The Foreign Service Journal, March 2009

14 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / M A R C H 2 0 0 9 What did they do? But in a security clearance adjudication, the goal is not to decide whether an act was commit- ted, but to develop and analyze a “whole person” picture of everything, good and bad, that is known about the individual, as indicators of integrity, honesty and trustworthiness. The key components of this process are: an objective investigation that col- lects positive information, not just derogatory; a whole person evaluation that considers all information, positive and negative; and a requirement that factors forming the basis of a decision be “reliable.” Unfortunately, good people some- times do bad things. They break rules, either inadvertently out of ignorance, or on purpose but for a very good rea- son. Or they do bad things during a wayward youth, becoming more trust- worthy when they get older. The task of the adjudicator is not merely to de- termine whether or not a piece of derogatory information is true, but whether it creates unmitigated doubt about a person’s loyalty, integrity or susceptibility to outside pressure. In a disciplinary matter, even igno- rance of the rules is no excuse. If a rule was broken, even inadvertently, the in- fraction must be punished. But in a se- curity clearance determination, that should not be the case. Accidentally breaking a rule, in ignorance, is hardly evidence of innate dishonesty. Causes for Concern We in the Concerned Foreign Serv- ice Officers organization have serious concerns about the way the Bureau of Diplomatic Security currently con- ducts the process. We would note that some 90 percent of all U.S. govern- ment security clearance adjudications are performed either by the Office of S P E A K I N G O U T