on. From the user level it just looks like a big food fight between USIS and the world, and the obvious news is that they are winning.
-
7678
For the uninitated, you can tell the DSS supporters from the OPM supporters quite easily. DSS supporters seem to be able to identify dates, reports and names to butress their claims. OPM supporters offer opinions with no demonstrable basis in fact or claims that are readily rebutted. Just read the posts in this thread.
-
7667
It's time to clear the air and take a look at this situation in an analytical and systematic manner. Having worked as an investigator for both DSS and OPM, I can offer a logical and unimpassioned analysis. It has been obvious for the last 5 years that DSS has not been fulfilling its central mission. DOD earnestly tried to correct the decrepit state of affairs with DSS and attempted to fix the dilapidated condition DSS was in. Naturally the majority of DSS "senior" special agents thought they were immune to any kind of changes that DOD attempted to infuse into the byzantine and convoluted DSS system. These so-called senior agents, to their own detriment, refused to abide by and rallied against any kind of changes that would improve the quality and timeliness of DSS investigations thereby bringing us to the present state of affairs. Now it is left to OPM to clean up the mess that DSS brought upon itself. I am confident that OPM will ultimately restore and revamp DSS and bring about much needed changes. But, as with all things, change will be difficult and complex. It would be much easier and less painful for the DSS investigators if they would simply learn from their mistakes and acknowledge the fact that DSS was a total failure. Up to this point the "senior agents" are refusing to admit the fact that the DSS system is defunct. These agents have got to come to the realization that the old DSS system does not work and that the OPM system will work.
-
7605
Mr. Munsons, your review of the GAO report must have been selective. Do try reading it this time.
Excerted from the 16 Feb 00 GAO report: "In examining the reasons for these deficiencies, we identified a series of ineffective management reforms at the Defense Security Service that occurred from 1996 through early 1999. We found that the Defense Security Service-in an effort to streamline operations and improve efficiency-relaxed its investigative guidance, eliminated key quality control mechanisms, inadequately trained its investigators, and ineffectively managed automation of its case processing system."
DSS agents were directed BY MANAGEMENT to ignore leads that expanded cases. DSS agents contacted Congressional representatives and the DODIG in order to overturn those MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVES. The DSS DIRECTOR was removed from her post by Under-Secretary of Defense (C3I) Arthur Money due to her MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVES to the field to ignore national security standards.
Sure hope that helps.
Mr. Heltmer, I will ensure that OPM reads your post, because you have contradicted what Kay Coles James and Kathy Dillaman have publicly announced. But then maybe you know more than they do? Ms. Dillaman has noted that other federal agencies want federal investigators to conduct their investigations, and she has sung to the praises of the DSS agents in terms of ability and effort. And who do you think will be doing the investigations of the contract investigators?
DSS Senior Agent
-
7534
If the DSS investigators do not increase their productivity (i.e. work harder) I have it on good authority that there will be a RIF in approximately mid to late 2006. If there is a RIF good luck to the DSS investigators, I don't think even USIS will hire them.
-
7531
Well Mr. Senior DSS Agent I also read the GAO report and I don't understand how mismanagement has anything to do with a DSS investigator not pursuing issues regarding a person's drug or alcohol abuse. What does mismanagement have to do with a DSS investigator not covering issues related to very important financial issues? What does mismanagement have to do with not confirming residency, corroborating birth or citizenship for foreign-born subjects, spouses, or family members, or verifying employment?
As a taxpayer I am appalled that this so-called Defense Security Service got away with hurting my country's national security. As I understand it DOD decided to transfer DSS to OPM because DSS absolutely requires a major overhaul. If this will improve our nation's national security then let's move forward.
-
7504
Work for USELESS? Maybe Mr. Sangerstein aspires to that lofty pinnacle, but the average DSS agent shoots for more substantative goals. As to the posts by Mssrs. Salcionado and Heismer, they fail to note that the quality issues in DSS investigations occurred during the tenure of Directors who mandated that national standards be ignored in order to get cases done quickly. The GAO report makes that quite clear and that DSS was chronically under-resourced, but for reasons known only to them, they neglect to mention those salient points. So gentlemen, what is your agenda?
