Meeting diplomats-in-residence

The State Department has a problem. Unlike the military, which has enjoyed huge support from the public since the GWOT started, the State Department has little to no domestic constituency. Unless you've lost your passport and gotten help from and embassy/consulate, you probably haven't ever even had contact with a U.S. diplomat.

To fix that, they've stationed "diplomats in residence" in the different regions of the U.S. These diplomats essentially perform public relations work in their areas -- they give presentations for those interested in the Foreign Service test, and explain available State Department programs. [State's DIR page]

On October 19th, State hosted an online webinar for those who've been selected to take the Foreign Service Oral Assessment this winter. And then on the 30th the Hawaii/Nevada/Southern California diplomat in residence scheduled "Coffee with a Diplomat" appointments for those interested in State Department programs. I participated in both events.

In both cases, the events were less helpful than I'd hoped for. The webinar rehashed the Oral Assessment timeline of events, but didn't offer any more information than what can be gleaned from the [FSO Selection Process page]. I understand why -- there's a wall between the diplomats-in-residence and the test assessors -- but at this stage I'm less interested in process than I am what's "good" and "bad."

Similarly, the range of topics you can cover in "Coffee with a Diplomat" is limited. I was interested in the diplomat's test experience, but they demurred, saying that was 16 years ago and would not be helpful. Since I already have overseas assignment experience with the U.S. government, and I'm not interested in other programs, there wasn't much else I wanted to talk about.

So while I understand the purpose and benefits of these programs, I realized I'm not really the target market for either. If anything, the one thing I've learned is that I should know which of the 13 dimensions get tested in which of the three oral assessment events. It may sound purely academic, but there were many others who already knew.

Passed the Personal Narratives phase

Today the Board of Examiners sent me an email saying the personal narratives I submitted to the Qualifications Evaluation Panel (QEP) were good enough. The next step in my candidacy is to schedule an in-person Oral Assessment -- the same test I passed in March 2006.

Between September 16th and September 27th, I can schedule my appointment. The testing dates are between November 4th and February 28th. As for locations, D.C. is always an option, with either Chicago or San Francisco as a secondary option.

Personal Narrative 6: Leadership

Leadership skills. Leadership can be defined as motivating others, encouraging creative solutions, establish positive team relationships, or significantly influencing the direction of the work. Describe how you have demonstrated leadership, either on one particular occasion or over time. Include the following elements in your response: the situation, and the steps you took to show leadership. What was the result?

In 2013 I was assigned responsibility for relocating the office buildings for the battalion headquarters and three subordinate company headquarters. My staff of four used the Project Management Professional methodology.

First, we engaged both installation and subordinate unit stakeholders by communicating the desired end-state face-to-face and listening to everyone's concerns.

Second, we began planning. We did a walkthrough of the new site, then developed a draft room allocation. We solicited feedback from everyone involved and went through several rounds of revisions. Once finalized, we used backwards planning to establish the movement timeline.

Once execution began, we monitored progress at the different locations, and sent out a progress report of each day's events.

At the end of the move, I walked through each location, collected keys, and then turned over the buildings to the installation management. We received written confirmation of the project deliverables, and recorded both the lessons learned and project documents on the unit's Sharepoint website.

The project was a success. We finished on schedule and within budget; we were one of only a few units on Camp Humphreys who could make such a claim.

Personal Narrative 5: Management

Management skills. Foreign Service Officers are often required to manage projects, demonstrating the ability to plan and organize, set priorities, employ a systematic approach, and allocate time and resources efficiently. Describe a project you managed (or helped to manage), and how you sought to achieve the project's goals. Include the following elements in your response: the project, and the steps you took to manage this project. What was the result?

In 2013 I was assigned responsibility for relocating the office buildings for the battalion headquarters and three subordinate company headquarters. My staff of four used the Project Management Professional methodology.

First, we engaged both installation and subordinate unit stakeholders by communicating the desired end-state face-to-face and listening to everyone's concerns.

