Skip to content
← The Issue Encyclopedia

Issue Encyclopedia · Guideline H · Drug Involvement

Failure to Complete or Abide By Treatment

What the decided record shows for this issue, computed from public DOHA hearing-level decisions. Descriptive history, not a prediction.

Does failure to complete or abide by treatment affect a security clearance?

Failure to Complete or Abide By Treatment is an issue decided under Guideline H, Drug Involvement. In the decided DOHA record it appears in 170 hearing-level cases, and 18% of the 170 decided ended with access granted (30 granted, 140 denied). The mitigating conditions judges credited most often, and example decisions either way, are below.

Basis: 170 decided hearing-level cases raising this issue. Descriptive history of decided cases, not a prediction.

More questions people ask the record

Decided cases

170

hearing-level decisions raising this issue

Granted

18%

30 granted · 140 denied or revoked

Official mitigating conditions cited

The formal mitigating conditions the case profiles identified on this issue, in cases that were granted and in cases that were denied. Each is shown with its paragraph number and a plain name. Read what each condition says.
  • ¶ 26(a) · So long ago, or so infrequent, that it is unlikely to recur

    In granted cases
    7
    In denied cases
    7
  • ¶ 26(c) · Prescription misuse followed a prolonged illness and has ended

    In granted cases
    7
    In denied cases
    3
  • ¶ 26(d) · Treatment completed, with a favorable prognosis

    In granted cases
    4
    In denied cases
    5
  • ¶ 26(b) · The involvement acknowledged, with abstinence established

    In granted cases
    3
    In denied cases
    4

Circumstances credited in granted cases

The specific circumstances the judge expressly credited among the granted cases on this issue where that detail was extracted.
  • substance treatment completed · credited in 1 granted case

Recent decided examples

  • The judge found that the applicant's personal conduct concerns were mitigated. The applicant's conduct was related to an attempt at self-medication following a personal tragedy, and she has successful…

  • The judge found that the applicant's personal conduct concerns were mitigated by evidence of rehabilitation and a change in behavior. The applicant admitted to past illegal drug use and alcohol depend…

  • Applicant, a pro se behavioral health technician, was denied a clearance after the judge found security concerns under Guidelines I, G, H, and E. The record showed longstanding suicidal ideation, two …

  • Applicant, a pro se defense contractor employee, was denied a security clearance after the judge found unresolved concerns under Guidelines H, G, J, and E. The record showed repeated marijuana use and…

See all 170 decisions on this issue

Related issues under Guideline H

How these numbers are measured

Scope: decided hearing-level cases whose per-allegation profile records this issue, matched to the same issue value the search filters use, so a count here and a filtered search always agree. A case raising several issues counts under each one. The mitigating conditions and the credited circumstances below were extracted for a subset of the record, so both are counts of cases rather than rates. Pages exist only for issues with at least 25 decided cases, and † marks any split built on fewer than 20.

Reading the statistics

  • Granted = access granted or continued; Denied = denied or revoked.
  • Grant rate = granted ÷ (granted + denied).
  • † marks figures based on fewer than 20 cases, too few to be reliable.
  • Hovering any rate shows its statistical range (a 95% confidence interval).
  • Figures are descriptive counts over decided, public DOHA ISCR decisions, never predictions or assessments of any pending case.

Where to go from here

Get help with my case

Send us your question, or the Statement of Reasons you received. No charge, and a CASE analyst reads it. Usually five to ten business days.

Ask a question →

I do this for clients

Rank every decision by how closely it matches a matter, see how the assigned judge has ruled, and keep it together with cited exports.

For attorneys and firms →

Decided public cases: descriptive, never a prediction.