Quoting from the GAO report dated 16 Feb 00:
"In examining the reasons for these deficiencies, we identified a series of ineffective management reforms at the Defense Security Service that occurred from 1996 through early 1999. We found that the Defense ecurity Service-in an effort to streamline operations and improve efficiency-relaxed its investigative guidance, eliminated key quality control mechanisms, inadequately trained its investigators, and ineffectively managed automation of its case processing system. However, the underlying cause of the Defense Security Service's problems is insufficient oversight of its operations by the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence). We believe that these factors led to incomplete investigations and exacerbated the growing backlog of uninvestigated cases."
Senior DSS Agent
-
7496
Boy, that GAO congressional report really stymied those arrogant DSS investigators. Not to worry my dear DSS Investigators, OPM will make good investigators out of you yet. You guys still have two options if you don't want to become good investigators with OPM: retire or transfer. Oops I forgot another option: WORK FOR USIS.
-
7394
I was reading a report from the congressional hearings and this part says it all about the DSS colossal problems. Quoting from the report:
"Source: GAO sample of 530 DSS investigations.
Importantly, in 26 percent of the investigations we examined, DSS did not pursue issues pertaining to individuals' prior criminal history, alcohol and drug use, financial difficulties, and other problems that its investigators uncovered. Any of these issues, if corroborated, could prevent an individual from being granted a security clearance. Of particular concern is the failure to resolve issues pertaining to large outstanding debts and bankruptcy, since financial gain has been the major reason individuals committed espionage. The following cases illustrated these lapses.
* A reinvestigation for an individual working on cross-service issues revealed that the subject's credit report showed $10,000 past due on a mortgage and indicated that the lender had begun foreclosure proceedings. The subject denied knowledge of the matter, and investigative records do not show that DSS pursued the matter further by contacting the lender.
* An initial investigation for an individual assigned to a communications unit revealed a bankruptcy on the subject's credit report, but investigative records do not show that DSS questioned the subject about the matter or made any further attempt to address it.
* Records for a reinvestigation of an electronics technician do not show that DSS attempted to verify the subject's claim to be a member of a foreign military service and to hold foreign citizenship. Further, although the investigative file indicated that the subject might have been involved in shooting another individual, we found no evidence that the matter was pursued by DSS."
-
7393
Here's a quote from the congressional report about the DSS problems:
"DOD's personnel security investigation program has resulted in investigations that did not obtain the information required by federal standards; did not address issues that the investigations revealed which could disqualify individuals from holding security clearances; and were not completed in a timely manner. The deficiencies in the program were due to a series of ineffective management reforms at DSS and inadequate oversight by the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence).
DSS Investigations Were Incomplete
To determine the completeness of DSS investigations, we selected a representative sample of 530 investigations finished by DSS in January and February 1999 for four key customers_the Air Force, the Army, the Navy, and the National Security Agency. Our findings are projectable only to the investigations conducted by these four DOD components. However, because these entities accounted for 73 percent of the investigative work conducted by DSS in fiscal year 1998, we believe that our findings suggest systemic program weaknesses. In the 530 cases we reviewed, DOD granted top secret clearances notwithstanding that
* 92 percent of the 530 investigations were deficient in that they did not contain information in at least one of the nine required investigative areas, and
* 77 percent of the investigations were deficient in meeting federal standards in two or more areas.
As shown in figure 1, we found problems primarily in six of the nine areas that the federal standards require for a security clearance investigation. Frequently, DSS did not confirm residency, corroborate birth or citizenship for foreign-born subjects, spouses, or family members, verify employment, interview character references, and/or check local agency records."
Good thing DOD dumped DSS, maybe OPM will also do the right thing and get rid of them.
-
7391
Actually a report by the U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) describing the DSS deficiencies can be found at http://www.fas.org/irp/gao/nsiad-00-148.htm
-
7390
As I read these posts from the OPM/DSS war, it appears the OPMers are jealous of the DSSers. My opinion, but the OPMers dis the DSSers about using Special Agent (who cares) and that they are "lazy". Yet no tangible evidence or facts to back up their rants, just like the way they do investigations. The DSSers post intelligent, articulate responses citing facts as rebuttles and are then attacked with "chicken to post your real names". If the OPMers dislike the DSSers and the way they do business, why do they come to facilities and try to pass themself off as DSS agents and then ask "how does DSS do it" when comes to standard protocal for investigation visits? Not to mention the OPMer arriving looking like they just got out of bed (not all of them), very unprofessional. Again, just my opinion.
