Blog

 
     

Two Unrelated Cases Highlight Holes in Portland School District’s Background Checks

By Michael Klazema on 1/20/2017
Portland Public Schools is under the microscope at the moment, after two unrelated cases came to light indicating potential holes in the district's employee background check policies. According to a recent report from Willamette Week, the two cases involved a pending hire for the district’s general counsel position and a district administrator, respectively.

The first incident occurred in November when the district was in the process of hiring an attorney to serve as general legal counsel for the district. Portland Public Schools extended a tentative job offer to Wes Bridges, a lawyer who hails from Florida. Bridges had previously served as the attorney for the school board of Florida's Polk County School District. In 2009, though, he pleaded no contest to charges of violating public records law during his work for the Polk County School Board.

According to the Willamette Week report, it wasn’t Portland Public Schools’ background check policy that uncovered Bridges’ conviction, but investigations by the media. Bridges subsequently withdrew his name from consideration, but Willamette Week says that the incident caused local journalists and community members to question the background check policies and procedures in place at PPS. As the largest school district in the state of Oregon, PPS serves some 48,500 students across 85 schools.

The second question brought Portland Public Schools and its background check policies even more under the microscope. This case involves Richard Gilliam, a district administrator who was disciplined and stripped of most of his duties a few months ago after what the Willamette Week report described as “complaints from subordinates.” Despite these complaints, though, Gilliam is still employed with PPS.

Gilliam has been working for Portland Public Schools since the summer of 2013. At the time, he passed his background check with no apparent red flags. As it turns out, though, Gilliam pleaded no contest to patronizing a prostitute in 1998 while living in Chicago. Under Oregon state regulations, individuals with such convictions (or pleas of no contest) are supposed to be automatically disqualified from holding a teaching license. It's not immediately clear whether or not the same stipulations apply to individuals seeking administrator licenses

and there is no clarity regarding whether or not Portland Public Schools knew about Gilliam's criminal history. The district only keeps records of employee background checks for three years. Since Gilliam was hired in 2013, records of his pre-employment background check were destroyed. The district also destroyed the form where, if Gilliam had self-disclosed his no contest plea, he would have provided the relevant information. A spokesperson for the district said that PPS is “trying to understand why” Gilliam’s no contest plea went overlooked at the time of his hiring.

Sources:

www.wweek.com/news/schools/2016/12/21/portland-public-schools-cant-explain-how-it-hired-a-director-with-a-prostitution-conviction/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Public_Schools_(Oregon)

Tag Cloud
Categories
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • April 10 — Oregon legislators have proposed a bill that would allow ridesharing companies to operate statewide. The bill’s critics argue that it doesn’t call for fingerprint background checks and would make it difficult for local municipalities to impose their own regulations.
  • April 06 — Idaho State University recently instituted a background check policy for faculty members and other full-time staff. Previously, the school only conducted reference checks.
  • April 03 — An Illinois man has been sentenced to three years in prison for failing to register as a sex offender and working as a youth sports referee. The state legislature is considering a bill that would require more in-depth background checks for licensed sporting officials.
  • March 13 — A Denver hospital was in the headlines last year for hiring a surgery technician who stole syringes of the painkiller fentanyl. New information suggests that a more thorough background check could have flagged the man’s addiction issues.
  • March 08 — On September 26, 2016, the state of California passed Assembly Bill 1843 that amended the Labor Code by prohibiting employers from asking an applicant for employment to disclose certain juvenile records. The amended Labor Code has been effective since January 1, 2017.
  • March 08 — For the past 5 years, backgroundchecks.com has reported rulings of district courts around the country that have ruled that an employer’s inclusion of a liability waiver or other extraneous information in a disclosure violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s (“FCRA”) disclosure requirements found in §604(b)(2)(a). Now, for the first time, a federal court of appeals has weighed in on the disclosure requirement.
  • March 07 — The Kentucky State Senate has approved a piece of legislation that would open the state’s child abuse and neglect registry to schools, camps, and parents. If passed, the law would allow anyone to request a search of the database.
  • March 06 — A federal judge in Florida has ruled that a plaintiff with a case against Amazon.com has the right to sue the company for an alleged violation of the FCRA. The suit accuses Amazon of failing to provide a standalone background check disclosure form free of extraneous information.
  • March 05 — A federal judge in Florida has ruled that a plaintiff with a case against Amazon.com has the right to sue the company for an alleged violation of the FCRA. The suit accuses Amazon of failing to provide a standalone background check disclosure form free of extraneous information.
  • February 21 — In January, a Washington, D.C. contractor was fired for being reckless with confidential patient files. The woman had a criminal record with two felony convictions, but a local background check did not list the offenses.