Utilizing thorough background checks to protect at-risk populations should have already been the norm but it wasn’t. Recently several jurisdictions in the country are addressing this issue and are making new State and Federal regulations especially with daycare. Conducting criminal background checks on individuals that will have access to at-risk populations like children and the elderly is one big step in achieving safety for the vulnerable portion of the population in the USA.

The benefits of employment screening and background screening in general is protecting at-risk populations, such as the elderly and children, and everyone in-between. Caregivers of this portion of the population must be thoroughly vetted before given access to these people, it is a sure way to help avoid malfeasant individuals from abusing the at-risk population in this country.

Background screening when conducted in a fair and equitable manner, one that is nondiscriminatory and lawful, can be a great risk mitigation tool. Background screening can verify information on resumes, provide details through the use of public records, and help hiring managers, for paid and unpaid positions, have greater information to make important decisions. Some places in this country are already addressing this issue:

In Buffalo, New York a caregiver facility is faced with the implementation of new regulations designed to further protect at-risk populations.

From WKBW.com (Oct. 28, 19):

New state and federal regulations are now in place for daycares around New York State, that bring daycare providers up to a more rigorous standard, protecting your children from potential predators. ^{wkbw.com/news/i-team/new-background-checks-implemented-to-protect-kids-at-daycare}

Enhancing background screening requirements is always a good idea, especially when protecting at-risk populations. Thorough background checks, ones that include a full array of screening reports like criminal history reports, can only improve risk management, and, further, mitigate that risk.

At the Buffalo facility one worker appears to agree with the direction law has taken.

From WKWB.com (Oct. 28, 19):

“It should have been implemented from the beginning,” … “There’s no reason that we weren’t checking a complete background history from state to state…but the benefit of it is, that we will have a complete background history and it’s important.” ^ibid

However, policies are only as good as how they are being fulfilled. Failure to follow policy can open the door to malfeasance and discrimination.

In Roselle, Illinois a football coach was removed once his past came to light. And it appears that policy was not followed and the coach was allowed to work with and amongst children.

From WGNTV.com (Nov. 07, 19):

The head football coach at Lake Park High School was removed from his coaching duties earlier this week after an investigation found a convicted sex offender was allowed to help coach the team.

Lake Park High School District 108 administration launched an investigation after it came to light that a volunteer varsity football coach was convicted of sexually abusing a minor in 1992. ^{wgntv.com/2019/11/07/if-we-dont-condemn-it-we-condone-it-victim-of-volunteer-coachs-sexual-abuse-in-the-90s-speaks-out/}

Similar challenges occurred in Ontario, Canada (Nov. 14, 19):

The Ontario Minor Hockey Association is investigating, two Windsor Minor Hockey Association board members have resigned and parents have been summoned to a meeting Friday after court documents from the United States show a local peewee coach has a criminal record in three states and two arrest warrants.

… admitted in a plea agreement in U.S. District Court in Arizona in 2017 that he had been convicted of aggravated assault, a felony, in Florida in 2001 and sentenced to 90 days incarceration. ^{windsorstar.com/news/local-news/court-documents-reveal-peewee-hockey-coachs-criminal-record-in-u-s}

It is instances like these that remind everyone of how important it is to properly vet all individuals paid or not paid that are given access to at-risk populations like children. To help thwart malfeasance and to help prevent past offenders from striking again a thorough background screening program is certainly a best practice.

In the end any company or organization working with at-risk populations should ensure they utilize the most thorough background screening packet, one that utilizes a full array of screening reports such as criminal history, sex offender registry, nationwide criminal record check and others. Further, working with a third party background screening agency still remains the best course of action.

To read more about how in-depth background screening of caregivers (even those that are non-paid volunteers) can help protect the at-risk portion of the USA’s population and how enforcing strict adherence to such background screening policies can mitigate risk and thwart malfeasant individuals and past offenders from abusing the vulnerable read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release: {Insert December CBR Press Release Link}

The Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) says that communities become safer when people are able to earn a decent living.  They think that formerly incarcerated individuals (those with criminal background records) don’t recidivate because of their character, they do it because they can’t find employment and decent living conditions and therefore can’t provide for themselves or their families.

Many scholars and criminologists state that successful employment and housing are critical in decreasing recidivism amongst formerly incarcerated individuals and allowing for reintegration into mainstream society.  Thanks in part to low unemployment as well as a growing trend of eliminating the question of criminal history as part of the pre-employment application, business cultures are shifting to a more open policy of inclusion for those individuals with criminal history records.