Second, we began planning. We did a walkthrough of the new site, then developed a draft room allocation. We solicited feedback from everyone involved and went through several rounds of revisions. Once finalized, we used backwards planning to establish the movement timeline.

Once execution began, we monitored progress at the different locations, and sent out a progress report of each day's events.

At the end of the move, I walked through each location, collected keys, and then turned over the buildings to the installation management. We received written confirmation of the project deliverables, and recorded both the lessons learned and project documents on the unit's Sharepoint website.

The project was a success. We finished on schedule and within budget; we were one of only a few units on Camp Humphreys who could make such a claim.

Personal Narrative 4: Communication

Communications skills are critical to successful diplomacy. Describe a situation which you used your communication skills (either in English or another language) to further an aim or achieve a goal. Include the following elements in your response: the situation and the steps you took to deal with the situation. What was the result?

In 2006, while I was working at the Shanghai Consulate General’s Foreign Commercial Service, my supervisor tasked me with attending the 4th Annual Jiangdu Cultural Economic Tourism Festival. The goal was to provide U.S. government support to an event that open up opportunities for American small and medium enterprises to export to China.

Upon my arrival to Jiangdu, event coordinators greeted me and asked me to give a speech at the event. They even provided me with a script, which was a point of concern. Because I was there in an official capacity, I knew that anything I said might indicate an official U.S policy, so I made sure to edit the script to remove anything that could indicate a commitment from the U.S.

The next day, I spoke at the event, which was much larger than I had anticipated. I gave my speech in front of a crowd of 900 local attendees, and appeared in a news story on local television.

The result of my participation in the event was greater visibility for the consulate’s Foreign Commercial Service and increased opportunities for U.S. companies to export to China.

Video of the newscast can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDwoTXFujn4&t=1s

Personal Narrative 3: Interpersonal skills

Interpersonal skills. In the Foreign Service, you will be asked to interact effectively and diplomatically with people in difficult situations. Describe how you have used your interpersonal skills in a specific situation to resolve a problem or achieve a goal. Include the following elements in your response: identity the goal or problem, and the specific steps you took. What was the result?

In 2011, I deployed to Afghanistan and was put in charge of 50 U.S. soldiers under an Australian Defence Forces commander. The detachment consisted of four squads from four different companies in two separate battalions, so I had no linear authority over most of the detachment.

Given the weak matrix organizational structure, I established ground rules for the team when I met with the squad leaders. I explained that I was not there to directly supervise, but to help solve whatever problems they might have. This approach set a cooperative tone for the effort, and proved essential in a critical situation.

One day, a rocket attack hit one of the housing units. In accordance with protocols, we collected the personnel accountability reports and forwarded them to the higher battalions.

Though no one was injured, being in the housing unit qualified the six soldiers inside for a Combat Action Badge, so I began the paperwork for submission to that element's company headquarters. I photographed the damage to the housing unit, collected sworn statements from the individuals affected, and submitted the relevant forms. Those six soldiers received their due recognition by the end of their deployments.

This correct application of interpersonal skills proved key to the unit's success.

Personal Narrative 2: Intellectual Skills

Intellectual skills. In the Foreign Service, you will confront challenging situations that require identifying the problem, collecting relevant information, and formulating innovative solutions to resolve the problem. Describe a time when you responded innovatively to unanticipated circumstances to solve a problem. Include the following elements in your response: the situation, the steps you took to think through this situation, and how your actions addressed the situation. What were the results?

When I became a company commander for the Army in 2014, few professional development materials were available, and some offered "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" era advice that would have caused legal problems.

Therefore, I drew on my experience as a newspaper editor to write an updated version that would be relevant to the contemporary needs of the service.

I contacted the publisher of the 1996 book to gauge their interest in a new book, and they agreed to work with me on a manuscript. While I was still in command, I began work on the outline and the first chapters.

