Clearance facts

Commonly misunderstood points about the clearance process, using the public DOHA record, government materials, and practitioner sources. Each item identifies which of those it comes from. Figures marked CASE record are computed from this site's database of 30,782 published decisions and link to the underlying data.

Descriptive research on the public record. Nothing here is legal advice, a prediction, or a recommendation.

Financial matters

The most frequent security concern in the record.

A bankruptcy filing is not an automatic disqualifier. 33 percent of such cases were granted.

Of the 1,382 hearing-level cases in the record in which the Statement of Reasons alleged a bankruptcy filing, 462 (33%) ended in a grant of access. Adjudicative practice treats bankruptcy as a lawful means of resolving debt; the recurring concern in denied cases is unresolved delinquency, not the filing itself.

CASE recordCASE record through October 2026, 1,382 hearing-level cases with a bankruptcy-filing allegation · view the cases

The government, not the applicant, pays for the background investigation.

Investigations are funded by the sponsoring agency, never the applicant. The Department's annual report to Congress put the FY2010 cost of contractor personnel security investigations at $218.0 million, and GAO put OPM's total background-investigation spending near $1.1 billion in FY2011. A request that an applicant pay for the investigation itself is not part of the legitimate process.

Official sourceDoD Annual Report to Congress on Personnel Security Investigations for Industry (Jan 2011); GAO-12-197

Prior conduct

Histories commonly assumed to be disqualifying, and what the record shows.

Marijuana involvement did not prevent a favorable decision in roughly one case in four.

4,521 hearing-level decisions in the record mention marijuana; 24% were granted. Federal guidance issued in 2021 directs agencies to weigh recency and probability of recurrence rather than the fact of past use, and prior use, including use that contributed to an earlier unfavorable determination, is not treated as permanently determinative.

CASE recordCASE record through October 2026, 4,521 hearing-level decisions mentioning marijuana · Guideline H in the record

A criminal record, including felony conduct, is weighed rather than treated as an automatic bar.

3,921 hearing-level cases in the record raise Criminal Conduct (Guideline J); 23% were granted. Under the whole-person concept, the judge weighs recency, seriousness, pattern, and evidence of rehabilitation. The statutory bars are narrow: current unlawful drug use, and certain categories of sentence where the position requires the most sensitive levels of access.

CASE recordCASE record through October 2026, 3,921 hearing-level Guideline J cases · Guideline J in the record

Mental-health treatment, standing alone, is very rarely the basis for an unfavorable decision.

One government-era analysis found that 99.98% of applicants with a psychological concern in their file retained or received eligibility. The questionnaire itself exempts several categories of counseling from disclosure, including marital, family, and grief counseling, counseling related to combat service, and counseling related to sexual assault, and states that counseling in and of itself is not a reason to deny eligibility.

Official sourceU.S. Army Central Clearance Facility adjudicative history (99.98%, reported 2009), repeated in DoD outreach; counseling exemptions from the SF-86 itself · Guideline I in the record

The application and investigation

Requirements and practices that come before any decision.

The seven-year lookback does not apply to every question on the SF-86.

Many questions on the SF-86 reach back seven years (ten for the most extensive investigations), but questions phrased have you ever carry no time limit, and several sections impose their own windows set out in the special instructions on the form's first page. An error in a timing window can later be alleged as falsification, so the distinction is consequential.

Official sourceSF-86 structure; practitioner literature (Edmunds Law Firm)

Historically, about one application in eight was rejected before any investigation began.

Across a multi-year government sample, approximately 12% of submitted applications were rejected on clerical grounds before reaching an investigator: missing or illegible fingerprints, a missing Social Security number for a spouse or co-habitant, missing references, or an incorrectly listed employer. A materially complete submission is a precondition the process enforces mechanically.

Practitioner sourceDISCO and OPM rejection data, October 2007 to January 2011 (12.3% combined), as reported in the practitioner and industry literature (FedCAS; ClearanceJobs)

Declination of an interim clearance does not predict the final determination.

Interim eligibility is decided in days on a partial file, and in some years as many as 39% of applicants were declined interim access, with no right of rebuttal or appeal. The final denial rate has run at only a few percent, and most applicants declined an interim clearance later received final eligibility. A declined interim is also not a denial for purposes of later questionnaires.

Practitioner sourceDISCO interim-eligibility data, 2008, as reported in the practitioner and industry literature (FedCAS; ClearanceJobs)

Investigators may restate an answer inaccurately to test the subject's agreement.

A documented interview technique is to repeat the subject's statement back with a small inaccuracy and observe whether the subject adopts it. Agreement with an inaccurate restatement, or speculation offered under polite pressure, produces the inconsistencies that later appear in Statements of Reasons as candor allegations under Guideline E.

Practitioner sourcePractitioner literature on the subject interview (Edmunds Law Firm; FedCAS)

Polygraph examinations apply to a narrower set of positions than is commonly assumed.

Polygraph screening is generally required only for particular sensitive-access programs, not for ordinary Secret or Top Secret eligibility. Charts are subject to second-examiner quality review, problem questions may be rephrased, and an unfavorable result ordinarily leads to re-examination rather than an immediate adverse determination.

