Criminal Record Checks
 

I was recently in a discussion with a fellow member who also coaches. And he asked me why officials do not have criminal record checks as part of the membership and his coaching association requires it. I stated our association has made the choice not to do them, at this point at least.

What are some of your opinions to having officials getting criminal record checks?

Coaches spend anywhere from 10 to 20 (or more) hours with the same kids each week; often times in private settings.

Officials spend only the amount of game time we have with kids each week (maybe, at most, 10 hours). They're different kids each night, and never in a private setting of any type. Nothing we do on the court can't be taped by a parent.

My understanding of criminal checks is they are a way of trying to prevent any inappropriate activity between the players and their adult coaches.

I know we are subjected to some background checks by our state. But as Snaqs says, our interaction is very limited. I would think giving background checks of fans would make more sense considering that people that attend games will likely see the kids more than we ever will.

Peace

I've had coaches say some of my calls were criminal, but they never asked for a background check. :rolleyes:

Connecticut Local Board Application ...
 

This is on our Connecticut local board's application. I don't know what the membership committee does if the answer is yes???

"Have you ever been convicted of a crime? If yes, please
explain."

State of Florida requires any individual who works on a high school campus to submit to a fingerprint and background check every five years. The state legislature passed the Jessica Lunsford act several years ago and all sports officials as well as any other type of subcontractor or contractor who enters school grounds must submit as a condition of their hiring.

It is expensive to say the least...around $65 per individual. Initially the state and local school boards absorbed the cost for officials. Now, a couple years in, we're on our own. Kind of a sign of the times we live and work in.

Jessica Lunsford was a 9 year old was was raped and murdered by a convicted sex offender in Feb 2005. Her assailant lived about 100 yards from her home. The Jessica Lunsford act also requires much closer tracking of sex offenders in Florida, which seem to be abundant here. Her murderer awaits execution on Florida's death row.

Are you sure the stripes on your shirt are vertical?

http://members.tripod.com/~JBarton/hamburglar.jpg

If you haven't done anything wrong, then there shouldn't be anything to worry about. That being said, Background Checks will begin in Texas starting the 08-09 school year, and at a cost or $65-85 to each official. I know a lot of officials who NET $750-800 per year calling games and have told me in no uncertain terms, that if they are required to submit to a criminal background check just to call some JH, JV, or the occassional Var. game that they will be hanging up their stripes. Whether or not they do . . . well, that is yet to be seen. I can't say I blame them.

MY opinion is that I am NEVER in contact with any athlete in a private setting . . . only on the floor, and yet I am to be treated with the same "caution" as a coach or teacher who is regularly in a private and unsupervised setting with students/athletes. Yet, in many states they are not required to go through a Criminal Background Check. I have a hard time accepting that scenario. But, that's just me. (NOTE: Criminal Background Checks for ALL education professionals in Texas (teachers, aides, etc.) were instituted 1-2 years ago, and will be in effect for ALL district employees beginning next year. YEAH!!!)

They should bring Old Sparky out of retirement.

I'd prefer to see him drawn and quarted with a rusty, dull chainsaw. But we could strap the pieces into old sparky and have a go with it.

I was surprised when I began officiating volleyball about three years ago, then basketball last year and softball this year that I have not been asked/required to undergo a criminal background check. Rationalizing that sports officials are somehow less of a threat because they (are supposed to) only have contact with the children on the court, is just not a reasonable excuse for not having them undergo some sort of background check. Officiating could easily provide the opportunity for future access to the child/teen.

With that being said, the truth of the matter is, even though we need to be concerned about those people with a history, we need to be even more concerned about those who have yet to be caught.

When the Jessica law first came into effect, the b/g check was for EACH county in FLA the official worked.

IL, yes, included in license fee. WI, none.

How so? I'm not rationalizing it. I'm thinking of the cost against the risk. The cost is high, especially since most of the time the officials would have to foot the bill for the background checks. The risk of not doing it is extremely low.

In Washington State, we have to submit one every 2-3 years. No cost to us. I haven't talked to any officials in our area that are against it.

I wouldn't have a problem with it either if I didn't have to pay for it. Although, if the state is paying for them, I'd probably have a problem as a tax-payer. I think it's a waste of money.

It's not an issue in Colorado, though, so I don't have a dog in the fight either way.

I've been a law enforcement officer for 16 years; the past 10 as a detective/investigator handling primarily crimes against children. I'm not trying to be snotty, but you obviously are not informed regarding who is a "risk", and what the levels of risk are.

Although I completely agree that officials should not have to foot the bill, or all of it; I'm still, never-the-less very surprised that as a three sport official I've not been required to go through at least a basic background check.

It wouldn't be the first time I spouted off without knowing what I was talking about.

That said, tell me how officials present a risk for committing crimes against children and how that risk is enhanced by the nature of our work as officials. Inform me.

Also, can someone point to a single instance where a child was molested by an official with aid from his position as an official. To make it even more difficult, I'd add that we should be able to show that the instance would not have happened if background checks had been done on that official.

