Post on 05-Jun-2020
transcript
www.bib.com | 877-439-3900
| 2
OVERVIEW• Screening Volunteers Has Its Challenges
• Trends Point to More Volunteer Screening
• Defining Who Is a Volunteer
• Setting Standards for Pass/Fail
• Who Will Review the Results?
• Managing Notifications
• Establishing an Effective Appeals Process
• Screening Annually for Maximum Protection
• Using Visible Credentials that Expire Each Year
• Implementing a Self-Funded Volunteer Screening Program
• Best Practices Checklist
Balancing tight budgets and concerned parents against the need to protect students.
| 3
www.bib.com | 877-439-3900
Screening VolunteerS HaS itS cHallengeSWhile screening teachers and staff has become
standard practice, screening volunteers is also fast
becoming a necessity. Failing to do so puts students
and school staff at risk and leaves school systems
and their administrators open to liability.
The reality is that the risks of not screening
individuals have quickly outweighed the reasons
for avoiding such screenings. The news has been
littered with recent reports of negligent hiring
lawsuits, violent workplace incidents, and child
predators who have found ways to get closer to
children. Today, most school administrators take
their role of protecting the school workplace and the
students they serve as a top priority.
Nevertheless, school systems are complex
environments, and volunteers bring unique issues
with them that administrators must handle. For
example, the sheer number of volunteers can make
screening and tracking them a challenge from a
cost and manpower perspective. Often, school
systems balance complex and demanding budgets,
and the cost of screening all volunteers is a difficult
decision for administrators to make. They may be
forced to reduce the number of screenings to only
certain types of volunteers, or they may conduct less
thorough screenings in order to reduce per-screen
costs.
After the background screen has been conducted,
administrators are still faced with keeping track
of who was screened and what access each person
is allowed within the school system. Imagine
hundreds, if not thousands of volunteers – some
screened and some not – who are moving in and out
of a decentralized workplace environment.
Of course, denying a parent the opportunity to
volunteer can cause conflicts for administrators and
even elicit lawsuits. Parent advocacy groups often
support screening but find it difficult to cope with
the reality that someone they know may be screened
out of volunteering.
There is a lot to think about when screening
volunteers, and the purpose of this paper is to help
administrators think through the complexities
and craft a smart, well-conceived program that
maximizes screening benefits while managing the
costs of doing so.
trendS Point to More Volunteer ScreeningDespite the funding and administrative challenges,
school boards and city councils are now pushing
for more screening, and the progressive school
administrators are often the ones advocating a
broader background screening process as a part
of their school safety programs. In fact, some state
governments are now mandating background
checks as policy.
As more and more school systems announce that they
plan to begin or expand their volunteer screening
programs, it is clear that volunteer screening will
continue to grow. Administrators who are considering
this action, should be prepared for pressure and
numerous questions about their system.
| 4
www.bib.com | 877-439-3900
deciding WHo iS a VolunteerOne of the most critical aspects of developing an
effective volunteer screening program is defining
the volunteer. The real distinction that must be
made is that of visitor vs. volunteer. Most parents
would believe they have a right to visit their children
while in school. This would include:
• Observing their children in class periodically
• Having lunch with their children,
• Attending classroom and school events
These are all occasions that could be classified
as “visitor” events, and complete background
screening should not be required in most of these
cases. When a parent wants to do more than visit
a child, by offering to help the school in some way,
that parent should then be considered a volunteer.
Examples include:
• A room parent who comes to class weekly to help
the teacher
• A lunchroom monitor
• A volunteer reader
• Someone who works in the library periodically
• A chaperone for a school field trip
• A “coach” who comes after school to work with the
children
Dr. Norman Ridder, Superintendant of Springfield,
MO public school says of volunteers, “If their
presence would be consistent enough that others
would become comfortable with them being in the
school regularly then they should be considered a
volunteer.”
Best Practice Guideline
Create a detailed list of “Visitor” versus
“Volunteer” guidelines and ensure it is
communicated to staff, educators and parents.
This list determines who must be screened.
Setting StandardS for PaSS/fail
What does an administrator do when someone
does not pass the background screening process?
A parent in this situation will not be happy about
the result, and each “failure to pass” outcome will
create conflict that, in turn, will create more work
for the school staff.
