Growing use of FBI screens raises concerns about accuracy, racial bias
By Ylan Q. Mui, July 30, 2013 - The Washington Post
Employers are increasingly turning to the FBIfs criminal databases to screen
job applicants, sparking concerns about the accuracy of the agencyfs information
and the potential for racial discrimination.
Many of the FBIfs records list only arrests and not the outcomes of those
cases, such as convictions. Consumer groups say that missing information often
results in job applicants who are wrongfully rejected. A lawsuit filed against
the Commerce Department by minorities alleges that the use of incomplete
databases means that African Americans and Hispanics are denied work in
disproportionate numbers.
The FBIfs background checks gmight be considered the gold standard, but these
records are a mess,h said Madeline Neighly, staff lawyer at the National Employment Law
Project.
NELP is slated to release a report Tuesday showing that the FBI processed
nearly 17 million employment background checks last year — six times more
than it did a decade ago. The advocacy group estimates that as many as 600,000
of those reports contain incomplete or inaccurate information.
In a statement, the FBI said it receives its data from state records
agencies, and states are responsible for keeping the information updated.
Background checks can serve as important safety precautions, helping to
ensure that sex offenders do not get hired at day-care centers, for example. The
FBI emphasized that the agency is not involved in hiring decisions, but the
number of industries that use its data to screen workers skyrocketed after the
2001 terrorist attacks. Because of new regulations, port workers, truck drivers
and even mortgage processors must now undergo FBI background checks, turning the
agencyfs rap sheets into a virtual gateway to millions of jobs.
The issue has gained traction on Capitol Hill amid the tepid economic
recovery and the tight job market. Rep. Robert C. gBobbyh Scott (D-Va.) is
planning to introduce a bill this week that would require the FBI to track down
updated information within 10 days for employment screenings. A similar measure
sponsored by Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) would apply specifically to background
checks for federal jobs.
gFinding a job in this economy is already hard enough,h Ellison said. gNo one
should lose the chance to work because of an inaccurate background check.h
Detroit resident Raquel Vanderpool lost her position as a nursefs aide in
2009 after an FBI screening turned up outdated criminal information.
Vanderpool had pleaded guilty to a drug offense in 2003, and the judge had
promised that the case would be dismissed if she served a year of probation,
according to a suit she filed to regain her work license. But her file in the
FBIfs database was never updated.
With the country in the depths of the recession, she was unable to find
another job. She eventually lost her home to foreclosure and battled
depression.
gI felt like I had lost everything and there wasnft anyone out there that
could help me, or would listen to me,h she said.
She was finally able to clear her record this spring with the help of a
lawyer from Michiganfs Legal Aid clinic, four years after she lost her job.
gItfs been quite a rough road leading up to fighting this case,h Vanderpool
said. gItfs caused us quite a bit of damage that itfs going to take us years to
really recover from.h
The FBIfs databases are the largest repository of criminal information in the
country. Records are linked to fingerprints, as well as names, reducing the
chances of an incorrect match.
Employers can request an FBI background check only when authorized by state
or federal laws and regulations. Many industries require potential employees to
be screened by the FBI before they can receive work licenses.
But the FBI databases were not intended to be comprehensive. Instead, they
function as a sort of index composed of arrests; the outcomes of those cases
often are not reflected in the FBIfs records. A 2006 U.S. attorney generalfs
report estimated that half of the FBIfs arrest records did not include
disposition information.
A spokesman for the FBIfs Criminal Justice Information Services, which
handles the databases, did not provide a more current estimate. However, in a
statement, the agency said that it relies on the states to provide its records
and keep them current.
The design gdecentralizes the criminal history responsibility by making the
states, rather than the FBI, primarily responsible for record maintenance and
dissemination,h it said.
At the state level, many of the records are incomplete. A report by the
Justice Department in 2010, the most recent available, found that in about half
the states, as many as two in five records were missing final outcomes.
Twenty-seven states reported a backlog of disposition data. Transmitting the
information from the courts to state records agencies could take less than a day
in Delaware to 555 days in Kansas.
Updating the records of those who fall through the cracks can be confusing
and cumbersome. FBI regulations say that employers and licensing agencies should
give applicants time to challenge and correct their records, either by
contacting the FBI or the jurisdiction that collected the data. But applicants
are not always given a copy of their report or told why they were disqualified.
Often, the burden is on them to prove an error was made.
The NELP report highlighted the Transportation Security Administrationfs move
to require FBI screenings for port workers in 2007. Since then, more than
120,000 applications were initially disqualified because of a background check,
according to TSA statistics. Just over half of them filed for waivers or appeals
to prove they were eligible — and 94 percent of them were successful.
Meanwhile, about a quarter of the 4 million applications to work on the
2010 Census were put on hold after the Commerce Department ran FBI background
checks, according to a lawsuit filed against the agency. Applicants had 30 days
to prove the FBIfs information was incorrect — but the alleged infractions were
not reported to them.
Among the hundreds of thousands of rejected candidates was Precious Daniels
of Detroit, who was arrested in 2009 during a peaceful protest and had her
charges dropped, according to the suit. Vivian Kargbo of Boston was supposed to
have her records sealed after two charges from a juvenile arrest in 1996 were
dismissed. Scotty Desphy of Philadelphia thought these charges from her arrest
28 years ago were expunged after she served a year of probation, but they
remained on her FBI rap sheet.
gIt was a dramatic screen of basically anybody with any interaction with the
criminal justice system,h said Adam Klein, a partner at law firm Outten &
Golden, which is handling the case. gIt included the craziest things.h
The suit alleges that the Census Bureaufs FBI screening process resulted in a
disproportionate number of rejections for applications from blacks and
Hispanics. These minorities are arrested in higher numbers, which civil rights
activitists attribute partly to racial profiling.
Forty-one percent of the census applicants who showed up in the FBIfs
criminal databases were black and 20 percent were Hispanic. If certified
for class-action status, the suit would cover about 850,000 people, making it
the largest discrimination suit in history.
The Commerce Department declined to comment.
The NELP report called for a more grobusth appeals process that would require
employers to inform applicants why they were disqualified and give them at least
60 days to dispute any errors. It said that the FBI should provide regular
reports to Congress on its background checks and any effect on minorities.
gPeople lose their jobs. They lose their homes. They have to go on public
benefits to feed their kids,h Neighly said of the inaccurate reports. gIt is so
damaging.h
© The Washington Post Company