Stats

Below is an historical tracking of Average Days Processing of FOID (new and renewal), CCL (new only), and FTIP transactions as reported by the Illinois State Police. Processing Statistics Source- https://isp.illinois.gov/Foid Month/ Year New FOID application Average Processing Time (Days) Renewal FOID application Average Processing Time (Days) New Non-Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) New Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) FTIP Average Processing Time (Hours) Source 11/2020 121.71 199.9 160.35 130.58 79.4 Website 12/2020 122.47 242.44 158.84 121.05 36.25 Website 01/2021 121.74 266.77 154.76 122.22 62.25 Website 02/2021 118.89 305.02 166.02 156.55 71 Website 03/2021 126.35 176.54 160.04 136.91 50 Website 04/2021 140.39 187.69 162.49 142.79 48.75 Website 05/2021 206.84 218.2 152.1 182.63 13 Website 06/2021 206.93 221.2 181.62 138.85 17.2 Website 07/2021 188.95 143.82 143.74 131.79 23.3 Website 08/2021 196.74 258.16 167 136.44 7.75 Website 09/2021 149.47 146.59 146.64 117.78 36 Website 10/2021 121.3 38.91 130.32 100.49 31 Website 11/2021 97.04 35.98 126.97 110.7 41 Website 12/2021 50.42 53.16 122.05 86.99 58 Website 01/2022 21.74 34.51 115.12 78.36 41.75 Website 02/2022 19.8 33.46 115.38 110.89 41.75 Website 03/2022 17.38 23.8 132 101.34 49 Website

With the release of the March, 2022 processing activity, below is an analysis of data provided on the ISP Statistics Web page (https://isp.illinois.gov/Foid/Statistics) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) site (https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/nics😞 FOID/ CCL backlog Analysis Items (Calculations/ Data anomalies) noted on the ISP Statistics Web Site National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Illinois State Police data analysis A summary of the backlog activity is: Analysis for March, 2022 New Aps / Trans Received Processed Estimated Backlog Notes: Current Month Prior Month % Change Current Month Prior Month % Change Current Month Prior Month % Change FOID New Applications 14,091 10,665 32.1 16,100 11,923 35.0 6,435 8,444 (23.8) FOID Renewal Applications 14,929 10,136 47.3 15,950 17,708 (9.9) (3,356) (2,335) 43.7 CCL New Applications 4,471 3,387 32.0 5,039 4,561 10.5 3,187 1,997 59.6 CCL Renewal Applications - - - - - - - - - Not reported by ISP FTIPS Transactions 46,062 34,749 32.6 46,062 34,749 32.6 - - - Portfolio 79,553 58,937 35.0 83,151 68,941 20.6 6,266 8,106 (22.7) In an effort to reconcile the backlog calculated in the analysis and what the ISP calculates, and occasionally publishes as a backlog, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request was submitted to the ISP relating to the backlogs. The ISP responded noting that the total FOID backlog (open processing greater than 30 days since receipt) of 165,534 as of April, 30, 2021. In the analysis, the total calculated backlog is 168,409 as of April 30, 2021. ISP did not break the backlog between New and Renewal applications. As the difference of 2,875 is just 1.71% of the calculated backlog, the difference can be viewed as immaterial and a validation of the backlog calculation methodology. Until the ISP can break out the backlog between new and renewal applications, due to the immaterial nature of the difference, an adjustment will not be made to the backlog in this analysis. Additionally, in December, 2021 the Illinois State Police published, via a press release, that the FOID renewal backlog was at 7,800. For analytical purposes, the FOID renewal backlog was increased by 11,823 to bring the end of (month) November, 2021 backlog to 7,800. Average Processing Time Changes between February, 2022 and March, 2022 are: Mar, 2022 Feb, 2022 Difference % Change New FOID application Average Processing Time (Days) 17.38 19.80 (2.42) (12.22) Renewal FOID application Average Processing Time (Days) 23.80 33.46 (9.66) (28.87) New Non-Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) 132.00 115.38 16.62 14.40 New Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) 101.34 110.89 (9.55) (8.61) FTIP Average Processing Time (Hours) 49.00 41.75 7.25 17.37 New CCL Applications (both fingerprint and non-fingerprint) above the statutory requirements. Mar, 2022 Statutory Requirement Difference % Change from Statutory Requirement New FOID application Average Processing Time (Days) 17.38 30.00 (12.62) (42.07) Renewal FOID application Average Processing Time (Business Days) 23.80 60.00 (36.20) (60.33) New Non-Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) 132.00 120.00 12.00 10.00 New Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) 101.34 90.00 11.34 12.60 FTIP Average Processing Time (Hours) 49.00 72.00 (23.00) (31.94) National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Illinois State Police data analysis Included is an analysis of ISP related NICS data. A summary of activity: March, 2022 NICS Analysis for March, 2022 IL Only All NICS IL as a % of all NICS Prior Month 308,269 2,514,818 12.26 Current Month 385,030 3,014,465 12.77 Current Month YTD 1,167,252 8,062,379 14.48 YTD Prior Year (Mar-2021) 3,332,055 12,328,744 27.03

