Program design · 34 min read

The screening program toolkit

Five documents, published in full rather than summarized: a policy, a triage matrix, an assessment worksheet, a retention schedule and the applicant-facing notices. Each one comes with the reasoning behind its choices, because the documents are the easy part.

The short version

  • The documents below are complete and free to take. Read them here or download the Word versions and adapt them.
  • They are written to work together: the policy states the sequence, the matrix triages, the worksheet decides, the schedule governs retention, and the notices are what the applicant actually sees.
  • The matrix is deliberately built as triage rather than as a decision. A grid that pre-decides outcomes is the most reliable way to lose an individualized assessment argument.
  • The worksheet is completed everywhere, not only where a jurisdiction compels it. The federal exposure exists in every state.
  • The retention periods are minimums driven by limitation and recordkeeping rules, and the rule is named in each row so a period can be defended rather than asserted.

Jump to a document: Background check policyAdjudication matrixIndividualized assessment worksheetRetention scheduleSample notices

Why these are published in full

Almost every page that offers these documents offers a summary of them and a form. The summary is written by someone who has read the document, and the form exists to capture a lead. What the reader gets is a description of a policy and no policy.

The documents themselves are not the valuable part. None of them is clever, and a competent employment lawyer could draft all five in a week. What is hard is knowing why each clause is shaped the way it is, which statute drives it, and where the choices are genuinely contestable. So the reasoning is what this page actually publishes, and the documents are what the reasoning is about.

That is also why nothing here is behind an email field. The artifacts are the cheap half.

Where each document sits in a program

These are not five alternatives or five parts of a menu. They are one sequence, and a program that adopts three of them has three-quarters of a process with a gap in it that a claimant will find.

  1. The policy is the governing document. It says what is screened, when, who decides, and what happens to the records. Everything else is referenced from it.
  2. The matrix triages a result. It sorts records into clearly irrelevant, clearly relevant, and requiring judgment, so that reviewer attention goes where judgment is needed.
  3. The worksheet is where the decision is actually made, and it is the document that defends it.
  4. The retention schedule governs how long each record from steps one to three survives, and what destroys it.
  5. The notices are the applicant-facing half: the four communications in the sequence, with the required elements marked.

1. The background check policy

This is the document that makes the other four enforceable. A matrix with no policy behind it is a spreadsheet someone maintains; a matrix referenced by a policy with a named owner and a review cadence is a standard, and the difference matters when someone asks why a particular decision was made in a particular way eighteen months ago.

Three choices in it are worth naming, because they are the ones that get changed first and should not be.

The notice sequence is written as a sequence, with the waiting period inside it as a numbered step rather than a footnote. The failure this prevents is the common one: a decision reached by a manager who did not know a step was outstanding, in a process where the wait was described somewhere else on the page.

Roles are separated from names throughout. A policy that says the program owner is a particular person dies quietly the first time that person changes job, and nobody notices until an audit asks who owns it. The signature block asks for a role for the same reason.

The credit report exception is recorded per position group rather than assumed. "We run credit on anyone with financial responsibility" is how an impermissible purpose claim starts, because the statutory exception is narrower than the phrase sounds. Recording which exception applies to which group forces the question to be answered once, in writing, by someone who looked it up.

One clause is easy to miss and does the most work: a location requirement amends the policy rather than being waived by it. Without that sentence, the first manager who finds a local rule inconvenient treats the policy as the ceiling rather than the floor.

Adopt as policy, then have counsel review it against the states you hire in before it takes effect.

Download this documentWord format, ready to adapt. Also printable from this page.

1. Purpose and scope

This policy governs how [Company] obtains and uses background information about applicants, employees and contingent workers. It applies to every hiring manager, every recruiter and every third party who screens on our behalf, in every location where we hire.

It is written to satisfy the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the state and local law that applies to each position. Where a location imposes a requirement this policy does not describe, the location requirement governs and this policy is amended rather than waived.

2. Roles and responsibilities

RoleOwns
Hiring managerRequests the check through the approved channel. Does not receive results before the disclosure process is complete.
Recruiter or HR operationsIssues the disclosure and authorization, orders the check, and runs the notice sequence.
Adjudication reviewerCompletes the individualized assessment and records the reasoning.
Program ownerOwns this policy, the adjudication matrix and the retention schedule. Reviews them on the cadence in section 11.
Screening providerFurnishes the report, its sources and its verification dates. Does not decide the outcome.

