Question about applications to multiple agencies and background

[dominicanops]

I applied to about 30 different agencies via the internet, but have only tested for 5 of them. The personal history statement asks "Have you ever applied to any police or Law enforcement agency", but do I have to list ALL of them, I don't even remember most of them since I just applied for kicks just for the sake of applying. I even applied to LAPD and I live all the way out in Jersey!! Can I get away with just listing the agencies in which I have just tested with, listing 30+ police departments seems to be a way to literal interpretation of the question, or am I should supposed to list all the departments?

How does the background check work in regards to the other agencies you applied for? Is there some sort of database that keeps track of all the agencies you applied to lol? So far on my history statement I only put down the ones I tested with or will be testing with. Any advice is appreciated!!

[Citicop]

If you submitted an application, then you applied.

List them all.

I'm not disclosing how background investigations work except to say that they are designed to weed out the liars and people with something to hide.

Tell the truth, or you'll never get in.

-Citicop.

[GoDirectly2Jail]

I applied to about 30 different agencies via the internet, but have only tested for 5 of them. The personal history statement asks "Have you ever applied to any police or Law enforcement agency", but do I have to list ALL of them, I don't even remember most of them since I just applied for kicks just for the sake of applying. I even applied to LAPD and I live all the way out in Jersey!! Can I get away with just listing the agencies in which I have just tested with, listing 30+ police departments seems to be a way to literal interpretation of the question, or am I should supposed to list all the departments?

How does the background check work in regards to the other agencies you applied for? Is there some sort of database that keeps track of all the agencies you applied to lol? So far on my history statement I only put down the ones I tested with or will be testing with. Any advice is appreciated!!

As one who screens apps. when they come in, I view discrepancies of applications as one of two things: the applicant is either being (1.) deliberately deceptive, or is (2.) careless or incompetent (or some mixture of the two).

We don't want to hire anyone displaying EITHER of those traits.

[dominicanops]

What do you mean discrepancies in applications? The applications I filled out are all the same since the website I filled out the application from uses a 1 resume system in which it saves it and then all you have to do is click "Apply Now".

And as for the background check, how do they find out you applied to particular place if you only submitted an online application a few months ago and never heard anything back from them.....it seems unlikely that if you gave someone a piece a paper and they put it in some folder, that other departments are going to find out that you applied to that particular place.

I know many people who only put the departments they took a written test with and they didn't get DQ'd for "either being (1.) deliberately deceptive, or is (2.) careless or incompetent (or some mixture of the two)."

[Citicop]

it seems unlikely that if you gave someone a piece a paper and they put it in some folder, that other departments are going to find out that you applied to that particular place.

Again, no one here is going to tell you the specifics of how a background gets done.

The quote above leads me to believe you intend to lie on the application because you think you can get away with it. If you think you can, go for it. It will free up the pool for more deserving candidates.

If they ask for all the departments you applied to, they want ALL the departments you applied to. Providing anything less is either careless or deceptive.

How hard is that to understand?

-Citicop.

[dominicanops]

Again, no one here is going to tell you the specifics of how a background gets done.

The quote above leads me to believe you intend to lie on the application because you think you can get away with it. If you think you can, go for it. It will free up the pool for more deserving candidates.

If they ask for all the departments you applied to, they want ALL the departments you applied to. Providing anything less is either careless or deceptive.

How hard is that to understand?

-Citicop.

If I think I can get away with it, I wouldn't started the thread. You are lead to believe what you want to believe. The only reason I ask is because I don't know EVERY single agency I applied for, and I don't want to appear deceptive when they say "What about this agency in Booonies Central, USA". I admit it was a mistake to go crazy applying to everywhere, but I did it. As far as I am concerned, that is the biggest mistake of my life and not drugs/traffic offenses/or criminal related matters. I just want to know if it will be held against me to forget a place I applied to two years ago.

[Citicop]

Just do your best.

If you list forty agencies, and leave out two, they will understand, provided it really was just an honest mistake. If you list two and leave out forty, then it starts to look bad.

