Background Check News

In this high tech, high speed world, computers and software technology are replacing much of what trained human beings have done for years. Pre-employment screening and pre-employment background checks are no different in this regard. Many software companies and date brokers have found that through the use of complex software programs they are able to search multiple sources of publically available, online information at once. These sources of data often include state incarceration records, online court information, public government databases and annually purchased “batch information� from various information vendors. The searches that are then offered by these Data Brokers are usually labeled as “National Criminal History Searches� or “National Criminal Database�. The problem is that these “National Searches� only include limited information from select states, counties and cities. There is no guarantee that the county, city or even state that your applicant resides in was searches. On top of the drawbacks of not knowing what sources were actually searched; applicants and employees with common names often fall victim to false positive criminal records. This is also the result of having computers do the thinking for you.

With private investigators on the other hand, applicants are screened by qualified, trained and experienced private investigators. The information that is searched is “direct source� information, meaning that is comes directly from the court, city or state where the data originated. This minimizes the chances that there are data entry errors and also cuts down on processing time and costs. Additional benefits include the ability to feel certain that an experienced investigator has personally conducted the searches and reviewed the incoming information. During this process, we are able to catch false positives and make certain that the results that are being reported are accurate and pertain to your applicant and not someone else.

Background investigations are hard enough as is without having to deal with locating records in foreign countries. The named investigative agency in the article below outsourced its search of Canadian criminal records to a vendor who handles those types of requests. Unfortunately, this common practice turned bad, and the data vendor is now being sued by the investigative company.

This high profile instance is just the most recent of many cases. The case involves a reality television star and a murder investigation, which has brought even more media attention to the industry and the type of investigation that was done. This article is definitely worth a read. It brings to light the difficulty in screening applicants and employees who have lived outside of the country.

How can we ever verify that a record from a foreign country is accurate? Canada is one example, but many vendors offer searches in countries that are far less civilized. Where are these searches actually being conducted?  Can we ever be sure that someone who lived outside of the United States for a period of time was not convicted of any crimes while abroad?

http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/10/26/Shoddy_Background_Check_on_Reality_TV_Star_Alleged_to_Ruin_Agency.htm

Too many times I have heard stories about applicants being denied jobs because of their background investigations. These are people who are told they have criminal records when they have never been arrested.  Most of this time this happens because of data vendors who do not hand view their results and check to make sure that the records in the database actually pertain to the applicant they are screening.  This usually happens with applicants  with common names.  What occurs is that an applicant may have the same name or date of birth as someone who has a criminal history.  The software automatically assumes that the arrest data pertains to the applicant  and includes it in the report to the employer.

Although not all methods are perfect, database background screening companies that utilize software programs to run their searches through outdated, publicly available sources are at the highest risk of error. Individuals with common names are also at a much higher risk.

The video link below from CNN is an example of how someone with a common name was denied a job because a criminal record belonging to someone else was in his background investigation. I can tell you that an experienced investigator would have caught the discrepancy and double checked the findings.

Hopefully more employers will see the consequences of using instant background searches conducted by computer software.

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/business/2009/09/29/willis.privacy.data.cnn

Clients often ask “what kind of searches can you do�. The truth is that there are dozens of different searches that are available to an investigator as part of an employee background check. Some of the searches that are most commonly selected by our clients include:

Driving Records
Credit Checks
Criminal Records (County Level and State Level)
Social Security Verification
Residential History
Education Records
Civil Court Records
Workers’ Compensation
Bankruptcy Records
Character References
State Licensing Records
Previous Employment Verification
Sex Offender Records

For each corporation, HR Department or small business, the need for information is different. Each client is able to choose the searches that they see fit for their applicants. The question still remains; “what is a good set of searches�. My usual recommendation for a company without industry standards or an idea of what is really important is to conduct state and county level criminal record searches along with a national sex offender search and a name, address and social security number verification search. In conducting these searches, our clients feel confident that their applicant does not have any criminal records in the state or county in which they reside in. Additionally, because we verified that applicant’s social security number, name, date of birth and residential history, we are confident that we conducted searches on the correct person and that the applicant is who they say they are.

