The Problem
Every few weeks another story breaks. A teacher or coach with a documented history of inappropriate conduct toward a student. Hired by a new school or college that never knew. Sometimes the warning signs were in a personnel file the new employer never asked for. Sometimes an investigation was underway and the employee simply resigned before it finished. Leaving no formal finding for anyone to disclose. Sometimes the law on the books simply did not require anyone to check.
This is not a hypothetical. It happened in our own district. Shoreline Community College hired a former Henry M. Jackson High School physics teacher. Who had resigned from Everett Public Schools. While under investigation for a years long inappropriate relationship with a student. Shoreline never called the high school. State law did not require it to. Washington's 2020 disclosure law. The first of its kind in the nation. Required colleges to check with other colleges. Not with K-12 districts.
A national review of all 50 states found that. North Carolina requires no background check and no fingerprinting for teachers at all. Leaving it entirely to individual school boards. Some of which may require nothing. New Jersey passed one of the country's broadest "pass the harasser" laws in 2018. It’s own state watchdog found in 2024 that the law was "insufficient, easily manipulated ." With no agency assigned to oversee it and no standardized way. To verify the findings the law was supposed to track. Higher education is worse. Most states have no disclosure law at all. Screening is left entirely to individual college policy.
The common thread in every one of these failures is the same. A state passes a law. Nobody is responsible for checking whether it's followed. The next time anyone finds out is when a reporter asks questions.
Why the Current Federal Approach Doesn't Work
Congress already tried to address this in 2015. With a provision of the Every Student Succeeds Act. It requires states to have some policy against helping a school employee with a known history of misconduct get hired elsewhere. It has no enforcement mechanism. The Department of Education does not even track which states comply. As of a few years after the law passed. The overwhelming majority of states had no real plan to implement it.
The only national database that exists. The NASDTEC Clearinghouse , is privately run by a voluntary association of state licensing boards. States report into it voluntarily. On their own schedule. With their own level of diligence. A national investigation found thousands of disciplined teachers are missing from it. Including over a thousand whose licenses had been permanently revoked. Participation is voluntary because there has never been a federal requirement to participate.
What Already Works and What's Missing
Some states have built real systems. Pennsylvania's Act 168 passed in 2014 is the strongest model in the country. It requires a hiring institution to formally request misconduct history from an applicant's current employer . And every prior employer where the applicant had contact with children. Employers have 20 days to respond. If they disclose anything concerning 60 days to provide full detail. Pennsylvania is the only state that actually penalizes a former employer who fails to respond. With civil penalties and real consequences. Every other state's law depends on the goodwill of an institution that often has every incentive to stay quiet.
What Pennsylvania's law does not do “ because no state law can “ is follow a teacher across state lines. Or reach a college hiring someone out of a K-12 job in a different state entirely. Or guarantee that an investigation interrupted by a resignation still gets recorded somewhere a future employer will see it. That is a job for the federal government. Only the federal government can build a system that works the same way in all fifty states.
The Proposal: A National School Safety Clearance
This bill creates a School Safety Clearance . A federal safety eligibility determination for every teacher, administrator, coach, and staff member with regular access to students. In K-12 and higher education public and private. It is built on a model that already exists and already works. The federal personnel security clearance system used for every employee who handles classified national security information.
That system works because it separates two questions that are too often conflated. The military decides who is qualified to serve. A separate federal process decides who can be trusted with classified material. The same split applies here. States keep complete control over teaching licenses and certification. Nothing in this bill touches who is qualified to teach a subject or run a classroom. The School Safety Clearance answers a narrower separate question. Has this person been the subject of a substantiated finding of sexual misconduct or abuse? Anywhere in the country in any school or college job ever?
How It Would Work
Every teacher and staff member submits fingerprints. Social Security number and a photograph once at hire. Those identifiers are then run every year against criminal, sex offender, child abuse and investigation databases. So that any new charge, complaint or investigation is caught automatically. This is the same continuous vetting model the federal government already uses for security clearances. Processed through the FBI's existing fingerprint infrastructure rather than building something new from scratch.
A new office inside the FBI. Leveraging the Bureau's existing fingerprint and criminal records systems. Maintains a single national registry of every covered employee's clearance status. Built and operated the way the Defense Department's central clearance database already operates today.
Every school and college must report within five business days. Every hire, every termination, every resignation. The start of every misconduct investigation and its outcome.
