Survey of State Criminal History Information Systems, 2006

A Criminal Justice Information Policy Report: October 2008, NCJ ______:

Survey revisions
Given the dramatic advances in information technology, legislative and social trends that increase demand for criminal history record access, and the need for criminal record managers to respond to these developments, BJS and SEARCH conducted an in-depth review of the existing survey questions for additions and changes and developed an initial draft of the survey.

New formats for easier response and collection of data were also considered and implemented. Many of these changes were suggested by users and respondents during the review process. Comments and suggestions collected focused on—

• increasing data on disposition reporting

• criminal vs. noncriminal justice fingerprint processing

• livescan usage and repository operations

• sex offender registries

• how information is disseminated and how it is used.

SEARCH developed and tested an online database system to collect more complete and comprehensive data. New features included online, password-protected reporting forms allowing respondents to complete and submit individual sections of the survey, as well as to examine/update previously submitted portions.

The Survey of State Criminal History Information Systems, 2006 consists of 44 data tables of information, up from 22 tables in previous years. New survey questions have been introduced and others removed.



Introduction
This report is based upon the results from a survey conducted of the administrators of the State criminal history record repositories in July– December 2007. Fifty-five jurisdictions were surveyed, including the 50 States, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, the Territory of Guam, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.1

Responses were received from all 55 jurisdictions. It presents a snapshot as of December 31, 2006. Throughout this report, the 50 States will be referred to as “States”; the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands will be referred to as “territories,” consistent with prior surveys; “Nation” refers collectively to both States and territories.

In addition, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was the source for information relating to criminal history records, including the States participating in the Interstate Identification Index (III) system (the national criminal records exchange system) and the number of records maintained by the FBI on behalf of the States, the number of records in the protection order file, and the number of sex offender records in the FBI National Crime Information Center (NCIC) files. ..For the remainder of the report.. by U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Note: Very important is knowing how the criminal system are broken down. Accordingly, see the description of all of the systems.

Note: Also important is the "Sex Offender Registry information (right hand col)" contained in the report. See also Table-6 which is very interesting. And, again Table-6a.

Survey of State Criminal History Information Systems, 2003

A Criminal Justice Information Policy Report: February 2006, NCJ 210297:

Introduction
This report is based upon the results from a survey conducted of the administrators of the State criminal history record repositories in May–December 2004. Fifty-three jurisdictions were surveyed, including the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Responses were received from all 53 jurisdictions. Throughout this report, the 50 States will be referred to as “States”; the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands will be referred to as “territories,” consistent with prior surveys; “Nation” refers collectively to both the States and territories.

In addition, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was the source for information relating to the number of criminal history records of the States participating in the Interstate Identification Index (III) system that are maintained by the State criminal history repositories and the number of records maintained by the FBI for the States, as of
March 1, 2003.

Major findings

Level of automation of master name indexes and criminal history files Overview of State criminal history record systems, December 31, 2003 (Table 1):

• Forty-nine reporting States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico have automated at least some records in the criminal history record file.

• Twenty-five States (Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming) and Puerto Rico have fully automated criminal history files.

Automation of master name index and criminal history file, 2003 (Table 4):

• All 50 reporting States and Puerto Rico have fully or partially automated master name indexes. The Virgin Islands does not maintain a master name index.

• The Virgin Islands has no automated criminal history files.

• Of those States maintaining partially automated criminal history files, when an offender with a prior manual record is arrested, the prior manual record is subsequently automated in 20 States. In four States (California, Delaware, Kansas, and Pennsylvania) and the District of Columbia, only the new information is automated. In Arizona, the new information is added to the manual file. ..For the remainder of the report.. by U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Note: Very important is knowing how the criminal system are broken down. Accordingly, see the description of all of the systems.