// clearance.jsx — OnboardIQ /features/clearance-onboarding // The govcon wedge as a feature deep-dive. Argument + product evidence + // a real-feeling reference for SF-86, tiers, polygraph, reinvestigation. const CL_MAX_W = 1180; // ─── hero (verdigris over ink) ───────────────────────────── function ClearanceHero() { return (
features · clearance-aware onboarding

A cleared hire is not
a checkbox. It is a
parallel architecture.

OnboardIQ treats clearance as the starting point for an entire track. SF-86 prep, tier-1 through tier-5 investigation tracking, adjudication notes, polygraph scheduling, the continuous-evaluation calendar, and the reinvestigation window. Not a flag on a generic flow. The whole architecture for a particular customer.

Start free trial Book a govcon demo 14-day trial · no card · real onboardings, not a sandbox
); } // ─── second buyer band: who this is for ────────────────── function WhoBand() { return (
Who this page is for

Small and mid-sized federal contractors, sub-primes, and the program managers who staff their contracts. If you have ever sent a clearance prep packet over email, kept a reinvestigation calendar in a shared spreadsheet, or watched a DCAA reviewer ask for a file you cannot easily produce, the rest of this page is for you.

); } // ─── the track diagram · sequential steps ──────────────── const CL_TRACK = [ { n: "01", title: "Position designation", body: "Mark the role as requiring clearance, set the tier (T1 / T2 / T3 / T4 / T5), pick the sponsor (your own facility clearance, the prime's, or an agency code).", time: "minutes" }, { n: "02", title: "SF-86 preparation packet", body: "Generated against the canonical .gov form, with a checklist of supporting documents (employment history, residences, foreign contacts). Links the new hire to the official eApp portal. We do not collect the SF-86 itself.", time: "1 to 2 weeks" }, { n: "03", title: "Investigation handoff", body: "Tracks DCSA / OPM / agency-specific case numbers and status. Records adjudication notes against the case. The system never pretends to be the investigator.", time: "varies by tier" }, { n: "04", title: "Interim determination", body: "If your sponsor grants an interim, the workflow opens the interim-only track: limited system access, sponsor attestations, work-product restrictions. The interim is a state, not a flag.", time: "weeks" }, { n: "05", title: "Final determination", body: "On final adjudication, the position moves to the steady-state track: full access provisioning, fitness sign-offs, position-of-trust designation tier set, CE program enrollment.", time: "months" }, { n: "06", title: "Continuous evaluation", body: "Calendar of CE check-ins, with reminders tied to the program your sponsor enrolls you in. Records anomaly reports and the responses to them.", time: "ongoing" }, { n: "07", title: "Reinvestigation", body: "Tier-aware reminder schedule keyed to the original adjudication date. The reminder is a legal obligation; we surface it twelve and six months out.", time: "T3 · 10y · T5 · 5y" }, ]; function TrackDiagram() { return (
The track

Seven stops, from designation to reinvestigation.

Each stop is a state, not a checkbox. The workflow knows what tier you are, what comes next, and what the legal obligation is when the calendar turns over.

    {CL_TRACK.map((s, i) => (
  1. {s.n}
    {s.title}
    {s.body}
    typical time
    {s.time}
    2. ))}
); } // ─── tier matrix · what changes per tier ─────────────── const TIERS = [ { tier: "T1", name: "Trust", invest: "Tier 1 (NACI equiv.)", scope: "Non-sensitive public trust", reinv: "5y", proto: "Standard background" }, { tier: "T2", name: "Moderate trust", invest: "Tier 2", scope: "Moderate-risk public trust", reinv: "5y", proto: "MBI-equivalent" }, { tier: "T3", name: "Secret", invest: "Tier 3 / T3R", scope: "Confidential, Secret", reinv: "10y", proto: "ANACI / NACLC" }, { tier: "T4", name: "High-risk", invest: "Tier 4", scope: "High-risk public trust", reinv: "5y", proto: "BI" }, { tier: "T5", name: "Top Secret", invest: "Tier 5 / T5R", scope: "TS, TS/SCI, Q", reinv: "5y", proto: "SSBI + polygraph variant" }, ]; function TierMatrix() { return (
Five tiers, five tracks

Tier-aware, not tier-blind.

Each tier has its own investigation type, its own reinvestigation window, and its own adjudication protocol. A workflow that treats them the same will eventually fail an audit on a position it should never have run.

