The Hidden Costs of Reentry: 

Understanding the Barriers to Removing a 

Criminal Record

April 21, 2022 | 1:00 PM ET

The webinar will begin shortly
Jennifer Scherer, PhD 

Acting Director

National Institute of Justice

Welcoming Remarks
The Final State Reentry Project

Renee Danser, Rianna Brooks, 

D. James Greiner, Ryan Halen, 

Marilyn Harp

This project is supported by Award No. 2019-RY-BX-0001, awarded by the National 

Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, 

findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this presentation are those of 

the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice.
What is criminal 

justice record-clearing?

Overview of the study What we’re seeing so 

far

What we’ll do today
What is criminal 

justice record-clearing?

What we’ll do today
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.

Distinctions:

* Automatic versus petition-based

* Limit access versus destroy
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.

Distinctions:

* Automatic versus petition-based

* Limit access versus destroy

 This study
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.

* Theoretical: Gov’t destruction or

suppression of info re key function good?

* Legal: Legal theory re private

info aggregators? “follow reasonable procedures to

assure maximum possible accuracy” FCRA, 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b)
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.

Problem: There is no such thing as a person’s criminal 

record.
KSSTID0XXX

KBI Cycle KLS Record Offense(s) Charged

Missing RAXXCRXX 1) Underage Consumption of Alcohol

Missing RAXXCRXX 1) Theft by Deception

Missing RAXXCRXX 1) Drug Paraphernalia 

2) Drug Paraphernalia 

3) Deprivation of Property

4) Possession of Stolen Property

Missing RAXXCRXX 1) Theft

Missing DCXXCRXX 1) Marijuana Possession

2) Drug Paraphernalia

1 Missing 1) Theft

2 Missing 1) Theft

Missing DCXXCRXX 1) Theft

3 DCXXCRXX 1) Burglary

Missing DCXXCRXX 1) Theft

4 DCXXCRXX 1) Probation Violation

6 DCXXCRXX 1) Driving w/o valid license

7 DCXXCRXX 1) Marijuana Possession

2) Drug Paraphernalia

Missing DCXXCRXX 1) Methamphetamine Possession
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.

Maybe . . . (Prescott & Starr 2020, but . . .)
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.

Automatic, public, broad record-clearing ban the box?

(or so an argument might run, Agan & Starr 2017,

Doleac & Hansen 2020)
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.

Benefit from petition-based record-clearing  host of 

assumptions

* Expungement gap & a2j

* Jobs, housing units otherwise available

* Recidivism, despite looooonnnnggggg waiting periods?
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.

* What is record-clearing for?

Perhaps identity???? (If so, don’t need empirical study, but . . .)

recidivism employment housing
What is criminal justice record-clearing?

An attempt to limit access to, or destroy, (frequently) 

factually accurate information (an individual’s “record”) 

so as to benefit the subject of that information.

So, does it? How about let’s find out???