-
7383
You want to talk about training and education, Carol B.? How about training that's twice as long and intensive than what contractors receive? One of my colleagues had her Periodic Reinvestigation done by a contractor who was fresh out of college with only 2 weeks of training by the contracting company -- and he asked her questions about her marriage. Not any divorce (there was none), but her *marriage*...what are they teaching these contractors?? Do the words "adjudicatively significant" even get mentioned? As my colleages & I have pointed out here, DSS handles the tough cases that contractors perennially return to us; DSS agents are better trained; DSS has always asked the poignant, crucial SCI questions which OPM had to add to their processes; and whenever DSS jobs become available, contractors magically stop criticizing us and try to come on board. Truly, CASE CLOSED.
-
7382
My, the confusion continues.
First, why don't DSS SPECIAL AGENTS reveal their names? Because the current mercenaries who head DSS and their managers in the Pentagon are a little on the vindictive side. You don't know, Janette Steinbrenner, so perhaps you can be forgiven. If you can find him, just ask the agent who investigated a former senator from Colorado (who was up for a DOD clearance) what the Pentagon did to him when he got too close.
Second, the quality of DSS investigations is far in excess of anything ever put out by OPM. GAO found a dip in DSS investigations only once, and that was when the director of DSS, Marge Munson mandated that investigations be conducted in a manner contrary to national standards. This was in a misguided effort to get them done quickly, quality be damned. Throw out that brief period in the mid to late 90s that the GAO report studied (Munson became Director of DSS in 96 and fired in 98) and DIS/DSS investigations have always exceeded national standards. Fast forward to the 01/02 timeframe. A revolving door of directors and acting directors who knew nothing about investigations, but who insisted on ignoring standards in more efforts to get cases done faster. So yes, at this point in time DSS is producing deficient investigations. However, that is at the direction of the Pentagon and the current DSS senior management, not because of the agents. Additionally, no one in the federal government is trained to recognize as many behavioral trip wires as the DIS/DSS agent, at least until the mid 90s when a decision was made that those things were relevant. Carol Buntheimersen may be hot stuff in her little neck of the world, but I doubt she has been trained in kinestetics, potential espionage indicators or analyzing treasury financial crimes reports Can she read a medical chart or recognize what portion of the DSM deals with clinical depression vice episodic depression? Can she explain why the average DSS agent can get sidebar information from local law enforcement that doesn't make its way into official reports and that other federal agents cannot get? So Carol can choose to throw bombs and disparage DSS SPECIAL AGENTS if she wants to, but really, why is she so jealous?
A DSS Senior Special Agent
-
7380
Carol B. Federal Agent!
I have just read the report that you posted a link to in your comment. Obviously you either have a reading comprehension problem or you haven't a clue about gathering and reporting facts. If you would have read the report you would have seen that the failure of DOD to manage the ever increasing backlog did not lie on the back of the agents. I am sorry that you feel so threatened by us that you feel the need to belittle our agency. And I do want you to take note in the report where it talks about the complexity of the investigations handled by DSS (we are not just employment verifiers)we investigate and don't rely on preprinted questions to read to the subject. Unlike the OPM investigators and contract investigators we asked the hard questions. I understand that your pips had to be altered to make sure you guys were asking the right questions. And the same could be said for your reporting system obviously you couldn't write a proper report either until they designed a system to prompt you to do that too. But better yet rather than all this bickering just ask your clients. Especially after the mess you made out of the TSA investigations? Yea what about all those non issue Subjects that had prison backgrounds?
-
7363
Anyone know what is going to happen to the 200 PSI investigator slots that the DSS was supposed to fill? Are they going to be hired before the merger on Feb. 20th, or will OPM quash those positions?
-
7345
I'm still waiting for any of the DSS investigators who have posted responses to shed their anonymity and post their names on their responses. Come on guys, show just a little guts, you're going to need it once you become OPM investigators.
-
7344
The bottom line is that lack of training and undereducated investigators at DSS resulted in deficient work. Read the congressional report about the DSS deficiencies at: http://www.dodig.osd.mil/audit/reports/fy01/01-073.pdf.
DSS should have been privatized a long time ago. Just read the congressional hearings report and CASE CLOSED.
-
7343
TO Leslie,
If OPM is so great why did I spend approximately 6 months of 2003 and 2 months of 2004 traveling all over the US redoing dirty cases that was pulled back from the contractors that OPM hired that could not do the work? Obviously you're confused and if all of OPM thinks like you God Help National Security!!!!!!!!