3. Positions screened, and at what point

The background check is ordered only after a conditional offer has been made and accepted, unless a location requires a later point. The criminal history question does not appear on the application form.

Position groupChecks runOrdered
All positionsIdentity, employment history, criminal record searchAfter conditional offer
Roles with financial authorityAdds credit report where the role meets the statutory exceptionAfter conditional offer
Roles with driving dutiesAdds motor vehicle recordAfter conditional offer
Roles working with vulnerable peopleAdds state and federal sex offender registriesAfter conditional offer
Contingent workersAs agreed with the agency in writingBefore assignment

4. Disclosure and authorization

  • The applicant receives a standalone disclosure in a document that contains nothing else. No liability release, no application language, no state-law notice that is not a disclosure.
  • The disclosure is clear and conspicuous, and a copy of it is given to the applicant to keep.
  • The authorization is a separate signature, on the same page if we choose, but distinguishable from the disclosure.
  • The applicant may request a copy of any report we obtain, and we provide it without charge.
  • Documents are delivered in the language the applicant reads, where required by location.

5. Ordering and provider management

  • Checks are ordered only through the approved provider, so that every report arrives with its sources and verification dates attached.
  • Every order carries the certification the provider requires under the statute, signed by an authorized representative.
  • Provider accuracy, dispute handling and turnaround are reviewed at the cadence in section 11, and the review is recorded.
  • A report missing a source or a verification date is returned rather than adjudicated.

6. Review and adjudication

Reports are reviewed against the adjudication matrix, which triages records into clearly relevant, clearly irrelevant, and requiring individual assessment. A record that coincides with a matrix exclusion is not thereby a decision: the matrix narrows what needs reasoning, it does not replace it.

Where the record is relevant to the duties of the position, the reviewer completes the individualized assessment worksheet. The assessment is written before the decision is communicated, in every case, whether or not the location requires it in writing.

7. Notice sequence before a decision becomes final

  1. The applicant receives a pre-adverse action notice, a copy of the report, and a written description of their rights.
  2. The position stays open. The applicant is given the longer of our standard wait or any wait the applicable location requires, counted from receipt.
  3. Where the applicable location requires a fair chance notice and a written assessment, those go with the same communication, and the applicant is told what the assessment concluded and what they may respond to.
  4. If the applicant disputes the accuracy of the report, the count restarts when we send the corrected information, and the applicant is given the additional time the location allows.
  5. If the applicant provides information about the circumstances, the reviewer records what it was and what difference it made before deciding.

8. The final notice

If we decide against the applicant, we send a final notice that names the screening provider, gives its address and telephone number, states that the provider did not make the decision and cannot explain it, and states the applicant's right to dispute and to a free copy of the report.

9. Retention and destruction

Records are retained and destroyed according to the retention schedule, which is published alongside this policy. Records subject to a legal hold are excluded from destruction until the hold is lifted in writing.

10. Accuracy and disputes

  • An applicant may dispute the accuracy or completeness of any information in a report, directly with the provider.
  • Where a dispute is received by us rather than the provider, it is forwarded within one business day and the applicant is told it has been forwarded.
  • No decision is made final while a dispute is open, except where the location permits it and the grounds are recorded.

11. Program review

WhatHow oftenWho
This policy and the adjudication matrixAnnually, and on any change in the states we hire inProgram owner
The screening providerAnnually, against the criteria in section 5Program owner
The notice templatesAnnually, and on any change to a location requirementProgram owner with counsel
A sample of completed assessmentsQuarterly, for consistency and for reasoning qualityProgram owner

12. Version control

Owner
[Role, not name, so the policy survives turnover]
Approved by
[Name and role]
Effective date
[Date]
Last reviewed
[Date]
Next review due
[Date, and this date is what makes section 11 real]

2. The adjudication matrix

This is the document most likely to be misused, so the reasoning matters more here than anywhere else on this page. A matrix is the obvious way to make decisions consistent, and consistency is a genuine virtue until it becomes the thing that defeats you: a decision the grid already made is not an individualized assessment, and the more complete the grid, the stronger the argument that the assessment was theater.

