NIBRS 2025 for Texas law enforcement.

Prepare now. Do not switch production merely because NIBRS Technical Specification v2025 exists. Follow Texas DPS’s implementation schedule.

As of September 17, 2026, Texas DPS has not announced a production effective date for v2025 and has not listed v2025 among the specification versions it currently accepts. On September 16, 2026, the Texas Incident Based Reporting Team notified agencies and vendors through the UCR/NIBRS Listserv that it expects to deploy v2025 within the next few months and will send another Listserv notification when that Texas deployment occurs.

Prepare the software and the agency. Do not change production submissions until Texas DPS directs the transition.

This guide covers what is changing, what Texas has announced, and what an agency should do now without switching too early. Monthly NIBRS operations belong in the separate reporting guide.

For the ordinary Texas NIBRS workflow—from the incident through monthly reconciliation—read NIBRS Reporting for Texas Police Departments.

Texas NIBRS 2025 status at a glance

Status reviewed September 17, 2026. Federal 2025 documents are published. What Texas accepts today is still the listing on the DPS NIBRS Technical Documentation page. The September 16, 2026 Listserv announcement describes the planned deployment; it does not replace that page.

A published 2025 specification is not a Texas production change

Four different facts get collapsed into “we’re on NIBRS 2025.” Keep them separate.

• Publication: the FBI has released the 2025.0 NIBRS Technical Specification (document date 06/16/2025), 2025.0 NIBRS User Manual (document date 06/23/2025), 2025.0 NIBRS XML Developer’s Guide, and the current 2025.0.1 NIBRS XML IEPD.
• Texas implementation: DPS decides when it will receive v2025, which values it will accept at first, and what Texas-specific reporting still travels with the submission.
• Vendor implementation: the RMS has to produce a Texas-compatible file, including Texas-centric reporting and any Texas exception to the federal specification.
• Agency production use: the agency should not submit v2025 until DPS accepts it and the agency’s tested configuration is in production.

A specification existing does not mean every state or agency immediately submits under it.

Texas still adds its own reporting layer

Texas DPS maintains Texas-specific reporting in addition to national NIBRS, including Family Violence, Drug Seizures, and Sexual Assault. On September 16, 2026, DPS announced that the Texas-Centric Technical Specifications were not affected by the 2025 NIBRS version and that TX v2025 will match TX v2023 as the current guideline. As of September 17, 2026, the published Texas-centric specification on the DPS Technical Documentation page remains 2023 (last revision listed 07/10/2026).

What actually changes in v2025

The FBI 2025.0 Technical Specification is the source for the federal changes below. Texas DPS announced on September 16, 2026 that, except for the Data Element 7 Unfounded value, the other specification updates will be in effect when Texas deploys v2025. Confirm each item against current Texas DPS guidance before treating it as a Texas production requirement.

Data Element 7 and the new Unfounded value

The FBI 2025.0 Technical Specification and User Manual update Data Element 7 from Offense Attempted/Completed to Offense Attempted/Completed/Unfounded. The valid values are A = Attempted, C = Completed, and U = Unfounded. The FBI 2025 specification uses Data Element 7 to indicate whether each offense in the incident was attempted, completed, or unfounded. Agencies should report U = Unfounded when a previously reported offense was determined not to be a crime.

Texas DPS announced on September 16, 2026 that the Unfounded (U) value for Data Element 7 will not be implemented initially while DPS waits for clearer direction concerning its effect on NIBRS reporting. DPS said agencies will be notified if or when this changes.

Other verified federal changes

These are the 2025 changes visible enough to plan around. If a change exists only in schema, file layout, or edit-message text, the agency usually does not need to learn it line by line. The vendor does.