If an employee resigns or is fired while an investigation is still open. The school must still report it. Including the fact that the investigation was never finished because the person left first. That single requirement would have caught the Shoreline case. It is the most direct response to exactly what happened here.
A college or K-12 district hiring someone from any other school or college . Anywhere in the country in any sector. Must check this registry and request disclosure from every employer where the applicant had contact with children. Not just employers in the same sector. Closing the exact loophole that let Shoreline hire from Everett without ever picking up the phone.
Institutions that fail to report or that knowingly stay silent when asked. Lose federal education funding and face direct civil penalties. Up to $100,000 per violation. Closing the enforcement gap that left Washington's and New Jersey's laws unenforced for years.
Why This Belongs in Congress Not Just Olympia
Washington was the first state in the nation to pass a disclosure law like this in 2020. We should be proud of that. But being first does not mean the job is done. A state by state patchwork will always have the same flaw. It stops at the state line. A teacher who loses a job in Washington can still be hired in Idaho if Idaho never asks. A college in California has no obligation to call a high school in Texas.
This is not a problem any single state can solve. It is exactly the kind of problem the federal government exists to solve. And exactly the kind of problem Congress has solved before. With the same legal tool already used in this space. Tying federal education funding to compliance. The same lever ESSA already uses. Just with a database an enforcement office. And real penalties behind it this time.
We protect our children or we explain to the next parent why we didn't.
Appendix A: Draft Bill Text
School Safety Clearance Act of 2027
(Establishing a National Pre-Employment and Continuous Monitoring Safety Clearance for All Personnel in K-12 and Postsecondary Education)
Drafting note: This bill responds to a documented recurring national failure. School districts and postsecondary institutions across the country routinely hire, retain or fail to screen employees with histories of substantiated sexual misconduct, abuse or pending investigations. Because no national system exists for tracking and verifying this history. Existing federal law (ESSA Section 8546, 20 U.S.C. Section 7926) requires states to have some policy against "passing the trash" but contains no enforcement mechanism and no national database. The U.S. Department of Education has not even tracked state compliance. This bill closes that gap by creating a National School Safety Clearance modeled on the structure of the federal personnel security clearance system. While leaving teacher licensure and certification entirely under state control.
Section 1. Short Title
This Act may be cited as the "School Safety Clearance Act of 2027."
Section 2. Findings and Purpose
Congress finds the following:
(1) Sexual misconduct by school personnel against students remains a persistent, documented national problem. Existing state and federal systems for screening, tracking and disclosing such misconduct are fragmented. Inconsistently enforced and frequently fail to prevent the hiring of individuals with known histories of misconduct.
(2) Teachers and school staff are entrusted with an exceptional degree of authority over and trust from. The students in their care. And must therefore be held to a correspondingly high standard. Students and their families have a reasonable expectation. That school is a safe place and that students will not become victims of the adults responsible for their education. A student who is exploited or abused by a teacher or staff member. Can suffer profound and lasting harm that affects the rest of that student's life. Protecting students from such harm is a compelling governmental interest. That justifies a rigorous, nationwide, continuously monitored vetting system for all personnel with access to students.
(3) The Every Student Succeeds Act (20 U.S.C. Section 7926) requires states to maintain a policy against assisting an employee in obtaining a new job. Where the employer knows or has probable cause to believe the employee engaged in sexual misconduct with a minor. But provides no enforcement mechanism, no federal database. And no penalty for non-compliance.
(4) The only existing national clearinghouse of educator discipline records is privately operated. Relies on voluntary state reporting. And has been documented to contain significant gaps. Including thousands of missing disciplinary records.
(5) No federal requirement exists for postsecondary institutions. To screen new hires for histories of sexual misconduct at prior employers including K-12 employers. Creating a gap in which an individual who resigns from a K-12 position. During a misconduct investigation. Can be hired by a college or university without that history ever being disclosed or discovered.
(6) A small number of states have adopted strong individual disclosure and screening requirements. Including Pennsylvania's Act 168 of 2014. Which requires employment history review, timed disclosure windows. Civil penalties for employers who fail to respond to disclosure requests. However even strong state laws have been found insufficient and inconsistently enforced. Absent independent oversight, verification and a real penalty structure.
(7) The purpose of this Act is to establish a single, national, continuously updated School Safety Clearance system. Covering all personnel teachers, administrators, coaches, contractors. And other staff with regular access to students in both K-12 and postsecondary education. Public and private modeled on the structure of the federal personnel security clearance system. While preserving the exclusive authority of states over teacher licensure and certification.
