The evidence behind the score.

The Bushway Opportunity Score is validated for applicants aged 18 to 60, and for criminal history within a 10-year window whose most recent conviction is at least one year old. An applicant outside the validated age range can still be entered, and the case is recorded in full — but no score is generated, and the case does not count against your assessment allowance. This is a limit of the model, not a judgment about the applicant, and no inference should be drawn from the absence of a score. Evaluate the applicant through your separate individualized assessment process.

The Bushway Opportunity Score is built to be used only once at least a year has passed since a person’s most recent conviction. When the most recent conviction on a record is less than one year old, Context records the case in full but does not produce a score, and the case does not count against your case allowance. This is a deliberate limit set by the researchers who built the model: they found it predicts less accurately in the first year after a conviction, so it provides scores starting one year out. It is not a judgment about the applicant, and no inference should be drawn from the absence of a score. Before you submit, the review screen tells you the date from which the same record can be scored if there is no new conviction. Until then, evaluate the applicant through your separate individualized assessment process.

The Bushway Opportunity Score estimates modeled risk of reconviction within the next year, based on validated criminological research. A higher score means the record shows more of what research links to lower modeled risk. The score is one input into an individualized assessment — it does not make a hiring decision.

State and local laws limit how far back criminal history can reach in a hiring decision. Most state rules limit what a screening company may report; a few (Hawaii and Philadelphia) limit what an employer may consider. When a conviction falls outside the applicable window, Context sets it aside and does not score it, so the score reflects only what the applicable rule allows. The case record names the rule, its citation, and which kind of limit it is.

When all convictions fall outside the applicable lookback window, the scoring model returns null — meaning there are no in-scope convictions to score. The result screen explains this clearly. The case is fully documented in your case history, and it is not charged.

Every word on a case record comes from a versioned, immutable row in Bushway Works Context — not from the scoring model. The model returns the score and the facts about how it was produced; Context owns the language. Each case record prints the case record version it was served under, so it is always possible to establish exactly which wording a given record carried, and a published version is never edited afterwards. The scoring model’s own commentary is not used.

Bushway Works does not publish, recommend, or endorse any score threshold, and no minimum is built into the product. How your organization uses the score within its own process is your decision, and responsibility for that process — including applicable law — stays with you. What the case record itself says is that the score should not be the only reason to hire or not hire someone, and should not be used as an automatic way to rule someone out.

Twenty-four months from the generated date, and the limit is printed on the record. The facts behind a score keep moving: time since the most recent conviction keeps accruing, convictions pass out of the applicable lookback window and stop counting, and the underlying record may itself have changed. After 24 months, score the case again rather than relying on the earlier record.

Yes, and the case record shows how. Three things move on their own: age, time since the most recent conviction, and — as convictions pass out of the applicable lookback window — how much of the record the model still sees. With no new conviction all three move toward a higher score; a new conviction moves it the other way. The Context Journey section on the case record projects that same record forward using the same lookback and derivation the live score uses, and stops at the point where the record would no longer be scoreable.

For fully remote employees working from home in a different state, the law of the employee's home state governs. For hybrid employees who regularly work from a physical office, that office location's state governs — even on days worked from home. When multiple jurisdictions apply, Bushway Works Context always uses the most restrictive lookback rule.

13 jurisdictions have lookback windows shorter than the Bushway Works 10-year baseline: CA, CO, HI, KS, MD, MA, MT, NH, NM, NY, TX, WA, and Philadelphia (PA). Hawaii and Philadelphia limit what an employer may consider; the others limit what a screening company may report. Several apply only below a salary threshold or differ by conviction type. Bushway Works Context applies these automatically and records the rule and its citation on the case record.

Six states (KS, MD, NH, NY, TX, WA) apply their lookback limit only to positions paying under a salary threshold. For example, Texas limits reporting to 7 years for positions under $75,000 a year. When you select the jurisdiction during Intake, any salary exemption is shown with its citation; if you enter the position's salary and it meets the threshold, an older conviction may be scored, though never beyond the 10-year baseline.

If you use AI extraction, the report text is sent to Bushway Works Context and forwarded to Anthropic's API to extract the 8 attributes. It is used for that one request and is never stored by Bushway Works — not in our database, not in our logs. If you enter the case manually, the report never leaves your machine at all. Anthropic deletes API data within 7 days and never uses it for AI training under the standard API agreement. Zero Data Retention (ZDR) is available for organizations requiring a contractual guarantee of immediate deletion — enable it in Admin → Settings.