There have been several initiatives in the USA in the last decade or so to help aid ex-cons find gainful employment.  The most famous of which is the ban-the-box movement which eliminates the question of criminal history on certain employer’s job applications.  At this point it is clear that the majority of people in this country are willing to help individuals with certain criminal pasts get back on their feet and reintegrate into mainstream society in a positive way and getting these people good jobs becomes a top priority to complete a successful transition into a healthy and crime free societal way of life.

Housing and employment are critical in keeping formerly incarcerated individuals from going back to jail.

From a recent article in USA Today (Mar 19, 19):

“I think it’s the perfect storm,” Taylor {Johnny Taylor, CEO of SHRM, Society of Human Resource Management} says, noting that communities also become safer when people are able to legally earn a living. ”People aren’t recidivating (or returning to criminal activity) simply because they’re bad actors. They’re recidivating because they can’t provide for their families.”  usatoday.com/story/money/2019/03/19/business-commitment-hiring-those-with-criminal-record/3091463002/

Successful efforts have been made in recent years to legislate the question of criminal history from the front end of pre-employment background screening by removing the question from the initial application.  These so called ban-the-box efforts have been implemented in numerous places across the country.  However, for employers (even those in jurisdictions where ban-the-box laws are in place) it is still a best practice to work with a professional employment screening agency to help insure that hiring practices and the proper use of background check reports are in compliance with all relative laws and guidelines.

From USA Today (Mar 19, 19):

Twenty-three states and Washington, D.C., have banned private or public employers from asking prospective employees if they have a criminal history until after they’ve passed an initial screening, had an interview or been given a conditional job offer, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Some local jurisdictions, like New York City, also ban most workplaces from asking about criminal history until they’re offered employment.  ibid

Recent surveys sponsored by SHRM have suggested that the general public is open to working with companies that hire formerly incarcerated individuals.

From FastCompany.com (Apr. 04, 19):

The Koch Institute and SHRM collaborated on yet another poll. It turns out that 78% of Americans are comfortable buying goods {sic} or services from a company who hires ex-cons to directly interact with them. Logically, that’s not surprising. Why wouldn’t people who are okay hiring ex-offenders or working alongside them also be fine patronizing places that acted similarly?  fastcompany.com/90329075/whats-holding-companies-back-from-hiring-people-with-criminal-records

Recently SHRM launched a new initiative and guidance for hiring organizations.

From FastCompany.com (Apr. 04, 19):

SHRM countered that in late January 2019 by launching Getting Talent Back to Work, an initiative that offers an online tool kit and additional guidance for all types of organizations.  ibid

It is critical, now more than ever, to work with a professional background screening agency to remain fully compliant with all applicable laws and guidelines pertaining to the hiring process as well as staying current with acceptable and practical cultural norms.

The action taken by SHRM will certainly push the industry toward hiring and rehiring formerly incarcerated individuals.  And with this action a renewed focus on fair and equal pre-employment background screening will take place.  Criminal background checks will remain an important tool in the hiring process, but where and when criminal background records are reviewed will change, as will the pre-conceived stigma attached to criminal history.

To read more about how SHRM is pushing for greater inclusion of formerly incarcerated individuals into the employment arena and why giving ex-cons good jobs is the best solution towards improving communities and the country read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release: SHRM Pushes for Greater Inclusion of Formerly Incarcerated, a Step that Could Greatly Impact Hiring; Opines CriminalBackgroundRecords.com

US unemployment rates remain low and the question of whether or not Ban-the-Box policies have helped individuals with a criminal record is still uncertain.  Hiring managers should be aware of existing and potential “Ban-the-Box” legislation and the effect it may have on hiring, especially with formerly incarcerated individuals.

As the USA is still experiencing a sustained period of low unemployment rates the question remains, is this helping formerly incarcerated individuals or those with any criminal record find gainful employment?  The answer is both yes and no depending on the source.  The combination of low unemployment rates and Ban-the-Box laws appear to be having an effect on potential employment with those with a criminal background record.

Still years after enacting Ban-the-Box laws there has been little evidence that Ban-the-Box laws are actually working.  However these laws combined with sustained low unemployment rates do appear to be effective.  With less and less available workers in the United States companies with open positions cannot be as selective as before and some of them are taking serious looks at people with previous criminal records.  Across the country employers are desperately seeking employees and often times struggle to fill positions.

The purpose of enacting Ban-the-Box laws is to help assist formerly incarcerated individuals or those with a criminal record find gainful employment and to become positive contributors to society.

Employers should remain fully aware of all laws pertaining to the hiring process, especially Ban-the-Box laws.  These laws can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and a best practice continues to be to work with a well-qualified third-party pre-employment background screening agency.