-
7324
On or about Feb 20, 2005, the personnel security investigation (PSI) mission will move to the OPM. What a colossal blunder by the DoD! Unfortunately, the DSS (DIS) never had the respect it deserved from senior Pentagon officials or from members of Congress. Year after year, we've had to fight for a proper budget. Our budget decreased, yet the workload increased. We went for years without hiring investigative personnel. We were told to "work smarter, not harder!" In a half-assed effort to get cases closed quickly, we were either directed to shelve cases or utilize silly shortcuts which ultimately led to some well-founded criticism of the quality of our work. As a result of pressure from DoD contractors and Congress, the DoD has decided to "divest" themselves of the PSI mission. Tell us Ms Haave - The DSS backlog of cases was primarily a direct result of inadequate staffing. We could not keep up with the work. Now, you have moved the work over to an agency (OPM) who prides itself in servicing over 100+ agencies. Tell me how the DoD will get their cases any quicker? As already discussed, OPM shuts down cases when issues surface, they close cases pending additional investigative leads. We will anxiously await the verdict from the CAFs. Are the cases as thorough? Will they be able to give applicants due process? Will the cases be closed in a timely manner? I bet the answer to all of these questions will be "no!" Understand Ms. Haave, Ms. Anderson, Mr. Wolfowitz, and Mr. Rumsfeld - you have single-handedly put our Nation at risk. It is not a question "if" there are more espionage cases, it is a matter "when". I predict that at some point - maybe four years, maybe eight, maybe 12...the DoD and / Congress will come to regret this decision and we will see another DoD PSI investigative agency rise from the ashes.
A DSS Special Agent
-
7323
All of you DSS investigators are so confused that you just don't get the point. Leslie Quaranphil is absolutely correct. I've always wondered why the DSS investigators were called special agents when they don't know how to conduct criminal investigations and are not weapons qualified. If DSS is so great why did the congress hold congressional hearings to look into the "shoddy work" that is being done by the DSS investigators. I worked for OPM before I became a federal special agent and the OPM investigators never underwent any kind of congressional hearings for any kind of deficiencies. By the way OPM does conduct National Security background investigations, just ask any Department of Energy employee or NASA. Can any DSS investigator answer the following question: If DSS is so great then why does the Department of Defense not want them anymore? I have some good contacts at the Department of Defense and I understand that the DOD is currently thinking of starting up a new department which will eventually conduct background investigations for DOD. This is currently in the planning stages. I guess they want to start everything from scratch and do it right this time. They don't want a fiasco like DSS. I also understand that OPM does plan to carry out a reduction in force in approximately early 2006. Too bad for the DSS investigators when the RIF does occur I guess they will have to get a job with one of those contracting companies that they so despise.
-
7319
Has anyone provided you with information regarding exactly why there is a backlog? Are you aware that DSS was instructed NOT to work any cases beginning in Oct 2003 because (a) we had NO funding, and (b) because the "transition" read "hostile takeover" was to begin by Dec 2003? DSS was recieivng cases at about 500 per week, OPM was NOT accepting them and DSS was told by OSD DSS could not process them. Now you do the math; only on Jun 20th, 2004, was DSS allowed to open cases from a special military command that needed to move out its troops. Also are you aware that DSS was asked to take back thousands of investigations that were too derog for the contractors to handle, so they were returned to DSS? Now if you couldn't fullfill the original contract what law allows those SAME contractors to bid on the 2004 contract to do investigative work! So now the plan is to return all those investigative papers to the requester telling them to resubmit (2 yrs later) because the information on the forms is too old to work with - that is how the backlog is going to disappear from the OPM ledgers! Our computer system, thought somewhat costly to maintain was user friendly, timely to update information and made to maximize use of the agents time to write and submit their reports. Our agency (DSS) DID NOT shut down investigations that were missing crucial leads,the adjudicators recieved a full case, derog and all with which to make a decision. OPM shuts down investigations when they don't get a police response or a National agency check response. Remember contractors who preform work for OPM move from contractor to contractor...there is no loyalty...it is a job not a career or profession for these people. Does anyone tell you the number of police department, military units and other who refused to be interviewed by a contract agent? DSS also went back and picked up that work! It's a shame that Mr Rumsfeld has pushed to have DSS taken out of DOD and not budgeted. Didn't anyone tell him that when the country is in crisis and at war you do not rearrange the government? Reestablish DSS and you can be assured that National Security will be protected and so will the intregrity of a security investigation.