With an RCT!!!!!!!!
Overview of the study

What we’ll do today
• Outreach & community engagement

• Client reaches out to KLS for services

• KLS intake and eligibility determination

•Study intake 

• Consent & authorizations

•Baseline survey

•Randomization

•Referral to treatment

•Surveys every 3 weeks for 2 years

• Administrative data collection for 5 years
• Outreach & community engagement

• Client reaches out to KLS for services

• KLS intake and eligibility determination

•Study intake 

• Consent & authorizations

•Baseline survey

•Randomization

•Referral to treatment

•Surveys every 3 weeks for 2 years

• Administrative data collection for 5 years
• Outreach & community engagement

• Client reaches out to KLS for services

• KLS intake and eligibility determination

•Study intake 

• Consent & authorizations

•Baseline survey

•Randomization

•Referral to treatment

•Surveys every 3 weeks for 2 years

• Administrative data collection for 5 years
• Outreach & community engagement

• Client reaches out to KLS for services

• KLS intake and eligibility determination

•Study intake 

• Consent & authorizations

•Baseline survey

•Randomization

•Referral to treatment

•Surveys every 3 weeks for 2 years

• Administrative data collection for 5 years
 Risks

 Benefits

 Expectations

 Voluntariness 

 Opt-out and complaints
 Retainers for service

 Powers of attorney

 Administrative data
• Outreach & community engagement

• Client reaches out to KLS for services

• KLS intake and eligibility determination

•Study intake 

• Consent & authorizations

•Baseline survey

•Randomization

•Referral to treatment

•Surveys every 3 weeks for 2 years

• Administrative data collection for 5 years
 Capturing participant information 

for future surveys

 Guidance on mechanics of survey 

tool

 Administering first survey
• Outreach & community engagement

• Client reaches out to KLS for services

• KLS intake and eligibility determination

•Study intake 

• Consent & authorizations

•Baseline survey

•Randomization

•Referral to treatment

•Surveys every 3 weeks for 2 years

• Administrative data collection for 5 years
 Controlled by A2J Lab

 Batches

 Multiple methods
• Outreach & community engagement

• Client reaches out to KLS for services

• KLS intake and eligibility determination

•Study intake 

• Consent & authorizations

•Baseline survey

•Randomization

•Referral to treatment

•Surveys every 3 weeks for 2 years

• Administrative data collection for 5 years
limited-scope services

full-scope services
• Outreach & community engagement

• Client reaches out to KLS for services

• KLS intake and eligibility determination

•Study intake 

• Consent & authorizations

•Baseline survey

•Randomization

•Referral to treatment

•Surveys every 3 weeks for 2 years

• Administrative data collection for 5 years
housing quality & maintenance

involuntary moves & homelessness

deterrence

employment

Subjective well-being

Baseline survey

Exit survey
• Outreach & community engagement

• Client reaches out to KLS for services

• KLS intake and eligibility determination

•Study intake 

• Consent & authorizations

•Baseline survey

•Randomization

•Referral to treatment

•Surveys every 3 weeks for 2 years

• Administrative data collection for 5 years
HUD & 

Utilities Dept. of Labor & 

Dept. of Revenue

KBI
What we’re seeing so 

far

What we’ll do today
 Most participants are 

employed

 Lots of job changes  Higher wages than 

expected

 Inconsistent records  Error prone records  Does a record ever go 

away?

 Incredibly high survey 

response rate

Accuracy and Permanency 

of Criminal Records in the 

Digital Age

NIJ Webinar: The Hidden Costs of Reentry: 

Understanding the Barriers to Removing a Criminal 

Record

April 21, 2022

Sarah E. Lageson 

Rutgers University

@sarahlageson
Dissemination and permanency of criminal records 

Accuracy and error in digital criminal records

Consequences

Theoretical & policy implications

Research funded by National Institute of Justice: NIJ: 2017-IJ-CX0036

TODAY
LAW ENFORCEMENT | public notification

COURTS | 1st amendment compliance

CORRECTIONS | community surveillance

REPOSITORY | criminal history services
DISSEMINATING CJ DATA

ARREST ROSTER

DATA BUY

CRAWL REPOST

CHARGE MERGE

INDEX

SELL
Agency practices

Modernize recordkeeping within limited resource capacity

Maintain institutional control while relying on third party software

Respond to community demands and FOIA requests

Synthesize and coordinate data across agencies and jurisdictions

Results?

internal management and investigatory systems  valuable data commodity

archived, outdated, and misleading data available to the public

fundamental changes to the purpose and uses of criminal record data
LEGAL – WHY IS THIS PUBLIC?

First Amendment protects re-publication of information obtained from publicly 

accessible sources 

Cox Broadcasting Corp v. Cohn (1975)

Law cannot impose damages for truthfully publishing public information

Florida Star v. B. J. F. (1989)

Even if those records are arrests that didn’t lead to charges, are sealed or expunged 

Martin v. Hearst Corporation (2015) 

Regulation only covers Consumer Reporting Agencies – not websites or platforms

Fair Credit Reporting Act; CDA Sec. 230
Public Record Designation – US States

N %

Law Enforcement 49 98%

Criminal Court 50 100%

Incarceration Rosters 44 88%

State Criminal Record 25 50%

VOLUME

TYPE N % ANNUAL 5-YEAR

ARREST RECORD 41 82% 10,160,728 50.8 MILLION

BOOKING PHOTO 21 42% 4,574,740 22.8 MILLION

COURT RECORD* 41 82% 19,508,593 97.5 MILLION

INCARCERATED

PEOPLE 50 100% 1,316,205 .

PRISON RECORD 18 36% . 6.5 MILLION

RAP SHEET* 29 58% . 13 MILLION

*includes paywalled
Public Criminal Record Data

What’s good?