Usually when people ask questions like this, it's because they admitted to something on an application that DQ'ed them, and now they want to cover it up and hope the department doesn't check with other agencies.

Citicop.

[DecentShack]

It is my understanding that different agencies are unable to communicate with each other about any background information or private issues related to an applicant. Think about it; these Personal History Packets that you fill out for each department or agency have every detail of your life from your greatest accomplishments to the skeletons in your closet. This information must be protected by each agency; imagine if every Law Enforcement Agency in the country from local to federal had access to this information and packet in some database form after one job application with a LEA. Does this mean all the millions of applicants whether selected or rejected are in this database or on some LEA national record? Not to mention governmental civilian jobs that require background checks; would they have access to these as well? It is just entirely too much power with too much liability for a Law Enforcement Agency of any kind to be able to share such information that you voluntarily submitted to them. Also how would any agency know you applied to another, other then you listing what agencies you applied for in the packet? Maybe two county agencies in the same state/area would communicate by chance whether legally or illegally concerning an applicant, but is a federal agency really going to know that you applied to a county agency in one of the states?
The background check process and personal history packets are private and many of them even have a waiver you sign agreeing to allow them to show these packets to all necessary personnel in the department; and no one else. Many agencies and departments are very secretative about how they perform background checks and just what they have the ability to do because their power is limited or the method of obtaining the information is illegal in getting another department to disclose such private information (I am not implying all or any departments do this). Although they tell you to be completely honest it is ironic that recruiters, investigators, and agencies overall are not being 100% honest in their implications of how much power they have and what information they have access to (once again I am not implying anything negative, this is just something departments have to do and keep secret in order to weed out any liars or possible people planning to ommit information that disqaulified them formerly at another agency). If agencies from county to federal communicated with each other on such a tightly knit level how do you explain the problems of the past such as 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina.
The fact is that most agencies are not coordinated well when it comes to working together including interacting with one another as far as what applicants applied where and what their outcomes were and why. The only way an agency will know you applied to another is if you list it and following that the information they gain from the other agency is borderline illegal if not entirely. Many may argue that the sharing of such information is legal for "law enforcement purposes" but that explanation is so broad, anything for any reason can be given the label "law enforcment purpose" by an officer/agent and the power would be far too extreme. So that is my explanation and I hope it explains alot to it's viewers and helps your understanding of applications and multiple agencies.

[Roger Dat]

They will talk, they will find out end of story.

[Roger Dat]

They will talk and they will find out. What experience do you have that leads you to believe that this information is so unattainable or that agencies arent allowed to talk to one another about applicants? It does happen it will happen and if your suggesting its ok to with hold information from one department because you think that it wont be discovered you are sadly mistaken.

[DecentShack]

I understand you have to say these things in order to weed out those thinking of lieing who read this post otherwise God forbid a person who lied or omitted information might become a law enforcement officer. And at no point did I suggest an applicant withhold information. As far as my experience I have studied and read many privacy and employment laws at the collegiate level. Also the applications I have filled out for LEA's clearly have a paragraph stating that by signing the line below you are giving them permission to share this information with all necessary personnel within the department, specifically stating "within the department", not to mention the recruiter I spoke to said the information stays within the department for their record and no other investigators or outside agencies will have access to the packets or information within them, LEO or civilian. Unless of course this law enforcement officer lied to me and the packet that represents the entire agency is untruthful?

For those of you who did not pick up on the level of irony I have just demonstrated; the arguement is a liar cannot become a police officer because they will get caught, but a law enforcement official must be lieing in this situation. Either the officer/recruiter spoken with lied about the protection of a background packet in order to purposely decieve one into attempting to cover something up and getting caught at another agency or the officers, I assume you are LEO's, posting here are lieing about an agencies ability to discover a lie or omitted information in order to purposely deceive one into being truthful and possibly not getting hired because of such information that may come with being totally truthful that otherwise would have remained your personal business and yours alone. (I realize that being deceived into being truthful sounds bizarre, but that is what may be taking place). The only honest explanation for the two groups are different policies in different areas of the country and being unaware of such various policies.