We had an official convicted a major crime a few years ago for getting into a relationship with an underaged player he initially met at games (he was probably around 30, she was about 15-16). I think it was statutory rape??? It may have been some other charge but he did real prison time.

Would the check have prevented it (it was before Oregon did checks)??? I don't know, but it will make sure he doesn't get another chance.

I have no problem with background checks at all. I just hope people are still realistic about what they are going to find or prevent. And if someone does not have a record, you are not going to prevent them any more than before if that person's intentions are not pure or legal. And that is why you see a coach that might have a history of violating the law, but it only comes to light after the 10 person they have violated reports the events. If anything there is fans that attend games that schools need to be more worried about and they are not given background checks before they enter games.

Peace

The issue with regard to child molesters is access .. and the potential for future, unsupervised access, sometimes well into the future. Here is a scenario that's not to far fetched in my experience:

"Hi there, I'm sorry I had to call you for all those [insert violation, foul]. You know, I like to help out kids who are having trouble with their game. Your coach probably doesn't have the time to spend with you as an individual to improve your game. I'll be hosting a clinic with just a few girls/boys on [insert date & time] @ [insert location, probably a public access playground or similar]. Come on buy, it's free." So she/he shows up and, behold, she/he is the only kid there.

You asked: http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2007/oc...r-life-prison/

Unfortunately, thats not quantifiable. If there was something in his background, would it have disqualified him from being an official. What is the standard for that association, local or state? Regardless, assuming there was not a background check on this official, if there had been and there was something there, at least you would know.

I'm sure it's clear that I think background checks are important, and that the benefits far outweigh the cost (regardless of who is paying), Background checks can (but now always) weed out potential problem people.

BUT, regardless of whether or not someone is in favor of mandated background checks, the reality is that they only alert you to those that have already been caught .. we should be equally concerned about those that have yet to be caught.

I know of two officials locally (not basketball) who used their position as a referee to get to know young athletes which then led to inappropriate interaction. Those officials were terminated. I have also read a couple newspaper stories in our state in the past couple of years where officials were sent to prison for using their officiating as a way to get to know young athletes and then abusing them sexually. Background checks won't stop everything, but they could help keep previous abusers from joining our ranks.

When an official enters the school, s/he basically has free roam of the place. The threat is not necessarily on the court, but possibly at other times and in other places around the school. As a parent of school-aged children, an official, and a member of Law Enforcement, I have no problems with background checks. I think anyone (maintenance, contractors, catering, repairmen, etc) who has unescorted access to schools should undergo some kind of check.

Saved me typing, anytime you enter a school, you're going to be under scrutiny. It's the times we live in.

Well, this isn't the first time I've changed my mind about something after further research and logical points.

That said, I'm not sure a complete background check would be required. We're getting further and further with technology, and something like a fingerprint check against all 50 states' sex offenders databases would suffice. Using fingerprints (or even DNA) would prevent people from slipping through by changing their names.

Annually would probably be too often, but I can see requiring it initially and every 3 years (an arbitrary figure) thereafter.

The problem with the 50 state databases, the information is not always updated the same or accurate. Even if you did that, there would be some holes in the system.

I just hope people think this is not going to solve all the problems. You need to watch more people than those that officiate. You also need to give background checks to the booster club members and other people that are not officials if you really want to keep kids safe as you people would like them to be.

Peace

In Virginia (VHSL), they have us sign a form stating that we have not been convicted of a Felony...bla..bla..bla. I dont know if they actually do the check.

I think the penalty would be a charge of "falsifying a document" here in VA.

[quote=BigTex]When an official enters the school, s/he basically has free roam of the place.

JMO, if you are entering a school and not informing administration (i.e. sec; principal; AD; coach) or someone that works there of your presence. You are WRONG!!!

I'm not against all background checks, and would willingly take one if necessary to officiate games. However, I do have reservations about including officials in with coaches, teachers, ect, with regards to access to students. Considering the very minimal times I actually speak to a player- all related to that game, then wouldnt it only be fair/safe to have background checks on, say, those that sell candy/popcorn at theatres, those that work at putt-putts, or bowling alleys? Every single employee thats works at a mall? What about gas stations attendants? And on and on....
Jmaellis, as one in law enforcement, where is your line? Who needs it, and who doesnt? I'm guessing that you say EVERYONE.....

Agreed. If it's not treated or advertised as a panacea, then I can see how the benefits outweigh the costs. If, however, it is advertised as a panacea, it could cause more harm than good by offering a false sense of security.

I'd be willing to bet the majority of sex crimes (against children and adults)happen after of a false sense of security developed; someone let his/her guard down.

I've got two young kids, and this stuff scares the hell out of me.

The inevitable, yet unanswerable question ... "Who need it .. where is the line?"

Everyone? I a perfect world with unlimited resources I would like to see that. Of course that's not realistic. Nor do I advocate that ANY impropriety in a person's background should necessarily disqualify them from a position of trust, but at least the knowledge of the impropriety will hopefully allow those that make these decisions to be informed.