Public, low-cost

Includes PIIs

Uses: Research, journalism, advocacy

Recidivism, program evaluations, public safety, system 

watchdogging

Victim safety and notifications

Lawyer and family notifications

What’s bad?

Locally produced & uneven

Includes PIIs

Easily duplicated – and profitable

Stale (case processing)

Decontextualized and stigmatizing
Data brokers

Experian Public Records: Repository holds 

600 million unique criminal records, covering 

90% of the U.S. population

CoreLogic Background Data: 350 million 

criminal records representing defendant, 

alias, offense and disposition details

BackgroundChecks.com: 650 million 

criminal records in database

Data Diver: Criminal index contains nearly 

500 million individuals, with over 2 billion 

criminal records ranging across 1,400+ 

jurisdictions.
Why do data brokers value criminal records?

CHEAP: FOIA access, data/web scraping

IDENTIFIABLE: full names, aliases, birth dates, home addresses, and 

photographs 

TARGETED: predatory advertising directed to low-income people

MARKETABLE: risk management, culture of fear, institutionalized background 

screening

UNREGULATED: no FCRA oversight; data brokers are not CRAs

CLICKBAIT: valuable resale to people search websites
Type of Access N % of 

reporting 

states

% of all 

states

Law Enforcement Agencies (N=41 disclosing states)

Photograph 21 51% 42%

Full date of birth 22 54% 44%

Year of birth or age 14 34% 28%

Full home address 4 10% 8%

City of residence only 6 15% 12%

Physical characteristics 30 73% 60%

Bail/bond amount 34 83% 68%

Criminal Courts (N=32 disclosing states)

Full date of birth 14 44% 28%

Year of birth or age 12 38% 24%

Full home address 10 31% 20%

City of residence only 5 16% 10%

Physical characteristics 14 44% 28%

Corrections Agencies (N=50)

Photograph 30 60% 60%

Full date of birth 26 52% 52%

Year of birth or age 18 36% 36%

Physical characteristics 41 82% 82%
Consequences

accuracy and 

error 

harms to people 

and expungement 

policy
Comparison of public and 

private criminal records 

across databases

Descriptive analyses of 

2,600+ “data points” for 178 

people

1.How reliable are digital 

criminal record data?

2.Where do records originate? 

Where do records appear in 

the private sector?
Data Collection

178 total participants from NJ and MN

Requested computerized criminal history report, or ‘CCH’

• (fingerprinting/notarized release, fees)

Entered and coded each ”criminal history event” into database

Matched criminal history events across platforms:

• CCH

• 3 levels of FCRA-compliant bulk commercial data vendor

• Non-FCRA compliant people search engine
CCH as baseline

• Automated matching:

• Case numbers

• Dates (e.g., offense, arrest, file, indictment, disposition, sentence; ±30 days)

• Statute

• Charge description

• Hand matching:

• Considering context, is it likely these represent the same charging event?

• LOTS of missing data in third-party records

• Identify “orphan records”: records that don’t seem to be connected to 

charges in the CCH




Regulated state criminal records repository.

Private records released only to participants. 

Official Criminal History Report (CCH)

Commercial data, National, State, County database search

FCRA-Compliant , Commercial

Unregulated commercial background/people search service. 

Non-FCRA Compliant , Internet

TOTAL

1,323 1,279 2,602

1,824 941 2,765

503 151 654

Participants n=73 n=101 n=174

Charge Counts

(total without matching across 

sources)
Regulated state criminal records repository.

Private records released only to participants. 

Official Criminal History Report (CCH)

Commercial data, National/State/County database search

FCRA-Compliant, Commercial

Participants

TOTAL

2,602

1,291

Unregulated commercial background/people search service. 

