U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Fact Sheet Summary of State Sex Offender Registries, 2001 March 2002, NCJ 192265 ------------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.wk1) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/sssor01.htm This report is one in a series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all in the series go to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pubalp2.htm#sssor -------------------------------------------------------- Devon B. Adams BJS State Program Manager ------------------------------------------ Highlights * About 386,000 convicted sex offenders were registered in 49 States and the District of Columbia as of February 2001, compared to 277,000 registered in April 1998. * California had the largest number of offenders in its registry with over 88,000 registrants. Texas had the second largest registry with almost 30,000 registrants. * Twenty-two State SOR's indicated that DNA samples are collected and maintained as part of registration. * As of February 2001, 29 States and the District of Columbia had publicly accessible websites containing information on individual sex offenders in a searchable format. Fifteen States had public websites in 1999, and 6 States had them in 1998. ------------------------------------------------- Background and overview In March 1998 the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) established the National Sex Offender Registry Assistance Program (NSOR-AP). As a component of the National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP), NSOR-AP assists States in meeting the requirements of the Wetterling Act (Pub. L. 104-145, 110 Stat.1345), as amended by Megan's Law, and the Pam Lychner Act (Pub. L. 104-236, 110 Stat.3093). The program also provides assistance to allow States to participate in the FBI's permanent National Sex Offender Registry (NSOR). The congressional appropriation in 1998 was $25 million. Subsequent funding was provided under the ongoing NCHIP program. Under NSOR-AP, a project was initiated in April 1998 to survey the States to evaluate the status of State sex offender registries (SOR's) and to identify priority areas, before the awarding of funds. The survey findings were published in a web-only format and are available on the BJS website at . 1999 update Pursuant to section 902 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Predators Act of 1998, Congress directed the Attorney General to study the feasibility of establishing a national hotline to access the FBI's sex offender registry. In support of this study, BJS was asked to contact the States a second time for an update of their sex offender registry dissemination procedures to reflect conditions as of May 1999. BJS asked the States to provide information on all existing State notification systems, and also to describe any use of the Internet, CD-ROM's, and hotlines to disseminate information to the public on registered sex offenders. Of particular interest were those procedures used to disseminate information on sexual predators, or the highest risk offenders in each State's registry. The report Summary of State Sex Offender Registry Dissemination Procedures, Update 1999, a BJS Fact Sheet, was published in August 1999 and is on the BJS website at . Summary of State sex offender registries, update 2001 In February 2001, BJS contacted the States for a third time to obtain information on the operation of their sex offender registries. In addition to updating procedures relating to community notification, the States were asked to update information on the overall operation and automation of the SOR's. Responses were received from all 50 States and the District of Columbia. Once the information was updated, a draft was sent to the States for final review. Location of State sex offender registries In 17 States, the State police (patrol or troopers) were responsible for operating and maintaining the registry. The department of public safety (DPS) was responsible in 11 States. The office of the attorney general operates the registry in six States, and the department of corrections is responsible in three States. In the remaining States some other defined criminal justice agency is responsible for the SOR. Number of offenders in the registry Several factors in the authorizing legislation significantly influenced the size of any particular State registry, among them are included the number of different offenses requiring registration, the date that "triggers" the registration mandate, and the duration of the registration requirement. (For example, California includes all adults convicted in a California court of a covered offense since 1944.) In February 2001, there were approximately 386,000 convicted sex offenders registered in 49 States and the District of Columbia. The number of offenders in individual State Registries ranged from 473 registrants in Maine to 88,853 registrants in California (this represents about a 14% increase in the California registry in a 3-year period), with the registry median being approximately 4,100 offenders. The legal status of registries was a factor affecting the counts of registered sex offenders. Massachusetts' information is not included in the 386,000, because at the time the survey was conducted a superior court injunction was in place against the Sex Offender Registry Board (SORB), prohibiting registration without first providing the sex offender a hearing. The injunction was appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court. On June 28, 2001, the court concluded that the SORB can require an offender to provide his home and work address prior to providing the offender a hearing to determine whether or not the offender has to register. Under the ruling the SORB may also transmit this data, and other data regarding the offender, to police departments. However, the information may not be disseminated to the public until the board classifies the offender and the offender has an opportunity to challenge the recommended classification at an administrative hearing. Massachusetts estimates that there are about 17,000 offenders identified as qualified to register. Comparatively, in April 1998, approximately 277,000 convicted sex offenders were registered in 49 States and the District of Columbia. (At the time the survey was conducted in 1998, Connecticut did not have a centralized sex offender registry and thus did not provide information on the number of registered offenders.) Automation status of sex offender registries Extent of database automation In 2001 the level of the SOR automation varied substantially, not only across States but also by which data and/or linkages were automated. All of the States reported some level of automation of their text database. It ranged from limited to full automation. SOR linked