I drew on my personal experiences in the position to explain the mechanics of being a commander – what disciplinary tools were available, how to manage unit funds, and how to plan unit training. I organized the chapters based on the various areas of responsibility, and submitted the text to the publisher in an iterative manner – one at a time, and revising each completed chapter based on feedback.

In January 2017, the book became available online and through the Army's official retail store. To date, the publisher has sold over 900 copies, and company grade officers are using it to become more professional in the execution of their jobs.

Personal Narrative 1: Substantive Knowledge

Substantive Knowledge. The Foreign Service seeks a diverse workforce with broad job skills and a depth of experience to represent the United States overseas. Briefly describe why you chose the career track you selected and what you bring to that career track.

I chose the Management career track because I believe it would be the best application of the language, job knowledge, and soft skills I have gained during my career.

I learned and used Japanese while I majored in International Business at the University of Hawaii, Korean while I taught English in Seoul, and Chinese while I worked at the Shanghai Consulate General Foreign Commercial Service. I could utilize skills in positions where I would process visa applications or manage host nation employees.

Second, I could apply the skills I've gained from the various positions I've had. During the ten years I served in the U.S. Army, I managed motor pools of nearly one hundred vehicles, developed $4 million budgets, managed foreign nationals, and directed an office relocation. As a Management officer, I could use these skills to supervise Management Foreign Service Specialists and local national employees.

Lastly, I could utilize the soft skills I have developed in my current position. As a logistics analyst in the U.S. INDOPACOM headquarters, I produce a daily summary of logistics movements and brief general/flag officers multiple times every week -- skills that would easily translate when interacting with senior diplomats.

Personal Narratives: Introduction

I got the news that I passed the Foreign Service Officer Test on the 26th. Today I also got the instructions for writing the Personal Narratives -- the next step in the process.

"To help write your PN, focus on your own experience in answering the questions. Use these precepts as a guide to (1) give positive examples that demonstrate your abilities; (2) identify learning experiences; and (3) indicate how your learning experience will contribute to success in your chosen Foreign Service career track. Make sure you show why you have skills or interest in the career track you have selected. Please make sure you answer the question.

"Although the QEP is a total file review, with no one element dominating all the factors considered, you have the most control over your responses to the PN. Your responses can be influential in determining your standing in your chosen career track. This is your chance to tell your story to the Foreign Service assessors. Bear in mind that your responses are subject to verification by the Board of Examiners.

"Once the QEP is completed, Pearson VUE will inform you of the results via an online letter that you can access using the personal login ID and password you chose when registering. In recent years, more than 20,000 candidates have taken the Foreign Service Officer Test annually. A much smaller number advance to the QEP review, and then only a few hundred are invited to the Oral Assessment.

"Please note that Foreign Service Officer candidate hiring targets are adjusted regularly. Many candidates with excellent qualifications who may have received an invitation to the Oral Assessment at a time of increased hiring authority will not receive one when the Department's hiring targets are lower or if there is an increase in the number of candidates. The process is highly competitive, and many candidates repeat the process.

"Key values to show:

1. Leadership: innovation, decision making, teamwork, openness to dissent, community service and institution building
2. Interpersonal Skills: professional standards, persuasion and negotiation, workplace perceptiveness, adaptability, representational skills
3. Communication Skills: written communication, oral communication, active listening, public outreach, foreign language skill
4. Management Skills: operational effectiveness, performance management and evaluation, management resources, customer service
5. Intellectual Skills: information gathering and analysis, critical thinking, active learning, leadership and management training
6. Substantive Knowledge: Understanding of U.S. history/ government/culture and application in dealing with other cultures. Knowledge or application of career track information that is relevant information.

So, I have six essays to write, each of them no more than 1300 characters long, due by July 11th. I'll include them here so that -- whether pass or fail -- someone can at least benchmark what I did.

FSOT: Passed

Back on June 6th I took the Foreign Service Officer Test (FSOT) for the first time since 2012. Today I got the results. -- I passed. Yay!

