Page 32 - Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS)

INTRODUCTION 17

The inked and rolled finger images on a tenprint card are gradually being
replaced by electronic images captured on livescan machines. These images,
captured at 500 pixels per inch (ppi) or higher, are becoming a larger per-
centage of the AFIS image database. Electronic cards eliminate paper and mul-
tiple entries of the same data during the booking and identification process.
However, unlike the paper tenprint card, the electronic card does not physi-
cally exist unless it is printed. Great care must be taken to ensure that the data
and images on the electronic card are the true and accurate reproduction.
Quality indicators must be in place to ensure that the print on the file belongs
to the person whose name is associated with it. While it is increasingly unlikely
that a paper record will be misfiled since there are fewer paper files, the prob-
lems created by mislabeling an electronic record are very time consuming to
resolve.
AFIS systems are constantly in use. With many systems operating on a 24
hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year schedule, the system must not only
be accurate and reliable, but also available nearly all the time. Before system
upgrades are introduced onto the operational or “live” system, the software and
components must be thoroughly tested under conditions that mimic the live
system. Just as computer users become mildly agitated when a new version of
Windows software does not work seamlessly, so do identification staff, booking
officers, the courts, district attorneys, and others who depend on accurate
and prompt delivery of identification information when AFIS systems do not
work properly. There is little margin for error and little tolerance for system
problems.
The addition of new fingerprintable crimes and job applications that require
fingerprint-based background checks has also created extra throughput
demands on existing systems. Taxi drivers, health care workers, financial indus-
try workers, teachers, and others who were not fingerprinted in the past must
now undergo a background search based on fingerprints. This proliferation of
fingerprint-based background checks raises important business and philosoph-
ical questions, such as who should pay the applicant fee for an applicant search
of the state AFIS and FBI IAFIS. The state may charge $50 to offset their admin-
istrative cost and investment in AFIS technology, and the FBI charges $25 for
an applicant search of its database. While these may be considered user fees,
the outlay of $75 for a background check may not be feasible for someone
making minimum wage. The cost for a school district or unit of local govern-
ment that requires a fingerprint search of all employees could be huge. If the
government employer pays the costs, then the costs fall on the taxpayers ser-
viced by that government. If the employees have to pay, they may demand reim-
bursement as a condition of their contract. If the state chooses not to charge
for these employees supported by local tax dollars, the cost gets shifted to the