to criminal history system Twenty-six States indicated that here was a link from the SOR database to the criminal history file, (including States in which the SOR is a part of the computerized criminal history file). Five States indicated that although the SOR is not linked to the criminal history file, it can be accessed through a separate "hot file" or through the State identification number. The remaining 20 States reported no electronic link between the SOR database and the criminal history file. Of these, four indicated plans to establish a link. DNA samples In 2001, 22 SOR's reported that DNA samples were collected and maintained by the registry as a requirement of registration. Ten SOR's indicated DNA samples were collected but were maintained separate from registry requirements. Nineteen SOR's reported limited or no collection of DNA samples. Of these, two had pending legislation to include DNA samples as part of the SOR program. In 1998, 15 SOR's reported that DNA samples were collected in conjunction with registration requirements. Nine SOR's reported that DNA samples were collected but not as part of the registry. Twenty-seven SOR's indicated limited or no collection of DNA samples. Dissemination procedures of SOR information Community notification The most notable findings in this section of the survey involve the increasing practice of posting offender-specific information on State and/or local law enforcement websites. A growing number of States uses the Internet to fulfill notification requirements under Megan's Law. Status of websites in April 1998 The use of websites has increased significantly since BJS first surveyed the States in 1998. Six States had publicly accessible websites with searchable offender information in 1998. Status of websites in May 1999 By 1999 the number of websites had increased to 15 State sex offender registries that maintained a website with offender-specific information available to the general public. Status of websites in February 2001 As of February 2001, 29 States and the District of Columbia had publicly accessible Internet sites containing searchable information on individual sex offenders. Eight States reported having a website limited to information regarding sex offender laws and registry requirements and/or restricted to use by law enforcement agencies. Six States were developing a website or are planning to develop one. And seven States reported having no website and provided no further information about whether one was planned. Methodology/data collection efforts The information, for the initial survey in 1998, was obtained on these State registries in several ways: * Review of State applications for BJS NSOR-AP funding * Review of State legislation on sex offender registries and registration programs * Information obtained from prior published reports on State registries * Phone interviews with registry directors and staff * Online research. After the information was collected and organized into a uniform template for each State, it was sent to the designated SOR agency for review, comment, and verification. The subsequent updates used the basic template established in 1998 and requested the designated contact at the State registry update the information for May 1999 and then again in February 2001. The State changes were incorporated into the update and sent out to the State for verification. Each State summary presented information on the agency (or agencies) responsible for the management and operation of the sex offender registry. The summaries were organized into four main topical areas: * Who is in the registry? * How is the registry automated? * What is the general operation of the registry? * How is sex offender registry information disseminated? Under the heading of "Who Is in the Registry" the survey asked about -- * covered offenses that require registration * who was mandated to register (this can be based on date of the offender's conviction, his release into the community or other stipulations imposed by the State) * the duration for which the offender must remain on the registry and continue to register (ranging from 10 years to lifetime or an indefinite period of time) * the number of offenders held by the State central registry. Under the second heading, BJS collected information on the automation level of the Sex Offender Registry which includes the following: * the extent to which the SOR database is automated * whether the SOR database is linked to the State's criminal history system * whether the SOR transmits data electronically to the FBI's Sex Offender Registry * the capability of the SOR to store and transmit fingerprints and mugshots to the FBI and to other criminal justice agencies within the State. Under the third heading, BJS collected information on the overall operation of the Sex Offender Registry in each State. Information was collected on the following: * The sources of initial information on offender -- whether the local law enforcement agency, the court of conviction, department of corrections, local jails or the offender himself provides the initial registration information * Whether a DNA sample was a requirement of registration * What procedures were implemented for validation and re-registration of current registrants. This includes whether or not the SOR proactively notified the registrant of the requirement to reregister; whether this notification is automated, and what are the penalties for noncompliance with the registration procedures. The fourth heading covered in the survey is the dissemination of Sex Offender Registry Information. BJS collected information from the States regarding -- * dissemination of SOR data to law enforcement and criminal justice agencies * how registrant information is disseminated to organizations serving children, the elderly, and the mentally ill * what procedures, if any, exist for disseminating SOR information to the general public * whether SOR data are disseminated over the Internet through a public access website maintained by the SOR agency. Appendix tables Organizational locus of State SOR's Number of offenders in State registries DNA sample collected and maintained in connection with sex offender registries, 2001 Sex offender registry information: Dissemination and community notification, 2001 To view detailed individual State summaries visit the BJS website at . ------------------------------------------ The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Lawrence A. Greenfeld is acting director. Devon B. Adams of BJS wrote this Fact Sheet under the supervision of Carol G. Kaplan, chief, National Criminal History Improvement Program. Tina Dorsey and Tom Hester produced and edited it. Jayne Robinson prepared the report for printing. March 2002, NCJ 192265 ------------------------------------------ End of file 03/28/02 ih