February, 2022 ISP FOID/CCL Processing- With the release of the February, 2022 processing activity, below is some analysis of data provided on the ISP Statistics Web page (https://isp.illinois.gov/Foid/Statistics A summary of the backlog activity is: Analysis for February, 2022 New Aps / Trans Received Processed Estimated Backlog Notes: Current Month Prior Month % Chg Current Month Prior Month % Chg Current Month Prior Month % Chg FOID New Applications 10,665 12,003 (11.1) 11,923 16,159 (26.2) 8,444 9,702 (13.0) FOID Renewal Applications 10,136 15,940 (36.4) 17,708 31,304 (43.4) (2,335) 5,237 (144.6) CCL New Applications 3,387 3,603 (6.0) 4,561 4,627 (1.4) 1,997 1,892 5.5 CCL Renewal Applications - - - - - - - - - Not reported by ISP FTIPS Transactions 34,749 33,828 2.7 34,749 33,828 2.7 - - - Portfolio 58,937 65,374 (9.8) 68,941 85,918 (19.8) 8,106 16,831 (51.8) In an effort to reconcile the backlog calculated in the analysis and what the ISP calculates, and occasionally publishes as a backlog, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request was submitted to the ISP relating to the backlogs. The ISP responded noting that the total FOID backlog (open processing greater than 30 days since receipt) of 165,534 as of April, 30, 2021. In the analysis, the total calculated backlog is 168,409 as of April 30, 2021. ISP did not break the backlog between New and Renewal applications. As the difference of 2,875 is just 1.71% of the calculated backlog, the difference can be viewed as immaterial and a validation of the backlog calculation methodology. Until the ISP can break out the backlog between new and renewal applications, due to the immaterial nature of the difference, an adjustment will not be made to the backlog in this analysis. Additionally, in December, 2021 the Illinois State Police published, via a press release, that the FOID renewal backlog was at 7,800. For analytical purposes, the FOID renewal backlog was increased by 11,823 to bring the end of (month) November, 2021 backlog to 7,800. Average Processing Time Changes between February, 2022 and January, 2022 are: Feb, 2022 Jan, 2022 Difference % Change New FOID application Average Processing Time (Days) 19.80 21.74 (1.94) (8.92) Renewal FOID application Average Processing Time (Days) 33.46 34.51 (1.05) (3.04) New Non-Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) 115.38 115.12 0.26 0.23 New Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) 110.89 78.36 32.53 41.51 FTIP Average Processing Time (Hours) 41.75 41.75 - - The ISP average processing time for New CCL Applications (Non Fingerprint), FTIP reviews, New and Renewal FOID applications have landed below the statutory requirements. The ISP does not report on CCL renewals. Feb, 2022 Statutory Requirement Difference % Change from Statutory Requirement New FOID application Average Processing Time (Days) 19.80 30.00 (10.20) (34.00) Renewal FOID application Average Processing Time (Business Days) 33.46 60.00 (26.54) (44.23) New Non-Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) 115.38 120.00 (4.62) (3.85) New Fingerprint CCL Average Processing Time (Days) 110.89 90.00 20.89 23.21 FTIP Average Processing Time (Hours) 41.75 72.00 (30.25) (42.01) National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Illinois State Police data analysis Included is an analysis of ISP related NICS data. A summary of activity: (https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/nics) Feb-2022 NICS Analysis for Feb-2022 IL Only All NICS IL as a % of All NICS Prior Month 473,953 2,533,096 18.71 Current Month 308,269 2,514,818 12.26 Current Month YTD 782,222 5,047,914 15.50 YTD Prior Year (Feb-2021) 1,904,138 7,683,135 24.78 Overall Analysis Notes Overview: This is an analysis of the Illinois State Police (ISP) information for new Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) applications, new Concealed Carry License (CCL) applications, and Firearms Transfer Inquiry Program (FTIP) transactions. The purpose of the analysis is to independently “re-calculate”/ verify the backlog of FOID and CCL applications from information published by the ISP. Due to the limitation of data made available by the ISP, a majority of the analysis focuses on new FOID, renewal FOID, and new CCL applications. FTIP transactions are added into the analysis as similar data is analyzed and similar resources may be used to analyze FOID, CCL, and FTIP items. Methodology/Constraints: Due to data availability, the initial calculation of the backlogs for new FOIL and CCL applications starts in January, 2020. For Renewal FOID applications, the calculation starts in March, 2020 to coincide with the publication of data. To calculate the backlog, the number of new applications received is reduced by the number of decisions, approved or denied, given. Subsequent monthly backlogs (new applications less approved and denied applications) are then included in the initial backlog to determine the cumulative backlog. Please note that the overall cumulative backlog is probably understated, but this methodology, when applied over time, will show the overall status (or trend) of a backlog. As this analysis has been ongoing, information has been requested either directly from ISP or via Illinois Legislature representatives’ offices. In December, 2021 the Illinois State Police published, via a press release, that the FOID renewal backlog was at 7,800. For analytical purposes, the FOID renewal backlog was increased by 11,823 to bring the end of (month) November, 2021 backlog to 7,800.