The resolution is to separate triage from decision. The matrix answers one question, which is whether a record needs assessment before it can be relied on. It does not answer whether the applicant gets the job. That is why most of the cells say assess rather than a yes or a no, and that is not a drafting failure: under a genuine assessment almost everything that is not a non-conviction or a sealed record has to be reasoned about, and the matrix earns its place by removing the records that must not be relied on at all.

Two categories are absolute excludes and should stay that way. A non-conviction disposition is not a conviction, and an arrest standing alone is not a lawful basis for a decision anywhere in the country. A deferred adjudication that was successfully completed belongs in the same category in most jurisdictions, and where the disposition is unclear the record goes to assessment rather than to a band.

The escalation rules are the part that keeps the matrix honest in practice. A record where the reviewer cannot state the role nexus in one sentence goes to assessment rather than exclusion, and decisions that depart from the matrix are recorded and reviewed. Without those two rules a triage tool slowly becomes a decision tool, one reasonable shortcut at a time.

Use as a triage step. It must not be used as the decision, and the assessment worksheet is what decides.

Download this documentWord format, ready to adapt. Also printable from this page.

How to use this matrix

The matrix answers one question: does this record need an individualized assessment before we can decide? It does not answer whether the applicant gets the job.

Step 1: what the record actually is

Take the category from the verified record, not from the applicant's description and not from a summary in the report. An arrest with no conviction is not a conviction, and a deferred adjudication that was successfully completed is not a conviction in most jurisdictions. Where the disposition is unclear, the record goes to assessment rather than to a band.

CategoryDefinitionDefault band
Pending chargeFiled, not yet resolvedAssess. Never dispose of it as a conviction.
Arrest, no convictionArrested, no conviction enteredAssess, and confirm the location permits reliance at all.
Non-conviction dispositionDismissed, acquitted, nolle prosequi, deferred and completedExclude. Confirm the state rule, since several bar reporting outright.
Misdemeanor convictionConviction for a misdemeanor offenseAssess against the matrix.
Felony convictionConviction for a felony offenseAssess against the matrix.
Traffic offenseNon-criminal traffic matterExclude unless the role involves driving.

Step 2: role sensitivity

LevelApplies toEffect
HighRoles with unsupervised access to children or vulnerable adults, roles with signing authority over company funds, roles with unescorted access to controlled substances or firearmsWider set of records is relevant; still assessed individually.
MediumRoles with customer funds handling, roles with access to personal data at scale, roles with driving dutiesStandard set.
LowRoles with no funds, no vulnerable persons, no driving and no sensitive dataNarrow set. Most non-violent, non-fraud records fall outside it.

Step 3: time elapsed

Time is measured from the later of the date of the offense and the date the sentence was completed, including any period of supervision. A record within a supervision period is not complete, and the completion date is not yet known.

Time bandMeasured fromEffect
Under 2 yearsSentence completionAssess, and record the reasoning in full.
2 to 7 yearsSentence completionAssess against the matrix.
Over 7 yearsSentence completionAssess for relevance to the duties. Note that the seven year limit in the statute does not apply to convictions, so an old conviction may lawfully appear and still be irrelevant.

Step 4: the matrix

Each cell states the default treatment. Where a cell says assess, the reviewer completes the worksheet and the outcome is genuinely open. Where a cell says exclude, the record is not relied on, and the reason is recorded.

Record categoryHigh sensitivityMediumLow
Pending charge, directly related to the dutiesAssessAssessAssess
Pending charge, unrelatedAssessAssessAssess
Violent offense, under 7 yearsAssessAssessAssess
Violent offense, over 7 yearsAssessAssessAssess
Theft or fraud, under 7 yearsAssessAssessAssess
Theft or fraud, over 7 yearsAssessAssessAssess
Driving offense, role involves drivingAssessAssessAssess
Driving offense, role does not involve drivingAssessExcludeExclude
Drug offense, under 2 yearsAssessAssessAssess
Drug offense, over 7 years, no role nexusAssessExcludeExclude
Non-conviction dispositionExcludeExcludeExclude
Sealed, expunged or pardoned recordExcludeExcludeExclude

Step 5: escalation

  • Any record involving a pending charge for a violent offense goes to the program owner before a decision is communicated.
  • Any record where the applicant has supplied information that changes the factual basis goes back to the reviewer with the applicant's material attached.
  • Any record where the reviewer cannot state the role nexus in one sentence goes to assessment rather than to exclusion.
  • Any decision to depart from the matrix is recorded with the reason, and departures are reviewed quarterly.

