I see so many companies that jump up and down when they sign off a brand new contract, only to lose it 3 years later or worse, have it terminated mid-contract term, for a failure of service.

Why does this happen, and what can be done to avoid it? 

We are all well aware that there is a disconnect between Sales, who promise the Earth to win a contract, and Operations, who have to try and deliver on those promises. Regardless of how unrealistic. There are, however, standards of service that every operations director and their team needs to focus on, to ensure that a successful client relationship is built and maintained.

Early Days

Show how much you value their custom. Have the MD/CEO take part in the first couple of progress meetings.

Train Your Staff

Make sure you site train enough officers to cover unexpected blowouts. Yes, it dents the bottom line, but utilise your bench team if you have them. It looks bad if an officer who does not know the site unexpectedly arrives to cover a shift.

Schedule Regular Visits

Get your contract/operations manager to have regular site visits and regular, at least weekly, video meetings with the client to make sure you are not dropping the ball somewhere.

Make sure that your supervisory staff/night mobile team pay regular visits out of hours, as well if applicable, and ensure that these are recorded in the site OB.

Befriend Your Client

There is little wrong with your operations management taking the client out for lunch after month 1 and 3, etc., etc. Building a close relationship with the client is priceless. Make the client a friend. 

When problems arise, and they will, a friend is more likely to work with you to sort things out. If a close relationship is not there, the client is more likely to send unpleasant emails to you and the contract relationship will be damaged.

Get Your Assignment Instructions Right

Go through the assignment instructions carefully with every member of your security team and make sure they are aware and happy about their responsibilities. Make sure you know them better than your officers, and ensure that they are not generic, cut-and-paste documents.

 A rule of thumb: Assignment instructions should have enough detail and content to ensure that an officer who has never been to the site before will know all that they need to do in any shift, from reading and referring to the AIs. 

Ongoing

Prioritise Staff Welfare 

Look after your site security officers, and take care of their welfare. If you upset one of your security officers, you can 100% guarantee that they will moan to the client, hoping that this will get them what they want. It always looks bad, regardless of the validity of the gripe or the history of the security officer.

Maintain Regular Communications

If you can’t get to the site every week, make sure that a manager arranges a call or video meeting weekly. No matter how much you tell a client that they can call you anytime for anything, issues will fester until they speak to you, so nip things in the bud and keep those comms regular.

Recognise Your Team

Big up your security team. Talk to your client about you potentially nominating them for industry awards or even company recognition. A little praise goes a long way, and demonstrating that you value the work of your officers like this goes a long, long way for a client.

Become the Expert

Be your client’s security SME. Be free to advise them on changes of legislation that may affect their business, Martyn’s Law, etc etc. Offer to provide advice and guidance on all matters physical security, and do so freely.

Be Honest and Open

When things go wrong, let your client know FAST. DO NOT wait to hear it from them! If it was the fault of security, put your hands up and take responsibility. Investigate thoroughly, and advise on what you are going to do to mitigate the chance of recurrence. If it wasn’t the fault of security, do not remain silent. Support your officers and carefully explain the circumstances. 

Easy Wins

If one of your security officers deals with a tough situation well or does something praiseworthy, let the client know pronto and reward a job well done.

Showcase the contract. Feature your client and site/s in your company newsletter. Get quotes from them and pictures. It is all great PR for you and makes them feel “loved”.

Let clients know if you are going to do some on-site training with your team (toolbox talks), and talk to them about the benefits of the training provided. (Value added.)

Big on-site event coming up? Offer your company’s services to provide additional assistance.

Big local event taking place? Make the client aware, and let them know that you can provide additional assistance. Advise and provide relevant intel if possible.

Recommended Reading: How To Cover Security Shifts Within Hours

The Bottom Line

None of this is rocket science, but it is easy to let standards slip if you have ops management that is stretched or not suitably engaged. To avoid this, ensure that your management is working to their own KPIs, or better still, using OKR methodology to set and measure their success. Build that effective client relationship fast, or lose the contract to someone who will.

Delivering On Your Promises Starts With The Right Team

Winning a contract is one thing—keeping it is another. And you can’t deliver exceptional service without exceptional people. GuardPass helps security companies hire, vet, and train the right officers from day one, so your operations team can focus on client relationships instead of firefighting staffing gaps.

Discover GuardPass for hiring, vetting, and training.

The post How To Build a Winning Relationship With Your Clients appeared first on GuardPass Resources.

It is a fact that there are over 10,000 non-ACS-approved security companies registered in the UK, and under 800 of those are ACS approved. So why do so many companies seem to be completely ignored?

Let’s go back to the formation of the Security Industry Authority’s Approved Contractor Scheme, what it was trying to achieve, and why it largely failed.

The Origins Of The ACS And Its Intended Purpose

The Private Security Industry Act 2001 was established after a series of tabloid scandals and stories involving, in general, some rather extreme criminal behaviours of some “bouncers” that were acting in a manner that would make the Krays wince. Its overriding objective was to better protect the public and remove the criminal element from the security industry.

Alas, other elements of the security industry’s operation took a back seat, or were forgotten altogether when the legislation was drawn up. The Government regulator and body responsible for enforcing the new rules and making the industry safer was the Security Industry Authority (SIA).

To encourage better behaviour from security service providers, they introduced an initiative designed to separate the wheat from the chaff and become the gold standard for the top-performing security companies. The Approved Contractor Scheme (ACS) was born and was intended to signpost those looking for the services of a contract security company towards the very best of the best in the industry.

How The ACS Gold Standard Became Tarnished

Not wanting to be left in the “also ran” pile, many companies got onboard and, ticked all the required compliance boxes and handed over the prerequisite membership fees to the SIA. The big companies out there that use security officers also became aware of this new standard and started to insist that they only use ACS-approved service providers. Inevitably, this sudden reduction in potential clientele drove a whole legion of not-so-great security companies to look at how they too could attain the oh so desirable ACS approval. 

It turns out that, as ACS compliance was so admin-focused, this admin can be tweaked and augmented to tick the required boxes, without any genuine positive changes to some awful company operating behaviours. So, what was a gold standard, slowly became a club that was successfully gate-crashed by some of the most dubious companies in the UK.

Seeing this, many companies made a very deliberate decision not to seek ACS approval. Many more companies decided that the cost of membership was not worth the potential benefits. Other companies had such good word-of-mouth recommendations and resulting organic growth that bothering to seek ACS approval was simply pointless.