Section 3. Definitions
For purposes of this Act:
Covered institution means any public or private K-12 school, school district, charter school or postsecondary educational institution (including any college, university, or community college, public or private, nonprofit or for-profit) . That receives any form of federal funding. Including Title I funds, Title IV federal student aid or any other federal education funding.
Covered individual means any person who works at or for a covered institution in a paid capacity. Including any teacher, administrator, coach, aide, contractor, substitute or other paid employee. As well as any volunteer, regardless of whether the position requires a state teaching license or certification. And regardless of whether the individual's access to students is supervised or unsupervised. The term includes any applicant for such a position.
School Safety Clearance or SSC means the federal safety eligibility determination established by this Act. Separate and distinct from any state teaching license or certification.
Substantiated finding means a determination by a preponderance of the evidence or a comparable standard applied. By the investigating institution or agency. That a covered individual engaged in sexual misconduct, abuse or conduct that would disqualify the individual from a School Safety Clearance under Section 6.
Sexual misconduct has the meaning given that term under Pennsylvania's Act 168 of 2014 (24 P.S. Section 1-111 et seq.) namely any act including any verbal, nonverbal, written or electronic communication or physical activity. Directed toward or with a child or a student. Regardless of the age of the child or student. That is designed to establish a romantic or sexual relationship with the child or student. Including but not limited to sexual or romantic invitations. Dating or soliciting dates, sexualized or romantic dialogue. Sexually suggestive comments, physical exposure of a sexual or romantic nature. Or any sexual, indecent, romantic or erotic contact with the child or student. This definition applies equally to conduct directed toward students at K-12 schools and at postsecondary educational institutions. Regardless of the student's age.
National School Safety Clearance Office or NSSCO means the office established within the Federal Bureau of Investigation under Section 4.
Section 4. Establishment of the National School Safety Clearance Office
(a) Establishment
There is established within the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The National School Safety Clearance Office.
(b) Functions
The NSSCO shall:
(1) Conduct or coordinate fingerprint based criminal history background checks for all covered individuals. Utilizing existing FBI fingerprint and criminal history infrastructure (including the Next Generation Identification system).
(2) Maintain a National School Personnel Registry. Containing the employment history, investigation history. And School Safety Clearance status of all covered individuals.
(3) Adjudicate applications for, and grant, deny, suspend, or revoke, School Safety Clearances under the standards established in Section 6.
(4) Receive, process and verify mandatory reports submitted by covered institutions under Section 5.
(5) Audit covered institutions for compliance with this Act and
(6) Refer suspected violations of this Act. Including failure to report or knowing submission of false information. To the Department of Justice for civil or criminal enforcement as appropriate.
(c) Relationship to State Licensure
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to grant the NSSCO or any federal agency. Authority over the issuance, renewal, denial or revocation of any state teaching license or certification. A School Safety Clearance under this Act is a determination separate from and in addition to. Any state license or certification requirement. In the same manner that a federal personnel security clearance is a determination separate from an individual's underlying job classification or appointment.
(d) Identifiers and Continuous Vetting
As a condition of initial and continued employment at a covered institution. Every covered individual shall submit to the NSSCO, through the covered institution. A complete set of fingerprints, the individual's Social Security number. And a current photograph, in a form and manner prescribed by the NSSCO. The NSSCO shall re-run these identifiers no less frequently than once every year. Against all available criminal history, sex offender registry, child abuse registry and pending-charge databases. And against the National School Personnel Registry. In order to identify any new criminal charge, conviction, complaint, investigation, or substantiated finding affecting the individual's eligibility for a School Safety Clearance. Where the NSSCO determines that an individual's appearance has materially changed or that identity verification requires it. The NSSCO may require submission of an updated photograph or fingerprints.
Section 5. Mandatory Reporting by Covered Institutions
(a) Hiring, Termination and Resignation Reporting
Each covered institution shall report to the NSSCO. Within 5 business days. The hiring, termination, resignation or other separation of any covered individual.
(b) Investigation Reporting
Each covered institution shall report to the NSSCO. Within 5 business days of initiation. The commencement of any investigation into alleged sexual misconduct or abuse by a covered individual.
(c) Investigation Outcome Reporting
Each covered institution shall report to the NSSCO the outcome of any investigation described in subsection (b), including:
(1) A substantiated finding.
(2) An unsubstantiated or unfounded finding or
(3) Termination of the investigation prior to completion for any reason. Including the resignation of the covered individual.