-
7309
Here are a few reasons why this transfer is a bad idea: OPM's standards of PSI processing are not up to par with those of DSS. They maintain their quick turn around by simply closing their investigations incomplete, within an allotted timeframe. In many discussions with adjudicative agencies, they complain of multiple file cabinets of incomplete OPM investigations - held in THEIR office, pending the final reports from OPM. This is simply moving a backlog of overdue cases from one agency to another. OPM's case processing system is outdated. They still process everything in paper, and their system is "stand alone" that can only be used internally and is not even close to being current with today's electronic world. It might work for OPM, at their inventory level, but when you combine DSS and OPM together, it will undoubtedly be a sluggish nightmare. OPM boasts of a 30% rejection rate. Rejection only delays an individuals' clearance process, which many times is crucial to employment - or unemployment! At DSS, the electronic submission guarantees that the documents are complete and are accurate before allowing transmission of the request. This results in almost zero rejection rate, timely case opening, and a quicker and more accurate security clearance process. OPM does NOT expand a case when they uncover derogatory or unlisted information - to include Foreign Connections/Travel. Instead, they close their case and let the requester decide if the information they DO NOT HAVE is important enough to National Security to warrant a case return for completion. This puts the burden of National Security on the Facility Officer and delays the accurate completion of any cases that are returned. DSS immediately expands any case that develops or contains derogatory information, so that the final document contains all accusations, investigative resolutions, and mitigating circumstances that are necessary for a complete and thorough adjudication. Remember, this is NATIONAL SECURITY at stake here. We are investigating the lives of individuals who are to be entrusted with documents and information ranging from the Confidential to the Top Secret level - information that, in the wrong hands - could lead to disaster. Bottom line, DSS investigates completely - OPM verifies and closes short. Who ya gonna call?????
-
7307
Leslie I appreciated the fact that you took the time to post your feelings and comments. I only wish more people would take the time and get additional information out in the open.
I am a little perplexed at some of your comments, but I suspect that some may be from personal contact(s) you have had with DSS personnel and/or from comments made by others? You make a very broad mark by commenting, "...DSS investigators will have to conduct background investigations the correct way (the OPM way) things will definitely improve... They will now have to put in an honest 40 hours per week plus overtime... "
Taking a broad swipe at the personnel of DSS and in a general sense - some of your comments categorized DSS personnel as (potentially) lazy and untrained employees - is not a fair assessment. I can only hope and suspect that you were passionate enough and cared enough to write out a quick reply, but you do not actually think that way.
My comment was directed toward the fact that National Security is National Security and it is NOT to be taken lightly. There is a distinct difference in a National Security investigation vice a Pre-Employment type of investigation. What price is freedom and securing our Nation's secrets? Unfortunately, this media will now allow a longer post.
-
7302
[Response to Leslie Quarinphil] The "right (OPM)" way? Quarinphil must mean for employment pre-screening cases, which are far different than national security investigations (which is ONLY what DSS does). OPM had to add additional lines of questioning to the new, draft manual and their reporting software -- key questions at the very heart of potentially disqualifying security behavior/conditions -- that they hadn't been routinely asking before, but which DSS always has. Why?! Private contractors perennially return thousands of cases (20k+) back to DSS which they "just couldn't get to"; tough, dirty, lengthy cases that DSS agents spend unpaid overtime on to finish that private contractors don't want to work -- and then DSS gets the blame for the overdue status. Why? I'm not entirely soured on this transition, but I also can't let this propaganda slide by without the truth being told. National security should not be measured by profit.