{/* header */}
{["TIER", "NAME", "INVESTIGATION", "SCOPE", "REINVEST", "PROTOCOL"].map((h, i) => (
{h}
))}
{TIERS.map((t, i) => (
{t.tier}
{t.name}
{t.invest}
{t.scope}
{t.reinv}
{t.proto}
))}
Tier nomenclature follows the SEAD-3 / Federal Investigative Standards. We track the case in your sponsor's terms, not ours.
); } // ─── live product surface: clearance tracker ───────────── const CLEARED = [ { name: "Jenna Whitfield", role: "Program Manager", tier: "T5", status: "active", sub: "Top Secret / SCI · adjudicated 2024-02-11", ce: "next check 2026-08-11", flag: null }, { name: "Aisha Karam", role: "Cyber Analyst", tier: "T3", status: "interim", sub: "Secret · interim · sponsor 24-OPM-7714", ce: "final pending", flag: "interim" }, { name: "Daniel Okafor", role: "Cloud Engineer", tier: "T5", status: "investigation", sub: "TS · T5 · DCSA case 24-D-118-22", ce: "pending adjudication", flag: "in-flight" }, { name: "Marcus Reed", role: "UX Designer", tier: null, status: "uncleared", sub: "Commercial role · no clearance required", ce: null, flag: null }, { name: "Priya Subramanian",role: "Sr Contracts", tier: "T2", status: "active", sub: "Public trust · MBI · adjudicated 2022-05-30", ce: "next check 2025-11-30", flag: "ce-due" }, { name: "Theo Bramwell", role: "IT Support", tier: "T3", status: "reinvest-due", sub: "Secret · adjudicated 2016-04-14", ce: "reinvestigation Q3", flag: "reinvest" }, ]; function ClearanceTrackerSurface() { return (
In the product · /app/compliance/clearances

One screen, all your cleared positions.

Tier, current state, last adjudication, next CE check, reinvestigation window. The color bar is the same ownership taxonomy as the rest of the app. The yellow rows are the ones the calendar is going to make you answer for.

{/* Header */}
Clearance tracker 34 active · 7 in adjudication · 2 reinvest due · last CE seal 09:41 Tier · all Export
{/* Column header */}
person · role tier status case ce / reinvest
{/* Rows */} {CLEARED.map((p, i) => { const flagColor = p.flag === "reinvest" ? 'var(--red-500)' : p.flag === "ce-due" ? 'var(--accent-600)' : p.flag === "interim" ? 'var(--accent-600)' : p.flag === "in-flight" ? 'var(--blue-500)' : 'var(--ink-300)'; const statusPill = p.status === "active" ? ['success', 'active'] : p.status === "interim" ? ['warn', 'interim'] : p.status === "investigation" ? ['info', 'in-investigation'] : p.status === "reinvest-due" ? ['danger', 'reinvest due'] : ['neutral', 'uncleared']; return (
{p.name}
{p.role}
{p.tier || 'n/a'} {statusPill[1]}
{p.sub}
{p.ce || 'n/a'}
); })} {/* Footer · audit hash */}
every state change written to the hash-chained audit log · last checkpoint 0x7a1f…c402
); } // ─── what gets retrofit vs built · the structural argument ─ function StructuralArgument() { return (
Why structural, not feature

What a generic HRIS bolts on, and what we built into the floor.

{/* Left: bolted on */}
✕ bolted-on

Clearance as a feature

    {[ "A checkbox on the personnel record: 'has clearance.'", "A free-text field for the case number, with no schema.", "Reinvestigation is a calendar reminder you set yourself.", "Interim vs. final is a tag, not a workflow.", "SF-86 prep is a Drive folder named 'paperwork, Daniel.'", "Adjudication notes live in someone's Notion.", "Auditor asks for the trail. The trail is in an email thread.", ].map((s, i) => (
  • {s}
    • ))}
{/* Right: built in */}
✓ structural

Clearance as the floor plan

    {[ "Clearance state is a typed object: tier, status, sponsor, case, adjudication date, CE program.", "Investigation case has its own schema, tied to the right authority (DCSA, OPM, agency).", "Reinvestigation reminders are tier-aware and tracked as legal obligations.", "Interim and final are different workflow states with different access provisioning rules.", "SF-86 prep is a generated packet with a checklist, not a Drive folder.", "Adjudication notes are field-level, audited, and access-controlled.", "Auditor asks for the trail. The trail exports as a scoped ZIP with a manifest.", ].map((s, i) => (
  • {s}
    • ))}
); } // ─── DD-254 sub flows · the other half nobody else does ── function SubFlows() { return (
DD-254 sub flows

The flow nobody else's HRIS ships.