(d) Resignation During Investigation
If a covered individual resigns is terminated. Or otherwise separates from a covered institution while an investigation described in subsection (b) is pending and not yet complete. The covered institution shall report to the NSSCO. Within 5 business days of the separation:
(1) That an investigation was pending at the time of separation.
(2) The general nature of the allegation, consistent with applicable student privacy protections.
(3) That the investigation was not completed because the covered individual separated from the institution before its conclusion and
(4) Whether the institution intends to complete the investigation not withstanding the individual's separation.
A report under this subsection shall be entered into the National School Personnel Registry and shall be visible. In a manner prescribed by the NSSCO. To any covered institution that subsequently requests a School Safety Clearance verification for that individual. Clearly noting that the underlying investigation was not completed and the reason it was not completed.
(e) Employment History Review for New Hires
Before extending an offer of employment to any applicant for a position as a covered individual a covered institution shall:
(1) Require the applicant to complete a Sexual Misconduct and Abuse Disclosure form. Substantially consistent with the form required under Pennsylvania's Act 168 of 2014. For the applicant's current employer and all prior employers at which the applicant had direct contact with children or students. Regardless of whether such employer was itself a covered institution under this Act;
(2) Submit the completed disclosure form to each listed employer. Which shall have 20 calendar days to respond.
(4) Query the National School Personnel Registry for the applicant's School Safety Clearance status and any reported investigation history. Including any report made under subsection (d).
(f) Penalty for Non-Responsive Former Employers
A covered institution or any other employer that received a disclosure request under subsection (e) . That fails to respond within the time periods specified. Or that knowingly provides false or materially incomplete information in response to such a request. Shall be subject to the civil penalties described in Section 8. In addition to any liability arising under the Educator Misconduct Act of the applicable state or comparable state law.
(g) Provisional Employment
A covered institution may provisionally employ an applicant for up to 90 days while disclosure responses under subsection (e) are pending, provided that
(1) The applicant has fully completed the required disclosure forms;
(2) The institution has no knowledge of any information that would disqualify the applicant and
(3) During the provisional period. The applicant does not have unsupervised contact with students. And works in the immediate vicinity of a permanent fully cleared employee.
Section 6. Standards for Clearance, Denial and Revocation
(a) Grant of Clearance
The NSSCO shall grant a School Safety Clearance to a covered individual upon completion of the background investigation under Section 4(b) . Absent a disqualifying finding under subsection (b).
(b) Disqualifying Findings
The NSSCO shall deny, suspend or revoke a School Safety Clearance upon a substantiated finding that the covered individual:
(1) Engaged in sexual misconduct as defined in Section 3. With a student or minor.
(2) Was convicted of or pled guilty or no contest to. A sexual offense, an offense involving abuse of a minor. Or a comparable disqualifying offense as defined by NSSCO regulation.
(3) Was the subject of a substantiated finding of abuse, as defined consistently with applicable state child protective services law.
(4) Was the subject of a substantiated finding. By a covered institution's own investigation. That the individual engaged in inappropriate conduct toward a student. Including conduct of a sexual, romantic, exploitative or abusive nature. That violated the institution's policies governing employee conduct toward students or
(5) Knowingly provided materially false information on any disclosure form required under this Act.
(c) Effect of Incomplete Investigations
A pending or incomplete investigation. Including one terminated due to the covered individual's resignation under Section 5(d) . Shall not by itself result in denial or revocation of a School Safety Clearance. But shall be recorded in the National School Personnel Registry and disclosed to any covered institution conducting a clearance verification. Together with a clear notation that the investigation was not completed and the reason for non-completion.
(d) Notice and Opportunity to Respond
Before denying or revoking a School Safety Clearance under subsection (b) . The NSSCO shall provide the covered individual with a written statement of reasons and a reasonable opportunity to respond and provide mitigating information. Consistent with due process protections comparable to those provided under the federal personnel security clearance adjudication process.
(e) Right to FBI Review of an Institutional Finding
Where a School Safety Clearance is denied, suspended or revoked on the basis of a substantiated finding made by a covered institution's own investigation under subsection (b), the affected individual may request that the NSSCO independently review that institutional investigation. Upon such a request:
(1) The NSSCO shall conduct an independent review of the institution's investigation. Including the evidence relied upon, the procedures followed. And whether the finding is supported.
