A practical tool for judgment, not grammar

What this artifact is

This is a clearance-stage checklist for supervisors (FSO or LES) who are responsible for reviewing, clearing, or approving embassy cables.

It is designed to help supervisors:

  • assess institutional risk, not just writing quality,
  • ensure proper coordination and attribution,
  • and protect both the drafter and the mission.

This is not a grammar checklist and not a substitute for subject-matter expertise.

Who this is for

  • Section chiefs and deputies
  • Acting supervisors
  • Senior LES with clearance responsibility
  • Front Office staff reviewing sensitive reporting

When to use this checklist

Use this before clearing a cable, especially if:

  • the issue is politically sensitive,
  • public attribution is possible,
  • the content crosses sections,
  • or the cable could be cited later.

Step 1: Purpose and Audience (Before Reading Line by Line)

☐ Do I understand why this cable exists?
☐ Is the purpose explicit (reporting, analysis, action, info)?
☐ Is it clear who in Washington should read this?

Red flag:
If you cannot summarize the cable’s purpose in one sentence, Washington won’t either.

Step 2: Subject Line and Summary (First Impression Test)

☐ Does the subject line indicate importance and timing?
☐ Does the summary state what changed and why it matters?
☐ Can a senior reader stop after the summary and still understand the issue?

Red flag:
Vague subject lines or summaries that repeat background.

Step 3: Accuracy vs. Certainty

☐ Are facts clearly distinguished from analysis?
☐ Is uncertainty acknowledged where it exists?
☐ Are conclusions supported by evidence or sourcing?

Red flag:
Language that sounds definitive without verification (“clearly,” “no doubt,” “will”).

Step 4: Institutional Positioning and Risk

☐ Does the cable unintentionally signal a policy position?
☐ Could any sentence be quoted publicly and cause confusion or escalation?
☐ Has reputational or political risk been explicitly considered?

Red flag:
Statements that could be read as U.S. endorsement, rejection, or commitment.

Step 5: Coordination and Clearances

☐ Are all relevant sections looped in?
☐ Are clearances real (not just CCs)?
☐ Have dissenting views been resolved or noted?

Red flag:
Missing POL clearance on political content, or PD clearance on public-facing implications.

Step 6: Tags and Routing

☐ Do tags accurately reflect content, not intent?
☐ Are both geographic and functional tags included?
☐ Is over-tagging avoided?

Red flag:
Tags chosen to “get attention” rather than describe substance.

Step 7: Classification and Sensitivity

☐ Is the classification appropriate and defensible?
☐ Does any sentence push the boundary of the chosen classification?
☐ Is sensitive but unclassified material handled carefully?

Red flag:
Paraphrased classified insights appearing in UNCLASS cables.

Step 8: Structure and Readability

☐ Is the cable logically organized (summary → background → analysis)?
☐ Are paragraphs short and focused?
☐ Is the active voice used consistently?

Red flag:
Chronological narration without analysis.

Step 9: Time and Longevity Test

☐ Will this cable still make sense in six months?
☐ Does it explain context for future readers?
☐ Does it document what post knew at the time?

Red flag:
Assumes shared context that will disappear with staff rotation.

Step 10: What Not to Do (Supervisor Discipline)

Do not:

  • rewrite the cable yourself unless necessary,
  • clear something you do not understand,
  • remove caveats to “sound stronger,”
  • approve content you are not comfortable owning.

If unsure:

  • pause,
  • ask questions,
  • or escalate.

Quick Supervisor Decision Guide

Clear as-is
→ Sound judgment, proper coordination, defensible language.

Return for revision
→ Structural or analytical weaknesses.

Hold / escalate
→ Authority gap, major risk, or unclear institutional position.

Common Supervisor Failure Patterns

  • Focusing on style over substance
  • Treating clearance as routine admin
  • Assuming another section “must have checked that”
  • Clearing under time pressure without noting caveats

Bottom line

Clearing a cable is not courtesy.
It is institutional ownership.

A good supervisor clearance:

  • improves reporting quality,
  • protects staff,
  • and strengthens decision-making.

A weak clearance:

  • creates exposure,
  • hides risk,
  • and shifts blame downward later.

Use this checklist to slow down just enough to get it right.