Task Force on Child Protection recommends changes affecting school districts
More Info
Task Force on Child Protection issues recommendations
The Pennsylvania Task Force on Child Protection recently released its 400-page report and
recommendations to improve state laws and procedures governing child protection and the reporting of child
abuse. The 11-member panel was created through passage of Senate Resolution 250 in December 2011 and
held its first meeting in January 2012. Following its year of hearings and research, the Task Force proposed
a number of policy and statutory recommendations.
PSBA has prepared a summary of the recommendations that will be of special interest to interest to school
officials. Click here to read the entire text of PSBA’s summary. Additionally, here is the link to the entire
text of the Task Force Report.
Among the general recommendations of interest:
Oversight of professional educators: Legislation should be enacted similar to the legislative proposals
that the Professional Standards and Practices Commission developed to amend the Professional Educator
Discipline Act to expand reporting requirements where allegations of misconduct, including sexual
misconduct, have been made. The proposal includes banning school entities from entering into
confidentiality agreements with educators accused of misconduct.
Truancy: In response to assertions that a large volume of resources of county agencies and juvenile
courts are devoted to providing services regarding teenage students who are truants, school districts should
be encouraged to more vigorously enforce school attendance rules, coupled with programs targeted
specifically at truancy.
Among the statutory recommendations that are of interest, most amending the Child Protective
Services Law (CPSL):
Mandatory reporting in institutional settings: Elimination of separate standards for those who are
educators or coaches, whether employed or volunteer, making all such persons mandated reporters with the
legal responsibility to report directly to ChildLine or law enforcement whenever they are aware that a child
is being abused, rather than up the line to administrators.
Role of school employees and volunteers: Under existing law, school employees committing child abuse
against their students are subject to special rules, definitions and reporting procedures. The Task Force has
recommended eliminating that distinction and to treat school employees in the same manner as any other
person involved with children. The definition of “school employee” is revised to include volunteers
providing services at schools. The definition of “school” is extended to include public and private colleges
and universities, community colleges and other post-secondary institutions where children may be involved
in programs, activities or services.
Education and training: Amendments are proposed that would add training requirements for mandated
reporters as well as other persons responsible for administering the CPSL. School employees not covered by
the training standards under the Public School Code, including the newest provision under Act 126 of 2012,
would also be subject to these provisions.
Oath: Persons subject to mandatory training under the CPSL will be required, upon completion of their
training, to affirm an oath regarding their responsibilities under the law.
Making reports: Under existing law, child abuse reports may be received by the DPW through
ChildLine, by the county agency or law enforcement. Any of the three entities may receive reports and all
three are required to communicate with one another, but the process is disjointed and at times duplicative
and at cross-purposes. The Task Force recommends amending the law to provide a “no wrong door” means
for persons to get reports of suspected child abuse to the proper authorities.
Who is a perpetrator: The term “person responsible for the welfare of a child” would be broadened to
include any person who, through a profession, employment or volunteer activity has access to children on a
regular basis and is in a relationship of trust as a coach, instructor, leader, mentor, chaperone or other role in
a “program, activity or service” in which children participate. A program, activity or service includes public
and private educational or athletic pursuits. Exemptions for school employees are deleted, as part of the
desire to treat school employees in the same manner as any other individual.
Background checks and bans: The Task Force recommends expanding the provision governing persons
having contact with children to include any person applying for a paid or unpaid (volunteer) position as a
person responsible for the welfare of a child. Because of the anticipated increase in the volume of
certification requests that these amendments will generate, the amount of time that DPW has to respond to
certification requests is increased from 14 days to 28 days.
Another recommendation provides the grounds for denying employment or participation in volunteer
activities. These bans are based on, and are consistent with, the restrictions imposed on school employees
under the Public School Code.
Assessment of homeschooled and cyber charter school children: According to Pennsylvania
Department of Education statistics, over 22,000 students are homeschooled in Pennsylvania, and over 32,000
students attend cyber charter schools. The common thread between the two is that most of these students are
educated in the home. The Task Force believes that safeguards be put in place to ensure the health and safety
of these children by requiring risk and safety assessments for them.
The recommendation is that the requirement would apply to a child who is of school age who is not
attending school, is enrolled in or has transferred to a home education program or cyber charter school and
either of the following has occurred: (1) A child or another child in the child’s household has been the
subject of a founded or indicated report or received general protective services within the last five years; or
(2) The parent or other person the child resides with has been the subject of a report within the last five
years.
The school district in which the child resides would have to notify the county whenever a child enrolls in
a home school program or cyber charter school, is truant, or fails to register for school. Upon receipt of such
notice, an initial assessment must be performed by the county, followed by two more assessments at six
month intervals. If no risk of abuse is discovered during those assessments, no further assessments are
required unless a report of suspected child abuse or neglect is received.
Violations of the CPSL: The penalty for failure to report child abuse by a mandatory reporter is
increased to a misdemeanor of the second degree. Additionally, the law would be changed so that: (1)
interfering with the making of a report or referral would be considered a first degree misdemeanor; (2)
concealing child abuse in order to protect another person or entity subsection would be a third degree felony;
and (3) willful failure to report when the person knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the abuse is
part of a continuing cause of action resulting in the child being actively abused as a third degree felony.