skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 240401 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: NICS Improvement Amendments Act: State Records Estimates Development and Validation Project, Year Three Report
Author(s): Richard Schauffler; Shauna Strickland; Anne Gallegos; Owen Greenspan; Dennis DeBacco
Corporate Author: Project on Addressing Prison Rape
United States of America
Date Published: November 2012
Page Count: 127
Sponsoring Agency: Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
Washington, DC 20531
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Project on Addressing Prison Rape
Washington, DC 20016
SEARCH, the National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics
Grant Number: 2009-NS-BX-K050
Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This report details the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA), which requires states to report reasonable estimates of the number of records available to the NICS.
Abstract: The National Instant Criminal Background Check System Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA) directs States to report reasonable estimates of the number of records available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The findings for the Year 3 analyses include: 1) 84 percent of the 56 States/territories surveyed provided records estimates compared to 75 and 79 percent for surveys performed in Year 1 and Year 2. 2) State record repositories contain 84 percent of the records housed by originating agencies. However, due to the limitations of the estimate quality, this percentage is not believed to be a reliable representation of records being reported to Federal databases. 3) The statistical model validated the reasonableness of the overall estimates reported by the State record repositories and the originating agencies. 4) The State record repository and originating agency estimates are considered reasonable and have face validity. The data provided appear to be reasonably accurate estimates of the numbers of records they are supposed to be estimating and the qualitative information provided by the 47 responding States enhanced that appearance of reasonableness by documenting the challenges that inhibit States’ ability to make more precise estimates. 5) The statistical model could not be used to develop estimates of data from non-responding States and territories. This was especially true of the larger non-reporting States because they are atypical of the States that did report and the model confidence bounds of the larger reporting States were too wide as to make credible assessments regarding their reasonableness. Report recommendations include focusing technical assistance on problems and challenges identified consistently through the review of all three estimates cycles, promulgating Promising Practices documents on the BJS website to encourage peer-to-peer technical assistance, and reconsidering the survey methodology to narrow the scope and improve the quality of estimates.
Main Term(s): Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
Index Term(s): BJS final report; Citizen gun ownership; Firearms; Firearms acts; Gun Control; Gun control legislation
Note: This project was supported by Grant No. 2009-NS-BX-K050 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the US Department of Justice.
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.