Assessing the Potential for Racial Bias in the Security Clearance Process
ResearchPublished Aug 15, 2022
In this exploratory report, the authors consider the security clearance process through the lens of racial justice. Some sources suggest that topics and questions covered in the background investigation process may exclude qualified applicants from minoritized racial and ethnic backgrounds. The authors identify areas where systemic factors and bias might contribute to the underrepresentation of Black Americans in the national security workforce.
ResearchPublished Aug 15, 2022
Because security clearances are required for designated national security positions, results of the background investigation and adjudication process can affect an individual's recruitment, hiring, retention, promotion, and ability to pursue a career in the U.S. Department of Defense and in the broader national security community — including government contractors.
In this exploratory report, the authors consider the security clearance process through the lens of racial justice. They identify areas where bias might create a barrier for Black Americans seeking positions or career advancement in U.S. departments and agencies with a national security mission. The authors describe societal factors (financial, drug-related, and criminal) and human judgment factors (affinity bias, confirmation bias, and statistical discrimination) as they relate to the security clearance process, and how they may contribute to racial bias. The authors then recommend areas for improvement and further exploration in transparency, training, and awareness of bias.
The 2021 version of this report was revised in August 2022 to clarify that although nowhere in the security clearance process are data on race gathered, data on race is collected during the hiring process — a separate and distinct process from the security clearance process. To assess the potential for racial disparities using existing information would require the integration of data from these two processes, which was outside the scope of this study. This version of the report also updates a data source citation and includes additional clarifying caveats to indicate that some data sources are of a more anecdotal nature and not generalizable.
This research was sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense and conducted within the Forces and Resources Policy Center of the RAND National Security Research Division (NSRD).
This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.
This publication supersedes a previous version published in 2021 (RR-A1201-1).