Whether or not Ban-the-Box legislation has assisted in reducing unemployment of formerly incarcerated individuals remains an important question.  As employers continue to search for employees in times of very low unemployment rates, hiring managers should be very conscious of Ban-the-Box related laws and related hiring of individuals with a criminal history.

Even with low unemployment numbers in the USA there is still a segment of the population that continues to struggle.

From TurnTo10.com (Aug 10, 18):

With the largest prison population in the world, the United States has a generally unacknowledged unemployment crisis that is not only devastating individuals and their families but taking a toll on the economy.

In the last quarter, the U.S. economy grew at a pace of 4.1 percent. July marked the 94th month of continuous job growth and saw more people returning to the labor force after dropping out. But for the millions of prime working-age adults who have a criminal conviction, the economic picture has been anything but rosy.  _{turnto10.com/news/nation-world/unemployment-crisis-for-ex-inmates-drags-on-the-economy-amid-push-for-prison-reform}

Ultimately hiring managers should continue to be stringent in their employment screening efforts and must do so in a fair and equal standing, as well as in full compliance with existing law.  Ban-the-Box laws continue to appear across the country and hiring managers should be very aware of all changes in laws that govern hiring.

Although the economic picture for adults with criminal records may in some estimation appear anything but rosy, there certainly are instances of hope.  In New Jersey a potential turnaround in unemployment for ex-cons may be occurring.

According to a recent article posted to NJTVOnline.com (Aug 10, 18) programs designed to assist in gaining employment for former offenders are finding recent success.

Most of the jobs are low wage, entry level positions. But those who have studied post-prison unemployment for years says there is a turnaround in the state.

“I don’t know if its attributable to the Ban the Box legislation. I’ve seen it very recently because the unemployment rate is so low,” said Reentry Coalition of New Jersey Executive Director Kevin McHugh. “I’ve been getting calls from human resources departments, employers asking me for help in connecting them with our program people to get them offenders for jobs. That’s just amazing.”  _{www.njtvonline.org/news/video/has-Ban-the-Box-legislation-reduced-unemployment-for-former-inmates/}

Ban-the-Box appears to be assisting formerly incarcerated individuals in finding gainful employment and that progress may have been greatly assisted by low unemployment.  However, it should be noted that as employers struggle to find new employees and fill positions they should retain a fully legal and compliant background screening policy.  Working with a well-qualified third-party pre-employment background screening agency remains a best practice.

Additionally with so many people in the USA that have already paid the price for their offenses it is imperative that they be given a second chance and that means being able to get a decent job.  This not only helps ex-offenders but also contributes to the overall economic health of the nation, and helps prevent the likelihood of recidivism.

In a final note…  The combination of sustained low unemployment in the USA along with the enforcement of Ban-the-Box laws is undoubtedly aiding in the accomplishment of these objectives.

To read more about why low unemployment rates in the USA along with Ban-the-Box laws are effecting the employment of former criminal offender’s across the nation read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release: Ban The Box Laws in Low Employment Economy: Are They Helping Ex-Cons Find Employment?

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is tasked with enforcing the Fair Housing Act and one of the key tools used in enforcement is the Disparate Impact Rule, one that is used to protect against discrimination, either consciously or subconsciously engaged.  HUD has recently reviewed the disparate impact rule and this may result in a broad effect on housing rules in the USA.

Anytime HUD reviews core policies, such as the disparate impact rule, landlords and property managers should take note and be aware that potential changes to tenant screening policies could be forthcoming.

The Fair Housing Act is enforced by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) oftentimes by the utilization of the Disparate Impact rule.  Landlords and property managers should take note anytime HUD reviews core policies, especially the use of the Disparate Impact rule, as this could signal potential change to tenant screening and tenant background checks.

Under the previous administration the use of the disparate impact rule was enacted and became a critical component with the enforcement of the Fair Housing Act.

From HousingWire.com (May 10, 18):

Changes could be on the way for the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s disparate impact rule, a rule enacted by HUD during the Obama administration and used as a way to enforce the Fair Housing Act.

Under HUD’s rule, lenders, landlords, and other housing providers can be held liable for discrimination against protected classes even if it was not their intent to discriminate.

The use of disparate impact was challenged all the way up to the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2015 in favor of disparate impact.  _{housingwire.com/articles/43340-hud-signals-changes-could-be-coming-to-disparate-impact-rule}

Disparate Impact cases have appeared across a number of actions related to housing, such as banking and mortgage lending, as well as tenant screening, and can be enormously complicated.  A best practice remains that landlords and property managers’ work with a professional third-party tenant screening agency to remain fully compliant with law, especially those against discrimination.