Background investigation companies have known about Facebook, MySpace and the dozens of other social networking sites for years. We often use these sites to look into an applicant’s personal life and make an estimation of what type of character that applicant has. Employers appear to be getting in on the action as well. Numerous news reports have documented the struggle between an individual’s privacy rights and the public availability of online information. Employers and background investigation companies argue that if an applicant puts themselves online for all to see, that there is no reason they should not be able to view that information and potentially use it to make hiring decisions.

Whether you agree or disagree with the use of social networking sites as a hiring tool, you should be aware that information available online can and will be viewed by people outside of your group of friends. Included in the list of major social networking sites that are often used are Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, Xanga, Frendster, LiveJournal and Flickr.

If you are an investigator, background screening company or employer, these sites are invaluable in determining if you are about to hire a class act or a class clown.

There are several websites out there offering fake references, diplomas, employment information and personal character interviews. The names of these sites alone are enough to leave you wondering if the person you are about to hire is being truthful or if they are “faking their way onto the job”.

Alibihq.com, absolutealibis.com, careerexcuse.com, careerhoax.com and careercheat.com are just a few that I have come across. These sits offer just about any lie you can imagine ranging from references from made up companies to false credentials.  If it sounds fishy, investigate the company/reference through pubic records and information available on the web.  These ficitious companies and educational facilities are just shells names.  Likely if you cannot find any records of these places online, they don’t exist and your applicant is trying to “fake thier way onto the job”.

What this means is that these inmates, newly released from prison, are going to be looking for employment in a market bloated with unanswered resumes. Companies that do not conduct background investigations are going to be targeted by these parolees because of their lax hiring processes. Obviously not all of these inmates are immediately looking to continue their deviance, but regardless, they will be applying for jobs that may give them access to your company assets or have direct contact with your clients.

In California alone it is estimated that 57,000 inmates could be released, all of whom will be required to find able employment. It is somewhat frightening to know that these people will be competing for jobs with the general population and in an environment without employee screening, they stand a chance of becoming employed over someone without a criminal record.

http://www.reuters.com/article/wtMostRead/idUSTRE5190CB20090210

Statewide criminal history searches are not the end all be all of employee screening. Many states don’t even offer this search and the ones that do don’t have 100% of all arrest data! I get calls all the time asking for this service alone. Don’t get me wrong, statewide criminal history searches are a great tool for employee screening, but they should never stand alone. County level court searches, especially in rural areas are an absolute must. District courts are also a good resource because many misdemeanor arrests that don’t show up in the statewide search will show up here.

The issue of using county level searches is further realized when working in a state that does not offer a statewide criminal history search at all. The most common of these that I have seen is Ohio. Despite not having the ability to search “statewide criminal records�, Ohio has an extensive amount of online court resources. The date from these searches is usually more detailed than most statewide searches that are out there. The only problem left is knowing where to conduct your searches….

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced today that it had reached a $40,000 fine settlement with the Krispy Kreme Doughnut Corporation for immigration hiring violations arising from an I-9 audit conducted in 2007. ICE initiated the I-9 inspection after receiving information from the local County Sheriff’s Office which indicated that Krispy Kreme was employing dozens of undocumented workers at one of their doughnut factories in Cincinnati. According to the ICE announcement, the company has agreed to revise its immigration compliance program and begin implementing new procedures to prevent future violations.

As previously reported, ICE announced a major shift in work site enforcement this year by focusing on employers who fail to properly complete the Form I-9. Last week, ICE issued I-9 audit notices to 652 employers across the country with a large percentage going to companies in the Los Angeles, California and Houston, Texas markets.

On July 1, 2009, several state E-Verify mandates will go into effect, affecting employers in Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina and Utah. Most of these laws were enacted some time ago, and are being implemented in stages as indicated below. Here is a quick summary of these new state requirements as of July 1, 2009:

Georgia: all state contractors and subcontractors must use E-Verify if the contract is for the physical performance of services within the state of Georgia. Previously, only state contractors with 100 or more employees were impacted.

Mississippi: all employers with 100 employees or more must participate in E-Verify. This law will expand to include employers with 30 or more employees in July 2010 and all employers in July 2011.

South Carolina: all employers with 100 employees or more must either participate in E-Verify or only hire employees who possess or qualify for a South Carolina driver’s license (or other state license with similarly strict requirements). This law will expand to include all employers in July 2010.

Utah: state contractors and subcontractors must use E-Verify or the Social Security Number Verification Service (SSNVS) if the contract is for the physical performance of services within the state of Utah.