Some criminal offenses are more difficult to evaluate — especially when the charges are related to ‘ plea-down offenses .’ Imagine this occurrence : a sexual offender is arrested and charged with aggravated sexual assault of a child — clearly a disqualifying offense . In the course of the criminal justice process , however , the offender is allowed to plea down to a lesser ( possibly even a non-registration ) offense . Examples of common plea-down offenses correlated to child sexual abuse include : indecency , contributing to the delinquency of a minor , criminal mischief , assault , and a variety of other labels , depending on the criminal codes of a particular state . For screening purposes , these are red flag offenses . The person reviewing the criminal search results must understand this concept and be sensitive to red flag offenses .
In many cases , the criminal behavior underlying a charge for indecency is simple and explicable . In some cases , however , the criminal behavior underlying a charge for indecency is child sexual abuse . If the offender was allowed to plea down to a lesser offense , he or she will have an explanation for the charge that does not involve sexual abuse of a child , and this explanation will be well-rehearsed and persuasive . Do NOT accept self-reported explanations for red flag offenses . Instead , politely explain to the applicant that you must pause the process . Shift the burden to the applicant . Politely request that the applicant bring you the arrest record for the indecency charge . The arrest record is more difficult for you to access , but it is available to the applicant . The arrest record will describe the behavior that gave rise to the underlying arrest . If the applicant was arrested and charged with sexual abuse of a child , the arrest record will say so . If the applicant was in fact arrested and charged with sexual abuse of a child , the applicant will simply disappear . He or she will self-select out of the screening process .
This concept is covered at length in MinistrySafe ’ s Skillful Screening Training : including grooming offenses , stair-step offenses and use of releases .
Ministry best practices Notwithstanding background check limitations , criminal searches must be completed . In so doing , ministries must wisely allocate limited resources . As financial resources are expended , the following principles should be considered .
Deeper searches
Given the growing crisis of child sexual abuse , background check vendors are quick to capitalize , encouraging ministries to run deeper searches and refresh searches more frequently . These are excellent suggestions , but deeper and more frequent background checks alone do not solve the problem , because less than 10 % of abusers will encounter the criminal justice system .
As an example , USA Gymnastics could have undertaken an exhaustive criminal background check on Larry Nassar weekly , without a single hit .
Create tiers of staff / volunteers
Most ministries choose a background check vendor based upon how quickly and cheaply a search can be completed . As a general rule , the ‘ cheapest ’ background check has the narrowest search scope . Often , it will not search aliases , it provides the shortest ‘ look back ’ period , and it does not confirm Social Security Number ( SSN ) identity . In other words , it ’ s relatively easy to foil .
Practice Point 1 : Develop a familiarity with ' plea-down ' or red flag offenses .
Practice Point 2 : NEVER accept a self-reported explanation for a red flag offense .
For some roles , a cheaper and narrower search might be acceptable : roles that are highly supervised with limited ( or no ) time alone with a child ( e . g ., a face-painter at your VBS ). For other roles , a deeper search is necessary , particularly high-trust positions where trusted time alone with a child or student might be contemplated ( e . g ., student minister , children ’ s minister , senior pastor , church counselor ). For these roles , a ministry cannot afford to be wrong .
Given differing roles and a limited budget , it is recommended that a ministry create two or more tiers of those who wear the ministry ’ s nametag . The depth of search should correspond to the trust level and access to children . Be prepared to spend more for personnel about whom you cannot be wrong . These tiers should be based on trust level and access , not whether a person is a staff member or a volunteer .
In general , there is no ‘ one-size-fits-all ’ criminal background check .
Disclosure requirements Every ministry should have a disclosure requirement requiring all staff members and volunteers to disclose whether they have been arrested , charged or accused of criminal behavior during the time of service as a staff member or volunteer . This is not to be confused with requesting information prior to engagement , which might be impacted by state law .
Periodically refresh
Every two or three years , each ministry should refresh or re-run criminal history searches to determine whether a staff member or volunteer has been arrested or charged with criminal conduct . Coupled with a disclosure requirement ( see above ), discovery of an undisclosed new criminal record provides an independent justification for dismissal ; requiring disclosure is an important first step .
Skillful screening training Managerial and screening personnel must receive training to recognize high-risk indicators revealed by and through an effective screening process , including those revealed by criminal records . Risk indicators stemming directly from skillful evaluation of background check records include common pleadown , stair-step , grooming and red-flag offenses , as well as disqualifying offenses ( mandated by state law or internal policy ).
Ministry leaders have much to learn about the criminal justice system , how criminal records are generated , how records are reported , and the various obstacles to obtaining a complete criminal history . When ministry professionals become educated consumers , they are best prepared to fully use the criminal background check with an understanding of what this screening element can — and cannot — provide .
Kimberlee Norris and Gregory Love are partners in the Fort Worth , Texas law firm of Love & Norris [ https :// www . lovenorris . com ] and founders of MinistrySafe [ https :// ministrysafe . com ], providing child sexual abuse expertise to ministries worldwide . After representing victims of child sexual abuse for more than two decades , Love and Norris saw recurring , predictable patterns in predatory behavior . MinistrySafe grew out of their desire to place proactive tools into the hands of ministry professionals . Love and Norris teach the only graduate-level course on Preventing Sexual Abuse in Ministry as Visiting Faculty at Dallas Theological Seminary .
16 CHURCH EXECUTIVE • STOP CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE churchexecutive . com