NCJ Number
221477
Date Published
January 2008
Length
52 pages
Annotation
Results are presented from a mandated feasibility study using driver’s license-related processes to improve the level of compliance with sex offender registration requirements for change of address upon relocation and other related updates of personal information, as well as results on the potential costs to States to implement a process whereby driver’s license applicants are prescreened against both the respective State’s sex offender registry and the FBI’s National Sex Offender Registry (NSOR).
Abstract
As of July 2007, 22 of the Nation’s 50 States were using some form of driver’s license-related process to encourage registration or provide additional monitoring of convicted sex offenders. One of the 22 States, Nevada, has a real-time process for screening every driver’s license applicant against the State sex offender registry before issuing a license. If States became required to establish a real-time screening system, moderate to major modifications to States current information technology (IT) systems would be required with cost implications. In addition, 22 of the responding State agencies indicated that before reliable cost estimates could be made, the prospective screening system’s operational requirements must be clearly defined. Beyond IT and cost issues, successfully implementing a driver’s license-screening program for convicted sex offenders would also depend on how well the program incorporates key design considerations. Once the Government agrees to move forward in this area, specific considerations are presented by Federal, State, and the American Automobile Motor Vehicle Administration (AAMVA) officials on designing the screening process. In accordance with congressional mandate Section 636 of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (the Walsh Act), this report addresses the following questions: (1) in what ways are States using driver’s license-related processes to encourage registration or provide additional monitoring of convicted sex offenders; (2) if Federal law were enacted requiring States to screen individuals against the respective State’s sex offender registry and the FBI’s National Sex Offender Registry (NSOR) what would be the level of IT modifications needed and the key cost factors; and (3) what other factors could affect the successful design and implementation of a screening process?