What this matrix does not do

  • It does not set a waiting period. The notice sequence and its timing are in the policy and in the applicable location law.
  • It does not authorize reliance on a record the location bars us from considering.
  • It does not authorize reliance on an arrest standing alone, in any band, anywhere.
  • It does not decide anything. Every cell that says assess is a question, and the worksheet is where it gets answered.

3. The individualized assessment worksheet

The worksheet is the defense. If a decision about a criminal record is ever examined, this is the document that is examined, and the question asked of it is not whether the conclusion was defensible but whether reasoning happened at all.

The order of the sections carries that weight. It asks for the duties of the position before it asks for the factors, and the instruction is that if the duties bearing on the record cannot be named, the assessment ends and the record is excluded. That ordering is deliberate: it makes the role nexus the first question rather than a conclusion reached at the end, which is the difference between an assessment and a rationalization.

The section that does the most work is the one recording what the applicant provided. It exists because the waiting period in the sequence exists, and a file where the applicant's input never changed an outcome is the strongest evidence available that the process was a formality. That is why the worksheet asks not only what they said, but what difference it made, and instructs the reviewer to answer plainly when it made none.

One choice may look like overkill to a small employer: the worksheet is completed everywhere, not only in the jurisdictions that require it. The reason is that the exposure is federal. Title VII reaches a blanket exclusion in every state, the business necessity defense rests on the same factors the worksheet collects, and a program with two standards produces one defensible standard and one that is hard to explain. Completing it everywhere is also the only version of this that survives a manager moving between locations.

Complete one per applicant per decision. This document is the defense, and a conclusion without reasoning is not one.

Download this documentWord format, ready to adapt. Also printable from this page.

When this is required

Complete this worksheet whenever a criminal record is going to be considered in a decision, in every location. Several jurisdictions require it in writing. We complete it everywhere, both because the federal exposure exists everywhere and because a program that only reasons in the places that compel it produces two standards and one of them is indefensible.

Section 1: the record

Applicant
 
Requisition or position
 
Record relied on
Offense, court, case number, date
Disposition
Conviction, pending, non-conviction, unknown
Date of offense
 
Date sentence completed
Including supervision. If not complete, say so.
Source and date verified
From the report. A record without this does not proceed.
Summary of the conduct
What the applicant was convicted of, in plain terms. Not the statutory citation alone.

Section 2: the position

Duties that bear on this record
Name them. If none can be named, the assessment ends here.
Sensitivity level
From the adjudication matrix
Supervision and access
Unsupervised contact, funds, data, driving, none
Role nexus
One sentence, connecting the conduct to those duties

Section 3: the factors

Complete each row with the actual answer. A row left at yes or no without a sentence is not an assessment.

FactorFindingReasoning
Nature and gravity of the offense
Time since the offense
Time since sentence completion
Nature of the position and its duties
Whether the record bears on the specific duties
Any statutory bar on considering this record in this location
Any statutory requirement to consider it

Section 4: what the applicant provided

Record what the applicant said, in their terms, including anything they provided after the notice. This section is why the sequence has a waiting period in it, and a blank here is a question a claimant will ask.

Information provided
Summarize it. Attach it.
Accuracy dispute raised
Yes or no, and the outcome
Rehabilitation or context
Employment since, education, treatment, references, restitution
What difference it made
Answer this. If it made none, say so and say why.

Section 5: the reasoning

State the conclusion and the reasons for it in sentences a reader who was not involved can follow. Address the factors above, address what the applicant provided, and reach a decision that could have gone the other way. A reviewer who cannot write this paragraph has not made an individualized assessment, and the honest response is to send the file to someone who can.