(2) The covered institution shall upon NSSCO request. Provide the complete investigative record. Subject to the complainant and witness confidentiality protections of Section 9(b)
(3) The affected individual shall have the opportunity to present evidence and a response and
(4) If the NSSCO determines that the institutional finding is not supported by sufficient evidence. Was reached through a fundamentally unfair process or does not constitute a disqualifying finding under this Act. The NSSCO shall reinstate the individual's School Safety Clearance and correct the National School Personnel Registry accordingly.
(f) National Effect of Revocation
A denial or revocation of a School Safety Clearance shall be effective nationwide and shall be reflected in the National School Personnel Registry immediately upon final determination. No covered institution may knowingly employ, in a covered position. An individual whose School Safety Clearance has been denied or revoked and not subsequently reinstated.
(g) Reapplication
An individual whose School Safety Clearance has been revoked, and who has not obtained reinstatement through FBI review under subsection (e). May not reapply for a period of not less than 3 years from the date of final revocation. And only upon a showing of changed circumstances or successful mitigation of the disqualifying conduct. As determined by the NSSCO.
Section 7. Application to Postsecondary Institutions
(a) Closing the K-12-to-Higher-Education Gap
The requirements of Sections 5 and 6 apply equally to postsecondary educational institutions. Including with respect to applicants whose prior employment was at a K-12 school, school district or other covered institution. A postsecondary institution's obligation to query the National School Personnel Registry and request disclosure from prior employers under Section 5(e) is not limited to prior postsecondary employers.
(b) State Law Not Preempted Where More Protective
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to preempt a state law that imposes additional or more protective requirements on postsecondary institutions regarding the hiring of personnel. Including state laws requiring disclosure from a broader category of prior employers or a longer look back period than provided under this Act.
Section 8. Enforcement
(a) Conditioning of Federal Funds
Beginning 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act. No covered institution and no state educational agency on behalf of covered institutions within that state. May receive federal funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, the Higher Education Act of 1965 or any successor statute. Unless the Secretary of Education certifies. In consultation with the NSSCO. That the covered institution or state educational agency is in compliance with the requirements of this Act.
(b) Civil Penalties
In addition to the funding condition under subsection (a). Any covered institution or any other employer subject to Section 5(f). That knowingly fails to comply with the reporting, disclosure or response requirements of this Act. Shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 per violation. To be assessed by the Department of Justice and payable to the United States Treasury. With the amount of the penalty to be determined based on the severity of the violation. And whether the failure to comply contributed to the continued employment of an individual with a disqualifying finding under Section 6(b).
(c) Individual Liability
Any officer, administrator or employee of a covered institution who knowingly falsifies, conceals or fails to submit a report required under Section 5. With the intent to prevent disclosure of a substantiated finding or pending investigation, shall be subject to the civil penalties under subsection (b) in an individual capacity and may be referred for criminal prosecution under applicable federal or state law.
(d) Whistleblower Protection
A covered institution may not retaliate against an employee for making or assisting in. A report required under this Act or for refusing to participate in a violation of this Act. An employee subjected to retaliation in violation of this subsection shall have a private right of action for reinstatement, back pay and other appropriate relief.
Section 9. Privacy and Data Security
(a) Access Restrictions
Information contained in the National School Personnel Registry shall be accessible only to. Covered institutions conducting a clearance verification for a current or prospective covered individual. The NSSCO and the Department of Justice for purposes of administering and enforcing this Act. The covered individual to whom the record pertains. Who shall have a right to review and dispute the accuracy of their own record.
(b) Confidentiality of Complainants
Personally identifying information of any complainant or witness in a reported investigation shall be exempt from disclosure under this Act. Consistent with the protections provided under applicable state public records exemptions for sexual misconduct investigations.
(c) Limitation on Use
Information obtained under this Act may be used only for the purpose of evaluating a covered individual's eligibility for a School Safety Clearance and covered employment. And may not be used or disclosed for any other purpose absent a valid court order or written consent of the covered individual.
Section 10. Rulemaking
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act. The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. In consultation with the Secretary of Education. Shall issue regulations implementing this Act. Including standardized forms for disclosure and reporting substantially consistent with the forms required under Pennsylvania's Act 168 of 2014. And technical specifications for covered institutions to query and report to the National School Personnel Registry.
Section 11. Severability
If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person or circumstance. Is held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. The remaining provisions of this Act shall continue in full force and effect.
Section 12. Effective Date
This Act shall take effect 2 years after the date of enactment, except that Section 10 (rulemaking) shall take effect immediately upon enactment.
Links
Shoreline college failed to investigate former Everett teacher, other applicants
Comments
Post a Comment