Non-FCRA Compliant, Internet 215

n=174

Charge Counts

WHERE THESE CHARGES ARE APPEARING 




“Orphan” Cases

Category Examples Count

Driving-related Driving after revocation/suspension, driving violations, 

driving with open bottle, no insurance

594

Drug-related Possession, paraphernalia, manufacture, sales 273

Miscellaneous Child endangerment, escape, underage consumption, 

disorderly conduct, false information

191

Theft-related Theft, shoplifting, auto theft 125

DWI 33

Receiving Stolen 

Property

27

Weapons-related Unlawful possession, possession of explosives 27

Assault/Sex Assault Agg assault, sex assault of vic under 13, simple assault 27

Burglary 23

Forgery/Fraud Credit card fraud, counterfeiting, forged check 23

Robbery 21

1, 364
Example: Participant NJ053 Convictions

CCH

12/16/86

Cocaine Possession Felony

2/10/91

Cocaine Sales Felony

FCRA MATCHES

07/30/1987

Cocaine Possession Felony

6/19/91

Cocaine Sales Felony

FCRA ORPHANS

12/07/1988 Robbery (F) Conviction

06/19/1991 Poss w/ Intent (F) Conviction

07/16/1991 Burglary (F) Conviction

09/12/1991 Murder (F) Dismissed

09/19/1991 Agg Arson (F) Conviction

07/21/1992 Rec Stolen Prop (F) Conviction

08/03/1995 Rec Stolen Prop (F) Conviction

12/10/1998 Drug Possession (F) Conviction

07/18/1999 Unlawful Poss Firearm (F) Conv

07/18/1999 Rec Stolen Prop (F) Conviction

09/22/1999 Burglary (F) Conviction

09/28/1999 Robbery (F) Conviction 

11/29/1999 Burglary (F) Conviction

12/21/1999 Felon in Poss Gun (F) Conviction

09/30/2004 Child Abuse/Neglect – Sex Act by 

Caretaker (F) Conviction

05/22/2009 Robbery (F) Conviction
Example: Participant NJ053 Convictions

CCH

12/16/86

Cocaine Possession Felony

3/24/87 Pending Court

3/31/90 Pending Court

2/10/91

Cocaine Sales Felony

FCRA MATCHES

07/30/1987

Cocaine Possession Felony

6/19/91

Cocaine Sales Felony

FCRA ORPHANS

12/07/1988 Robbery (F) Conviction

06/19/1991 Poss w/ Intent (F) Conviction

07/16/1991 Burglary (F) Conviction

09/12/1991 Murder (F) Dismissed

09/19/1991 Agg Arson (F) Conviction

07/21/1992 Rec Stolen Prop (F) Conviction

08/03/1995 Rec Stolen Prop (F) Conviction

12/10/1998 Drug Possession (F) Conviction

07/18/1999 Unlawful Poss Firearm (F) Conv

07/18/1999 Rec Stolen Prop (F) Conviction

09/22/1999 Burglary (F) Conviction

09/28/1999 Robbery (F) Conviction 

11/29/1999 Burglary (F) Conviction

12/21/1999 Felon in Poss Gun (F) Conviction

09/30/2004 Child Abuse/Neglect – Sex Act by 

Caretaker (F) Conviction

05/22/2009 Robbery (F) Conviction

“The first time I tried to do expungement, I went to the 

DA and she said, ‘you’re stuck with this for the rest of 

your life’”
Opting out

“I have looked myself up out of curiosity and try to see what pops up. And it’s not a pretty sight. It 

tells me that as long as I don’t try for high level jobs, that I should be ok. I should fly under the 

radar.” - Daryl

“I applied for two jobs over Christmas and then they said they were gonna do a criminal 

background check, and that means they hire a company to look up your record. Then they find it 

and then it’s permanently in databases even if you get it expunged later.... it will go around the 

internet. It could go anywhere.” – Tammy
Digital avoidance 

“I’ve never really looked it up online. I don’t want to know what’s on there.” – Sam

“I never look for myself. Not interested. I know who I am. If it’s out there, it’s out there. Not 

interested in that. I hope there’s not any photos of me floating around. But I don’t go looking 

for them.” – Ryan

“Everything just goes onto the computer. I don’t look at it.” – Kira 

“I’ve never looked for it. It’s too complicated. What CAN I do – IF I could do anything? And 

then people see it, and they think you did it, it says you did something, but the truth is I didn’t 

do anything.” – Mariah 

“No. I deliberately avoid it. It’s a horror story I don’t want to relive. And what good is my 

reaction to a website? What does that accomplish?” – Albert 
Low recidivism; improved employment

BUT – very low uptake, less than 10% 

• Second chance gap; selection bias

• Slow, onerous, expensive, narrow

• Compliance questions

~37 states

Variation: sealing, set-aside, destroying, expunging

Eligibility: Offense, Time, Age, Fines/Fees

See: https://ccresourcecenter.org/

Does expungement work?