[Reasoning]

Section 6: decision and sign-off

Decision
Proceed, proceed with conditions, or withdraw the offer
Conditions, if any
E.g. a re-check at 12 months, a restriction on duties
Reviewer
Name and role
Date
 
Second reviewer, where required
Name, role and date
Date notice sequence began
 

4. The retention schedule

Retention is the part of a screening program that vendors mention least, because it is not a feature anyone sells. It is also the part that decides what is available when a claim arrives two years after a decision, which is when it stops being administrative.

Four things drive the periods, and the schedule names the driver in each row so that a period can be defended rather than asserted. The FCRA limitation period is the outer bound for anything that would prove a notice sequence was run: a claim may be brought up to two years after discovery and no more than five years after the violation. The EEOC recordkeeping rule sets a floor of a year, longer while a charge is live. Federal contractor obligations extend some records to two years. State limitation periods can be longer than all of them, which is why the schedule says the longest applicable period wins rather than picking one.

One rule in it runs against intuition and is worth stating plainly. Where a state requires a shorter period for a category of record, we do not shorten below the federal period without counsel confirming that the state rule displaces it. A state rule that requires destruction is not a license to destroy something the applicant may still need, and an employer who shreds a file because a state statute permitted it has created a problem rather than solved one.

The document inventory at the end is exhaustive on purpose, because it is two checklists wearing one coat. It is the list a destruction run works through, and it is the same list a response to a claim is assembled from. An inventory that is convenient for the first job is usually incomplete for the second.

Adopt as the schedule referenced by the policy. The periods are minimums driven by limitation and recordkeeping rules, not preferences.

Download this documentWord format, ready to adapt. Also printable from this page.

What drives these periods

Four things, and the longest one wins in each row.

  • The FCRA limitation period. A claim may be brought up to two years after discovery and no more than five years after the violation, which is the outer bound on records that would defend a notice sequence.
  • The EEOC recordkeeping rule. Employment records, including records about a personnel action, are kept for one year from the date of the record or the action, whichever is later, and for the life of any charge that is filed.
  • Federal contractor obligations, where they apply. Employment records for contractors are generally kept for two years.
  • State limitation periods and state recordkeeping rules, which can be longer than any of the above and which are checked per state rather than assumed.

The schedule

RecordMinimumDriver
Disclosure and authorization5 years from the date signedFCRA limitation period
Consumer report as received5 years from receiptFCRA limitation period
Pre-adverse action notice and proof of delivery5 years from sendingFCRA limitation period, and this is the record that proves the sequence
Individualized assessment worksheet5 years from the decisionFCRA limitation period, plus state fair chance record requirements where they apply
Final adverse action notice5 years from sendingFCRA limitation period
Records for applicants not hired1 year from the decision, 2 years for federal contractor positionsEEOC recordkeeping, contractor rule
Records for a person hiredDuration of employment plus 5 yearsFCRA limitation period, and employment claims
Adjudication matrix and policy versions5 years from supersessionProves the standard in force at the time of a decision
Dispute correspondence5 years from resolutionFCRA limitation period
Provider contracts and certifications5 years from expiryFCRA limitation period
Any record under legal holdUntil the hold is lifted in writingPreservation duty overrides the schedule

Where the schedule and a state rule disagree

Where a state requires a longer period, the state period governs and the row above is extended for that state. Where a state requires a shorter period for a category of record, we do not shorten below the federal period unless counsel has confirmed the state rule displaces it, because a state rule that requires destruction cannot be read as a license to destroy a record the applicant may still need.

Legal hold

  • A hold applies to everything in the applicant's file and to the assessment, and it survives any period in this schedule.
  • Holds are lifted in writing by the person who set them, and the lift is recorded against the file.
  • Destruction that runs on a schedule while a hold is unknown is the failure this section exists to prevent, which is why the program owner confirms holds before each destruction run.

Destruction

  • Paper records are shredded, cross-cut, and the destruction is certified by the vendor.
  • Electronic records are deleted from live systems and from backups on the backup rotation, and the deletion is logged with the date, the record type and the authority for the action.
  • Records held by a screening provider are covered by the contract, which must require destruction on the same schedule and must say what the provider does at the end of the term.
  • No consumer report information is disposed of in a way that leaves it readable, which is the requirement the Disposal Rule imposes.

Document inventory

The following records exist for a single hire. This list is the checklist for a destruction run and for a response to a claim, and the two uses are the reason it is exhaustive rather than convenient.

