Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

Ok. First and foremost - This policy is to protect FIRST - the organization. It is written carefully to protect FIRST. I believe that a better protection would have been a waiver, but in the aftermath of any problem (i.e. sexual misconduct) the outcry of "how could FIRST have prevented this???!!!" would lead to this sort of check.

Here is my problem: As a "Team Leader", FIRST is asking me to take personal information, and check references. Upon what basis do I evaluate these references or their responses? Does this make me responsible if something does happen? I do not want to be in the position where I am doing reference checks on volunteers, mentors and especially parents - who am I to do this?

Our team has 3 "coaches", about 7 volunteer engineers, 10 or so parents and probably 5 students who are 18. I am the only one who is exempt from the screening and reference check process. Cost to the team for the checks: $250. Oh, and the matter of 72 phone calls to be made by me in my spare time.

If FIRST needs to protect itself, that's fine. It just shouldn't do it on the backs of those of us who volunteer our time and already work so hard to make our teams the best they can be.

How are other "Team Leaders" dealing with this?

-Joseph Vanderway
Coach, Team 599

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

But wouldn't students be participating in those things? If volunteers are doing things completely out of sight of students doesn't that defeat the purpose of FIRST?

Personally I don't think FIRST is making the distinction you're making. According to the Mentoring Guide "Every adult on a FIRST team must consider themselves a mentor" -- its the first sentence after the introduction.

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

(warning, this is a long post... bail out now if you don't want to wade through it)

This policy has some very bad things about it and a few good things.

Here are the good:
1. This is a general effort for teams to officially attempt to protect children from people who should not be mentors. If the result of this program protects one child from a terrible act, then it has much worth, even at the inconvenience of many.

2. This program does put the responsibility on the public school systems to "police their own" volunteers (you just need to read the fine print to find it). FIRST is just wanting to see that public schools are being responsible and screening their "coaches" who are acting as mentors. If you notice, FIRST has made an exception that people who are either teachers at a public school, employed at the school, or volunteers at the school. If a school screens these people and can simply show to FIRST that they have done this, then it seems that FIRST is happy.

For instance, Kokomo High School screened me years ago through a painless process by using my name and Indiana driver's licence number. All sports team coaches go through the same thing.

Now... the negative things are big also:

1. By implementing this program, it seems to me that FIRST has now made themselves more responsible for student protection than they were without an official program. In the past, I can easily see that the responsibility is on the school... but since FIRST has started this policy, then they have to police and enforce it to make it have worth. Since it is pretty much impossible for FIRST to police and enforce this policy, then they are leaving themselves open for litigation if something bad would take place on a team which was allowed to compete but did not comply with the policy. Now, FIRST is gonna have to be the "bad guy" by punishing teams who don't adhere to the policy.

2. Teams who are not associated with public schools are going to have to do alot of work through VolunteerSelect. Team leaders are going to need to ask for references from people that might have already been on the team for many years, with is a slap in the face to these long-time FIRSTers. Most likely, these teams have already taken care of their own and done simple checks (most teams do this), but this effort will not be recognized by FIRST. This is unfortuneate.

3. FIRST is trying to do these screens with SS#'s. People have the right not to give them, and FIRST will probably not get good screening without them, so there is an endless loop of futility.

4. FIRST has no way to check to see if teams are complying. A team may only put in 1/2 of their mentor to the check (only the mentors who agree to give their SS#'s) and FIRST has no good way to know who the omitted people are.

5. Once a team leader completes the process and dutifully submits all of their teammate mentors for checks, then they will get results back. Most results will be "green", and possibly there will be a reply where a mentor is "red flagged". The team leader will not know the details of why this person is "red flagged" (DUI 10 years ago?, murder?, jay walking?, etc.). Who will know... well, FIRST will know. Do they need to know? no. Does local administration (principal, company president, etc.) or team leadership need to know? probably yes. But, from what I can gather right now, the only people who will see the detailed results are FIRST management.

All in all, I think that FIRST is going too far with requiring that all teams should do this. They should provide information and resources for teams to do it (like through VolunteerSelect), and then have teams sign off by saying that they, the teams, are responsible for screening their own mentors. Their "requirements" and mandatory screening are simply going too far.

Andy B.

