V20140101-1.0.

Validation
Validation is the process used to confirm a deficiency exists and its impact. It is a twoway communication between the inspection team and the inspected unit to make sure the
deficiency actually exists and to accurately describe the deficiency. The following excerpt from
AFI 90-201 provides the overarching guidance for validation.
2.20.5. Validation. MAJCOM and Wing IGs will establish a validation process that
provides the inspected unit the opportunity to clarify and/or rebut in a timely manner any
potential deficiencies identified during the inspection. The IG Team Chief, in coordination
with the unit under inspection, will coordinate with the appropriate FAMs on critical and
significant deficiencies identified during the inspection. This process applies to deficiencies
levied against other Wings, MAJCOM units or HHQ organizations. (T-1)
2.20.5.1. When the IG determines the need for external validation of a potential
deficiency, inspectors will validate with the appropriate subject matter experts
(SME) at the lowest possible level, but no higher than the appropriate FAM at the
IGs organizational level: Wing IGs validate with Wing FAMs if available;
MAJCOM IGs validate with MAJCOM/NGB/FOA/DRU or organizations with
whom the IG team has a memorandum of agreement. MAJCOM/NGB/FOA/DRU
FAMs will consult with the appropriate HAF Functional as required to ensure
proper interpretation of Air Force (or higher) policy. (T-1)
2.20.5.2. FAMs or other SMEs will clarify policy and procedures, or validate that a
potential deficiency does/does not comply with policy, and will not provide
input/comment on the severity of a validated deficiency; that responsibility resides
with the IG.

V20140101-1.0.0

2.20.5.3. Oversight Deficiencies. IGs are not required to validate deficiencies

beyond the appropriate FAMs or agencies with which the IG has
MOA/Memorandum of Understanding for validation support. If an external
oversight team independently validates with the HAF Functional and receives
contradictory information, a deficiency may be levied against the MAJCOM and/or
HAF Functional.
2.20.5.4. All validated deficiencies will be documented in the IGs report and
entered in IGEMS.
During the validation process, the unit may disagree with the inspectors assessment or
offer additional evidence to try and eliminate or mitigate the deficiency. As an inspector, you
can never let any disagreement during validation to become unprofessional. You must always
stay professional even if the inspectee doesnt. Never let it get personal, stick to the facts.
Dont get into a long argument over the issue. Once it becomes clear that further discussion
would be counter-productive, just agree to disagree and up channel the issue through the
appropriate chains of command.

V20140101-1.0.0

The inspection isnt over until the team chief says its over. Units may provide additional
evidence during the validation process. When additional evidence is provided, you responsibility
as an inspector is to:
1. Validate the authenticity of the evidence through primary and/or secondary sources.
2. If the evidence is authentic, determine the impact to the original deficiency.
a. Does the original deficiency as written not exist in light of this new evidence?
b. Does the evidence lessen the severity of the original deficiency?
c. Does the evidence create a different type of deficiency?
3. If the evidence is not authentic, then the original deficiency stands. However, be
prepared to defend why you think the evidence isnt authentic.