For me, based upon my professional experience, I would like to see those who are in a position of trust/control/authority over children be required to submit to background checks. Those people who we, as parents, tell our children to trust/respect because of their position. That being said, the vast majority of those who commit crimes against children are people who would never go through a background check .. close friends who we entrust your children to .. Uncle Bob .. mom's new boyfriend .. etc (a nearly endless list). "Stranger Danger" ... sheeesh, ..... not even close.

At the present time there has not been any decision made as to whether or not TASO officials will be mandated to provide background checks. It is rumors like this that keep our officiating community in an uproar over issues which may not even be relevant to us. Unless things change between now and November, you and your friends (as well as me) will still have that $65-$85 in your pocket to spend on something else.

Great discussion!!!


Now would it change your opinion if you knew one of your fellow officials was once found guilty of "improper conduct"when they were coaching high school girls?? Now they are officiating to "stay in the basketball world".

What would you do?

BTW you don't need to have sexual relations with a young athlete for it to be improper. Any type of unwelcome contact, words or advances in inappropriate!

re Criminal Records Checks
 

I work with a Catholic school system. Parents are strongly encouraged to participate in some volunteer manner, such that thousands of them volunteer. Everyone of them attends a seminar about protecting children from abuse, and they all pay for their own background checks (local and FBI). If they become inactive for over 6 months, they have to get a new background check. Some private companies offer national criminal background search for lower cost with instant results, but they do not qualify for the School system, which requires the FBI fingerprinted background check.
So, I'm betting that there will be plenty of Officials and Referees willing to get a background check and keep the league running properly. The procedure is pretty simple. Get your fingerprints taken at you local sheriff's office. If they scan you fingerprints electronically, then you just pay and it's done. If they take your fingerprints with ink on a paper card, then you have to mail it into the FBI and to your State criminal records bureau.

This isn't settled yet. TASO is looking to see if officials are covered by a recently enacted state statute that talks about employees of school district contractors being required to have background checks conducted. There are a lot of problems with this. First of all, officials aren't employees. Second, usually, the local chapter doesn't actually contract with the school but rather with the school. Some may say this is a distinction without a difference, but that can be important when discussing statutory interpretation. Finally, believe it or not, the way the statute is worded, it doesn't make clear what hurdles, if any, must be cleared. In other words, the individual doesn't actually have to PASS a background check, just have one administered. In addition, it doesn't talk about what offenses or other background information would disqualify an official from working. Could a quick search on publicdata.com suffice? I see nothing in the statute that says it can't. Thus, an expensive check may not be necessary.

With that said, it appears that I am one of the ones in our chapter who, by committee appointment, will be working on this. Lets keep this topic active because I'm interested in what's going on elsewhere.

Yes officials on the field/court are not in private situations with potential for contact, but I can say as an official I have been in a number of less than public situations with students, after a football playoff game last year our crew shared a shower room with the visiting team, at a basketball tournament a few years ago the path out of the official's lockerroom to the front door went right through the cheerleader's warm up room. If I or any of my crewmates wanted to violate the law they would have had the opportunity.

Yes officials should have to submit to background checks, by all means.

No the officials should not have to cover this cost, it should be a part of the state association's licensing requirements. When we certify child care providers we cover the cost for the background checks and include it as a budget need. There is more and more revenue coming into the high school sports to offset that cost.

A couple of examples: American Red Cross volunteers pay for their own background checks. I work for a Catholic school systems. Parents are heavily encouraged to volunteer and thousands of them do. They must attend a seminar on preventing child abuse and they pay for their own background checks. If they become inactive for 6 months, then they must pay for another background check.
To do a free background check on someone, you may contact multiple government offices while collecting information for a State background check. In Colorado, one place to start is the official website for the state of Colorado located on the web at www.colorado.gov . You will find a complete list of state agencies with phone numbers as well as other helpful information on obtaining vital records including the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. This is where you can find contact information to vital records offices to every Colorado county.
The Attorney General’s site is at http://www.ago.state.co.us/index.cfm . They can be useful in finding information for a Colorado background check.
The Colorado Secretary of State is located at http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/business/main.htm . The Secretary of State holds business and corporate records. You may need to check a potential business partner or run a nationwide criminal background record search on anyone you may hire or plan to do business with before committing yourself financially.

It's one thing to require volunteers to pay for their own; they're volunteering anyway; although one should be aware of the negative impact the requirement will have on the number of volunteers.

For officiating, if you require officials to pay for their own checks, you'll have the same affect, maybe more. Our motives aren't nearly as altruistic, even though we don't do it "for the money."

That said, if the requirement were instituted at the same time as, say, an increase in game fees, it might go better.

We have a similar thing here in Columbus with our Catholic Schools. All parent volunteers and any coaches must take a course "Protecting God's Children" and be fingerprinted. I also officiate USA Volleyball and am subject to paying for a backround check every 2 years at $20. This is over and above any other fees.

Because I was a coach, I have had a background check done. I am for everyone having it done.

I coached for 11 years and refereed for 8 now. So , my background check was done way long time ago. Better safe than sorry. It's another plus to give to the school systems.

We had a guy come into our assocation that had a problem in his background. He was banned from the association, but not before he had done about 15 games for us. But they found out about him. There maybe others that we just don't know about. we have people move here all the time and get into refereeing.