I’d say it really depends on directorate because some have additional screeners past online testing. But they won’t waste your time putting you through all the testing and interviews if they don’t think you have a shot at getting an offer. So stay in it!

Did this person tell you about how many people are applying to the agency nowadays? I read that in the months and years following 9/11, tens of thousands and maybe even hundreds of thousands of people applied every year. However almost 20 years later, it's got to be a significantly lower number than it was then. I've also read that the agency still supposedly receives thousands of applications monthly. But that's a very vague figure. "Thousands" is anything equal to or greater than 2,000.

Edited by user Sunday, March 14, 2021 1:14:22 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

No clue on what the stats are from application to testing, but it seems like most of those that get interviewed in person end up with a COE. I guess they don't foot the bill for you to fly across the country unless they are pretty sure they want you.

All that said, there appears to be a substantial cut after the poly, which looks like the make-or-break moment of the clearance process. And those that get past it get rewarded with years and years of agonizing waits with little to no contact--not to mention the constant possibility they could cut you "just because".

I want to believe the job is ultimately worth the wait, but it comes at the cost of 3+ years of frustration and uncertainty.

I do think there is probably a higher fail rate for FS. I think it is also just a cultural difference in how CIA thinks about the poly versus other agencies.

Most agencies (with the exception of NSA) seem to do the BI and the poly concurrently, suggesting that they view the poly as one piece of the "whole person" concept for the clearance adjudicator to consider. CIA brings people in for the poly first, adjudicates the results (in tandem with medical/psych/credit pull), and then sends people onto the BI if they feel confident in the applicant's ability to obtain a clearance. In this sense, CIA views the poly as a step that must be passed in itself rather than only a piece of the bigger picture. They have no compunctions about throwing an applicant out for even the slightest doubt about their fitness to obtain a clearance--even if those doubts could be cleared up through the BI and a "whole person" review by an adjudicator.

Again, my .02 from what I've read on these forums. I get the sense that CIA knowingly gives out a good bit more COEs than they actually have jobs for because they know security will weed out so many applicants.

That’s actually false - at least partly. No hard and fast rule about adjudicating poly/med/psych before starting the background. Not at CIA or really any of the other IC agencies either. Varies person to person and guessing also dependent on resources at the time.

But how would something like this be possible? I know that CIA doesn't have hiring events and a hiring pool like DIA does. However it's my understanding that when someone applies to the CIA, they're still applying for a career field and not a specific vacancy or vacancies. Would the agency send a letter like that to an applicant that late in the process if the career that they applied to doesn't currently have any vacancies? Because according to the CIA website, there are currently no vacancies in certain analytical career fields and people can't apply for those analytical careers now. And so I wonder if there are some people who had previously applied to those careers but were later sent the above letter because the agency decided not to hire any new analysts in those fields.

"CIA brings people in for the poly first, adjudicates the results (in tandem with medical/psych/credit pull), and then sends people onto the BI if they feel confident in the applicant's ability to obtain a clearance. In this sense, CIA views the poly as a step that must be passed in itself rather than only a piece of the bigger picture."

Not true in every case. Sometimes the ploy is last.

If you didn't screw the entire test up you're probably fine. I messed a nice chunk up and still got called.

How does the agency wade through those 4 to 5k apps per month? Does HR decide which people will advance in the application process or is it up to the specific directorate that people apply to?

Are you talking about adjudication? Narrowing down CIA job applications has nothing to do with adjudication.