That is only part of the picture. Law enforcement has always had the ability to run the "number". In fact, in the system (LEADS), your vehicle registration is tied to you drivers license, which is tied to the CCL (and FOID). So whenever your license plate is run, it will pull the CCL information for any of the registrants of the vehicle. This has been in place for a while. (In the vehicle, the information is retrieved, but on a page that requires the LEO to navigate towards) Now, by requiring a FOID lookup for ammo purchases, the ISP will now have the ability to track the usage for a all of your "simple" ammunition purchases. (This was not the case before). Now the ISP will be can expand the tracking of the law abiding gun owner. If the ISP goes to the "Smart Phone/Card" technology, the tracking ability would be further enhanced. This potentially could be the time and location that the "card" was retrieved. Just some food for thought.

Based on what the ISP has stated, the issuance of the original FOID was done because the state of Mississippi did not enter Martins conviction into one of the criminal databases. So no matter how many times that he had a NICS check done, he would not have shown up as a felon. Per ISP, it was not until he submitted his CCL application with fingerprints that his felony was "discovered". Once the felony was discovered, that is when the FOD was revoked and where the ISP did not follow up on the revocation. So, it appears that the alleged lack of data entry of the conviction into a database would have simply denied Martin the FOID. Now, instead of fixing the data processing issue, we have the call for fingerprints for FOIDS and potentially background checks for ammo purchases. If there is/was no change in the processes, the unfortunate situation could happen again. I really think that many have lost sight of that. Not sure if the new laws passed are really "common sense".

The Illinois State Police were named in a law suit. https://www.rapoportlaw.com/helpful-information/firm-news/henry-pratt-company-mass-shooting-lawsuit-filed/

Awesome. Thank you for the insight!

Just out of curiosity, for all of the cards, is the AL "number" the same on any of the cards? (No need to publish the numbers, just a yes/ no answer would be good. (Form what we have seen so far has been the last eight digits of the AL number would correspond the date that the card is sent to the print queue) As the AL number is supposed to be used for security purposes going forward, it would be interesting to see if two cards were issued with the same AL "number".

I was able to talk to a representative from the ISP about the issue, solution, and a way to potentially monitor the situation. Issue: The overall issue is two fold. One, is the indicator on some cards may say "Y" where it should say "CCL". This was a programming error. Issue two is that on the bottom of some cards (where the FOID "cardholder" also has an active CCL) the wording on the bottom of the card states: This does not authorize the carrying of a concealed weapon. This is incorrect. This issue was caused by the use of an "incorrect card blank". Solution: This ISP is currently reviewing previous cards issued. If it is noted that the cards have one or both of the issues (for FOID/CCL combined cards) the ISP is going to reissue the cards. This process may take some time. After the cards have been printed, the ISP says to allow 30-45 days for mailing. Potential Monitoring: As the cards are going through the "reissuance process", you might be able to monitor some of the progress. If you go to your ISP online account, you might note that the print date (Of the CCL Card) has changed. If this date has changed, it should signify that your card will be reissued, printed, and mailed to you. Once again, it may take 30-45 days to mail. (For a real life experience, my CCL says it was printed on 2/14/2022- where (my renewal) was printed in August, 2021. I am still waiting from my new card in the mail.) Recap/ Suggestion: I had an issue with my card. I am lucky enough to live in somewhat close proximity to one of the ISP kiosks. The representative was not only helpful but extremely knowledge able about all of the moving pieces and she gave me an update on the situation. She stated that this may impact several (many) cards, and was hopefully that the ISP would communicate more, to a larger audience, as to an update and the number of cards impacted. With any luck, the ISP should be able to rectify the situation without any further intervention from the "cardholder". If, after an extended period of time and you do not see any action, you may need to reach out to the ISP to remedy the situation. Good luck to all who have been effected!