YES, for what it’s intended for – employment, housing, 

regulated screening processes

BUT:

Automation clears legal records; does not automate 

expungement compliance

Stigma is about more than employment
POLICY

DIRECTIONS

Provide free digital access to personal criminal histories

- Credit report/Medical history 

Streamline and automate sealing

Restrict (pre-conviction) data

Protect data: user IDs, captchas, paywalls

Regulate people search

Right to Be Forgotten

CREATE LESS RECORDS.
THANK YOU!

sarah.lageson@rutgers.edu

@sarahlageson
The Clean Slate 

Clearinghouse 

and 

National Inventory of 

Collateral Consequences 

of Conviction

This project was supported by Grant No. 2019-MU-BX-K015 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Department of 

Justice's Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention, the Office for Victims of Crime, and the SMART Office. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the 

official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Mission

To provide leadership and services in grant administration and criminal 

justice policy development to support state, local, and tribal justice 

strategies to achieve safer communities. BJA works with communities, 

governments, and nonprofit organizations to reduce crime, recidivism, and 

unnecessary confinement, and promote a safe and fair criminal justice 

system.

bja.ojp.gov

About the Bureau of Justice 

Assistance (BJA)

75
Funded and administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), the National Reentry Resource Center 

(NRRC) is the nation’s primary source of information and guidance in reentry.

76
About the American Institutes for 

Research®

Established in 1946, the American Institutes for Research® (AIR®) is a nonpartisan, notfor-profit organization that conducts behavioral and social science research and 

delivers technical assistance both domestically and internationally in the areas of 

education, health, and the workforce. AIR’s work is driven by its mission to generate 

and use rigorous evidence that contributes to a better, more equitable world. With 

headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, AIR has offices across the U.S. and abroad. For 

more information, visit www.air.org.

77
Clean Slate Clearinghouse

1. Includes overviews of adult and 

juvenile record clearance policies

in all U.S. states and territories

2. Offers contact information for legal 

services providers in each state. 

3. Provides news, resources, 

trainings and other tools focused 

on clean slate and related records 

clearance policies and practices

78

https://cleanslateclearinghouse.org/
Clean Slate Resources

79
https://niccc.nationalreentryresourcecenter.org 80

National Inventory of Collateral 

Consequences of Conviction (NICCC)
NICCC

Collateral consequences. Legal and regulatory restrictions that limit or prohibit people convicted of 

crimes from accessing employment, business and occupational licensing, housing, voting, education, 

and other rights, benefits, and opportunities.

The NICCC includes more than 

40,000 consequences* across all 

U.S. states, DC, PR, USVI, and 

federal

Inventory is fully searchable by 

description, jurisdiction, 

consequence type, keywords, 

offense type, discretion and 

duration.

Results can be exported.

*The NRRC is currently reviewing and updating 81
NICCC

Collateral consequences impact:

82

Civic

Participation

Employment Education Family/Domestic

Rights

Government

Benefits

Health/

Wellbeing

Housing/

Residency

Immigration/

Naturalization/

Travel

Income Loans/

Grants

Judicial

Rights

Licensing Property

Rights
NICCC

Inventory provides details on 

each consequence (and1,500+ 

relief mechanisms) including 

offense(s), keywords, legal 

determinations, statutory 

references, and direct link to full 

text.

Important note: Inventory 

information is not legal advice.

83
NICCC Updates

The NICCC team is currently 

reviewing all existing entries in 

the Inventory for accuracy. 

The team updates the Inventory 

with new consequences, and 

removes repealed statutes and 

regulations, annually following 

state legislative calendars.

84
NICCC Resources

The NICCC library currently 

houses more than 100 current 

state and national studies; 

standards, policies, and model 

legislation; state consequences 

inventories; journal articles and 

other reports; videos, podcasts, 

and other trainings; and much 

more.

And we’re always looking to add 

to our resources!

85
Thank you! 

Nicholas Read

NRRC Deputy Director / NICCC Director

nread@air.org

Join the NRRC’s distribution list to receive 

National Reentry Resource Center updates!

https://nationalreentryresourcecenter.org/subscribe
Questions?

Please enter your questions into the Q&A box

Send to All Panelists