Here's how the score broke down:
Job Knowledge: 66.81
Situational Judgment: 60.01
English Expression: 53.34

The sum of the three multiple choice sections was 180.16, which was comfortably above the 154 minimum, though I was surprised to see I did better on the job knowledge than on English Expression and my essay only met the minimum score to pass (6 out of 12).

If I have to take it again, I'll know what to spend more time error checking.

The next step is to write the Personal Narratives. I have to write six essays about my motivation, leadership, and experiences related to the Foreign Service. The due date is July 11th.

FSOT ... again

"Commanding a starship is your first, best destiny; anything else is a waste of material." -- Mr. Spock, Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan.

Being a contractor in my post-Army career is not bad, , but I have grown to wonder if it's the best use of my life experiences. For the past 20 years, I've thought (and pursued) being a diplomat, with mixed success.

So now that I'm in charge of my own career path once again, I'm considering it again. I took the State Department's Foreign Service Officer TEST (FSOT) on June 6th.

The test has changed quite a bit since I took the fill-in-the-bubble version at the University of Hawaii Law School one Saturday in 1999. There's still the Job Knowledge part, of course, but thankfully there aren't any jazz questions anymore..

The English expression part remains pretty much the same, too. Fortunately, I know how to use a semicolon properly, so I have always done adequately well in this section.

The biggest difference is the Situational Awareness section -- a series of workplace situations where you have to pick the best -- and worst -- solutions. 

For this part, I developed a "methodology" of sorts based on a series of values. It works like this:

1.) Communication/Listening/Open-mindedness. This was my most important value. If there was a solution that applied these qualities, I felt that was the best answer. Keeping people in the loop, listening to others' ideas, and not rushing to judgement seemed like best values.

2.) Working with others. It seems appropriate that a U.S. diplomat would be able to get along with people, so I prioritized solutions that displayed this. If a co-worker is doing something wrong, it's better to talk to them first than report them to security right away. And if a co-worker needed help, it was more important to lend a hand than lecture them.

3.) Standards/ethics. Insistence on professionalism is important,but not at the expense of working with others or consideration of different perspectives, unless it's *clearly* wrong. This may seem counter-intuitive, but I subordinated to the other two based on what I saw in the State Department website's practice test.

4.) "I'm not going to do that" Toward the other end of the spectrum, there's standoffishness. Being a jerk to your boss is not the way to do business. However, if it keeps you from doing something illegal, then that's the way to go.

5.) Break the law, embarrassing the U.S. or others. To me, the worst thing a person could do in any scenario was to take bribes, publicly disagree with your boss, embarrass the U.S., or undercut your co-workers.

We'll see how this turns out.

The fourth part was the essay question. I had seven minutes to choose one of three topics on which to write an essay within 25 minutes (2800 character maximum).

This was probably the biggest challenge for me, because I'm not as good at writing essays as I was when I worked for the UH student newspaper, but I felt had some good strategies.

First, I used the decision time to plan my essay, so that I could maximize my writing time. Second, I kept to the Introduction/Three Points/Conclusion framework. And I was sure to save some time to proofread my text before submission.

I pressed the "Submit" button with 10 seconds to spare. Not the greatest essay I've ever written, but I feel fairly happy with it.

At the end of the test, the examiner gave me a printout that said the results will be available in three weeks. 

First time failing the FSOT

On February 4, I took the Foreign Service Officer Test (formerly the Foreign Service Written Exam) for the first time in about six years. This past Thursday I found out I didn't pass. Despite the feeling after the test that I didn't do well in the essay section, I was still bummed, mostly because I've never failed the written test before.

What's interesting is that they now break down the scores for you, though it's in the form of a "T-score." Here's how my scores translate to the more traditional "percentile ranking." [Source]

Job knowledge: 61.49 > 87th percentile
Biographic Information: 62.03 > 89th percentile
English Expression: 54.12 > 66th percentile
[Score converter]

As in my case, when sum of the three section scores is above 154, the examiners grade the essay. I needed 6 out of 12 on the essay to pass the whole thing; unfortunately, I got a 5. Now I have to wait a year before I test again.