It looks our cards may have been in the same "batch" as my card has the same characteristics. 2 questions- 1) What are the last eight digits of your AL? This is the date that the card is issued. The last eight digits of mine are 01282022. On the ISP website, the FOID expiration should be 10 years after the date imbedded in the AL number. This appears to be the issued/ printed date. 2) On your card, is there reference in red on the bottom of the card to a concealed weapon? On my card it states that "This does not authorize the carrying of a concealed weapon" Reason being here is that I it appears that some cards may have been printed in error with contradictory information. I have been working (as best I can) with the ISP to get a resolution to the issue. Currently there are three other card with an issue like this, but any information you provide would be helpful.

Two questions for you- (if you can indulge) 1) For the Indicator, does it say "Y" or "CCL"? 2) Is there wording in red on the bottom of the card regarding concealed weapons?

This situation never should have been expected. Anticipated, maybe, but it should not have been expected. The chain of events and logic you layout seem reasonable to justify what happened. But the issuance of the card with a conflicting Indicator and verbiage as to conceal carry is not permitted is, probably, in the favorite term of the Director of the ISP, "unacceptable". In my opinion, the ISP could have prevented this issue by issuing the FOID in the old format, with an expirations date (until it got the new new card stock). Also, this shows that the ISP has little to no controls over it processes. The ISP was very quick to issue press releases with the new card and the new format with out the the conflicting language. Yet it failed in the final delivery. Someone in the ISP should have caught this. If the ISP uses a "fulfillment" or card printing vendor, the vendor should have been notified of the specific changes. Either way, someone should have caught the issue ISP or potential vendor. Going further upstream, the ISP might not be the only ones culpable. The General Legislature passed the bill that consolidated the FOID/CCL in late June under the premise that the bill was needed urgently to fix the backlog. Also, the bill was passed as the session was winding down, in haste, as legislators using a video conference "exception" or were rushing to get home. The governor waited over one month (between his vacation schedule and probably waiting for a photo opportunity) to sign the bill. All of these factors put the recourse/ technology/ project management strapped ISP in a precarious situation to make (and hopefully test) major changes to systems/ processes of an organization that received an adverse (rare) operational audit opinion from an external auditor. Now, would this impact an individual? in reality, I am not sure. Maybe local law enforcement (Illinois) would use LEADS and know what to expect (and ignore the language on the bottom of the card) . As for other states that might accept the Illinois CCL, I do not know. Maybe the out of state agency would have electronic access to the CCL information. Or maybe, just maybe, the out of state law enforcement agent would see the wording and detain an individual further to research the situation. I am really hoping that the ISP holds up to its' directors pledge to make things easier on the good guys. Maybe we are not there yet. Or maybe law abiding "cardholders" are not really the good guys. (Makes you think) So anticipated- yes. But as a stakeholder and a tax payor, this type of outcome should never be expected. The ISP should get the 5 "P" award- Piss Poor Prior Proper Planning. Or better yet- 8 Ps- Piss Poor Prior Proper Planning Produces Poor Performance

Does your wife's combined card, which has an indicator of "CCL", have the wording (on the front bottom portion of the combined card) of: This does not authorize the carrying of a concealed weapon." That correlation I am trying to make here is that on some (or many) of the newly issued "combined" FOID/CCL "cards" that if: Indicator = "Y" then wording on the front (bottom) of the card says: "This does not authorize the carrying of a concealed weapon." -or- Indicator = "CCL" then wording on the front (bottom) of the card says: "This does not authorize the carrying of a concealed weapon." IS NOT INCLUDED ON THE FRONT OF THE CARD. I am just looking to see if there was a "printing" (or use of incorrect materials) when the cards were produced. This would be somewhat consistent with the issue that ISP had last year. Last year, from January to April the ISP admitted that about 1% of the cards issued January to April had incorrect pictures on the card (https://abc7chicago.com/foid-card-illinois-application-)renewal/10768765/) As a side note, over 176,000 FOID cards, (new and renewal) were issued from January to April, 2021.

I think that the indicator "Y" is supposed to mean that you are a CCL "cardholder". It look like our cards were printed on the same day. One question for you- On the bottom of the front of your card is there wording that states: "Caution: This card does not permit bearer to UNLAWFULLY carry or use firearms. This does not authorize the carrying of a concealed weapon." I think that if does say this, the indicator would be contradictory to the disclaimer on the bottom.

And "Universal Background Check" is a codeword (phrase) for "gun registry". So the slippery slope keeps on getting more slippery (and steeper).