The Current State Of The UK Security Industry

This leaves an interesting situation in today’s security industry. Many ACS company owners and leaders seem increasingly bitter that companies that may have been set up yesterday and appear to have zero contracts or employees are allowed to share an industry in which they have shed blood, sweat, and tears to achieve the most impressive ACS scores imaginable. 

Figures, however, are undeniable. ACS member company numbers are falling. This leaves over 10,000 incorporated security companies that haven’t joined the ACS club, for whatever reason. I suspect that most of these do indeed have contracts, employ security officers, and were not set up yesterday.

10,000 companies or not, the traditional stakeholders in the UK security industry are, without exception, ACS-approved security companies, and they really don’t want anyone who hasn’t joined the club having a say in how the industry is run. It seems to many that most ACS company leaders are banging their fists on the desk, screaming, “But we are the best of the best, dammit, and we have a badge that proves it!” This is a big problem for some initiatives that genuinely seek to improve the security industry. Most recent and indeed, promising of these is the S12 Security Guarding Leadership Group.

Recommended Reading: Security Company Licensing In The UK: A Retrospective

The S12 Group: A Missed Opportunity For Inclusion?

The S12 Group was founded after a great deal of hard work by Carlisle Support Services CEO, Paul Evans, and it achieved a bit of a coup in that he had gained the ear, and ongoing support and engagement of, Dan Jarvis, the Government’s Security Minister. Unprecedented access to policymakers, no less. Exciting times. 

There is, however, one huge problem that the S12 doesn’t seem particularly willing to address. Not a single non-ACS company has any representation on the S12 governing board. Dan Jarvis voiced his desire that the S12 become the inclusive and united voice of the security industry, able to advise and guide policy:

In a speech at the International Security Expo in London on 1st October 2025, he said: “I am very pleased to announce the formation of the S12, a new industry-led initiative to bring together various parts of the private security industry and speak to the government with one voice.” I’m not sure how much weight the Government will give to a body that has excluded any senior representation from over 10,000 companies, beyond open participation in their working groups.

Why Representation Matters

Alas, this isn’t really “one voice”. Companies that form the backbone and overwhelming majority of the UK security industry, non-ACS companies, seem to be the new prejudice among the traditional stakeholders, sadly now exclusively forming the S12. None of this is good for the industry, but appeals have fallen on deaf ears with the S12 leadership. For full transparency, seeing the wonderful potential of the S12, I applied to be their Chief of Staff, and I raised this issue at the interview. 

Sadly, it didn’t seem to change much. We all hope this changes soon, but the recent announcement for nominations for the last 2 seats on their governing board certainly doesn’t encourage non-ACS security company participation.

UKSICA: A Voice For All Security Companies

There is, however, an organisation out there that is not ignoring the input and experience of those legions of non-ACS-approved security companies, and it seeks to help them improve their operation with advice and guidance. I am proud to have been invited onto the board of this group (voluntary and unpaid), which is the United Kingdom Security Industry Compliance Association or UKSICA for short. 

Non-ACS companies can join the register at UKSICA and will gain access to advice, guidance, and support to help them simply be better. Companies that don’t want to jump through the ACS hoops can apply to the UKSICA for “verified company status, which simply means that a series of checks has taken place to ensure that a security company is run in a proper manner and is fully compliant with UK law, without exorbitant cost or administrative box ticking.

The UKSICA is new and still developing policies and procedures, but if you want to find out more and get involved, drop an email to info@uksica.org. UKSICA is a non-profit organisation simply looking to improve standards across the UK Security Industry, fight malpractice, and provide a voice for ALL UK security companies. No egos involved.

Professionalism Beyond The Badge

One thing worth noting: ACS approval was never meant to be the only marker of a professional operation. Proper staff vetting, robust hiring practices, and genuine investment in your workforce speak louder than any badge. Platforms like GuardPass exist precisely because the industry needed tools that work for everyone—not just those in the club.

Book a demo to explore GuardPass for hiring, vetting, and training.

The post Are Non-ACS Security Companies The Ignored Majority? appeared first on GuardPass Resources.

In the private security sector, BS7858 vetting is often spoken of with a kind of dread and resignation. With good reason. The standard is thorough, detailed, and non-negotiable. Fail to meet its requirements, and you’re risking compliance breaches, damaged reputation, or even losing business. But it doesn’t have to be a labyrinthine, paperwork-filled ordeal. With modern tools and smarter process design, one can achieve full compliance and do so swiftly, reliably, and without burning out your HR or operations teams.

My preferred tool is GuardCheck, the BS7858 vetting solution from GuardPass. Here’s how it shifts the balance from headache to managed, reliable process, and what the benefits are to organisations large and small.

What BS7858 Asks Of You

For those not steeped in the details, BS7858 mandates a comprehensive set of screening checks for anyone working in positions with security-sensitive responsibilities. Key elements include identity verification, right to work checks, criminal record checks (via DBS), a full employment history (generally last five years), address history, and personal references. The standard’s aim is obvious: filter out risks before deployment.

That all sounds reasonable. The trouble is not the requirement, but the implementation. Getting clean, verified references, collecting the correct identity documents, chasing up employment gaps, ensuring proper right to work documentation, managing sensitive personal information, all these steps are time-consuming, error-prone, and expensive if done manually. Many firms find themselves with hiring pipelines held up, or legal exposure where compliance is partial. Some are barely meeting the minimum standard.

Why The “Headache” Is Largely Avoidable

There are several common problem areas:

Delays & Bottlenecks: Waiting for paperwork or references and manual verifications taking days or weeks.

Visibility & Tracking: Nobody always knows which check is done, which is waiting, and which candidate is stuck halfway.

Quality & Consistency: Gaps in employment, missing documentation, and inconsistent standards of checks.

Data Security & Audit-Readiness: Misplaced files, unsecured storage, and lack of digital trail.

Overhead Costs: Staff time in chasing, correcting, filing, and duplicating. Also risk of non-compliance, which can cost far more.

These are real costs, both financial and reputational. But equally real is the opportunity to do better.

GuardCheck By GuardPass: What It Brings To The Table

GuardCheck is a fully-managed vetting service designed specifically around BS7858 compliance, offered by GuardPass. Its philosophy is simple: preserve the rigour, eliminate the friction. Here are its main advantages.

Speed Without Compromise

GuardCheck can reduce the BS7858 vetting timeline dramatically. What might traditionally take many weeks can be completed in 24 hours to 6 days under GuardCheck. This removes the major friction point for firms that need to get boots on the ground fast.

Full BS7858 Compliance, Including NSI Silver Approval

GuardCheck is not a “lite” or “just enough” solution. It provides all the required components: identity docs, employment and address history, right-to-work, DBS checks, SIA licence verification and more. It also holds NSI Silver Approval for its BS7858 screening process, giving you independent assurance of its integrity.

Transparent, Trackable Workflows

The service includes real-time dashboards/portals for employers to track the progress of vetting. No more guessing whether a reference has come in or whether a candidate’s termination date has been validated. Each step is visible.

Digital, Paper-Free, And Secure

The process is largely app-based, document uploads are digital, storage is auditable, and data privacy is treated seriously. This not only speeds up the process but also helps with audit trails, regulatory compliance, and protecting candidate information.

Managing Overseas Candidates And Difficult Verification

One of the biggest pain points is verifying candidates who come from abroad, or who have gaps or non-standard employment history. GuardCheck is built to handle these challenging cases more efficiently by guiding candidates through documentation and having established workflows to resolve gaps in history.

Integrated Onboarding & Customisation

Beyond pure vetting checks, GuardCheck offers onboarding support and digitised forms, integrating parts of the employer’s existing workflows and customised questionnaires, all in a single file per candidate. That means less toggling between systems, fewer errors, and a faster ramp to operative status.

Cost Effectiveness

While speed and compliance are vital, budget matters. GuardCheck offers competitive pricing (as low as ~£49 + VAT for some checks) depending on required checks and volumes. Combined with time saved and risks avoided, this often delivers superior value over legacy, manual vetting or multiple supplier arrangements.

Real-World Impact And What To Ask Your Provider

Putting this into practice means better outcomes. Freelance security firms are able to bid on contracts with tight mobilisation timelines. Larger companies reduce idle staff time, improve client satisfaction, and reduce financial risk through non-compliance. HR teams can redirect effort from chasing paperwork to training and performance management.

When evaluating a vetting solution, ask these key questions:

• Can the vendor deliver full BS7858 compliance, including all required checks (DBS, employment history, SIA licence, etc.)?
• What is their typical turnaround time, and how do they handle exceptional cases (overseas, gaps in history)?
• How transparent is the process? Are there dashboards, real-time status updates, and audit-grade documentation?
• Data privacy: how is candidate information stored and processed? Who has access?
• What is the cost over time, including staff time savings and risk mitigation?

GuardCheck by GuardPass has strong answers in all these areas. The NSI Silver approval adds external confidence. The technology-driven workflows, the real-time tracking, the integration with candidate apps and onboarding, and the speed, all these approximate what the modern security employer needs.

Recommended Reading: 10 Questions to Ask for Security Background Checks

Conclusion

BS7858 vetting is essential; there’s no way around its requirements if you operate in regulated, sensitive environments. But the standard doesn’t have to mean mountains of paper, weeks waiting, or constantly firefighting compliance gaps. With a well-designed service like GuardCheck, much of the friction disappears. What remains is what matters: verified, trusted personnel deployed in roles they are cleared and qualified for; compliance you can defend; time and money saved; and reputational risk reduced.

If you find yourself dreading the next vetting round or losing contracts because “we can’t get staff cleared in time,” it may be time to try a tool built for the demands of today, not yesterday. Not all 3rd party vetting services are equal. GuardCheck lets you do all that and more.

Book a free demo to get started.

The post BS7858 Staff Vetting Made Easy With GuardCheck appeared first on GuardPass Resources.

Let’s be honest: the private security industry is often misunderstood, both by the public and by policymakers. Yet, it’s a sector that quietly underpins the safety of millions across Europe. Having spent decades on the ground and in management, I’ve seen firsthand how the UK’s approach to private security stands apart from our European neighbours. This isn’t just about paperwork or politics; it’s about how we keep people safe, how we train our staff, and how we build trust in a profession that’s too often overlooked.

Market Size and Structure: Not All Security Is Created Equal

The UK’s private security sector is a heavyweight. With revenues nudging £9 billion and a workforce of over 400,000, it’s a major employer and a critical cog in the national safety machine. London, of course, is the epicentre, where the stakes are highest and the standards are (or should be) at their sharpest. The sector’s growth has been fuelled by public sector outsourcing, rising crime, and, frankly, the police being stretched to breaking point.

Now, zoom out to the EU. The numbers are even bigger: €76 billion in revenue, 2 million people employed. Germany leads the pack, followed by France, Spain, and Italy. But here’s the rub: the EU market is fragmented. You’ve got everything from global giants to tiny local firms, all jostling for contracts in manned guarding, electronic security, cash handling, and event management. It’s a patchwork, not a tapestry.

Regulation: The SIA and the “Gold Standard” (Or Is It?)

Here in the UK, we love a bit of regulation. The Security Industry Authority (SIA) is the gatekeeper, and if you want to work in security, you need their licence. No badge, no job. The SIA regime is strict: mandatory training, criminal record checks, security vetting standards, and ongoing professional development. Frontline operatives must display their licence at all times whilst on duty, no exceptions. Well, almost none. Store detectives swerve this, for obvious reasons. Managers and directors need non-frontline licences if they’re supplying staff. There’s an “in-house” exception, as it was forgotten about in the PSIA 2001, but it’s narrow and getting narrower.

Contrast this with the EU. There’s no Brussels-based SIA. Each country does its own thing. Belgium and Spain are famously strict, with lots of hoops to jump through. Germany and France? Big markets, but regulation is often regional or even municipal. Training and vetting requirements can vary wildly, even within the same country. If you’re licensed in one EU state, don’t expect to waltz into another and start work. Cross-border recognition is, frankly, a mess.

Brexit? It’s made things even more complicated. The UK is now free to diverge from EU rules, and we’re already seeing differences in how investments and reporting are handled. For the average security officer, it means more paperwork and less mobility.

Training and Professional Standards: The Devil’s in the Detail

The SIA sets a minimum bar for training, but let’s be clear: it’s just that, a minimum. Good employers go further, offering site-specific and ongoing training. The SIA’s Approved Contractor Scheme (ACS) is supposed to recognise the best of the best, but as anyone in the industry knows, ACS status doesn’t always guarantee quality on the ground.

Across the EU, training is a mixed bag. Some countries demand extensive courses and background checks; others are more relaxed. The European Confederation of Private Security Services (CoESS) has been banging the drum for harmonisation, but progress is glacial. Until there’s real consistency, standards will remain uneven.

Recommended Reading: Building a Strong Security Culture

Trends and Challenges: What’s Really Happening on the Ground?

UK

• Integration with Police: Increasingly, UK private security is plugging gaps left by the police, especially during crises like the pandemic. We’re not the police, but we’re often the first responders.
• Counter-Terrorism: New laws like Martyn’s Law are bringing the UK’s private security into the heart of national counter-terrorism strategies. This is a huge responsibility and a huge challenge.
• Tech Adoption: The UK is leading the way in electronic surveillance and integrated systems. But technology is only as good as the people using it.

EU

• Event-Driven Growth: Major events (think football tournaments, festivals) drive demand for security. But when the crowds go home, so do the jobs.
• Digital Transformation: The move to contactless payments and digital security is reducing the need for old-school cash-in-transit services.
• Regulatory Fragmentation: The lack of harmonised standards is a real headache for companies and professionals alike.

Conclusion: Where Do We Go from Here?

The UK’s private security industry is, in many ways, a model of centralised regulation and professionalisation. But we shouldn’t get complacent. The SIA system is far from perfect, and standards on the ground are at best “patchy”. Across the EU, diversity is both a strength and a weakness: local knowledge is invaluable, but the lack of harmonisation holds the sector back.

As the industry grows and evolves, the pressure for higher standards and greater consistency will only increase. For now, the UK leads in regulation and training, but we must keep pushing for real professionalism, because at the end of the day, security is about people, not just policies.

While the UK and EU private security industries share common drivers, rising crime, public sector outsourcing, and technological change, the UK stands out for its centralised, rigorous regulatory regime and professional standards. EU countries, by contrast, display significant diversity in licensing, training, and oversight, reflecting local legal and market conditions. 

Brexit has accentuated these differences, with the UK moving towards greater regulatory autonomy. As the sector continues to grow and evolve, calls for harmonisation and higher standards across Europe are likely to intensify, but for now, the UK remains a model of centralised regulation and professionalisation (well, if the new S12 group performs as we all hope). 

Stay Ahead with the UK’s Trusted Security Hiring Platform

While the UK and EU private security industries share common drivers—rising crime, public sector outsourcing, and rapid technological change—the UK leads with its centralised regulation and clear compliance standards. But leadership requires momentum.

If you’re serious about building a trusted, high-performance security team, GuardPass gives you the tools, talent, and technology to do it right. From building a flexible guard pool to accessing a purpose-built security recruitment platform, we help you meet today’s demands with tomorrow’s expectations.

Hire better with GuardPass.

The post The UK Private Security Industry vs. the EU: Key Differences and Trends appeared first on GuardPass Resources.

For many years, the Security Industry Authority (SIA) has consulted with an amorphous group of security industry “stakeholders” to look at policy, planning and development of the industry. Many would say that during this time, very little change or improvement actually took place, possibly due to the fact that these “stakeholders” were doing very nicely financially, thank you. Change did not suit their business plans. Now, however, the SIA has been placed under the umbrella of the Home Office’s Homeland Security division, and things seem to be changing.

The first recent change was the formation of the new S12, a UK security industry consultation group. The arrival of the S12, “security guarding leadership group”, could not be more timely. With increased demands on the sector caused by the introduction of Martyn’s Law, there is a genuine chance for the organisation to become a catalyst for lasting, practical improvement. Get it wrong, however, and there is a grave danger that an already cynical industry will view the S12 as just another defensive veneer and PR face for the industry, whilst leaving systematic problems untouched.

What Does the S12 Security Guarding Leadership Group Aim to Do?

Officially launched during the International Security Expo at London’s Olympia earlier this month, the S12 is being billed as a cross-industry forum to raise standards, shape policy, and accelerate implementation of key legislation. The group’s main aims include broader integration with policing, the creation of a Security Skills Academy and improved professional standards across the contract guarding sector. 

This sounds good so far, uncontroversially so, and indeed the security minister, Dan Jarvis, attended the launch, giving a significant speech to the assembled members. His speech is available in full here.

Who’s In the Room? Meet the S12 Board

The composition of this group is critically important. Credibility depends on it, and the S12 is off to a good start. Highly respected Paul Evans (Carlisle) has been named chair, with equally well-regarded Peter Harrison (FGH Security) as deputy chair; the group includes senior executives from national providers, SMEs and trade bodies, and has observers from the National Security Inspectorate and other governance outfits. 

Members are committed to two-year terms and monthly meetings, with each member sponsoring at least one initiative. There is also a commitment to introduce wider ‘sub-working groups’, spreading involvement further across the industry—full list of board members below.

S12 Security Guarding Leadership Group Members

• Paul Evans, CEO, Carlisle Security Services Limited (Chair)
• Peter Harrison, Managing Director, FGH Security (Deputy Chair)
• Gary Culloden, Managing Director, Security, Mitie
• Tim Kendall, President, G4S Secure Solutions (UK&I)
• Rachel Fleri, Managing Director, Specialist Security
• Ahmad Rafique, CEO, SSG Support Services
• Claire Shrosbree, CEO, CYS Security
• Alex Booth, Managing Director, AURA UK Services
• Paul Howe, Managing Director, Venture Security Management,
• John MacAskill, British Security Industry Association (BSIA)

Observation and Governance Roles

• David Ward, City Security Council
• Richard Fogelman, National Security Inspectorate (NSI)

From S10 to S12: A Move Toward Inclusion?

When the initial idea of a security guarding leadership group was announced, it was framed as the S10. This was met with substantial criticism as many engaged individuals were automatically excluded from participation. This led to the group being widely viewed as just a formalisation of the SIA’s ‘usual’ consulting stakeholders. Stakeholders that had achieved little in the way of security industry improvement over the years. 

Indeed, I was one of the critics of the initial idea for just that reason. To its credit, these objections were taken on board rapidly, and a more open and inclusive organisation was proposed, with membership across numerous categories being democratically voted to the board.

If the S12 can convert its new and unprecedented access to Government and regulators into positive, concrete change, it will have achieved its goals and gained industry respect.

The Challenges Ahead

There are, however, three quick and uncomfortable truths the S12 Security Guarding Leadership Group must confront:

1. Representation is not the same as reach.

The group’s membership includes heavyweights and trade association nominees, but voices from the trenches, small guarding firms, security operatives themselves, and front-line client procurement teams need structured, funded channels into S12’s policymaking. Token representation on a committee is not the same as systemic pulling power over tendering practice, low-margin outsourcing and the use of casualised labour models that corrode standards. 

2. Standards without enforcement create perverse incentives. 

Raising the bar for training and conduct matters, but it must be paired with consistent audit, accessible escalation paths for contract breaches, and proportionate sanctions for malpractice. Otherwise, the market will continue to reward the providers who cut corners on wages, training and supervision. S12’s promise to work with the SIA and regulators is necessary; now it needs to define measurable KPIs and public reporting on progress. 

3. Perception is policy. 

The sector still carries reputational baggage. Ministers and officials will listen to S12, but they will also ask whether its conclusions reflect the real world or merely the interests of larger incumbents. That’s not paranoia; there are already public expressions of scepticism from parts of the industry suggesting S12’s composition risks privileging bigger players. For S12 to be credible, minutes, membership criteria, voting procedures, and conflict of interest declarations should be transparent and easily accessible. 

Recommended Reading: Mandatory Security Business Licensing

Setting a 100-Day Roadmap

So, how is the S12 going to get started? Momentum is important, and the industry will be watching, so if I were setting the first 100-day deliverables for the S12, they would look something like this:

1. Publish a one-page public roadmap with named owners. 

We don’t need vague commitments; we need named people, milestones and measurable outcomes for the Skills Academy, a sector-wide training baseline and proposals for procurement reform. Transparency builds accountability and reduces the ‘closed circle’ perception.

2. Launch a rapid-response standards task force focused on contracts and procurement. 

Building on the minimum charge rate framework published by the IPSA, and created by John Lambert, the group should produce a short, client-facing code of practice for procurement teams (public and private) that disincentivises the race to the bottom.
It should be short, enforceable, and include simple mechanisms for clients to check whether a provider meets minimum pay, training and supervision thresholds.

3. Commit to worker engagement. 

Create a standing workers’ panel and fund independent surveys of front-line staff. If the industry is serious about professionalism, it must listen to the people who do the work night after night, day after day. Their insights on rota design, supervision levels and unrealistic client expectations are often the fastest route to meaningful improvement. This is no easy task, and the S12 will inevitably need to work with organisations such as the IPSA, Guild of Security Industry Professionals and IFPO.

Pitfalls to Avoid

The S12 has access to the minister and to regulators. Valuable political capital. But the group must avoid two traps. 

First, capture: if S12 becomes a lobbying group for privileged commercial interests rather than a public-interest forum, ministers will move on, and the sector’s window to influence policy will shut. 

Second, inaction: announcing committees, working groups, and further consultations is easy; delivering systemic change is not. The political appetite for fixes will be finite unless S12 demonstrates early wins. 

Recommended Reading: Security Industry Business Challenges

Closing Thoughts: Can the S12 Earn Industry Trust?

This industry is capable of self-improvement. We have competent professionals, committed firms, and a regulator that can be constructive despite historically being hindered by its Home Office overlords. The S12 might just be the mechanism that turns scattered initiatives into a coherent, credible programme that elevates guarding from a poorly regarded tactical commodity to a recognised, respected, trained profession that serves public safety.

Credibility and respect need to be earned. The S12 must be brutally practical, setting target outcomes, not stating aspirations. It needs to publish data, not PR platitudes. Crucially, it needs to show that the UK security industry can effectively protect the public whilst advancing the legitimate commercial interests that sustain the workforce. 

If it does that, politicians will listen and reputations will mend. 

If it doesn’t, it will become just another ‘old boys club’, fuelling more cynicism and achieving nothing for nearly half a million workers in the sector.

Either way, the industry will be watching.

Building a Fairer Future for Security Employers

As the S12 group aims to raise standards and open up industry influence, the question remains — who gets to benefit from these changes? At GuardPass, we’re making sure it’s not just the biggest players. Our platform gives security companies of all sizes a direct route to qualified, licensed professionals — without relying on legacy networks or outdated recruitment methods. 

Discover how we’re building a fairer, faster hiring ecosystem at GuardPass.

The post The New “S12” Security Group: Who Are They and What Is It All About? appeared first on GuardPass Resources.

Navigating the landscape of security vetting in the UK can be a complex challenge for any employer. With various standards and acronyms to decipher, ensuring you’re compliant while hiring the right people can feel like a daunting task. Two of the most important standards you’ll encounter are the Baseline Personnel Security Standard (BPSS) and BS7858. While both are designed to ensure the trustworthiness of individuals, they serve different purposes and are required in different contexts.

This guide will demystify BPSS and BS7858, clarifying what each standard entails, when you need to use them, and how you can avoid the inefficiencies of redundant data entry in your vetting procedures.

What is BPSS (Baseline Personnel Security Standard)?

The Baseline Personnel Security Standard, or BPSS, is the foundational level of security screening for anyone who has access to UK government assets. This includes civil servants, members of the armed forces, temporary staff, and contractors working on behalf of the government. It’s important to note that BPSS is not a formal security clearance but rather a pre-employment screening process that underpins higher levels of national security vetting.

The primary goal of BPSS is to confirm the identity of an individual and their right to work in the UK, while also providing a level of assurance as to their trustworthiness, integrity, and reliability.

BPSS screening involves four key checks:

•Identity Verification: Confirmation of the applicant’s identity through official documents

•Right to Work: Verification of the applicant’s legal right to work in the UK

•Employment History: A check of the applicant’s employment history for the past three years

•Criminal Record: A check for any unspent criminal convictions

What is BS7858?

BS7858 is the British Standard for the screening of individuals employed in a security environment. It is the established benchmark for the private security industry and is considered best practice for any organization that needs to ensure the integrity of its security personnel. For companies that are part of the Security Industry Authority (SIA) Approved Contractor Scheme (ACS), compliance with BS7858 is a regulatory requirement.

This standard is more rigorous than a basic background check and is designed for roles where the safety of people, goods, or property is paramount. It involves a more in-depth investigation into a candidate’s background to ensure they are of sound character and do not pose a risk to their employer or the public. Modern platforms like GuardCheck have streamlined this process, making BS7858 compliance faster and more efficient than traditional methods.

BS7858 vetting includes comprehensive checks:

•Identity Verification: Rigorous confirmation of the applicant’s identity

•Right to Work: Verification of the applicant’s legal right to work in the UK

•Financial History: A check of credit history and bankruptcy records for the past six years

•Employment History: Detailed verification of employment history for the past five to ten years

•Character References: In-depth character references are obtained and verified

•Address History: Verification of the applicant’s address history

•Criminal Record: A check for any unspent criminal convictions

BPSS vs. BS7858: The Key Differences

While both standards share the common goal of ensuring the reliability of personnel, they are designed for different sectors and have distinct requirements. Understanding these differences is crucial for compliance and cost-effective hiring.

Comparison Overview:

BPSS (Government Sector)

• Application: Government departments and contractors
• Employment History: 3 years required
• Financial Checks: Not included
• Character References: Not required
• Target Roles: Civil servants, military personnel, government contractors

BS7858 (Private Security)

• Application: Private security industry
• Employment History: 5-10 years required
• Financial Checks: 6-year financial probity check
• Character References: Required and verified
• Target Roles: SIA-licensed personnel, security staff, high-trust positions

These differences have significant implications for employers. Choosing the wrong standard can lead to non-compliance, or conversely, unnecessary and costly over-vetting of candidates. For comprehensive guidance on implementing effective screening processes, our blog on best practices for security vetting provides essential insights for 2024.

When Do You Need BPSS vs. BS7858?

Knowing when to apply each standard is essential for compliance and efficiency:

Use BPSS when you are hiring for roles that involve access to government assets, information, or premises. This applies to all civil servants, military personnel, and any contractor or temporary staff working for a government department.

Use BS7858 when you are a security company hiring SIA-licensed personnel, or you are hiring for any role in the private sector that involves a high level of trust and responsibility for the safety of people, property, or sensitive information. For a detailed breakdown of the process, see our comprehensive guide to BS7858 screening steps.

The Problem of Double Work in Security Vetting

One of the biggest frustrations for employers is the duplication of effort in the vetting process. Often, a candidate may have undergone one type of check, but then needs another for a different role, leading to a time-consuming process of re-entering the same data into multiple systems. This manual re-entry not only wastes valuable time but also significantly increases the risk of human error, which can lead to compliance issues and flawed hiring decisions.

The Solution: Single Data Capture for Streamlined Vetting

The answer to this inefficiency lies in adopting a single data capture approach. By using an integrated digital platform, you can create a single point of entry for all candidate data. Once the information is entered, it can be seamlessly used for either a BPSS or a BS7858 check, without the need for manual re-entry. This follows the principle of “One Entry, Multiple Outputs” [3].

How Single Data Capture Works

Modern security vetting platforms eliminate double data entry through:

Centralized Data Entry: Candidates enter information once into a secure portal, creating a digital profile for multiple vetting requirements.

Automated Verification: The platform uses this data to run required checks for BPSS, BS7858, or both.

Integrated Systems: Platforms integrate with existing HR systems, eliminating manual data transfer.

This approach saves time, reduces errors, improves candidate experience, and ensures compliance with clear audit trails. Traditional vetting processes can take up to 12 weeks, but with modern platforms, you can achieve security staff vetting in just 6 days.

Making the Right Choice for Your Business

Choosing between BPSS and BS7858 doesn’t have to be complicated. By understanding the specific requirements of the roles you are hiring for, you can easily determine which standard is appropriate. Modern, integrated vetting platforms eliminate the inefficiencies of traditional, paper-based processes while ensuring full compliance with regulatory requirements.

At GuardPass, we understand the importance of fast, reliable, and compliant security vetting. Our BS7858 and BPSS screening platform is designed to streamline the entire vetting process, providing you with comprehensive reports in as little as 48 hours. By embracing technology and a single data capture approach, you can ensure you are hiring the right people, every time, without the headache of double work.

Ready to transform your security vetting process? Discover how GuardCheck makes BS7858 vetting fast and compliant, and start hiring with confidence today.

The post BPSS vs. BS7858: Which Security Check Do You Need and How to Avoid Double Work appeared first on GuardPass Resources.

A single SIA compliance failure cost Titan Security Services 24/7 Ltd over £4,000 in August 2024. The company directors were prosecuted after deploying a door supervisor with a suspended SIA licence at a Bristol nightclub. Despite claiming 20 years of experience in the security industry, they told Bristol Magistrates’ Court they “did not realise online licence checks existed”.

This case demonstrates how quickly SIA compliance failures can escalate into criminal prosecution, devastating fines, and public humiliation that destroys business reputations.

Titan Security’s Nightmare: When Ignorance Becomes Criminal

In October 2023, Mohammad Nazar was found working at a nightclub in Kingswood with an SIA licence that had been suspended eight months earlier. He was deployed by Titan Security Services 24/7 Ltd, whose directors, Aaron Williams and Ashley Fido, faced criminal prosecution for the violation.

The Brutal Financial Reality

• Each company director: £753 fine + £293 victim surcharge + £342 prosecution costs = £1,388
• Company penalty: £1,388
• Total cost: Over £4,000 for one incident

The Reputational Execution

The case became a government press release, creating permanent public records linking the company name to criminal prosecution for regulatory violations. In an industry built on trust and reliability, this kind of publicity can be business-ending.

The SIA’s Criminal Investigation Manager stated: “Our robust licensing system is there for a reason: to protect the public. Door supervisors play a vital role in keeping people safe and are specially trained to respond to dangerous situations and safely de-escalate conflict. When security companies and individuals flout these regulations, they put people at risk.”

Criminal Penalties Are Waiting for You

The Security Industry Authority operates under the Private Security Industry Act 2001, with powers to impose severe penalties for licence condition breaches. These penalties include:

• Written warnings that affect future licensing decisions
• Licence suspension or revocation
• Criminal prosecution under Section 9 of the Act

Breaching SIA licence conditions is a criminal offence, not merely an administrative violation. This means companies and individuals face criminal records, substantial fines, and prosecution costs.

The SIA Compliance Minefield: One Mistake Ends Everything

Front-line licence holders must comply with strict legal obligations:

• Wear licences visibly at all times during designated activity
• Report lost or stolen licences to both the SIA and the police
• Notify the SIA of any convictions, cautions, or charges within 21 days
• Report name or address changes within 42 days
• Produce licences for inspection when requested by police, SIA members, or authorised persons
• Do not deface or alter licences in any way

Companies employing security staff must ensure these conditions are met. Failure to do so can result in criminal prosecution, as demonstrated by the Titan Security case.

Why Companies Like Yours Are Failing Right Now

The Titan Security case reveals a fundamental problem: companies operating without proper SIA compliance systems. Despite 20 years in the security industry, the directors claimed ignorance of basic licence checking procedures.

This highlights the compliance failures happening in your industry today:

Inadequate Licence Monitoring: Companies without systems to verify current licence status risk deploying staff with suspended or revoked licences, leading to criminal prosecution.

Poor Record Keeping: Maintaining accurate records of staff training, licence status, and compliance activities is essential but often neglected.

Training Documentation Gaps: Security staff must complete ongoing CPD requirements. Companies unable to demonstrate continuous professional development face compliance issues during audits.

The Business Death Spiral Starts Here

Beyond immediate fines, SIA compliance failures create cascading business consequences:

Contract Termination: Clients increasingly include strict compliance clauses in security contracts. Regulatory violations can trigger immediate contract termination.

Insurance Void: Professional indemnity and public liability insurers are becoming stricter about compliance requirements. Violations can void coverage or increase premiums significantly.

Operational Collapse: When staff have licences suspended or revoked, companies face immediate service delivery problems and struggle to find replacement licensed personnel.

Recruitment Crisis: Companies with compliance violations face increased regulatory scrutiny and may struggle to attract quality staff.

GuardSkills: Your Last Line of Defence Against SIA Compliance Disaster

GuardSkills provides a comprehensive training and SIA compliance management solution designed specifically for UK security companies. The platform offers:

CPD-Certified Training

Over 50 CPD-certified courses delivered through a single dashboard for assigning training, monitoring completion, and downloading reports.

Audit-Ready Documentation

The platform generates instant audit reports for inspection readiness, helping companies demonstrate ongoing compliance.

Mobile Learning

Short, engaging videos accessible on mobile devices allow security staff to complete training during downtime.

Professional Development

Role-relevant content that meets CPD standards supports career progression whilst maintaining SIA compliance requirements.

Flexible Pricing

Credit-based pricing starts at £100, with each seat valid for a year and reassignable as team composition changes.

The Math That Should Terrify You

The mathematics are stark: the Titan Security case cost over £4,000 for a single violation involving one employee. This represents only the immediate financial cost, excluding reputational damage, potential contract losses, and ongoing regulatory scrutiny.

Compare this to GuardSkills’ starting price of £100 for comprehensive compliance training and documentation capabilities. The platform addresses the fundamental compliance challenges that lead to prosecution: inadequate training records, missing CPD documentation, and inability to demonstrate ongoing professional development.

Act Now Before You Become the Next Case Study

Companies relying on manual systems and spreadsheets are vulnerable to the same fate as Titan Security Services. The question isn’t whether regulatory scrutiny will occur—it’s whether you’ll be ready when it does.

GuardSkills provides the CPD-certified training and audit-ready documentation that eliminates regulatory risk. For security company directors serious about avoiding criminal prosecution and business-destroying compliance failures, the choice is clear.

The cost of non-compliance isn’t just financial—it’s reputational, operational, and potentially criminal. A single compliance failure can destroy decades of hard work. Don’t wait for compliance failures to destroy your business. In the security industry, SIA compliance isn’t optional—it’s essential for survival.

Watch the demo here and protect your business from the devastating costs of non-compliance.

The post Your Next SIA Compliance Failure Will Destroy Your Business — Just Ask Titan Security appeared first on GuardPass Resources.

In just one year, GuardCheck has earned NSI Silver Approval for BS7858 screening, one of the highest recognitions in UK security. This isn’t just a milestone for the GuardPass team; it’s a significant development for every security employer seeking a screening process they can trust implicitly.

But what does this recognition from the National Security Inspectorate (NSI) truly mean for your business? Let’s break it down.

NSI Silver Approval for BS7858: A New Benchmark in Trust and Compliance

In the security industry, compliance isn’t optional—it’s the foundation of your operations. BS7858 is the UK’s benchmark for vetting security staff, and GuardCheck is now officially certified to deliver it.

Achieving NSI Silver Approval for BS7858 screening certifies that GuardCheck not only meets but excels in upholding these critical standards. The NSI conducted a thorough and independent audit of our software, workflows, and processes, confirming that our platform delivers the highest level of integrity and reliability. For employers, this means you can trust every check will stand up in an audit or client review, giving you full confidence that your screening process is robust, defensible, and aligned with the industry’s best practices.

Beyond the Certificate: The Practical Advantage

While the NSI Silver mark is a symbol of excellence, its real value lies in the practical benefits it brings to your hiring process.

• Guaranteed Compliance: With GuardCheck, you are using a service that has been officially recognised for its adherence to BS7858. This eliminates guesswork and reduces the administrative burden of ensuring your screening methods are up to standard.

• Enhanced Credibility: Using an NSI-approved service strengthens your company’s reputation. It demonstrates a commitment to quality and security that resonates with clients, regulators, and potential employees alike.

• Streamlined Efficiency: This approval validates the power of our platform, which combines AI, seamless integrations, and intelligent workflows. We built GuardCheck to tackle the complexities of security screening head-on, turning a traditionally cumbersome process into a fast, accurate, and user-friendly experience. Now, that efficiency is backed by an official seal of approval.

Why This Matters for the Future of Security Screening

The security landscape is constantly evolving, and the demand for transparency and accountability has never been higher. Manual, error-prone screening processes are no longer sufficient to meet today’s regulatory challenges.

The NSI Silver Approval for GuardCheck signals a shift towards technology-driven solutions that offer both efficiency and unwavering compliance. It validates the idea that innovation can—and should—be used to elevate industry standards. By integrating a certified tool like GuardCheck into your operations, you are not just hiring faster; you are building a more secure and trustworthy organisation from the ground up.

At GuardPass, our mission has always been to empower security employers with the tools they need to succeed. This recognition from the NSI is a testament to that commitment. We believe that robust, reliable, and efficient screening should be the standard for everyone, and we are proud to offer a solution that makes it a reality.
Ready to elevate your screening process? Discover the NSI-approved advantage of GuardCheck today and hire with complete confidence. Book a demo to get started.

The post Big News: GuardCheck Awarded NSI Silver Approval! appeared first on GuardPass Resources.

Imagine completing comprehensive BS7858 security staff vetting in just 6 days instead of waiting 12 weeks. For security company directors and operations managers, this timeline transformation represents the difference between winning contracts and watching opportunities slip away to faster competitors.

The security industry has long accepted that thorough security staff vetting takes months. Traditional providers routinely quote 8-12 week timelines for BS7858 and BPSS screening, forcing employers to plan recruitment months in advance or risk missing urgent deployment opportunities. This extended timeline has become so normalised that many security companies build their entire operational strategy around these delays.

GuardCheck challenges this accepted wisdom entirely. Our digital vetting platform completes the same comprehensive BS7858 and BPSS screening in 24 hours to 6 days, representing a timeline reduction of over 90%. This isn’t about cutting corners or reducing thoroughness – it’s about applying modern technology and intelligent process design to eliminate the unnecessary delays that plague traditional security staff vetting.

For security employers, this timeline revolution creates immediate competitive advantages. When clients need emergency coverage or rapid deployment, you can respond with confidence rather than explaining why your candidates won’t be available for months.

Why Traditional Security Staff Vetting Takes 12 Weeks

Understanding the 12-week timeline requires examining where traditional vetting providers lose time. These extended delays aren’t inevitable – they’re the result of outdated processes that haven’t evolved with available technology.

The traditional journey begins with manual application processing, where paperwork sits in queues waiting for administrative review. DBS applications then enter government systems that process requests in the order received, with no priority given to urgent business needs. This single step often consumes 6-8 weeks of the total timeline.

Employment verification extends the process further as bureaus manually contact previous employers through phone calls and postal correspondence. When employers are slow to respond or difficult to reach, these delays compound. Address history verification follows a similar pattern, requiring manual gathering and verification of documentation for each location where candidates have lived.

Financial checks add another layer of delay as credit reports must be requested, received, and manually reviewed. Reference checks require coordination with multiple contacts, often involving several rounds of communication to gather complete information.

Perhaps most significantly, traditional providers process these checks sequentially rather than simultaneously. Instead of running multiple verification streams in parallel, they complete one check before beginning the next, artificially extending timelines that could be dramatically shortened through better coordination.

Administrative overhead between multiple agencies creates additional delays as information moves slowly between systems that weren’t designed to integrate efficiently. Each handoff point introduces potential delays and communication gaps that can extend processing by days or weeks.

How GuardCheck Achieves 6-Day Timelines

GuardCheck’s 6-day timeline isn’t achieved by reducing thoroughness – it’s the result of intelligent automation and parallel processing that eliminates traditional bottlenecks whilst maintaining full compliance standards.

The transformation begins with digital document submission through our candidate app. Instead of postal delays and manual data entry, candidates upload required documents directly into our system, where AI-assisted verification immediately begins pre-validating information against official registers, including SIA licences and DBS records.

Parallel processing represents a fundamental shift from traditional sequential approaches. While DBS checks are processed through government systems, our platform simultaneously conducts employment verification, address history checks, and financial verification. This parallel approach alone reduces timelines by 60-70% compared to sequential processing.

AI-assisted verification accelerates initial screening by automatically cross-referencing submitted information against multiple official databases. This technology identifies discrepancies or potential issues within hours rather than weeks, allowing for immediate resolution rather than discovering problems late in the process.

Real-time status tracking through employer dashboards provides unprecedented visibility into progress. You can see exactly where each candidate stands with clear categories: Not Started, In Progress, Issues Flagged, Expiring, or Full Screened. This transparency eliminates the uncertainty that characterises traditional vetting.

Admin-verified checks combine AI efficiency with human expertise to ensure accuracy whilst maintaining rapid timelines. Our verification team focuses on cases that require human judgment, whilst automated systems handle routine verification tasks that don’t require manual intervention.

The Business Impact of 6-Day Vetting

The timeline reduction from 12 weeks to 6 days creates measurable business advantages that extend far beyond simple convenience. This transformation fundamentally changes how security companies can operate and compete in the market.

Emergency deployment capability becomes a realistic service offering when you can guarantee staff availability within a week rather than months. Security companies using GuardCheck can pursue urgent contracts that traditional competitors simply cannot accommodate due to vetting constraints.

Client satisfaction improves dramatically when you can provide realistic, short timelines for staff deployment. Instead of explaining why qualified candidates won’t be available for months, you can offer confident deployment schedules that meet client expectations.

Competitive positioning strengthens significantly when you can respond to opportunities that require rapid deployment. While competitors explain their 12-week limitations, you can commit to deployment within days, often securing contracts based on timeline advantages alone.

Operational efficiency increases when vetting delays don’t dominate your hiring workflow. Your team can focus on finding the right candidates and building client relationships rather than managing the consequences of extended vetting delays.

Candidate retention improves when qualified professionals don’t have to wait months to start work. In today’s competitive job market, the best candidates often accept positions with employers who can start them quickly rather than waiting for lengthy vetting processes.

Recommended Reading: Security Vetting and Training Benefits

Implementation and Getting Started

Transitioning from 12-week to 6-day vetting timelines requires minimal disruption to existing operations whilst delivering immediate benefits. GuardCheck integrates seamlessly with current recruitment processes through the GuardPass platform.

Setting up your employer account involves configuring specific vetting requirements and preferences. Once configured, you can send vetting invites directly from your dashboard interface, eliminating the need to coordinate with multiple external providers.

The candidate experience streamlines document submission through our secure app. Candidates receive clear guidance for uploading identity verification documents, employment history information, and right to work documentation. The app handles all communication about additional requirements, reducing administrative burden on your team.

Progress tracking happens in real-time through comprehensive dashboards that provide complete visibility into each candidate’s status. You receive compliant reports as downloadable PDF files that meet all industry standards, whilst automated notifications keep you informed of progress without requiring manual follow-up.

The Future of Security Vetting Timelines

The contrast between 6-day and 12-week vetting timelines will only become more significant as client expectations continue to evolve. Modern businesses increasingly expect immediate response capabilities, and security providers who can deliver will gain substantial competitive advantages.

Traditional 12-week timelines create artificial barriers that prevent businesses from capitalising on immediate opportunities. GuardCheck’s 6-day timeline represents the future of security staff vetting – efficient, transparent, and designed for the realities of modern business operations.

Security companies that embrace this timeline revolution position themselves to thrive whilst competitors struggle with outdated processes that limit their responsiveness and growth potential.

Start using GuardCheck and transform your vetting timeline from 12 weeks to 6 days.

The post 6 Days vs 12 Weeks: How GuardCheck is Revolutionising Security Staff Vetting Timelines appeared first on GuardPass Resources.