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

Andy:

I was thinking about this yesterday afternoon as I was driving over to my team's high school. What the controversy is all about is this:

What is more important? My right to privacy or the imagined problem/threat to a child on my team's safety? As I'm a volunteer, I feel that my past performance over my three years participation, the fact that I'm periodically investigated by the Defense Investigative Service to maintain my clearance, and the fact that I am myself a parent involved in an activity my child is participating in should be good enough. I really doubt that any series of checks that FIRST or the contracted "security service" does will be more invasive than the ones DIS conducts for clearance adjudication.

To me this is something like the alleged security procedures implemented at our nation's airports. I think the press has plainly pointed out that the system is certainly not fail safe. For me to travel on an aircraft today, I must submit to the nonsense...but that's not the same with FIRST. I'm a volunteer. I'm giving my time and efforts...basically with nothing in return.

Who is going to forward to FIRST the concerns being outlined here in this and other forums regarding the new policies.

Something that came up in the meeting yesterday was the ill-timing of this directive. Most teams have already ponied up their money (for us, 9000) and started lining up sponsors. For us to back out now....will look very bad.

I've rambled enough....not feeling well. Must be the Nyquil talking.

See you on the high ground!

Jim

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

I was speaking to another team leader about this the other day. He said that if he were to simply refuse to follow the policy and as a result, get his team thrown out of the FIRST competition, his mentors, school and community would support him all the way.

I think that the same is almost certainly true with my team.

I'm not saying this is a good idea, it isn't, but it goes to show that EVERYBODY involved in FIRST, mentors, students, sponsors, everyone except FIRST itself realizes how bad this policy is.

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

I think now that this is now in place there is almost no way it can go away. Its is crossing a line, if they were to just take this policy away and something did happen, first would be in difficult situation they would be blamed because they had a program in place and it got taken away. Although many of us don’t like the way they are presenting this I doubt in one month they can come up with a system that still protects the kids and satisfies the adults.

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

[quote=Andy Baker

2. This program does put the responsibility on the public school systems to "police their own" volunteers (you just need to read the fine print to find it). FIRST is just wanting to see that public schools are being responsible and screening their "coaches" who are acting as mentors. If you notice, FIRST has made an exception that people who are either teachers at a public school, employed at the school, or volunteers at the school. If a school screens these people and can simply show to FIRST that they have done this, then it seems that FIRST is happy.

All in all, I think that FIRST is going too far with requiring that all teams should do this. They should provide information and resources for teams to do it (like through VolunteerSelect), and then have teams sign off by saying that they, the teams, are responsible for screening their own mentors. Their "requirements" and mandatory screening are simply going too far.

Andy B.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you completely. It will be difficult though now for FIRST to be proven negligent in any lawsuit, which from my simple understanding of law, is most important. With a policy in place, they have pushed the burden to the team leaders who will be named along with schools and sponsors in any lawsuit. Most schools probably have a process in place, whether or not it is used by teams. Team leaders should consult with schools and legal counsel if they are concerned. CYA!

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

How can anyone disagree with Dave ?? :)

Well I don't!

However it seems to me that FIRST is really opening up a can of worms with this new policy. I think it is easy to understand the points made by those on all sides of this arguement. And I personally feel that this new policy is really about protecting FIRST from the potential liability for not addressing this issue at all. The problem is that FIRST can (and probably should, for their own protection) prohibit anyone from participating if they do not comply. I don't see how the program can continue to grow and thrive under those conditions (prohibiting NASA volunteers ?? THAT'S absurd!). It's a tough problem and I am glad I don't have to make those decisions, unfortunately I don't have any good answers either ... :confused:

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

I haven't though into this too much but wouldn't a nicely writted waiver accomplish the same goal for FIRST? Put the responsibility of child safety on the team instead of FIRST. Seriously, why is FIRST taking responsibility for this? What if a kid's finger got sucked into the provided gearbox and ripped off? Would FIRST be responsible then? What if at a competition a couple students were carrying the robot, one tripped over the field entrance bar, and broke his neck, or hit his head on some other part of the field and got brain damage, maybe a coma even? It would not take much for this to happen to a person. Who's responsible then? There are a million other things concerning child saftey than adult predators.