The rule of Disparate Impact can be complex.

From ArnoldPorter.com (May 18):

HUD’s disparate impact regulation was finalized in 2013, at which time the vast majority of federal courts of appeals had agreed that the FHA prohibits any practice that produces a discriminatory effect, regardless of discriminatory intent, but had taken various different approaches to determining liability under an “effects” standard. According to HUD, the disparate impact regulation was necessary to “formalize [HUD’s] long-held recognition of discriminatory effects liability under the [FHA]” and to provide “consistency nationwide.”

HUD’s current regulation establishes a burden-shifting framework for adjudicating disparate impact claims under the FHA, pursuant to which the charging federal agency or private plaintiff has the initial burden of demonstrating that a challenged practice caused, or predictably will cause, a discriminatory effect. A practice is deemed to have a discriminatory effect if it actually or predictably results in a disparate impact on a group of persons or creates, increases, reinforces, or perpetuates segregated housing patterns because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.  _{ARNOLDPORTER.COM/EN/PERSPECTIVES/PUBLICATIONS/2018/05/HUD-TO-EVALUATE-DISPARATE-IMPACT}

As HUD is reviewing the disparate impact rule now is the time for all organizations involved in the housing market to review their own policies and procedures especially landlords and property managers.  The best way the apartment management industry can protect themselves from liability is to make certain that their tenant selection process does not discriminate any particular grouping of people directly or indirectly.  To help with the process of becoming compliant or remaining compliant it is wise to work with a professional tenant screening agency.  However, in the end the liability of being caught by HUD conducting a discriminatory tenant selection process falls on the landlord.

To learn more about the disparate impact rule and how recent review of this rule by HUD could impact the housing market read recent TenantScreeningUSA.com press release:  HUD Recently Began Reviewing the Disparate Impact Rule Which May Have Broad Effect on Housing Rules; Opines TenantScreeningUSA.com

The poor in Buffalo rely on government assistance to pay their rent and even with established law it appears they have been discriminated against.  In the city of Buffalo, one of the poorest cities in the country, alleged discrimination against Section Eight renters may have occurred and subsequently caused significant concern within certain protected classes.

Discrimination against any class of individual is troubling.  A variety of classes have protections under law and violation of these protections could incur expensive legal action.

From InvestigativePost.com (Jul 05, 18):

Buffalo’s fair housing law was put in place to protect the thousands of city residents who rely on government assistance to pay their rent. But, in the 12 years since the law passed, the city has done little to enforce it, despite receiving at least 25 complaints like the one Adkins filed, most of them borne out by undercover testing – the gold standard in housing discrimination cases.

In many cases, it’s unclear whether city officials even decided whether a landlord had violated the law. Those decisions, when they were made, were painfully slow. And even when a landlord was found to have discriminated, in most cases there’s no indication that the city took any action against them.  ^{investigativepost.org/2018/07/05/buffalo-not-enforcing-its-fair-housing-law/}

The challenges in housing in Buffalo highlights the immediate need for all landlords and property managers to work with a well-qualified third-party tenant screening agency to conduct all tenant background checks.  This method still remains a best practice.

Discrimination is illegal in housing under the Fair Housing Act of 1964.

From Nolo.com (No Date Given):

• The federal Fair Housing Acts apply to all aspects of the landlord-tenant relationship. A landlord may not:
• advertise or make any statement that indicates a limitation or preference based on race, religion, or any other protected category
• falsely deny that a rental unit is available
• set more restrictive standards for selecting tenants or refuse to rent to members of certain groups
• before or during the tenancy, set different terms, conditions, or privileges for rental of a dwelling unit, such as requiring larger deposits of some tenants or adopting an inconsistent policy of responding to late rent payments
• terminate a tenancy for a discriminatory reason.  ^{nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/renters-rights-book/chapter5-2.html}

One small example of a penalty a landlord or property manager might face by breaking discrimination laws is in Menlo Park, California.

From The Almanac, a local Menlo Park community news webpage (Jul 7, 18):

A violation of the ordinance would be considered a misdemeanor, punishable with fines up to $1,000 or six months in county jail.  ^{almanacnews.com/news/2018/07/06/menlo-park-bans-landlords-from-discriminating-against-rent-subsidy-recipients}

Tenant screening is a critical part of the vetting process with new applicants.  Landlords are always seeking out long-term stable tenants.  Shortcutting the screening process and discrimination often proves to be a costly mistake.  A best practice remains for all landlords and property managers to work with a well-qualified third-party tenant screening agency to stay fully compliant with all laws state and federal regarding tenant screening.

