Posts Tagged ‘coach background check’

PIAA Being Asked to Background Check Athletic Officials

Thursday, September 18th, 2008

As a result of an investigation published by the Pittsburg Post-Gazette Saturday, the Western Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic League (WPIAL) is asking its parent, Pennyslvania Interscholastic Athletic Association (PIAA), to complete background checks on its 13,700 officials beginning in January.

The Post-Gazette’s investigation revealed dozens of past and present officials registered with the PIAA who possess criminal convictions including child molestation, possession of child pornography, gun crimes, drug offenses and more.

According to a statement released on their website in response to the investigation, the PIAA has taken other measures rather than conducting background checks to insure the safety of the children involved in their sporting events. Aside from requiring sports officials to reveal prior criminal convictions on their applications, they also rely on other people in the organization to let them know who has been charged and convicted, or pled guilty to crimes. They also have adopted policies to prevent unsupervised contact between students and sports officials.

The PIAA also cites the cost of doing background checks as a major factor to why they have not enacted the policy thus far. They fear losing officials if they must raise the price of dues. Dues average around $40.00 per official and they anticipate the background checks to cost $50.00, thus doubling the price for their officials. The PIAA claims they could not afford paying for the background checks on their own.

Additionally, the PIAA’s statement included the following:

“To summarize, this issue is one that has been debated by PIAA for several years now. While criminal background checks may be a “feel good” means of taking some action to protect student-athletes, it is not the only, and is certainly not even the best, means available to provide protection. PIAA has taken a different approach, but with (so far) very good results. Perhaps, though, after further assessment of benefits and costs ofdoing so, we will also require criminal background checks. Stay tuned for future developments.”

One hopes that they will see the benefits to conducting background checks outweigh any costs involved when it comes to the welfare of our children.

Sacramento Little League Coach Sentenced to Prison

Tuesday, September 9th, 2008

Last week, a coach for a little league football team in Sacramento, California was sentenced to 7 1/2 years in state prison for intending to distribute cocaine.

Nakia “Keith” Owens was pulled over by police in October 2005 for not having license plates or visible registration on his car. When police checked the inside of the vehicle, they found a bag with marijuana, as well as a sock with crack cocaine in it. Both items were found inside an equipment bag marked as belonging to the Sacramento Raiders youth football team. In fact, Owens admitted to police that he was the little-league coach during the search of the car.

Owens was a passenger in the vehicle, but he was under what is referred to as “searchable probation.” He was also wanted for several vehicular violations.

Thankfully, the children involved with this little-league team weren’t outwardly harmed by their coach’s actions; however, a drug test and background check, including a motor vehicle records, would have been prudent.

Legal Consequences for Sex Offenders Trying to Work with Children?

Thursday, August 21st, 2008

There have been an alarming number of stories in the news lately about registered sex offenders or people who have criminal records for crimes involving children who are found coaching little leagues.

I talked this over with a coworker. What consequences are in place to keep a registered sex offender from applying to be a coach? None. In the event that a sports organization actually runs a background check, discovers that a prospective employee has a criminal record (which was undisclosed on an application) and doesn’t hire the person, there is nothing stopping that person from just going down the road and applying for another coaching position, possibly in an organization which doesn’t perform background checks.

In most areas, it is illegal for a sex offender to live within a certain vicinity of a school or park, and it’s actually a felony. Sex offenders must also make sure they register in the state or area of residence, or they face legal consequences. So, how about imposing legal consequences on a registered sex offender who knowingly applies for a job involving children and does not disclose their past?

In Greensboro, North Carolina, the city’s Parks and Recreation Department recently adopted a formal background check process, but it’s only on randomly selected coaches. The organization cited the cost (about $14.00 per person) as the reason they cannot run background checks on all of their coaches. Sadly, all it will take is one coach who slips through the cracks and harms a child to make this organization realize that it’s worth the price to background check everyone. In the unfortunate event that something does go wrong, the Parks and Recreation Department will probably pay a lot more money than if they had conducted background checks on all of their employees.

However, placing legal consequences on sex offenders who knowingly apply for youth coaching jobs just might be part of the answer in helping protect our children.

What do you think?