• New or changed values: Data Element 35 adds CO = Cohabitant (non-intimate relationship), FP = Victim was Foster Parent, and FC = Victim was Foster Child. Data Element 8 adds R = Drone/Unmanned aircraft system. Data Element 33 adds G = Gunshot Wound.
• Changed allowable values: Data Element 13 expands 90 = Other for Type Weapon/Force Involved to include deadly, dangerous, or communicable diseases.
• Offense language: the specification and User Manual replace “Fondling” with “Criminal Sexual Contact.”
• XML / schema: submissions move to the 2025 document set, including the 2025.0.1 NIBRS XML IEPD. DPS announced agencies may use a 2023 or 2025 header for XML purposes.
• Validation: multiple federal edits become warnings, become inactive, or receive new messages. Those edits matter to the reporting engine more than to the officer writing the original report.

Separate agency work from vendor work

Some v2025 changes are RMS engineering. Others can affect officer entry, supervisor review, records/UCR workflow, offense mapping, validation, training, local procedure, or certification. Do not retrain officers for a schema or edit-message change. Do not assume a vendor software update completes the agency’s transition.

Treat offense mappings as current work, not history

If a label or mapping changes—Criminal Sexual Contact is the clearest v2025 example—ask who updates the current catalog used for new records, how that change reaches production, and how historical offense information is preserved. Do not rewrite historical incidents merely because current mappings or specifications change.

Texas DPS separately maintains the Texas UCR Offense Code Table used to map state offenses to reporting classifications. That catalog is not itself the NIBRS v2025 specification, but agencies should review current mappings while preparing for the transition.

For how historical records should be preserved when codes or systems change, read the Public Safety Data Conversion Guide.

Explain validation changes by where they originate

The federal 2025 specification is where most edit changes originate: some errors become warnings, some become inactive, and some messages are rewritten. Texas has not published a line-by-line Texas edit list for v2025 beyond the September 16, 2026 statement that other specification updates will be in effect at deployment and that Unfounded will not be implemented initially. The RMS should catch Texas-applicable problems before submission. Staff behavior changes only where a new value, label, or review step actually appears. A useful test shows the changed validation on a representative Texas incident.

What the RMS vendor should be doing

Ask for a Texas-specific v2025 plan, not a generic statement that the product “supports NIBRS 2025.” The useful answers name the product version, which federal changes are implemented, how the Data Element 7 exception is handled, whether Texas-centric reporting remains intact, how existing agency configuration will be updated, whether officer or records workflows will change, and what testing happens before production.

Ask which specification the software actually produces for Texas—not whether the brochure says it supports NIBRS.

A software version number is not proof. Test the path from the operational record through NIBRS and Texas-mandated data to a generated submission, validation, and DPS testing or acceptance as applicable.

What the agency should be doing now

Use the advance notice. Do not use it as a reason to change this month’s production file. DPS has not published the following as a mandated order of operations.

KNOW
Current Texas specification + vendor/product
       ↓
ASK
Vendor Texas v2025 plan
       ↓
INVENTORY
Workflow, mapping, and technical changes
       ↓
TEST
Validation / certification as applicable
       ↓
TRAIN
Only where workflows actually change
       ↓
VERIFY
Certification expectations + first-month plan
       ↓
TRANSITION
After DPS production direction

• Know which NIBRS and Texas-mandated specification versions the agency submits today, and which vendor/product/version produces them.
• Designate someone to monitor DPS UCR/NIBRS Listserv updates and the Technical Documentation page.
• Ask the vendor for its Texas v2025 implementation plan and release timing.
• Inventory which changes affect officer entry, supervisor/records review, or mappings—and which are technical only.
• Prepare a test environment or test-file process where appropriate.
• Update training only where workflows actually change.
• Confirm with DPS whether certification or recertification applies to this agency’s circumstances.
• Wait for DPS production direction before switching submissions.

For monthly close, error queues, and ordinary certification mechanics, read the Texas NIBRS Reporting Guide.

Certification only if the agency’s circumstances require it

As of September 17, 2026, the Texas DPS UCR overview lists NIBRS Certification Procedures 2025. Those current procedures cover agencies transitioning to NIBRS, new UCR agencies, and agencies re-certifying because of a change in vendor and/or vendor product. The September 16, 2026 Listserv announcement did not itself state that every already-certified agency must re-certify solely because Texas is moving to v2025.

