60 Minutes degree mill story

Security clearance can be pulled....

Earlier today, I was looking into the whole security clearance process, most of which can be found here: http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/generalinfo/a/security.htm

And reviewing the appeals process, I see that the grantors have no problem revoking that security clearance from you.
http://www.defenselink.mil/dodgc/doha/industrial/

There were too many cases of not just stupid stuff, but things that you would think "wash" away after xx years of good service. The biggest thing is LYING i.e. putting fraudulent information on the application or purposely OMITTING information.

 

"And reviewing the appeals process, I see that the grantors have no problem revoking that security clearance from you.
http://www.defenselink.mil/dodgc/doha/industrial/"

I assume by "you" you are refering to anybody that holds a clearance? Additionally keep in mind that different policies are in force for different agencies and personnel. The military, can, and does, revoke clearances for far less offenses than would a civilian counterpart who is not covered under the UCMJ.

Further, there has never been any public indication that Callahan was ever facing any issues since she resigned before any action could be taken.

Your premise is correct that deception is not the best course of action.

 

Everyone makes mistakes....

If you looked at the defense link, the appeals dealt with civilian contractors or gov't employees.

But if the application specifically required formal education from an accredited school (recognized by DoEd), then technically they could bust her for it.

What surprised me about some of those cases is that they were working on the job with no problem for years, but their security clearance was still pulled because of a relatively minor omission (on financial problems, for example) for something that happened years ago. The gov't argument is the issue of trust and ability to make good choices. Even if you sustain future good performance, it doesn't necessarily negate the f**k up you did 10 years ago (depending on the f**k up). I agree, but to a certain extent.

Like my supervisor often aludes to: "I don't understand the big picture."

Glad I stayed out of trouble in my younger days (financial and criminal). It's just scary to think that after xx years, my career can be thrown away over something stupid (not 'DUI' stupid, but 'I didn't pay a bill' stupid.) Nobody's perfect, especially in the financial arena.

 

This appears to be a dying thread but I may as well add my opinion, lol...The EPSQ (electronic personnel security questionaire((SF 86)) only ask where you went to school, and highest level attained, not if it is accredited, so I do not believe that a person would get in trouble there as it is likely difficult to prove whether your degree exists or not, if it not RA or NA is it not a degree? Or is it just an unaccredited degree? Grasping at straws really.

The DSS/CCF will yank a military clearance for far less than they yank a civilian contractors or other federal employee's clearance.

Derogatory financial information is a pretty good way to have your clearance denied, in fact quite a few are denied due to derog financial info.

William Parker

 

When quoting dates could people please write the month in letters, so as not to to confuse the non-americans out here?

 

My quote:

"OPM regulations require that education listed be from schools accredited by accreditors as approved by the dept of education."

And if your degree is not from a body approved by an accreditor as defined under the department of education then "no" it is not a degree that can be considered for federal employment. Check the info below and you will see this information. My point was that criminal penalties are in fact pointed out in the information on the SF-86. And it is not difficult to prove whether a degree exists or not. So listing a degree in conflict with this policy could place you in an undesirable position. Whether or not anyone would actually face these issues is a good debate.

"Only degrees from an accredited college or university recognized by the Department of Education are acceptable to meet positive education requirements or to substitute education for experience. For additional information, please go to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and U.S. Department of Education websites at - http://www.opm.gov/qualifications and http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html"

Regards,

Kevin

 

I do not doubt that for job qualifications it has to be accredited, my question is the SF 86, or more specifically the EPSQ (which the military uses) it does not mention accreditation, so in light of that, and the fact they want to know what school you went to for background purposes, you would be required to list it.

"WHERE YOU WENT TO SCHOOL
List the schools you have attended, beyond Junior High School, beginning with the most recent (#1) and working back 7 years. List College or University degrees and
the dates they were received. If all of your education occurred more than 7 years ago, list your most recent education beyond high school, no matter when that education
occurred.
Use one of the following codes in the "Code" block:
1 - High School 2 - College/University/Military College 3 - Vocational/Technical/Trade School
For schools you attended in the past 3 years, list a person who knew you at school (an instructor, student, etc.). Do not list people for education
completely outside this 3-year period.
For correspondence schools and extension classes, provide the address where the records are maintained.
10"

W Parker

 

Agreed, in the interest of full disclosure if I had an earned unaccredited degree I would list it. However, a diploma mill degree is not a degree (nor a school) and representing one as such on an application can result in job loss, on an SF-86 you can face an entirely different issue. For the sake of debate the lack of consistency actually favors those positions where a clearance is not required since the worst an individual in this type of position can face is removal. An additional concern is with folks who are already in the system and performing well but have diploma mills listed on the SF-86 or worse, have earned but unaccredited degrees that then get classified as non degrees. Will the employee be provided an opportunity to correct their information so as to comply with new guidance? I believe that there are folks who were duped and should not be penalized, deployed military members for instance.

I think the challenge by Kennedy-Western and its result may dictate the direction the federal government takes in this issue.

You will note on the civilian, I don't have access to the system you note, that 5 CFR is the reference for the form and goes directly back to the qualifications/suitability addressed previously.

I don't think listing an unaccredited degree is the issue as long as it is not used for qualifications purposes and in fact the statements provided to the public regarding uncovered employees reflect that education was not a qualifying factor. I think that listing or representing a degree in a status other than its actual merit is the issue.

 

I have an unfair advantage...I am currently stationed in a remote area and one of my additional duties is the Battalion S-2, our policy is when in doubt or if there is a lack of guidance (is that not always the case, lol) disclose...Yes, often an investigator will come here to speak to the person requiring the clearance and then you can discuss questionable items or questions you have.

W Parker

 

Yep, I never figured I looked good in green cutting grass at a federal prison so if anything, I put too much info on the form. It sure beats being on 60 Minutes.