When you bring on a cleared subcontractor, the contract carries a DD-254 with its own classified-information requirements. The sub has a sponsor, the sponsor has a contract code, the contract has a security classification specification, and the new hire's access is gated on all three. We treat the DD-254 packet as a first-class workflow with its own envelopes, countersignatures, and audit trail. The sub-prime sees their own portal, you see your view, the contracting officer sees a scoped export.

tip · the DD-254 contract security classification specification has thirty fields and a signature block for the prime, the sub, and the cognizant security office. We pre-fill the boilerplate against your facility clearance record so you fill in the contract-specific parts only.
{/* Envelope / packet rendering */}
dd-254 · packet · v3 signatures · 2 of 3
contract
CONTRACT-MFD-441 · IDIQ task order 2026-04
prime · MeridianFed · sub · BlueRidge LLC · sponsor · 24-OPM-7714
); } function DDFieldRow({ label, value }) { return (
{label} {value}
); } function DDSig({ name, when, done }) { return (
{done && }
{name}
{when}
); } // ─── photo slot · capability evidence ──────────────────── function ClearanceEvidencePhoto() { return (
Where the work happens

The product is shaped by the office it serves.

OnboardIQ is built for the kind of contractor who actually runs cleared work: small, sub-prime, or program-managing teams who have to keep the clearance calendar themselves. The clearance track is shaped by how the work happens, not by an HR taxonomy that treats clearance as a checkbox.

); } // ─── compliance + audit band (re-used pattern) ────────── function ComplianceBand() { return (
The second buyer

Built for the auditor you have not met yet.

A contracting officer in 2028 is going to ask for the chain of custody on a clearance decision from 2025. The chain has to be there, and it has to be verifiable. Everything on this page is also a file in that chain.

{[ ["Hash-chained log", "Every state change is an append-only event with the previous hash baked in."], ["WORM replication", "Daily snapshots replicate to write-once-read-many storage."], ["Scoped exports", "Time-boxed, scoped ZIP with cryptographic manifest. DCAA-ready."], ["Auditor magic-link", "External auditors get a read-only, scoped, time-boxed view."], ].map(([t, b], i, arr) => (
{t}
{b}
))}
we list what we actually do · where a control is provider-attested, we name the provider · where a certification does not exist, we do not imply one
); } // ─── FAQ ───────────────────────────────────────────────── const CL_FAQ = [ { q: "Does OnboardIQ replace eApp / SF-86?", a: "No, and it is not designed to. eApp is the only legitimate way to submit an SF-86 to an investigative authority. We generate the prep packet against the canonical form, walk the new hire through what they will need (employment history, residences, foreign contacts), and link out to the official portal. We do not store the SF-86 itself." }, { q: "Can OnboardIQ submit to DCSA / OPM directly?", a: "No system can. Investigation submissions go through the eApp pipeline owned by the agency. OnboardIQ tracks the case number the agency returns, records the adjudication status notes you receive, and writes everything to the audit log so the workflow knows where the case stands." }, { q: "What about FedRAMP?", a: "Today OnboardIQ runs on US-region infrastructure with documented controls. We have a documented path to a FedRAMP-aligned deployment topology for federal customers who require it. We will not claim a certification we do not hold." }, { q: "Does it support CMMC?", a: "We surface CMMC training acknowledgement as a step type and store the artifact under the same retention rules as the rest of the audit log. We are not a CMMC assessor; we make it easier to produce evidence for one." }, { q: "How do you handle position-of-trust roles that do not require classified access?", a: "Public trust and high-risk public trust (T1, T2, T4) are first-class tiers in the workflow with their own investigation types and reinvestigation windows. The clearance tracker treats them as tracks of equal weight, not as edge cases." }, { q: "What if our sponsor changes mid-onboarding?", a: "Sponsor change is a workflow state with its own signal. The case under the old sponsor is closed with a status note, and a new packet opens under the new sponsor with the relevant fields pre-filled. The audit log carries both." }, ]; function ClFAQ() { const [open, setOpen] = React.useState(0); return (
Questions security officers ask

Clearance FAQ.

{CL_FAQ.map((it, i) => (
{it.a}
))}
); } // ─── final CTA · overlay with cleared workstation photo behind scrim function ClFinalCTA() { return (

Run a cleared onboarding this week.

Trial includes the full clearance track. If you want a govcon-specific demo with sponsor and DD-254 fixtures preloaded, we run those on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

Start free trial Book a govcon demo
No credit card. 14-day trial. Real onboardings, not a sandbox.
); } // ─── assembly ────────────────────────────────────────── function Clearance({ tweaks, setTweak }) { return (
); } Object.assign(window, { Clearance });