Also, did anyone read how they are going to randomly audit teams and perhaps ban them from the competition if they are not truthfully naming all their helping adults. That scares me. Because say your team leader does not have a check conducted on everyone who is supposed to have one. And then they come to your pit and ask who helped you build the robot. Then a student naturally says all these people, and then FIRST goes and checks how many people got screened, see it isn't enough, and then bans the team from competition. Then the mentor and everyone else on the team gets mad at the student who told FIRST all the people who help. What a disaster!

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

Normal disclaimer, any comments real or imagined are from me, not my teams mentor/coach/teacher.

I will try hard to not comment on how I see this new policy I only want to ask a question or perhaps make an observation.

Who, specifically from those viewing this thread, is going to choose to not be a mentor because of the policy ,please don't loose this in the SSN issue or the security clearance issue. Who is simply going to *refuse* to take part in any FIRST mandated screening policy?

If I am reading the thread correctly FIRST needs to start finding ALOT more mentors.

(For what its worth I am asking my adult mentors to comply and will respect their choice if they decline. The team will need to decide how to handle the issue and possible consequences if mentors refuse. Also, I am cleared by a public school system in Washington. But I would , myself, jump through the hoops FIRST is asking if I was not already cleared.)

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

"Are there any exemptions for people screened through other processes?
The following is the only exemption: Adults who have been screened by a public school system to work with youth are exempt from the background screening and reference check process. (Those exempted and screened by a public school system may include currently employed teachers, other currently employed school employees, and current school volunteers.) The team leader should maintain documentation that the mentors have been screened by the school."

"What screening documentation does FIRST require?
FIRST does not require that you send the documentation to FIRST, nor do you need to bring it to events. FIRST will conduct random team audits to determine compliance and will require documentation at that time."

Both Quotes are directly from the FIRST YOUTH PROTECTION POLICY FAQ which I received today.

It looks to me like the screening we do through school will do the trick, be free for my team and keep FIRST happy.

Have a good holiday!

Steve Yasick
Team 85

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

Good point Steve ... maybe that is a great "compromise" solution. If our schools already have a method/policy in place for screening volunteers we (mentors) could all volunteer/submit to that ...

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

In reviewing the FAQ for this item I have read the exemptions for screening.
I see that currently employed teachers and currently employed school employees are exempted (for public schools only) but that the door is open for current school volunteers ... whatever that is...

screening is also defined as: "a web-based process that searches an individuals criminal history."

I believe that if you have a criminal records based screening method, as defined above, already in place for your public school that you may be exempt. For those of us in these schools, we must still pay a fee, similar to that shown in FIRST for these screenings. We have never had a mentor/volunteer pay them so the cost is still born by the organization. The only difference is that we will recieve information back from these and not just a red or green.
We would also have to use the FIRST method for any NEW school volunteers because this only works for current school volunteers...one must assume that current means before the beginning of this year when the system was put into place.

I must agree with many who have indicated that FIRST is just placing another burden on the team leader who is, in most cases, a teacher... FIRST has consistently given little credit to teachers... most of their awards and recognition are for MENTORS, Engineers, volunteers for regional events... no awards or recognition for those leaders and teachers who have put in countless hours working behind the scenes and without whose efforts the program would fail. Nope let's just lump one more program and time on the teacher/ to protect FIRST's liability...

thanks for listening

Re: Volunteer Screening?
 

One last comment...

The Document on line states:

A background screening and reference checks (sic) must be conducted on any adult electing to participate as a Team Mentor in a FIRST program for the first time. (emphasis added....) A background screening must be conducted every other year for adults returning to participate at (sic) a Team Mentor to ensure that records are current.

This would indicate that reference checks are NOT required for those who have already been a Team Mentor before and that background screening must be done every other year for everyone. FAQ says that All Team Members must be screened. ( I presume that this means student members over the age of 18 must also be screened?) So screening and reference checks are two different things...

I am interpretting this as follows:
No reference checks for anyone except NEW mentors...
Screening for everyone... including student members over 18

I think this is consistent as the team acts as its own reference checks for mentors that have worked before... otherwise we could just put down three mentor names as references and during a meeting say " Does anyone have any objections to this person being a mentor? " none seen he is admitted....

Anyway... any thoughts???

The original document DID say that the checks must be conducted on adults electing to participate as a mentor for the first time... one could interpret that as saying that everyone is grandfathered in... at least for this year

?????