In trying to look at the bright side, I focus on a couple things. First, it doesn't look like they're offering the oral assessment anywhere but Washington, D.C., which I've been advised to avoid because of the caliber of the candidates that live there. It saved me quite a bit of airfare.

Second, with career prospects in the Army looking good right now it's not likely I'd continue my candidacy anyway. Yes, it would be nice to transition as an FSO-5 and get promoted to FSO-4 in two years, but if I stay two more years in the Army I'll transfer as an FSO-4 anyway.

Finally, and this is admittedly a bit silly, I'd like to show up at my high school reunion as an Army captain. Being a company-grade officer 20 years after high school is not really high on the list of awesomeness, but everyone I knew from way back when expresses surprise to hear I joined the Army (my family most of all). I kind of like that.

So it's not a total loss -- after all, I still have a good job -- but it's something I'd have liked to have an option on, at least. A captain with four years of service has reached a significant inflection point in his pay scale -- things level off quickly from that point forward. [Military pay chart] And with the drawdown casting a cloud on things, I wonder if I'll be able to do the things I hope for in the future.

Oh well. As I've told myself at least a half-dozen other times, there's always next year....

FSWE/FSOT #8?

I took the Foreign Service Officer Test (FSOT) for the umpteenth time today. I think I did OK, but I don't feel as confident about the essay section as I do on the other sections. And I know I missed one question in the job knowledge section about the 1960s.

With my service obligation having ended on December 4, I'd hoped to take it the last two times it was offered, but with the deployment I guess the Army had other plans for me. I'd missed the June test by just a few days and the October test by a month. It's not too big a deal, though. If things work out, I'll at least have enough time as a captain to influence a salary offering (I think).

The last time I took an FSOT was 2006. Hopefully, this candidacy will go better.

State finally pays up

I found out today that the State Department finally paid my last outstanding bill on April 15. This finally ends all remaining issues with my 2006 foreign service officer candidacy. Here's a time line of the important details:

• March 2006 – Passed the foreign service officer oral examination in Washington, DC.
• April 2006 – Had my security clearance interview with Diplomatic Security. My wife and I start doing the tests required for the medical clearance.
• May 2006 – took the French language test, but failed
• June 2006 – took the Chinese language test, but failed
• July 2006 – Had to take a few other medical tests.
• Sept. 2006 – Had an additional security clearance interview at the consulate in Shanghai
• Nov. 2006 – took the Korean language test, but failed
• Late Dec. 2006 – Found “unsuitable” by the final review board; I appealed.
• Jan. 2007 – SY required to do additional tests. Took the Chinese language test again, and this time passed.
• Feb. 2007 – Appeal rejected. We start getting bills from the hospital for the January tests. I send the hospital the proof that the State Department is responsible.
• Aug. 2007 - Payment for out-of-pocket costs received at parents' address, though the hospital bill remains outstanding.
• Sept. 2007 - The hospital sends our outstanding account to a collection agency. Being out of the country, I "didn't get the memo."
• Nov. 2007 - Just a week or so before my credit report would have been permanently affected, I find out about the collection agency issue and immediately send them the documents showing that State is responsible.
• April 2008 - Six months later, State finally pays the hospital, closing the account.

I can think of three reasons why things took so long: First is my wife's lack of a Social Security number. Second is the fact that the order for the tests came while my candidacy was under appeal. Third is the fact we didn't have insurance.

Normally, candidates send the bills to their insurance provider and State takes care of any remaining portion. However, we didn't have any insurance in February 2007, so the government was responsible for the full amounts. The hard part is prooving that you don't have insurance - I had to provide written statements to that effect.

GRR! &%$! State Department!

OK I'm really ticked off at the State Department.

You may recall my October post that I had been reimbursed for a lot of my tests. Well, I just got a bunch of mail from my parents and it seems they didn't pay the last thing they ordered us to do.