There are things that administrators can do to make
this process much easier to manage. First, develop
a clear and concise policy guideline as to what past
offenses will prevent a potential volunteer from
“passing” the background screen. This should be
a detailed document of offenses, and we suggest
working with the school systems council and a
professional background screening company to
develop these guidelines.
Next, communicate the guidelines to the potential
volunteer prior to the background screen. Sharing this
information in advance will act as a screen in itself.
For example, once the screening process is in place
and communicated up front, potential volunteers
with serious background issues will then elect not to
volunteer because they will be aware that they may
not qualify.
| 5
www.bib.com | 877-439-3900
Best Practice Guideline
Develop a clear and concise policy guideline as
to what past offenses will prevent a potential
volunteer from passing the background screen.
Communicate this to the volunteer candidate
prior to the background screen application.
WHo Will reVieW tHe reSultS?Another important aspect of a successful volunteer
screening system is the review of the background
screening results. The decision that must be made
is whether or not to have school system staff
review the final reports and make the decisions as
to which volunteers passed or whether to have the
background screening firm review the screens and
provide the results of its review to the school.
The screening firm may charge an additional fee
for this service, so each administrator must weigh
the costs of school staff review against the cost of
the screening firm’s review. Of course, another
consideration is whether school staff has the proper
training and expertise to make policy decisions
based on the background reports.
Managing notificationSNotifying someone that they will not be allowed to
volunteer based on their background is an important
but uncomfortable part of the process. Managing
this process effectively is the best way to avoid
political fallout over screening decisions.
Since most school systems use an outside background
screening firm to conduct their background screens,
we recommend the following process:
Approval Notification – A letter or email is sent
to volunteers letting them know that they have
passed the background screen and are approved to
volunteer within the school system.
OR
Pre-Adverse Letter Mailed to the Volunteer with Notice of a Potential Policy Decision – A
“Pre-Adverse Letter” is mailed to volunteers who did
not pass the screen, along with a copy of the report
and a copy of Consumer Rights. The volunteer is
provided an opportunity to contact the background
screening company directly within 10 days to dispute
the report prior to a final decision being made.
Dispute Resolution – If the volunteer disputes
the reported information, and the dispute is valid,
the background screening company will update the
report.
Final Adverse Decision Letter – If no successful
dispute has occurred, a letter is mailed to the
volunteer applicant after the 10-day waiting period,
advising that the applicant has not met the policy
guidelines and may contact the school system for a
personal appeals process.
This notification system allows the school system
to remove itself from any issues related to the
background report itself and allows the screening
firm to handle the applicant’s concerns prior to the
time of the final decision.
eStabliSHing an effectiVe aPPealS ProceSSWhen a final decision has been made that a volunteer
applicant has not passed the background screen, it is
important to have an appeals process in place that
provides individuals the opportunity to demonstrate
| 6
www.bib.com | 877-439-3900
a potential special circumstance. This process
should be taken seriously and should include the
input of people who are experienced in conducting
background screenings and evaluating criminal
offenses. Dr. Ridder says he personally gets involved
with appeals, “It’s an important part of the process
and I want to know what’s going on.”
The process should take into account real life
situations and whether an individual has shown that
he or she has “changed” or has current circumstances
that would make passing the applicant plausible.
In other words, the appeals process needs to be
balanced between consistant application and the
flexibility to allow for common sense decisions that
are specific to each circumstance.
Screening annually for MaxiMuM ProtectionSchools should require that all approved volunteers
notify the school system if they are charged during
the course of the school year with an offense that
would violate the background screening policy and
volunteer screening should be an annual occurrence.
Volunteers pose some of the greatest risks to school
systems because administrators often have little
control over them, and in many cases, long-term
relationships are not established.
Waiting for two years between background checks
equals 720 days when someone could commit a
crime. Dr. Ridder says, “Bad people have a way of
finding ways near children; schools can be magnets.”
