In a recent video, Alexander Parsons, Portfolio Manager for Technology & Infrastructure, broke down the fundamentals of facility and personnel clearances. He explained how each clearance type safeguards mission-critical work by ensuring only authorized individuals can access sensitive information. It was a straightforward, practical look at how compliance underpins national security.

But as Starla Condes, Portfolio Manager for Talent Acquisition, points out in her follow-up video, the conversation shouldn’t end there. Clearances protect information once someone is already in the system. What protects the system from who gets in?

“Espionage isn’t just a firewall issue,” she says. “It’s also a recruiting issue.”

That single line reframes an often-overlooked truth: national security starts before an offer letter is signed.

When Hiring Becomes a Security Function

Recruiting has long been seen as an administrative process, but in government contracting, it carries national implications. Each résumé, interview, and background check represents both opportunity and risk.

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) notes that human resources teams play “an integral role in developing and contributing to multi-disciplinary threat management teams to effectively detect, deter, and mitigate insider threats.”

Starla explains that while recruiters have always verified work history and education, the stakes have changed. “We’re not just protecting the quality of hires anymore,” she says. “There’s an element of national security that is being protected.”

In other words, the line between cybersecurity and human resources is thinner than most realize.

Verification as a First Line of Defense

Starla describes every stage of hiring as a checkpoint. Each interaction with a candidate is a chance to confirm, clarify, or catch something that doesn’t add up. “Every touchpoint with a candidate during the interview phase is a checkpoint, and those checkpoints matter,” she says.

She encourages interviewers to move past surface-level questions. Ask about past managers, project details, team communication, and results achieved. “Ask them for examples,” she says. “Make them explain and talk through what’s on their résumé.”

The Center for Development of Security Excellence (CDSE) reinforces that personnel vetting is often the first opportunity to identify insider threats before they gain access to sensitive systems. Similarly, a RAND Corporation report on continuous evaluation found that long gaps between personnel investigations leave organizations vulnerable to undetected insider activity.

Verification, then, is not about catching someone lying. It’s about confirming trustworthiness at a moment when prevention matters most.

The Cost of Overlooking Recruitment Risk

When verification is skipped or rushed, the impact isn’t limited to HR metrics. It affects contract performance, compliance, and mission readiness. A single falsified credential can derail deliverables or trigger costly re-screenings. In more serious cases, it can create insider-threat exposure that puts entire programs at risk.

The National Insider Threat Special Interest Group (NITSIG) reports that insider incidents across federal agencies and contractors remain a persistent challenge.

In acquisition terms, that’s not just a personnel issue—it’s a performance risk. Contracting officers and program managers are accountable for results, and unverified or unvetted hires can introduce vulnerabilities that no amount of technical security can fix.

Closing the Gaps in the Security Chain

Parsons explained how facility and personnel clearances form the structural framework of security. Starla builds on that by focusing on the human gateway that comes before clearances ever begin.

Clearances safeguard classified information. Recruitment safeguards access.

Treating hiring as part of the security perimeter closes a gap that technical defenses cannot. It’s a mindset that treats people, process, and policy as one integrated system rather than separate silos.

Guidance for Acquisition Professionals

For Acquisition Professionals, this isn’t theoretical. It’s operational. Integrating stronger verification standards into contracts and oversight processes can directly reduce mission risk. Consider these practical steps:

• Include verification requirements in contract terms. Ask for documented credential checks, interview validation procedures, and audit-ready hiring records.

• Involve HR in risk management planning. CISA emphasizes that human resources teams should be part of insider-threat and risk management structures from the start.

• Train hiring managers to recognize behavioral red flags. The NITSIG Insider Threat Indicators Guide lists early signs that may surface during interviews, including inconsistent timelines, unreported foreign travel, or vague explanations of past work.

• Promote continuous evaluation. RAND’s research confirms that ongoing review and re-verification are essential to maintain the integrity of cleared programs.

Each step supports a culture where recruitment is recognized as a shared responsibility, not an isolated function.

The New Security Perimeter

Firewalls, encryption, and access controls will always matter. But security begins long before an employee logs into a system. It begins the moment their résumé is submitted.

Starla summarizes it best: “If talent-acquisition professionals treat the hiring process with the same vigilance that IT treats a firewall, we can harden some of the most overlooked entry points into an organization—the hiring process itself.”

Parsons and Starla are addressing two sides of the same mission. One protects information. The other protects access to it. Together, they remind acquisition leaders that compliance is not the finish line. It’s the starting point of national defense.

If you missed the first part of this discussion, check out Alexander Parsons’ video on the basics of facility and personnel clearances. It lays the groundwork for understanding how security starts long before hiring ever begins.