  1. The job requisition and the conditional offer
  2. The signed disclosure and authorization
  3. The provider certification signed by us
  4. The consumer report as received, with sources and verification dates
  5. Proof of delivery of the pre-adverse packet
  6. The fair chance notice and written assessment, where required
  7. Any dispute correspondence from the applicant
  8. The corrected report, where a dispute produced one
  9. The completed individualized assessment worksheet
  10. Proof of delivery of the final notice
  11. The decision record on the requisition

5. The sample notices

These are skeletons rather than finished letters, and the note at the top of the document says so. Change the wording freely. Do not remove an element, and do not merge two notices unless both sets of elements survive the merge.

That merge rule is the whole of the law on combining notices, and it comes from FTC staff opinions which confirmed that the two federal notices may be combined into one document where both sets of content are present. The same logic extends to the fair chance layer: a single communication can carry the report, the rights summary, the record relied on, the assessment and the response window. What it cannot do is carry one statute's contents and be treated as satisfying the other. The fair chance article sets out the confusion in full, since it is the expensive one.

Two elements in these notices cause more trouble than the rest. The first is the Summary of Consumer Rights, which is a prescribed document published by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Do not retype it and do not paraphrase it. A paraphrase is a compliance defect, and it is the kind that is invisible because the notice looks complete.

The second is subtler. Where a decision was not based on a consumer report, the final notice must say so and give the actual reason. Naming a report that was not the basis of the decision is a false statement in a document the applicant will keep, and it is the kind of error that is easy to make when a template assumes every decision came from one.

Adapt the wording, keep the elements. Every bracketed field must be filled or deliberately deleted, never left as a placeholder.

Download this documentWord format, ready to adapt. Also printable from this page.

How to use these

These are skeletons, not final text. Each one lists the elements that must be present for the notice to do its job. Change the wording freely. Do not remove an element, and do not merge two notices into one unless both sets of elements survive the merge, which is the only condition on which a combined notice is safe.

Notice 1: pre-adverse action notice

Sent before a decision becomes final, when a report may lead to an adverse decision. Accompany it with the report and the Summary of Consumer Rights.

[Date]. Dear [Applicant name]. We are considering taking adverse action on your application for [position] based in whole or in part on information in a consumer report we obtained about you. A copy of that report is enclosed, together with a written summary of your rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The report was furnished by [provider name], [address], [telephone]. Before we make a final decision, you have the right to review the report and to dispute with the provider the accuracy or completeness of anything in it. If you believe any information is inaccurate, you may contact the provider directly using the contact details above. [Where a location requires it: Our written assessment of the information is enclosed. You may respond to it, and you may provide any information you would like us to consider, including information about the circumstances, by [date]. The position will remain open until that date.] You may also contact [us] at [contact] with any questions.

  • Required: a copy of the report
  • Required: the Summary of Consumer Rights
  • Required: the provider's name, address and telephone number
  • Required: the applicant's right to dispute
  • Required where a location says so: the written assessment and a response deadline

Notice 2: adverse action notice

Sent after the final decision, and after the waiting period has run. This is a separate notice from Notice 1 and is owed whether or not the applicant responded.

[Date]. Dear [Applicant name]. After consideration, we have decided not to [proceed with your application / continue your employment] for [position]. This decision was based in whole or in part on information contained in a consumer report furnished by [provider name], [address], [telephone number]. The provider did not make this decision and cannot give you the reasons for it. You have the right to obtain a free copy of the report from the provider within sixty days, and the right to dispute with the provider the accuracy or completeness of any information in it. [Where the decision was not based on a report, say so and give the actual reason, since a notice that names a report that was not the basis is a false statement.] You may contact [us] at [contact] with any questions.

  • Required: the provider's name, address and telephone number
  • Required: a statement that the provider did not make the decision
  • Required: the right to a free copy of the report within sixty days
  • Required: the right to dispute with the provider
  • Required: where no report was the basis, that fact stated plainly rather than left out

Notice 3: fair chance rider

Attached to Notice 1 where a state or local law requires an individualized assessment and a response window. It is a rider on the pre-adverse notice, not a substitute for it and not a substitute for Notice 2.

