A Report on the Use of Criminal History Information by Texas State Agencies and Institutions of Higher Education
January 2007
Report Number 07-009
Overall Conclusion
In an effort to determine how state agencies and higher education institutions apply their statutory authority regarding criminal background checks, the State Auditor's Office compiled this report. Specifically, this report includes the results of two surveys, reviews of policies and procedures, and a benchmarking study of Texas statutory authority with the statutory authority of the four neighboring states.
The results of our surveys indicate that all but one higher education institution and half of the state agencies surveyed collect criminal history information on certain prospective and current employees, clients, students, or contractors. Additional information from our review shows the following:
Higher Education Institutions - Employee Criminal Background Checks
- Texas Government Code, Section 411.094, provides a broad definition for the term security sensitive position and authorizes higher education institutions to access criminal history information on applicants for these positions. Higher education institutions interpret and apply the term differently. Forty percent of the higher education institutions designate all positions as security sensitive, while others define that term more narrowly.
- Fifty-seven (98 percent) of 58 higher education institutions surveyed collect criminal history information on prospective or current employees.
- Forty-nine (86 percent) of the 57 higher education institutions that collect criminal history information do so on all employees in the positions they identified as security sensitive.
- Forty-nine (86 percent) of the 57 higher education institutions have developed policies and procedures for performing criminal background checks on current and prospective employees.
Higher Education Institutions - Student Criminal Background Checks
- Thirty-one (65 percent) of the 48 higher education institutions that offer specific academic programs noted in our survey perform criminal background checks on students in majors that may lead to professions involving interaction with children, the elderly, patients, students, or people with disabilities.
- Fourteen (40 percent) of the 35 higher education institutions that offer education or teacher certification programs perform criminal background checks on teaching majors.
- Seventeen (55 percent) of the 31 higher education institutions that perform criminal background checks on students have developed policies and procedures for performing these criminal background checks.
- There is no state statutory requirement for higher education institutions to conduct criminal background checks on students.
State Agencies
- Twenty-one of the 46 state agencies surveyed perform criminal background checks on employees. Fourteen (67 percent) of those agencies perform checks on all types of critical positions they identified in our survey.
- Twenty-three of the 46 state agencies surveyed perform criminal background checks on employees, contractors, or clients. Seventeen (74 percent) of those agencies have developed applicable policies and procedures.
Higher Education Institutions and State Agencies
- Both agencies and higher education institutions rely largely on the less rigorous and less costly types of criminal background checks for employees, students, clients, and contractors. These types of criminal background checks include name-based checks, self-disclosure, and other methods such as using private vendors and searching public information databases.
- Agencies and higher education institutions do not always require contractors to perform criminal background checks on their employees.
In addition, results of our benchmarking indicate that Texas statutory requirements for authorizing the collection of criminal history information or requiring criminal background checks are more explicit and comprehensive than the statutes of four neighboring states.
Contact the SAO about this report.
Download the Acrobat version of this report. (.pdf)
If you prefer an HTML version, follow this link to an Adobe site which converts PDF files to HTML.