In January, while my appeal was pending, the medical office required SY to do additional tests. The total, about $201, was billed directly to the State Department, but they never paid it.

In the time between we left and when I got the box, the hospital had sent the bill to a collection agency. Now I have a collection agency mailing stuff to an address I'm no longer at.

Sometimes living overseas really sucks, and this is one of those times.

I'll send the collection agency the orders I received from State, and see if they can sort it out. Until then, I have to call every so often to make sure it doesn't affect my credit report.

Medical reimbursement arrived

It's taken over a year, but SY and I finally got reimbursed for all the medical expenses we incurred while I was trying to become a Foreign Service Officer.

I passed the oral test in March 2006, and began doing the tests in May. In July, I had to take another test because I had a high liver enzyme count. Six months later, SY had to get more tests done as well.

From what I can tell, the six month delay was caused by the way records in State's HR system are linked by Social Security number. SY doesn't have one (she's not a U.S. citizen) so there wasn't any file for her.

But now, after dozens of "you haven't paid us yet" bills and "we're not responsible for that -- contact the State Department if you want your money" responses, everybody has finally been paid (including us).

The check arrived and got deposited in early August. I gotta tell you, those 15 months flew by.

Bad news again

I found out on March 20 that I didn't pass the PMF test either. Out of 3,200 test takers, only 800 were chosen. I was one of the 75 percent that didn't make it.

Competition must have been tough -- everyone that took the test was a graduate student, and many of them had to go through university level competitions just to get nominated.

So I guess I won't be pursuing my dream of a federal career anytime soon. I guess the good thing is that the private sector's quicker about hiring folks and pays better. After the past three months, I can definitely appreciate that.

Thoughts on the PMF test

For those that are interested, this year's "PMF Assessment Battery" differs substantially from that of previous years. [See p. 25 of this article for more details.] This year’s test consisted entirely of written, multiple choice questions. The whole process took three and a half hours (from 9:00 to 12:30).

The first part was Critical Thinking Skills; it was 50 minutes long. There were six reading passages with seven questions each (42 total), and they were very similar in style and format to the sample questions in the Assessment Preparation Guide. The questions included some sort of statement based on the reading, and you had to mark whether the statement was True, False, or Insufficient Information.

The second part was Life Experience; 125 questions, 45 minutes. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) says answers are accepted in good faith, subject to verification, and that any misrepresentation is grounds for dismissal. Some questions had to do with things I hardly remember, like “what was your most common grade in high school math classes?” or “how often did you miss school?” Others were more timely, but still easy to see through: “What is the biggest motivating factor in your desire to work for the government?” A.) money, B.) job security, C.) benefits, or D.) the chance to serve the public.

The third part was Writing Fundamentals; 40 questions, 70 minutes. Strangely, there’s no writing needed -- this is more a test of proofreading ability. After reading a passage, you may have to choose the best order of the paragraphs (C,A,D,B), select the best word that would fill in the blank (“assess” strengths and weaknesses), or find the error in subject-verb agreement. Again, it's similar to those in the guide hyperlinked above.

There was an optional fourth section as well; the administrator said it was "experimental," and added that it wouldn't count towards our scores. Though we had the option of leaving everything blank, we couldn't leave early if we didn't want to participate, so I think everyone did it. There were 58 questions in that section. Answers to statements like "I often feel blue" and "I have a good imagination" ranged from "I strongly agree" to "I strongly disagree."

Overall, I was a bit surprised by how easy the test was, and how silly some of the biographical questions were. In some ways, how one answers "My peers see me as [blank]" says more about their test-taking skills than their self-confidence, and it's hardly verifiable. I mean, everyone in the room was a graduate student; if someone was a jerk, they’re probably smart enough to answer “correctly.”

[Similar opinions found here]

I'm trying to figure out why OPM changed the test. Certainly it's easier and cheaper to grade, but I think it's more than that. I think OPM is deliberately setting the bar lower so that more people can pass.