Whether additional testing, certification, or recertification applies depends on the agency’s circumstances—especially a vendor change, a product change, a submission-format change, or specific DPS direction for the version transition. Confirm with current Texas NIBRS Certification Procedures and the Texas Incident Based Reporting Team. Do not treat a specification announcement as a silent recertification order, and do not skip testing that DPS or the vendor says is required.

Watch the first production submission

The transition is not finished because a software update installed. After DPS deploys v2025, review acceptance, errors, warnings, Texas-specific validation, unexpected changes in record counts, offense mapping, and applicable data completeness. If something looks different from a normal month, find out whether the difference is a real operational change or a mapping or validation change introduced by the new specification.

What not to do

• Do not switch production because the FBI published a specification.
• Do not assume generic vendor “v2025 support” means Texas readiness.
• Do not retrain the whole agency before identifying actual workflow changes.
• Do not rewrite historical records simply to match new codes or specifications.
• Do not wait until DPS’s production date to ask the vendor what its plan is.

Texas NIBRS 2025 Readiness Checklist

A practical preparation checklist for chiefs, records personnel, NIBRS coordinators, RMS administrators, and vendors. It organizes the transition. It does not determine NIBRS compliance or certification.

Know the current state

• We know which NIBRS and Texas-mandated specification versions we submit today
• We have identified the current Texas DPS transition status
• Someone is subscribed to or monitoring DPS UCR/NIBRS communications
• We know which vendor, product, and version currently produce our submissions
• We know our current NIBRS certification/reporting status

Ask and inventory

• Our RMS vendor has provided a Texas-specific v2025 implementation plan
• We know which product release contains required changes
• We know which changes affect officer entry
• We know which changes affect supervisor or records workflow
• We know which changes are technical only
• Offense/code mappings have been reviewed where necessary
• We know how the vendor will handle the Texas Data Element 7 Unfounded exception
• Texas-specific Segment 8/9 reporting remains supported

Test, train, and wait

• Test submissions or validation are planned where applicable
• Representative test records include multiple offense types, relationships, property, arrests, and applicable Texas-specific scenarios
• Training changes have been identified only where workflows actually change
• Certification or recertification expectations have been confirmed with current DPS procedures
• We have not changed production before DPS direction

When Texas deploys v2025

• Confirm the official DPS deployment notice
• Confirm v2025 appears in current Texas technical guidance as applicable
• Confirm the RMS production version and agency configuration
• Confirm users know about applicable workflow changes
• Generate the first production submission and review DPS acceptance, errors, and warnings
• Correct the operational records where applicable and resubmit as necessary
• Document the successful transition

Watch Data Element 7

• Confirm current DPS guidance before enabling the value
• Confirm how the RMS vendor handles the Texas exception
• Do not assume federal support means Texas acceptance
• Recheck this item when DPS publishes future guidance

Questions to ask the RMS vendor about Texas v2025

Prefer “Show us” over “Are you NIBRS 2025 compliant?”

1. Show us your Texas v2025 implementation plan.
2. Which product version contains the changes?
3. Which v2025 requirements are complete, and which remain pending?
4. Which items depend on further DPS guidance?
5. Show us how you will handle the Texas Data Element 7 Unfounded exception.
6. Show us any changed officer or records workflows.
7. Show us changed validation on a representative Texas incident.
8. Show us changed Texas offense mappings where applicable.
9. Will Texas-centric Segment 8/9 reporting remain intact?
10. How will existing customers receive the update, and what agency action is required?
11. What testing will occur before production?
12. What certification or recertification work do you expect for our agency?

NIBRS 2025 Change Quick Reference

Only verified, material changes appear here. Texas implementation language is limited to what DPS has announced. Where Texas has not specifically addressed a federal change, the table says so rather than guessing.

The best time to prepare is before Texas turns it on

Texas has given agencies and vendors advance notice. Use it to understand the changes, verify vendor readiness, test, and train where workflows actually change—before the first production submission under the new specification.

A specification transition should be a planned reporting change—not a month-end surprise.