Context stores: the 8 derived attributes, the score, the score ID, your case reference, the jurisdiction, lookback flag decisions, the reviewer's attestation, and the timestamp. It does NOT store the applicant's name, date of birth, SSN, or the raw background report. The case record is pseudonymous: only you can link it back to a person, using your own reference. The 8 attributes are what is derived and stored; the model itself scores on a subset of them — the exact list is printed on every case record.

It depends on how you enter the case. With MANUAL ENTRY, the report never leaves your machine at all — you read it and type the attributes. With AI EXTRACTION, the report text is transmitted to Bushway Works Context and forwarded to Anthropic's API to extract the 8 attributes. It is used for that single request and is never stored — not in our database, not in our logs. Only the extracted attributes are saved with the case. If your organization requires that report text never be processed by a third party, use manual entry.

It is your own identifier for the case — a requisition number or candidate ID from your systems. It IS transmitted and stored, because it is how you find the case again in Case history. It cannot be changed once the case is submitted. Who can see it depends on the Case history setting for your organization: all reviewers can see every case, only administrators can, or each reviewer sees their own cases while administrators see all. The last is the default. It should never be the applicant's name: Bushway Works Context never retains applicant identity — no name, date of birth, or SSN — and your reference is the only thread connecting a case record back to a person.

Case records are kept for as long as your account exists — there is no deletion date. You can request a full CSV export at any time from Admin → Export & Retention. If you cancel your subscription, you keep read access to Case history, reports, and case report downloads — only new scoring stops. We will also prepare a full export of everything we hold. An adverse-action question can surface long after a hiring decision; your records need to be there when it does.

Six, and each does one job. CLOUDFLARE — hosting and the database where case records live. STRIPE — payments and subscription billing. WORKOS — sign-in and identity. RESEND — outbound email. ANTHROPIC — AI extraction only, and only if you use it: the report text is sent for that single request, is never stored by Bushway Works, and is deleted by Anthropic within 7 days under the standard API agreement. If you enter cases manually, nothing goes to Anthropic at all. PUSHOVER — operational alerts to Bushway Works staff when a business is waiting for verification or a new account signs up; it receives the company name, domain and plan, and no case data, applicant data or scores. The AI-extraction path is the only one that ever carries report text. Every other sub-processor sees account and billing information, never case or applicant data — and Context itself never receives the applicant’s name, date of birth or SSN, so there is no identity for it to pass on.

One assessment = one scored case where the API returns a numeric score (10–28). Cases with no score — because every conviction is outside the lookback window, because the record falls outside the validated 10-year window, or because the applicant is outside the validated age range — are recorded in full for your audit trail and are not charged at all. If no score is produced, you are not billed. Outage cases are never charged and your draft is saved for resubmission.

Overage cases are charged at your plan rate (Context: $10 each, Context Professional: $7.50 each). Overages are added as line items on your monthly Stripe invoice. You can view current usage in Admin → Billing. There are no hard caps — you will not be blocked from scoring.

EEOC guidance requires employers to consider the nature of the offense, how long ago it occurred, its relevance to the specific job, and evidence of rehabilitation — not just the existence of a conviction. The Bushway Opportunity Score supports this process but never replaces it. A final hiring decision must always be made by a qualified human reviewer.

No. Context is a decision-support tool, not a Consumer Reporting Agency (CRA) under the FCRA. It does not generate or certify background reports; it helps you interpret a report obtained from a licensed CRA. The Bushway Opportunity Score is intended for internal decision support. It is not part of the consumer report, and it carries none of the dispute or accuracy obligations that attach to one. Adverse-action requirements apply to the background report from your CRA, not to this score — follow your CRA’s process and applicable law for those.

If you intend to take adverse action based on background check results, FCRA requires: (1) pre-adverse action notice with a copy of the report, (2) a waiting period (typically 5 business days), and (3) final adverse action notice if you proceed. Bushway Works Context provides a reference guide in the result screen. Always consult legal counsel for your specific situation.

No. A case record is produced for an employment decision by the organization that ran it, and the record says so. It is not prepared for, and should not be used in, decisions about housing, credit, insurance, licensing, or any other purpose.