Frequent Monitoring When Possible
State criminal databases vary, and some may require
a visit to a courthouse to find a record. Other states
have more robust databases that can be accessed
regularly, while still other database searches offer
the opportunity to monitor volunteers on a frequent
basis. Administrators need to know immediately if
someone who has been charged with a crime is in
their school. Therefore, administrators should speak
with the school’s background screening firm to find
out if it is possible to monitor the school’s screened
volunteer population regularly.
uSing ViSible credentialS tHat exPire eacH yearScreening volunteers has often been anything but
an exact process. So, hundreds, maybe thousands,
of volunteers come in and out of schools every day,
and the complexities of keeping up with them are
overwhelming. Often, school office staff are required
to know who is approved for after-school programs,
field trips, and other events. It’s simply inefficient for
staff to look someone up to see if they have passed
the background screen.
We believe that the most effective tool is a visual
credential that volunteers are required to carry
with them while working within the school system.
This credential should be offered to all volunteers
containing their name and expiration date. The
credentials should expire at the end of the school
year and should be visually changed each year.
Background screening firms may be able to manage
the issuing of credentials.
| 7
www.bib.com | 877-439-3900
iMPleMenting a Self-funded Volunteer Screening PrograMAdministrators are faced with the tremendous
struggle of managing complex demands and
budget constraints. Implementing a robust and
effective volunteer screening program can be costly,
especially for school systems with thousands of
volunteers in their schools. Administrators often
find themselves questioning the costs associated
with a robust background screen on an expanded
volunteer population. Instead of trying to figure out
ways to cut the scope of such programs, which could
put children at risk, we recommend implementing a
self-funded program.
In a self-funded program, the cost of the volunteer
screening program is outsourced to the volunteers
themselves by asking them to pay for their own
screen when they submit their application. This is
a reasonable request, and when positioned against
the alternative of reducing the effectiveness of
the screening program, it is often seen as a safer
alternative.
Of course, some may resist a self-funded program,
suggesting that the program’s expense will deter
some individuals from volunteering. Dr. Ridder
warns that, “I have done it both ways and self funded
may sound appealing, but it has its challenges as
well. It has to be well thought out.”
Therefore, we suggest using the school’s budget to
offer financial assistance to potential volunteers
who cannot afford the background screen. In this
way, administrators can improve the safety of
their schools while also effectively managing their
budget.
| 8
www.bib.com | 877-439-3900
Best Practices Checklist□ Create a detailed list of “Visitor” versus “Volunteer” guidelines, and ensure it is communicated to staff,
educators, and parents. This list determines who must be screened.
□ Develop a clear and concise policy guideline as to what past offenses will prevent a potential volunteer from
passing the background screen. Communicate this to the potential volunteer prior to the background screen
application.
□ Set up a notification system that allows the background screening firm to handle printing and mailing of the
notification letters and the initial disputes.
□ Establish a clear appeals process and build in some flexibility to make common sense decisions.
□ Screen annually for maximum protection.
□ Issue visible credentials that expire every year. Make access to the school the responsibility of the volunteer
to have their credentials properly displayed at all times.
□ Consider a self-funded volunteer screening program before cutting the scope or frequency of screening.
| 9
www.bib.com | 877-439-3900
dr. norMan ridder Dr. Norman Ridder became Springfield Public Schools’ 13th superintendent on
July 1, 2005. Dr. Ridder has 38 years of professional education experience. He’s
been a teacher, coach, principal and superintendent. In Springfield, Dr. Ridder
has quickly established himself as a person very much into values and a strong
advocate of life-long learning.
Thank you to Dr. Norman Ridder for contributing his insights and expertise to the Best
Practices for Screening School Volunteers, he was instrumental in helping Background
Investigation Bureau form its volunteer screening position.Dr. Norman Ridder, Contributor
about background inVeStigation bureau Background Investigation Bureau, Inc. (BIB) supplies employment screening services to qualified businesses
and schools systems seeking workplace improvements through back ground verifications and customized hiring
solutions.
Founded in 1995, BIB combines fast, accurate reporting with exceptional cus tomer service and industry leading
technology, helping our clients accelerate their hiring processes, reduce costs and remain FCRA compliant.
BIB has an exceptional reputation servicing the educational industry including public and private schools and
universities across the country. BIB serves one (1) out of every three (3) school systems in its home state and has
used the experience of servicing these school systems to grow its educational business nationwide. BIB can work
closely with school systems to improve their screening process and reduce their costs. School system clients use
BIB to run background screens on teachers, substitutes, bus drivers, staff and volunteers.
To learn more about BIB’s educational industry expertise and services please contact our office at 877-439-3900.