Official sourceSEAD-2, Use of Polygraph (ODNI, revised 2020); practitioner literature (Edmunds Law Firm; FedCAS)

The Statement of Reasons and hearing stage

What the public record shows about SORs, hearings, and how they resolve.

Some Statements of Reasons are withdrawn after the written answer, with no hearing.

Where the written answer resolves every stated concern, the government may withdraw the Statement of Reasons and processing resumes. No decision is published in such cases. Matters resolved this way are therefore invisible in every published statistic, including the figures on this site, which describe only cases that proceeded to decision.

Practitioner sourceDOHA process; practitioner literature (Edmunds Law Firm; FedCAS)

An allegation that is not specifically answered may be treated as admitted.

The answer to a Statement of Reasons must admit or deny each numbered allegation, separately and in writing. Under the Directive, an allegation left unaddressed may be treated as admitted. It is the most mechanical requirement in the process and among the most commonly mishandled.

Official sourceDoD Directive 5220.6 answer requirements

Applicants who elected a hearing were granted at twice the rate of those decided on the written record.

Among the 9,321 decisions in the record in which the procedural route is identifiable, applicants who appeared at a hearing were granted 22% of the time; those decided on the written record alone, 11%. The figures are descriptive rather than causal; the two populations differ in composition. The gap is nonetheless large and stable across the record.

CASE recordCASE record through October 2026, 9,321 route-classified decisions

Eighty percent of hearing-level applicants proceeded without counsel. Outcomes differed materially.

In the record, applicants with counsel of record were granted 51% of the time (5,120 cases); unrepresented applicants, 30% (21,363 cases). An independent 2012 review of 500 DOHA cases reported nearly identical figures, 51% and 32%. The figures are descriptive, not causal, and case volume is not a measure of quality; the consistency of the disparity across fourteen years is the notable point.

CASE recordCASE record through October 2026, 26,483 hearing-level cases with known representation status; W. Henderson, 500-case review (2012) · representation in Statistics

Falsification allegations are frequently more consequential than the underlying conduct.

The Personal Conduct guideline treats concealment or minimization on the questionnaire or in the interview as an independent security concern, and practitioners on both sides report that it routinely outweighs the matter concealed. Dated financial or personal issues are commonly mitigated; a recent falsification concerning them is substantially harder to mitigate.

Practitioner sourceGuideline E mechanics; practitioner literature · Guideline E in the record

A final denial permits reapplication after one year.

A final unfavorable decision imposes a one-year waiting period, after which the applicant may reapply. The reapplication is evaluated on whether the circumstances underlying the original concerns have been addressed in the interval. Grants on reapplication appear throughout the record, particularly where the original concern was mitigable with time, such as debt resolution, recency of use, or completion of treatment.

Official sourceDoD Directive 5220.6 reapplication provisions

Judges and the Appeal Board

Where the record shows the sharpest disparities.

Grant rates among the busiest administrative judges range from 8 percent to 62 percent.

Across the 57 administrative judges in the record with at least 100 decided hearing cases, the lowest observed grant rate is 8% and the highest is 62%, under the same guidelines and the same burden of proof. The identity of the assigned judge is among the largest observable variables in the record.

CASE recordCASE record through October 2026, judges with 100 or more decided hearing cases · judge outcomes in Statistics

On appeal, the government prevailed in 69 percent of its appeals; applicants in 0.4 percent.

Of 3,254 applicant appeals in the record, 14 resulted in reversal and 151 in remand. Of the 327 appeals filed by the government against decisions it lost, 224 resulted in reversal. The Appeal Board receives no new evidence and hears no witnesses; it reviews the existing record for error, which is why arguments not raised below are ordinarily unavailable later.

CASE recordCASE record through October 2026, 3,594 profiled ISCR appeals · appeals in Statistics

Published decisions never identify the applicant by name.

All 30,782 decisions in the record refer to the individual only as Applicant. Judges, Department Counsel, and applicants' attorneys are named; applicants are not. An adverse decision therefore does not place the applicant's name in any public listing, and this anonymization is what makes open research on the record possible.

CASE recordCASE record through October 2026, all 30,782 published decisions

A pending incident report at separation can leave the record in a status that is neither decided nor appealable.

Separating from a sponsoring employer while a security incident report is unresolved can place the record in a status known as loss of jurisdiction: no adjudication occurs, no appeal lies, and the notation remains in the government's system until a future sponsor initiates adjudication of the outstanding report. The condition is typically discovered only when a subsequent employment offer stalls.

Practitioner sourceDoD personnel-security practice, as documented by FedCAS

Primary sources

The official rules and directives, at their source.

How the process worksA contested case follows a published sequence. Open this for the short version, or put a question to Ask Mode on the home page. Accounts are free and include up to 25 questions per day.

A contested case follows a published path: a Statement of Reasons, the government's written list of its concerns (an SOR), a written answer, a hearing or a decision on the written record, the judge's decision, and in some cases an appeal.

Read the stages of a DOHA case · Ask a question about the process

Sources and method: CASE record figures are computed from the 30,782 published DOHA decisions in this site's database as of October 2026, scoped to verified hearing-level standard ISCR cases unless noted. Historical government figures are attributed to the years they cover and to the practitioner literature that reported them (FedCAS / William Henderson; Edmunds Law Firm). All percentages describe decided public cases. Not affiliated with the U.S. Department of Defense or DOHA.

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.