From what I’ve read online, the PMF program has been very successful and Finalists (those who pass the test) are popular among federal agencies. Fellows have the necessary job skills to perform their duties, they are intrinsically motivated by the concept of public service, and they're easier to hire than external candidates. In a good number of the DC area universities, just getting nominated is the hard part -- nominations are given on a limited and competitive basis.

With fully 50 percent of all federal workers eligible to retire in the next five years, the PMF program represents a great opportunity for federal agencies to get high-quality people in the system quickly. Due in part to lengthy clearance processes and hiring procedures, only about 15 percent of GS-9 to GS-15 vacancies are filled by external candidates.¹

My concern is that PMF seems to be evolving from a management development program into a general hiring tool. The purpose of the program, as stated by President Bush, is "to attract to the Federal service outstanding men and women from a variety of academic disciplines and career paths who have a clear interest in, and commitment to, excellence in the leadership and management of public policies and programs."²

Yet many agencies that hire PMFs do not provide the mandatory training or the rotational assignments that characterize the experience. Rather, they view PMF as a glorified temp agency or a way to get around hiring freezes.

And once hired, it doesn't seem like PMFs actually get any kind of preference. Fellows have an attrition rate roughly equal to non-fellows, and promotions to supervisory positions are just as likely to go to non-PMFs.³

On paper, the PMF program sounds pretty cool -- it comes across as a fast track to senior management. Yet with none of the 125 Life Experience questions dealing with the issue of leadership experience, I'm afraid that the program's future will be the same as it's past -- after ten years, fewer than one in five of the participants in 1990 were in a supervisory position.^{3, p.12}

In any case, to me the PMF program represents the best way to get hired by the federal government. At this point, getting in doesn't seem to be a problem. Now I just have to get a good position.

Bad News

I got back the response from my appeal. State upheld its original finding of unsuitability, and ended my candidacy.

This is big shock for me. Becoming a diplomat is something I've been actively pursuing for the past five years. On my fourth attempt at the oral test, I finally passed. It took about five months for my medical clearance to go through, followed by another four for my security clearance. During that time, I took four language tests: French (which I failed), Chinese (which I failed), Korean (which I failed), and finally Chinese again on January 5, which I passed.

The really hard part is that the reason for my unsuitability is my job history, which by the standards of 3 FAM 4130 isn't clean enough. To make matters worse, I don't know how long I have to wait before my mistakes no longer matter.

For now, I really hope I can pass my February 15 test. Participating in the PMF program would be a great ointment for the burn I got from State.

Holding pattern

I have good news and bad news. I can't really explain them separately, though, so I'll have to go through them topic by topic.

First, the Foreign Service stuff. I passed my Chinese test in early January, so that vaulted me to the top ranks of the registry. However, due in part to my termination at JEL and the fact that I filed my taxes late for 2004 and 2005, I was found "unsuitable," subject to appeal. I submitted my appeal a few days later, and that's in process now.

Hopefully, the biggest reason for the Board of Examiners' finding was the tax issue. Thinking it wasn't any big deal because I didn't have any U.S.-based income for those years, I didn't file my returns by the time of my security clearance interview in April. My interviewer informed me of my error at the time, and I got everything taken care of soon after, but the Board apparently didn't have that information.

I say "I hope that's the biggest reason" because it's easily remedied. Correcting perceptions about my termination from JEL would be much harder.

In the "bad but potentially irrelevent" category, I took the Foreign Service Oral Test (fifth time) on January 24 in San Francisco. Disturbingly, I failed, and failed badly (my second worst score). This may, however, be irrelevent if my appeal goes through.

Lastly, I have the Presidential Management Fellows final assessment on February 15 in Chicago. Like a cross between the LSAT and the Foreign Service Written Exam, it's three sections measure critical thinking skills, English usage, and personal accomplishments. I could say a lot more about this, but I'll wait and see if I get into it first.

Until then, it's wait and see, but if the first week of March ends and nothing happens, I'll have to come up with a whole new plan.