-
7301
At least DSS investigators will have some continuity of leadership with OPM. Upper management at DSS have come and gone faster than johns through a whorehouse the last several years. Sadly, the OPMs computer system for investigations is slightly ahead of the manual typewriter in capabilities. Their Contract workforce has a turnover rate slightly lower than the Bagdad Police force. It is made up of retirees and freshly graduated college students who receive a couple of weeks training (mostly on the computer system) and sent out on their own. I just hope that no one will die as a result of this circus. PAD
-
7300
In the interests of full disclosure I will state that I am a DSS investigator. Its probably a waste of time but Leslie Quarinphil needs to be educated. DSS investigations have consistently been of significantly higher quality than anything OPM has put out, even when its Office of Federal Investigations existed. I know because I worked for it before escaping to DIS. There is an entity that studies DSS investigations (also adjudications, reciprocity, etc,), independent of DSS, called PERSEREC. PERSEREC has noted that DSS investigations have been typically very thorough over the years, despite the de-emphasis on quality in recent years by senior management. Contrast that with reviews of the quality of OPM's investigations...Homeland Security was so unimpressed that it sought Congressional authority to obtain its own background investigations. Perhaps Leslie has not heard of the recent GAO report that found that many of the Sky Marshalls who were investigated by OPM's contractors had significant issues in their prior federal positions (largely Bureau of Prisons) that were not found by the investigators, even when there was strong evidence the adverse information existed and which the investigators should have followed up on. Perhaps Leslie could explain why State does not want OPM to conduct their investigations after seeing the results. Maybe Leslie could offer an explanation why the OPM employees who handle background investigations at its headquarters in Boyers, PA are now years behind on regualr investigations into their own background. No, Leslie would rather throw bombs at DSS Special Agents than resort to facts. By the way, the non-criminal law enforcement status that DSS agents enjoy must have some attraction for OPM contract investigators, since they frequently try to pass themselves off as DSS agents when trying to conduct law enforcement checks. Leslie might sound more serious if he/she had some facts to support his/her remarks, but then why let something silly like mature discourse get in the way.
-
7295
KDN you must be a DSS Investigator (notice I didn't call you a special agent, since OPM will discard that job title because DSS investigators do not carry weapons and do not conduct criminal investigations). Actually now that DSS investigators will have to conduct background investigations the correct way (the OPM way) things will definitely improve. Hopefully congress will not have to conduct hearings on the quality (or lack of it) of DSS investigations the way they did before now that OPM will be running things. The gig is up for the DSS investigators. They will now have to put in an honest 40 hours per week plus overtime, which will probably be necessary because they are still learning the correct way of conducting security clearance investigations. Don't worry if OPM does lay you off USIS will be more than happy to offer all the DSS investigators a job, but not at the same rate of pay that you are currently receiving. Let's face it, the DSS investigator is grossly overpaid for the shoddy work they have done in the past.
-
7263
First - this posting is not an attack on DSS or OPM, but unfortunately, a comment on the current Security Clearance process - from submission of an individual's EPSQ or SF-86 - to the Granting or Denial of Clearance.
The transfer of DSS investigators to OPM is (IMHO) a band-aid fix to a major wound. Will suspect or expect, that once the transfer actually happens, OPM will cancel the backlog of cases - actual number of cases probably NOT known.
OPM's rationale may be that with their "new" system, it will be faster for those individuals to be granted a clearance rather than wait for the backlog to be worked. That will supposedly give OPM a chance to put the "new" system into effect and meet timeliness goals. While that may work for a short period of time, another - newer - backlog will grow because there is simply a matter of numbers. Many cases - not enough Investigators.
It is also suspect that the quality of the "new" investigations will decrease - especially when dealing with any issue matter. OPM's process is to give what the Customer pays for and no more. Anticipate many cases developing an "issue", but no resolution until the Customer coughs up another payment for the extra work.
The OPM reporting system PIPS is not user friendly and takes MORE effort to complete an Investigative report and there are no signs that anything is being done to develop PIPS as a more streamlined reporting and tracking system.
Even if OPM's "new" process works half as good as it is projected - who is addressing the fact that the adjudicative process will hinder the clearance process? There does not appear to be a resource or study in place to streamline that part of the Security Clearance process. There are numerous (total amounts probably unknown) cases where the Investigative Process has been completed - months to years ago, but the case sits somewhere - waiting for a review and ultimately an issue or rejection of a clearance. While a procedure in the entire process MAY improve - it appears that the FINAL PRODUCT will be held hostage in another procedure.
Unfortunately, the main thrust of all of this is that National Security is at stake and it appears that suitability of an individual is being overlooked in these processes. In dealing with Costs - what is the current price of protecting our National Security?
-
7260
Maybe i'm just paranoid, but does anyone else get the feeling that OPM is the wolf dressed in grandma's clothing and is just waiting for little red riding DSS to look into its mouth? They objected to the merger before, but now they are looking forward to it and welcome DSS with open arms. Then they use words like "streamlining" and "increasing efficiency". Translation? "We are going to fire every last one of the DSS investigators and use the cash to purchase shoddy private investigators. Sacrificing quality for quantity, we will clear the backlog!" Sigh....
-
7258
Team OPM? Rah, Rah, Shut it.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.