Without a national database from which to retrieve information, and with no such system likely to be put in place any time soon, security and human resources personnel are relying on background screeners and their network of researchers to comb court documents and determine whether potential employees meet a company's hiring criteria.

Access to the FBI's fingerprint database under the National Intelligence Reform Act has been helpful to those industries that rely on fingerprint checks to vet employees in markets such as banking, government and, in some states, healthcare and childcare. But the information within the FBI's database is admittedly only partially complete, noted Angela Linville, assistant vice president-compliance consultant for Wachovia and vice chair of the ASIS Privacy and Personnel Information Management Council.

Counties, she noted, send the FBI arrest information, "but if people are found guilty or not guilty, they don't report it."

NOT A PANACEA

Blair Cohen, chief executive officer of InfoMart, concurred with Linville that the FBI system "contains less than 50 percent of the crimes," and that it is criminal justice data, not court data.

"It's a long way from a panacea" for the background screening industry, noted Cohen. He said private industry has begun to assemble their databases. InfoMart's contains 250 million files vs. 160 million for the FBI, he said.

Linville said the United States isn't likely to come up with a national database in which all criminal records reside. "If we can't get (courts) to report to the FBI, how can we get them to send information to a national database?"

While there are certainly opportunities to get more data these days, said Fred Giles, vice president-research services at Wackenhut, there are strict rules on electronic data, including that it must be maintained by the source, not a third party; it has to be at least seven years in depth; and it must be the same data that is found within the courts.

Researchers are still the backbone of the employee screening process. Giles said there are 3,200 sources for court records, each with different requirements for access, different hours and so on. "Keeping it straight is where the third-party researchers come in," he said.

FEET ON THE STREET

Cohen agreed that criminal background checks are conducted the old-fashioned way, with feet on the streets. "We have thousands of people who go out and pull information," he said. "There are no databases that are accurate."

Although the industry continues to look for better sources of information, all participants agree that background screening is an integral and growing part of the hiring process.

Linville said ASIS continues to work with the National Association of Professional Background Screeners to develop industry-wide guidelines. These guidelines, she said, "will provide employers with a good basis for how everyone does."

Screenings range from criminal background checks to social security traces that identify past addresses and aliases, along with credit checks, driving record examinations and education verification.

The latter, noted Barry Nadell, president and co-founder of InfoLink Screening Services, is becoming more necessary as phony diplomas become more accessible. Nadell said he was able to purchase via the Internet a novelty diploma from an actual university -- complete with transcripts.

MORE FOR THE FEDS

Another relatively new area in which background companies are getting involved is compliance with the Immigration Reform and Control Act, which mandates that employers must verify eligibility of new employees within three days, he said.

Marketed through background screening companies, Nadell said the website, formI9.com is integrated with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Social Security Administration to verify the documents presented to employers.

The site, said Nadell, "takes the guess work out of the process."

At Wackenhut, which both provides screening services and screens its own employees for guard service positions, Giles said the company conducts a seven-year activity check, reviewing all employment, unemployment and education during that period. "We want to account for all periods of activity," he said. The federal terrorist watch list is also checked on every search.

For companies looking to set policies for screening employees, Giles said they need to evaluate the risk and determine what is acceptable for the company. "It can be as in-depth or defined as a company wants it to be," he said.

B2B CHECKS

Not to be overlooked, said Giles and others interviewed by Security Director News, is the screening of vendors.

Giles said the more sophisticated companies are requiring vendors to conduct background checks on their employees based on a minimum requirement and company guidelines.

InfoMart is conducting more business-to-business background checks, said Cohen, because customers may feel vulnerable. He noted one company with 6,000 vendors found that based on background checks, 13.6 percent of those employed by the outside companies would be ineligible to work at their company.

Ten to 15 years ago, the client was the security director or loss prevention person, explained Giles. Now, the trend is toward human resources. "But we always find the security director/loss prevention person is the inside consultant who helps HR craft the program for everyone. The security director is important as the point person or advisor," he said.

From his point of view, Cohen said the security director better understands what needs to be done in terms of screening for security purposes, "but HR does a better job of handling the information we return. They understand the human resources laws," he said.

ID THEFT BILLS

Whether it's security or human resources at the forefront of the screening process, Jack Lichtenstein, director of government affairs and public policy at ASIS, said all parties need to be aware of bills moving through both House and Senate committees related to identity theft and privacy that could impact how companies receive and use data.

He said while there needs to be protection of data for privacy and identity purposes, "it shouldn't deny the ability to prevent crime."

"We would like to see a law that makes data handling companies more responsible ... but that doesn't prevent background checkers from doing their jobs."

Lichtenstein noted police rarely investigate crimes in the workplace "unless it is horrendous." So the first line of defense is private security "and we can't have that door slammed."