	Background

All states, the District of Columbia, U.S. territories, and some Indian tribes  have laws and/or codes requiring convicted sex offenders to register with  local or state law enforcement authorities, the purpose of which is to  enhance public protection and provide an additional investigative tool to  law enforcement agencies. States Are Using a Variety of Driver’s License-Related Processes to Encourage Registration or Provide Additional Monitoring of Convicted Sex Offenders

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. Further, five of these nine states—Alabama, Delaware,  Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi—also label the applicable driver’s  license, identification card, or registration card with an annotation that  identifies the person as a sex offender. Most States We Surveyed Report They Would Need to Modify Their Information Technology Systems to Screen Individuals against Sex Offender Databases before Issuing Driver’s Licenses; Software Modifications Would Be a Key Cost Factor

In our survey of 26 states, most of the responding motor vehicle agencies  and sex offender registries reported that (1) moderate or major  modifications to their current IT systems would be needed to screen  driver’s license applicants against the respective state’s sex offender  registry and the FBI’s NSOR before issuing a license and (2) the most  significant cost factor would be software modifications. Also, the  agencies generally indicated that reliable cost estimates for establishing  the prospective screening system discussed in section 636 of the Walsh  Act cannot be calculated until the system’s operational requirements or  business rules are clearly defined. Key Design Considerations Could Affect the Success of Screening Programs Using Driver’s License Processes

Beyond the IT and cost issues discussed in the previous section,  successful implementation of a driver’s license screening program for sex  offenders will also hinge on how well the program incorporates key design  considerations. Developing an effective nationwide screening program  could be a daunting challenge given the different processes, procedures,  databases, and operational environments in the motor vehicle and law  enforcement agencies across the nation. For example, a recurring observation  by the motor vehicle agency officials we contacted is that their offices are  already overburdened. Decisions on the most optimal approach to pursue—and, if  applicable, how best to integrate the design considerations discussed in  this report—likely would necessitate collaboration among various  stakeholders, including interested states and AAMVA as well as relevant  Department of Justice components—particularly the FBI, which manages  NSOR, and the SMART Office, which is responsible for administering the  standards for the sex offender registration and notification program set  forth in the Walsh Act. Further, AAMVA provided various technical comments, which we  incorporated in this report where appropriate. Further,  we reviewed documentation obtained from and interviewed officials at the  American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) and the  National Conference of State Legislatures. Level of Modifications to States’ Information Technology Capabilities and Key Cost Factors Regarding Prospective Federal Law

To determine what level of modifications would be needed to states’ IT  capabilities to comply with a prospective federal law that would require  screening individuals against the respective state’s sex offender registry  and the FBI’s NSOR before issuing a driver’s license and to determine the  key cost factors in implementing and maintaining this screening capability,  we conducted a survey of a majority (26) of the states, which involved  contacting motor vehicle agency and sex offender registry officials in each  of the states (see table 1). Other Design and Implementation Factors That Could Affect the Results from Any Sex Offender Screening Program Using Driver’s License Processes

To determine what other factors, in addition to IT capabilities and costs,  could affect the successful design and implementation of a process for  screening individuals against a state’s sex offender registry and the FBI’s  NSOR before issuing a driver’s license, we relied largely on the  information we obtained during our review of Nevada’s driver’s license  screening process and from our contacts with motor vehicle agency and  sex offender registry officials in the 26 survey states (see table 1).
Why GAO Did This Study

To enhance public safety, all states have laws requiring convicted sex offenders to register with law enforcement authorities. Because ensuring compliance is a challenge, in part because offenders may move frequently, policy makers are considering a role for motor vehicle agencies. In response to section 636 of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (the Walsh Act) and as discussed with congressional committees, this report identifies (1) the various driver's license-related processes that states are using to encourage registration or provide additional monitoring of convicted sex offenders; (2) the level of modifications to states' information technology (IT) capabilities that would be needed, and the key cost factors involved, if a federal law were to require the screening of individuals against the respective state's sex offender registry and the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) National Sex Offender Registry before issuing a driver's license; and (3) other factors that could affect successful implementation of this type of screening program. To accomplish these objectives, GAO reviewed state statutes and surveyed motor vehicle and public safety agencies in 26 states. The 26 states reflect regional representation, among other factors. GAO also interviewed officials from various components in the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA). GAO is not making any recommendations in this report.

What GAO Found

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. For example, nine states specifically require convicted sex offenders to obtain a driver's license, an identification card, or a sex offender registration card issued through driver's license-related processes, and five of these nine states also label the respective document with an annotation that identifies the person as a sex offender. One of the 22 states--Nevada--has a process for screening every driver's license applicant against the state's sex offender registry before issuing a license. However, no state has a screening process whereby all applicants are screened against both the respective state's sex offender registry and the FBI's national registry before being issued a driver's license. To establish this type of screening process, most of the motor vehicle agencies and sex offender registries in the 26 states surveyed by GAO said that moderate to major modifications to their current IT systems would be needed, with software modifications being a key cost factor. Many of the responding state agencies indicated that before reliable cost estimates for this type of screening process could be developed, operational or functional requirements must be clearly defined. Moreover, a recurring observation by motor vehicle agency officials was that given competing demands for programming resources, the agencies were not positioned to handle additional projects during the next several years. In addition to addressing IT and cost issues, successful implementation of a driver's license screening program for sex offenders will also hinge on how well the program incorporates key design considerations. Developing an effective "one-size-fits-all" screening program could be a daunting challenge given the different processes, procedures, databases, and operational environments among the motor vehicle and law enforcement agencies across the nation. If the federal government were to require this type of screening process, several key design factors could affect the outcomes of the process. Among other considerations cited by federal, state, and AAMVA officials, particularly important are design factors aimed at minimizing the burden on states, maintaining customer service at motor vehicle agencies, and mitigating unintended consequences. Although not an exhaustive list, these design considerations could affect the results from and the costs of a nationwide screening program. Decisions on the most optimal approach to pursue--and, if applicable, how best to integrate the design considerations discussed in GAO's report--likely would necessitate collaboration among various stakeholders, including interested states, AAMVA, and the FBI, which manages the national sex offender registry. In commenting on a draft copy of this report, DOJ and AAMVA provided technical clarifications, which GAO incorporated where appropriate.