We have carried out an individualized assessment of the information in your background check against the duties of [position]. The information relied on is [offense, court, date, disposition]. Our assessment considered the nature and gravity of the offense, the time that has passed since it and since the completion of any sentence, and the duties of the position, which are [summary of duties]. Our assessment concluded [conclusion]. You may respond to this assessment. You may provide information about the circumstances, about rehabilitation, about employment or education since, or about anything else you would like us to consider, and we will consider it before making a final decision. You have until [date, which is the longer of our standard period and any period the applicable location requires, counted from the date you receive this notice] to respond. The position will remain open until that date. If you dispute the accuracy of the information, tell us or the provider, and the period will be extended by [additional period]. If you would like help understanding this notice, contact [contact].

  • Required: the specific record relied on
  • Required: the duties it was assessed against
  • Required: the conclusion, stated rather than implied
  • Required: the response deadline, counted from receipt
  • Required: a statement that the position stays open
  • Required where the location says so: the extension if accuracy is disputed

Notice 4: disclosure and authorization

Not a letter. A standalone document, signed before any check is ordered. The single most litigated document in this area, and almost every loss is a matter of what else was on the page.

  • The disclosure contains nothing except the disclosure. No liability release, no waiver, no at-will language, no state notices, no application terms.
  • It states that a consumer report may be obtained for employment purposes, in clear and conspicuous terms.
  • It appears as its own document, not as a paragraph inside an application or a handbook acknowledgement.
  • The authorization is a separate signature. On the same page is acceptable where it is clearly distinct; inside the disclosure paragraph is not.
  • A copy of the disclosure is given to the applicant to keep, and this is recorded.
  • Where a state requires its own notice or its own form, it goes in a separate document alongside, not inside the disclosure.

Notice 5: dispute acknowledgement

Sent when a dispute reaches us rather than the provider, or when an applicant responds to a notice with an accuracy challenge.

[Date]. Dear [Applicant name]. We received your message about the accuracy of information in your background check on [date]. We have forwarded it to [provider name] for investigation. The provider will contact you directly. No final decision will be made about your application while the dispute is open. [Where the location requires it: the period for your response has been extended to [date], and the position will remain open until then.] If you do not hear from the provider within [period], contact us at [contact].

  • Required: confirmation that the dispute was received and forwarded
  • Required: the statement that no final decision will be made while it is open, where that is true
  • Required: the extension of the response period, where the location provides for one

What these documents do not do

They do not tell you which law applies to a given hire. That depends on where the applicant lives, where the job is performed, where the employer is established and which jurisdictions reach the decision, and the honest answer is that the per-jurisdiction position has to be looked up rather than generalized. The compliance section carries it for every state.

They do not cover the statutory limits on what may be reported in the first place, which are in the FCRA article, nor the notice sequence in detail, which is in the adverse action article.

And they are not legal advice. They are a starting position written by people who run screening for a living, drafted to be reviewed by counsel against the states you actually hire in. An employer who adopts them without that review has a better program than most and no guarantee at all.

Adapting them

The documents are meant to be edited, and the edits that matter are the ones that localize them. Every bracketed field must be filled or deliberately deleted; a placeholder left in a document that goes to an applicant is worse than a blank, because it suggests nobody read it before it was sent.

Where a state requires its own notice or its own form, it goes alongside these rather than inside them, because the disclosure in particular must contain nothing but the disclosure. That single rule is the most litigated line in this area and the easiest to break by being helpful.

What we do

We furnish the report these documents operate on, and we furnish it with its sources and verification dates attached, which the worksheet asks for and which a report without them cannot supply. We do not adjudicate. A screening company deciding what a conviction signifies is the reflex the fair chance layer exists to prevent, and a provider that offers to make the decision for you is offering to take on a duty that is yours.

If you would rather not build this from a template, we will run it with you, using these documents as the starting point and adapting them to the states you hire in.

Sources

Last reviewed 2026-09-27. Nothing here is legal advice; see the terms of use.

TrueFingerprints LLC is a Consumer Reporting Agency as defined by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681.

Consumers have rights under the FCRA and applicable state laws.
Learn more about your full rights on our Consumer Rights page.

To request or dispute a background report, click here to access the dispute form.