[nate1]

You have to be fingerprinted to complete the hiring process as a police officer. It takes about thirty seconds to find when and where you were fingerprinted, by which agency, and for what reason. From there, the investigating agency will request and obtain your PHQ from other agencies, once they see you were printed for employment purposes.

[Samuel]

It is my understanding that different agencies are unable to communicate with each other about any background information or private issues related to an applicant. Think about it; these Personal History Packets that you fill out for each department or agency have every detail of your life from your greatest accomplishments to the skeletons in your closet. This information must be protected by each agency; imagine if every Law Enforcement Agency in the country from local to federal had access to this information and packet in some database form after one job application with a LEA. Does this mean all the millions of applicants whether selected or rejected are in this database or on some LEA national record? Not to mention governmental civilian jobs that require background checks; would they have access to these as well? It is just entirely too much power with too much liability for a Law Enforcement Agency of any kind to be able to share such information that you voluntarily submitted to them. Also how would any agency know you applied to another, other then you listing what agencies you applied for in the packet? Maybe two county agencies in the same state/area would communicate by chance whether legally or illegally concerning an applicant, but is a federal agency really going to know that you applied to a county agency in one of the states? The background check process and personal history packets are private and many of them even have a waiver you sign agreeing to allow them to show these packets to all necessary personnel in the department; and no one else. Many agencies and departments are very secretative about how they perform background checks and just what they have the ability to do because their power is limited or the method of obtaining the information is illegal in getting another department to disclose such private information (I am not implying all or any departments do this). Although they tell you to be completely honest it is ironic that recruiters, investigators, and agencies overall are not being 100% honest in their implications of how much power they have and what information they have access to (once again I am not implying anything negative, this is just something departments have to do and keep secret in order to weed out any liars or possible people planning to ommit information that disqaulified them formerly at another agency). If agencies from county to federal communicated with each other on such a tightly knit level how do you explain the problems of the past such as 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina. The fact is that most agencies are not coordinated well when it comes to working together including interacting with one another as far as what applicants applied where and what their outcomes were and why. The only way an agency will know you applied to another is if you list it and following that the information they gain from the other agency is borderline illegal if not entirely. Many may argue that the sharing of such information is legal for "law enforcement purposes" but that explanation is so broad, anything for any reason can be given the label "law enforcment purpose" by an officer/agent and the power would be far too extreme. So that is my explanation and I hope it explains alot to it's viewers and helps your understanding of applications and multiple agencies.

If you're gonna spew forth - for god's sake USE PARAGRAPHS! :rolleyes:

[Samuel]

I understand you have to say these things in order to weed out those thinking of lieing who read this post otherwise God forbid a person who lied or omitted information might become a law enforcement officer. And at no point did I suggest an applicant withhold information. As far as my experience I have studied and read many privacy and employment laws at the collegiate level. Also the applications I have filled out for LEA's clearly have a paragraph stating that by signing the line below you are giving them permission to share this information with all necessary personnel within the department, specifically stating "within the department", not to mention the recruiter I spoke to said the information stays within the department for their record and no other investigators or outside agencies will have access to the packets or information within them, LEO or civilian. Unless of course this law enforcement officer lied to me and the packet that represents the entire agency is untruthful?

For those of you who did not pick up on the level of irony I have just demonstrated; the arguement is a liar cannot become a police officer because they will get caught, but a law enforcement official must be lieing in this situation. Either the officer/recruiter spoken with lied about the protection of a background packet in order to purposely decieve one into attempting to cover something up and getting caught at another agency or the officers, I assume you are LEO's, posting here are lieing about an agencies ability to discover a lie or omitted information in order to purposely deceive one into being truthful and possibly not getting hired because of such information that may come with being totally truthful that otherwise would have remained your personal business and yours alone. (I realize that being deceived into being truthful sounds bizarre, but that is what may be taking place). The only honest explanation for the two groups are different policies in different areas of the country and being unaware of such various policies.

For the amount of spewing you're doing, use More Paragraphs than just one! :rolleyes: