EmployeeScreenIQ Blog

This great search was powered by Search Unleashed.
Help to remove this message by getting the site owner to support this software.

I have started out way too many posts with “Who’s guarding the guards!”  I decided to spare you with this one.  It appears a Bellevue NE man has been scamming the public offering fake FBI employment background checks.

Bellevue Man Accused of Background Check Scam

Bellevue, NE – Federal investigators have arrested a Bellevue man, accusing him of running a background check scam. …

Continue Reading

Last month we learned that Bobby Scott, D-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, introduced the 2010 Fairness and Accuracy in Employment Background Checks Act in response to a June 2006 report from the attorney general that showed nearly 50 percent of criminal records maintained in the NCIC background check database failed to note court decisions to dismiss arrests.

The New York Times was particularly critical of the FBI’s Daniel D. Roberts, Assistant Director of Criminal Justice wrote a letter of response to the publication.  See below.

To the Editor:

In a May 27 editorial (“Check It Again”), you discussed the accuracy of data the Federal Bureau of Investigation relies on when doing criminal records checks.

The F.B.I. takes its role as a central repository for criminal justice information very seriously, but must rely on the voluntary submissions of criminal history records supplied by local, state, tribal and federal law enforcement agencies, and the courts, for the overwhelming majority of its information.

While the F.B.I. appreciates this support, vital data often fails to get to the bureau in a timely way because of the time lag in criminal prosecutions. To help find ways to capture this information more efficiently, the F.B.I. formed an interagency task force to identify problem areas in states’ disposition reporting and methods to improve the system. The F.B.I. also oversees another task force to improve the flow of criminal history information from the courts to the state repositories and then to the F.B.I.

The F.B.I. is also working on internal improvements, including the Next Generation Identification program, an upgrade to the existing fingerprint identification system, which will improve disposition reporting, while a related initiative will enable efficient electronic updates.

Through advances in technology and the continued cooperation of our partners, the F.B.I. hopes to clear the way for additional improvements in the completeness of the background check information we provide.

Daniel D. Roberts

Assistant Director, Criminal Justice

Information Services Division, F.B.I.

Washington, June 2, 2010

While the letter is very open, honest and insightful we still caution employers that there many holes in the FBI’s criminal record database.  Past studies have shown that it includes only 55% of all criminal records from across the county and the FBI is the first to admit that the database was not created our intended for employment screening purposes.  However, some organizations and industries are required to perform criminal background checks through this resource.  In addition to the fact that the database is incomplete, it also contains information that cannot be used in a hiring decision such as arrest records, charges that do not result in convictions, etc.

Continue Reading

We’ve written extensively about the many holes in the FBI’s criminal record database.  Past studies have shown that it includes only 55% of all criminal records from across the county and the FBI is the first to admit that the database was not created our intended for employment screening purposes.  However, some organizations and industries are required to perform criminal background checks through this resource.  In addition to the fact that the database is incomplete, it also contains information that cannot be used in a hiring decision such as arrest records, charges that do not result in convictions, etc.

According to NextGov.com Bobby Scott, D-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, introduced the 2010 Fairness and Accuracy in Employment Background Checks Act in response to a June 2006 report from the attorney general that showed nearly 50 percent of criminal records maintained in the NCIC database failed to note court decisions to dismiss arrests.

See the story below:

Bill Would Require FBI to Fill in Gaps in Criminal Records Database

A bill introduced in the House would strengthen the accuracy of the FBI’s criminal records database by requiring the U.S. Attorney General’s Office to verify that crime data is up to date. Employers rely on the database to conduct background checks on potential hires.

The 2010 Fairness and Accuracy in Employment Background Checks Act would require the attorney general to find out from court offices, including those in state and local jurisdictions, the outcome of arrests whenever an employer requests a background check, and update that record in theNational Crime Information Centerdatabase. In cases where the attorney general discovers an arrest was dismissed in court, he has 10 days to update the record before responding to the employer’s request.

Employers often consult the NCIC database to conduct background checks on individuals applying for jobs in law enforcement, homeland security or organizations where they’d be working with vulnerable populations, such as children and the elderly. Typically only public sector entities can request FBI background checks, though certain private sector companies — such as those supporting federal homeland security efforts — can as well.

Bobby Scott, D-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, introduced the bill on May 13 in response to a June 2006 report from the attorney general that showed nearly 50 percent of criminal records maintained in the NCIC database failed to note court decisions to dismiss arrests.

“In the current economy, neither employers nor workers can afford employment background records that are inaccurate or incomplete,” Scott said in a statement e-mailed to Nextgov.

The legislation would give job applicants the opportunity to obtain a copy of records provided to a potential employer and challenge their accuracy and completeness. If the records are challenged, the attorney general would have 30 days to complete an investigation, make changes or deletions, and report those changes to the applicant and the employer.

More

Continue Reading

Got FCRA?  This letter from a census bureau employee who was terminated due to misinformation on his background check was published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.  I have highlighted the areas I think deserve special attention and will explain each.  BTW, we’re generally happy that background checks are being conducted.  We just think that they might want to evaluate their screening practices.

“I was excited to have the opportunity to be a part of the Census staff giving me the chance to create the change that I seek in the accuracy of the official count of current US residents. As a part of the training process for US Census Enumerator I was required to submit my finger prints to the FBI for a thorough criminal background check. I was swiftly contacted to have my census materials taken away due to the fact that my finger prints matched an federal arrest record. Of course upon review of the case I was approved for work with the census the news, however came conveniently after someone had already taken over my responsibilities for census work.

Since I am eligible for work in the next round of census jobs I just have to sit tight until I am contacted again by the local main office.

Unfortunately the census bureau has no authority to share any information with me regarding my background check and when or what I was arrested for, or what crime I was guilty of. So, now I have to pay to request my own background check, get finger printed again, and speak directly with the FBI.

Why do I suddenly feel like the FBI owes me lost wages and pain & suffering?”

FBI Database and Thorough Criminal Record Search- These two phrases contradict each other.  Just ask the FBI.  They’ll tell you that their database is far from comprehensive and was designed as a law enforcement tool.

Swiftly Contacted to Have Materials Taken Away- Interesting.  Sounds as if the person wasn’t given a Pre-Adverse Action notice with a copy of their record as mandated by the FACT Act.  That said, they probably weren’t provided with an Adverse Action notice either.

Approved for Work After They Gave Someone Else the Job- Just asking, but wasn’t the census bureau supposed to hold the position open or offer a similar position in case the employee successfully disputed the findings of the background check?

Census Bureau Can’t Share Findings of the Background Check- Seriously? I think somebody forgot to read the latest edition of “Employment Background Checks for Dummies”.  Okay, it’s not a real book, but maybe I’ve found a second career (as a dummy and an author).

Continue Reading

Not directly related to the background screening industry, however, this was the biggest background check story of the last century!   Twenty-nine years ago today, President Ronald Reagan was shot in the chest by a deranged man, John Hinckley Jr.

Reagan was walking out of the Washington Hilton Hotel in Washington, D.C., on March 30, 1981, when Hinckley, standing among a group of reporters, began firing at the president and others in his group.

One of the six shots collapsed Reagan’s lung. White House Press Secretary James Brady was shot in the head, while Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy and D.C. Police Officer Thomas Delahanty were also shot. Reagan, 70, was able to walk into the hospital under his own power and resumed some of his duties the following day after surgery. More

This set off a culmination of events that would later produce what was known as the “Brady Bill.” Also known as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, it instituted federal background checks on firearm purchasers in the United States.  According to Wikipedia:

The Brady Act requires that background checks be conducted on individuals before a firearm may be purchased from a federally licensed dealer, manufacturer or importer – unless an exception applies. If there are no additional state restrictions, a firearm may be transferred to an individual upon approval by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) maintained by the FBI. In some states, proof of a previous background check can be used to bypass the NICS check. For example, a state-issued concealed carry permit usually includes a background check equivalent to the one required by the Act. Other alternatives to the NICS check include state-issued handgun purchase permits or mandatory state or local background checks.

Section 922(g) of the Brady Act prohibits certain persons from shipping or transporting any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce, or receiving any firearm which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, or possessing any firearm in or affecting commerce. These prohibitions apply to any person who:

1. Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
2. Is a fugitive from justice;
3. Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance;
4. Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution;
5. Is an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States;
6. Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
7. Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced U.S. citizenship;
8. Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner, or;
9. Has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

Section 922(n) of the Act makes it unlawful for any person who is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year to ship or transport any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce, or receive any firearm which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

From 1994 through 2008, 1.8 million attempted firearm purchases were blocked by the Brady background check system. For checks done by the Federal Bureau of Investigation  in 2008, felons accounted for 56 percent of denials and fugitives from justice accounted for 13 percent of denials. In April 2009, the FBI announced it had completed its 100 millionth NICS approval since its inception 10 years before.

Continue Reading

A U.S. senator is calling for a federal probe into the system of background checks for employees at nuclear plants after learning that a suspected al Qaeda member from New Jersey worked at five such sites.

“We simply cannot tolerate at any time having someone with terrorist ties working at a nuclear plant, period,” Sen. Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, said in a written statement Saturday.

“It seems like common sense, but clearly we need to tighten up the system.”

The FBI said earlier this week that it is investigating Sharif Mobley, a 26-year-old from Buena, New Jersey, as a suspected member of al Qaeda. Mobley also is accused of shooting and killing a security agent and severely injuring another while trying to flee the Republican Hospital in Sanaa, Yemen, last weekend, a law enforcement source said last week.

Mobley’s father said Saturday, “My son is no terrorist.” He would not comment further.

Mobley worked at nuclear plants operated by PSEG Nuclear for different contractors from 2002 to 2008, doing routine labor such as carrying supplies and assisting with maintenance activities, company spokesman Joe Delmar said Thursday.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it was working with the FBI to determine whether Mobley had access to any sensitive areas of the nuclear plants where he once worked, spokeswoman Holly Harrington said.

“It’s important to note that for him to even be in the plants, he’d have to undergo a background and criminal history check,” she said. She said Mobley worked at five plants between 2002 and 2008 in “labor [and] maintenance kind of positions.”

Schumer said the Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspector general should conduct an “immediate and thorough review” of its procedures for background checks on new and transfer employees. The senator said the monitoring of current employees needs improvement.

He said the current background checks include an examination of criminal and employment histories, a psychological assessment and behavioral observation.

However, “the NRC delegates the authority to complete background checks, which results in a certain degree of disparity in how checks are carried out, and what information is ultimately covered,” Schumer’s statement said.

He said the checks are not required to cover such information as past travel and ties with other countries.

Yemeni counterterrorism forces rushed to the scene and captured Mobley, who had barricaded himself in a hospital room, said Mohammed Albasha, a spokesman for the Yemeni Embassy in Washington, on Thursday.

Mobley remains detained in Yemen after the incident at the hospital.

Yemeni authorities detained him and 10 other al Qaeda suspects this month in a “successful security sweep” in Sanaa, the capital, Albasha said. Mobley had been transported to the hospital over the weekend for medical treatment, Albasha said. He would not elaborate.

More

Continue Reading

And for our 900th EmployeeScreenIQ Blog post we have IRONY!  When we started blogging many years ago we wrote a lot about the failures of FBI background screening.  Well today, for our monumental 90oth post, the story has been written for us!

Fired Due To Error In Background Check, Carroll Woman Still Jobless

Eschol Amelia Studnitz lost her $58,000 accounting job July 31 because a government background check deemed her “unsuitable” for a low-level security clearance. She was stunned. She had no criminal record.

“I kept thinking, ‘What could I have done?’ ” said the 59-year-old Carroll County resident, who goes by the name Amy.

Her shock was warranted: Her firing was based on a mistake. And within days, her employer, Corporate Mailing Services of Arbutus, heard from the Social Security Administration that she could, in fact, work on a new contract handling mail for the agency.

But three bewildering months after her dismissal, Studnitz has not been rehired or found other work in this tight job market. A single woman who’s relying on her $405 weekly unemployment checks, she says she is behind on the mortgage for her Manchester home and has a shut-off notice from Baltimore Gas and Electric Co.

“I’m in a jam, a real jam,” she said, “and I didn’t do this to myself.” She wants to regain the job she landed in April 2008, but the company now says it won’t rehire her due to supposed performance shortfalls. She would like to sue the government for thousands of dollars of lost income, but could face long odds.

More

Continue Reading

Many organizations use employment background checks as a way to look at an individual’s past  to determine future behavior.  It can be very helpful when you find adverse or negative information.  But what if the background check doesn’t reveal any red flags?  The lack of negative information certainly stacks the odds in your favor that future behavior behavior will follow suit, but it’s not a guarantee.

Not sure if you saw this, but a Newark airport security guard was arrested for threatening to shoot President Barack Obama a day before he was supposed to fly into the that airport.  The New Jersey state police  licensed this individual and the company who hired him claimed that he passed their background check.  Let’s give both the state and the company the benefit of the doubt and say that this person was really never convicted of a crime.  Can the state or the employer be held accountable?  In my opinion, no.  They performed proper due diligence.  Remember, the lack of negative information can’t guarantee that the person will never pose a risk.  It just says that at the time you ran the background check, there was no adverse information.  Ordinarily, this is a pretty reliable indicator for the future, but not a guarantee.

See Newsday Article

Obama Threat Suspect Had Passed Background Checks

A security guard charged in a shooting threat against President Barack Obama had cleared extensive state and federal background checks, the Port Authority said Friday.

Screening for security guards is under the spotlight after an unarmed Newark Liberty International Airport guard, John Brek, 55, of Linden, N.J., was charged with three state felony counts after he was allegedly overheard making comments while on a coffee break a day before Obama was due to fly into the airport. Brek, a six-year employee of Floral Park-based FJC Security Services, has pleaded not guilty. One charge against Brek is for knowingly receiving a stolen rifle.

New Jersey State Police licensed Brek as a security guard after he met the required criminal-background checks, the Port Authority, which has a contract with FJC, said Friday. Brek also received authority clearance to work at Newark Liberty after he cleared its required FBI and 10-year background screening, an authority official said.

But a former police officer and chief executive of a national securities firm said such screenings aren’t always enough to weed out bad seeds. Michael Evans, chief executive of security firm USPA Nationwide, said a psychological evaluation also should have been required.

“I can see how it happened,” Evans said. “People put their best foot forward in their job interview.”

Psychological evaluation isn’t required under New Jersey state security guard licensing requirements, however. Prosecutors are seeking a psychiatric evaluation as part of their case against Brek.

Evans said contractors should require private security firms to perform psychological tests on employees. “It’s very hard to know what people are actually thinking,” he said.

More

Continue Reading

Unless you have been on a desert island all weekend you might have heard about the recent Van Jones story coming out of Washington.  Van Jones was recently appointed as the “Green Job’s Czar” by President Obama.  The controversy sets in because there is no legal requirement for the administration to properly vet a Czar.  Unlike a cabinet level position, Czar’s are not subject to thorough FBI background checks or Senate approval.

However, many of the stories are misleading.  It is correct to assume that Van Jones did not go through the same process as other “non-czar’s” but don’t be fooled, a full criminal background check is always conducted.  The United States Secret Service would not allow anyone access to the President on that level without being fully checked for criminal records.  You need a background check just to step foot in the West Wing of the White House.  What does not occur is the type of vetting that goes on with other appointees.  As we can see from this story, that happens in the court of public opinion.  The Czar rule gives the administration a lot of flexibility to avoid certain process and get things done quickly, but we see now that can have adverse consequences.

Lets be clear, this is NOT a process invented by the Obama Administration.  Czar’s have been appointed going back many Presidential terms.  This is not a shot at one particular decision.  A thorough background screening process just makes sense. While trying to make this posting as politically benign as possible, I will say this; being in the screening business, I would not recommend appointing a presidential dog walker that is not properly checked out.  In the future, it would be my hope that future appointees are researched a bit more thoroughly.

Pence requests background checks of all Obama ‘czars’

As controversial White House ‘czar’ Van Jones resigns, leading House Republican Mike Pence requests background checks on all Obama-appointed ‘czars.’

Key GOP Congressman Mike Pence is uncomfortable with President Obama’s “czars,” and he would like to have background checks conducted on all of them and is suggesting suspension on future czar appointments. The House Republican was a leading voice on the Van Jones resignation – after Van Jones was associated with the 9/11 “truther” movement.

“I’m suggesting that the administration should suspend immediately any future czar appointments while both the constitutionality of this practice is examined and while the background and qualifications of individuals who’ve been appointed as czars is carefully examined,” Pence said.

More

Continue Reading

In wake of shooting, move will come with a price tag, to be passed on to participants

By Christopher Baxter OF THE MORNING CALL

Most Palmer Township residents knew Daniel Autenrieth as a neighbor and youth baseball coach before the June day when he led state Trooper Joshua Miller and other officers on a winding chase that ended in a shootout in the Poconos. Both men died.

In the wake of the shooting, the Palmer Township Athletic Association plans to implement background checks for all coaches, assistant coaches and parent helpers. The policy was in the works before the tragedy, Vice President Jim McDonald told the Board of Supervisors on Monday, but the outcry from parents since has been fierce.

”With recent events in the community and society, there’s an ever-growing outpouring for this kind of thing,” McDonald said. ”Background checks are not an end-all, meet-all. They don’t catch everybody, and that’s something the community needs to be aware of.”

The practice, common among youth sports organizations in the Lehigh Valley, will help screen out applicants with a violent history or record of abusing kids, McDonald said. Preliminary plans for the policy would require coaches, assistant coaches and parent helpers to submit to FBI background checks and child abuse checks.

A panel of people will then review the checks and make a final determination, McDonald said. All approved coaches and helpers will receive a standard T-shirt to indicate they have been cleared. McDonald said the checks have become so sought after that some leagues won’t allow Palmer’s teams to compete without cleared coaches.

The association will pay for the background checks by raising its fees, McDonald said. The association estimates it will cost $15,000 up front to run checks on all current coaches and helpers. Costs will then decrease dramatically, as most coaches return each season and will not need to be rechecked, McDonald said. The fee increase has not yet been set.

Supervisor Chairman David Colver said parents should understand that the protection has a cost, and that Palmer generally charges much less for its sports leagues than other municipalities. McDonald said the association plans to use a town hall-style meeting to educate its members on why the fee must be raised.

Full Story

Continue Reading