Who should the government trust? Now’s your chance to weigh in

For years, those of us steeped in the world of national security have known that the biggest risks to government operations aren’t always spies or cyberattacks. Often, they are employees who take their position of public trust and leverage it to do harm.

That’s why a shift is happening right now in how the federal government evaluates an individual’s suitability for employment. These changes, outlined in a proposed rule from the Office of Personnel Management, aim to better align the suitability process with the broader framework of the Trusted Workforce 2.0 personnel vetting reform effort. And while it may sound like bureaucracy as usual, the move is about streamlining, not stove piping.

Aligning Suitability with the Trusted Workforce Vision

For the uninitiated, "suitability" refers to whether someone is appropriate for federal employment—not whether they should have access to classified information (that’s the realm of security clearances). But the two systems have long operated in silos, creating confusion, inefficiencies, and even legal gray areas for agencies trying to protect their missions and the public trust. 

The new proposed changes to 5 CFR Part 731, now open for public comment, are intended to bring suitability more fully under the same risk management umbrella as security clearances and credentialing. That means more consistent adjudicative standards and a clearer process for determining whether someone should be removed from federal service.

It’s a long-overdue modernization that’s part of the Trusted Workforce roadmap: a future where all vetting decisions—whether you're applying for a contracting job at the Department of Energy or a GS-7 position at the Agriculture Department —flow from the same principles of trust, risk, and reliability. And ensuring that employment issues don’t fester or go unaddressed, allowing an individual at risk of breaking that government trust to simply drift from one agency to the next without accountability.

Why the Fine Print Matters

So what’s actually changing? In practical terms:

• OPM will have increased authority to direct agencies to take removal action—even after a candidate has been hired—if new information reveals they’re unsuitable.

• Agencies will have clearer guidance on disqualifying criteria, like misconduct, false statements, or prior removals for cause.

• The proposal further codifies the idea that suitability and security are both critical to the government’s maintenance of a Trusted Workforce. 

These changes are especially relevant in today’s federal workplace, where the line between public trust, national security, and agency mission support is increasingly blurred. A contractor with no clearance might still handle sensitive personal information. An entry-level employee might still pose an insider threat. 

Critics argue the policy is government overreach at the exact time when the executive branch seems intent to unleash greater control over hiring decisions. But the proposed update to suitability has been bantered about since before the Trump Administration, and jives with the government’s goals of better alignment between suitability and security clearance determinations.

With Continuous Vetting starting to roll out across the High-Risk Public Trust Population, the need for this action is more pronounced. Public trust employees working across government will soon be subject to the same regular criminal and financial checks as national security workers. 

The Path to Trusted Workforce Across GovernmentThese rules aren’t final. OPM has opened a public comment period through July 3, giving stakeholders the opportunity to weigh in before the regulations are set in stone.

If you’re a federal HR practitioner, a hiring manager, a security professional—or even someone who has been on the receiving end of a suitability determination—now is the time to share your insights. Are the criteria fair? Does more streamlined suitability make sense?These aren’t just legal tweaks. They’re part of a whole-of-government attempt to build a more agile, risk-based personnel system. But that system will only work if it reflects the realities of how hiring, onboarding, and vetting play out across the federal landscape.

For years, suitability has been the overlooked sibling of the security clearance process. That’s changing, and for good reason. Trusted Workforce 2.0 is a roadmap for how the federal government can hire and retain people it can trust.

So take a moment, read the proposal, and add your voice. Suitability may be a wonky term, but its impact touches every corner of government. Let’s make sure we get it right.