BASIC: A Model for Executive Background Screening

Talent Check's BASIC reflects many years of investigative experience for public and private concerns, including the New York State Department of State and a major insurer. Our experience includes not only background checks but also investigation of high-end fraud and other wrongdoing.

Our model is provided here as an information resource only. It does not constitute legal advice or authority, and it is nonspecific with regard to jurisdictional requirements. Prior to implementation, consult a local attorney to ensure compliance with federal, state and administrative laws.

The model comprises five stages:

Basic information gathering. Ensure that all necessary releases, resumes, and application forms are in order. Gather all other readily available information, which may include but is not limited to the following:

• Performance evaluations
• Letters of commendation
• Documentation of prior and present business interests
• Street addresses, phone numbers, email addresses
• Internal and external writing samples, including published works, theses, dissertations

Consent forms for background checks on executive hires must be ironclad and broad:

• Scrutinized by an attorney to ensure that they are non-discriminatory and in keeping with federal and state laws, EEO and FCRA mandates, time limitations and reporting requirements.
• All-inclusive. Given the impact that someone who serves as the face of a corporation can have, a pre-employment background check justifiably casts a broad net. Anything that could point to a questionable business or social affiliation-online activities, forum memberships-should be subject to verification, in addition to such traditional areas of concentration as education credentials, certifications, work history, credit reports, criminal records, civil suits, substance abuse screening, etc.

Analyze and categorize. Analyze all documentation, categorizing it into areas of concentration and assigning levels of scrutiny to those areas. Accept nothing as fact. There is no such thing as presumptive integrity when it comes to executive hiring and/or promotion decisions.

• In determining what to scrutinize, look for contradictory documentation, omissions, gaps in service, conflicting address and pedigree information, etc.
• Do not assume the candidate has been properly vetted, even if they worked their way up the ranks (recall Bernard Kerik and Bernard Madoff). Even law enforcement and military experience should not afford a candidate instant credibility. It's easy to purchase phony documents on the Internet: degrees, college transcripts, employment histories, utility bills, references-even "replacement" certificates of military service, discharge papers and the like.

Search. Search online resources, databases and manual records. The information gathered establishes a foundation for focused, productive interviewing in the next stage.

• Order credit, criminal and civil reports. The latter not only speak to character but also may show money judgments resulting from convictions.
• Verify all pedigree information, including social security number, date of birth and address history. Compare the addresses on credit-report headers with those given on the employment application; conflicts are a red flag.
• Verify professional licenses.
• Confirm previous employers, business entities, contacts and listed references, determining undisclosed personal relationships, false statements, authenticity of educational institutions, etc. Send out requests and releases to prior employers and educational institutions.
• Check published and unpublished works for plagiarism.
• Check social media for evidence of alcohol or drug abuse, inappropriate relations with subordinates, etc.
• Run email addresses, determine domain name and website ownership, and examine networking both within and outside the hiring company's industry.
• Collect any news coverage

Interview. Interview all references, both disclosed and developed. Discretion is paramount: the candidate's reputation must be preserved.

• Interviewees should include current and/or former employers, business partners, business associates, community organizations, neighbors, landlords, spouses, friends, classmates and other professional and personal affiliations that might speak to the candidate's character.
• Questions should be predefined, uniform and relevant.
• Face-to-face interviews performed by experienced field investigators are always preferable to phone interviews. They tend to elicit more open and honest communication and also offer the opportunity for potentially relevant direct observation.
• Collateral interviews should be explored: one source often leads to additional, undisclosed, sources.

While most interviews can be conducted openly under the auspices of HR screening, some circumstances, such as when unethical or illicit activities are suspected, require a pretext. This method must be preapproved by legal counsel.

Compare and clarify. Compare the original documentation provided with all of the information gathered. Follow up on discrepancies, focusing on supplementary testimonial and documentary assets.

When qualitative and quantitative measures conflict, prior stages may have to be revisited. For example, re-interviewing may be required to validate certain statements. Additional fieldwork and research may be needed to substantiate prior professional duties, achievements and awards, particularly if there's evidence of exaggeration.

The findings from this stage help determine the depth of the candidate interview.