To learn more about possible discrimination against the poor in the City of Buffalo and how proper tenant screening practices can help avoid discrimination against rental applicants read recent TenantScreeningUSA.com press release:  Alleged Discrimination against the Poor in the City of Buffalo Highlights Need to Work w/ Tenant Screening Agency; States TenantScreeningUSA.com

Constantly and currently in the news headlines demonstrate the continuation of caregiver abuse in the USA.  Children and the elderly are considered at-risk populations that need to be protected from malfeasant individuals under the guise of caregivers.  Instead these at-risk populations should go under the care of professional kind people without histories of abuse and criminal activity and this determination can in many cases be made with a thorough and complete background screening.

Finding a caregiver can be an enormous task.  Regardless of whose being cared for, either very young or elderly, finding the right caregiver for a loved one is of paramount importance and a task that should never be taken lightly.  Whether those that are being cared for live at home or in an institution, proper and thorough vetting of a caregiver may avoid potential harm and misfortune.

This is why all caregivers prior to given unsupervised access to children and the elderly must pass a thorough background screening that includes a criminal background check, sex offender registry search and verifications as well as proper reference checks.

Today’s headlines are filled with stories about abusive caregivers.  From an Indiana daycare facility to elder abuse in Syracuse, New York the risk remains significant for those under the aid of a caregiver.

Interestingly enough being a caregiver can be a richly rewarding occupation.  The care of at-risk populations such as the young and the elderly is a critically important task, but one with a high potential for risk.

Managing risk is the central precept of background screening.  The ability to mitigate risk through careful and lawful use of public records such as criminal background records as well as thorough verification of references is of critical importance to those utilizing background checks for caregivers.

In Indiana horrific details emerged as a daycare facility allegedly allowed a 1-year-old child to be beaten and severely injured.  During the course of an investigation several significant violations were discovered.

From MSNnewsnow.com (May 04, 18):

Violations included: no drug screen completed for caregiver, no consent form submitted for caregiver, no fingerprinting for national background check. Violations also included: unqualified caregiver present, two lack of supervision violations and child abuse not immediately reported by caregiver. As a result, the location was shut down.  msnewsnow.com/story/38112300/daycare-shuts-down-after-1-year-old-beaten

A thorough pre-employment background check, one with a complete drug screen, as well as compliant consent documentation, may have deterred malfeasant individuals.

In Syracuse, New York a caregiver received sentencing in a case regarding her actions against a 92-year-old individual.

From a May 3, 2018 article (Syracuse.com) discussing the actions of the abusive caregiver:

First, she stole lots of money from the elderly woman: $24,000 when you count the fake checks, forged withdrawals and other hanky-panky, according to testimony in court today. Pierce, who couldn’t pay any of it back, spent it on everything from nail treatments and Burger King to fast cash to support her drug habit, according to testimony in court today, authorities said.

Second, she abused the victim, who weighed less than 100 pounds, by leaving her alone for long stretches (neighbors saw her wandering aimlessly in her backyard with a walker); taking away her Life Alert (which her family found on top of the fridge) and driving the victim to the bank and stores for the sole purpose of emptying her accounts.

Third, the victim’s family says, Pierce pushed the victim to take a ton of Benadryl — far more than she needed to sleep — so that she was sleepy and quiet when family came to visit. That was Pierce’s way of keeping her from revealing the abuse, her family alleged.  syracuse.com/crime/index.ssf/2018/05/outraged_family_grandmother_92_could_have_gotten_better_care_from_a_serial_kille.html

Unfortunately caregiver abuse is a continuing crisis in the United States and will continue to appear in headlines.

In order to aid in the reduction of abuse to at-risk populations In the USA it should become common practice to fully vet all caregivers, family or professional using a well-qualified third-party background screening agency. An agency that remains fully compliant with law and has the capability to draw information from public records and can complete thorough reference verifications and assist in confirming the accuracy of caregiver job applications.  It is incumbent on the rest of the country to ensure that everything possible is being done to protect those that cannot protect themselves, and thorough vetting of caregivers before given access to children and the elderly is a good start.

To read more about why caregiver abuse remains in the news and how proper background screening can help prevent this kind of harm and misfortune to at-risk populations read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release:  Caregiver Abuse Remains in the Headlines

Even as summer weather is delayed in many areas in the USA parents are already thinking about what to do with their children once school ends in June.  Across the country thousands of children will be thrust into the void that can be summer break.  Certainly weeks long family vacations can fill parts of the summer void but desperate parents, especially those with two-income families, will look to various kinds of camps to keep the little ones occupied.

For many families in the US that means time for summer camps.  During the summer break children across the country will participate in a wide variety of activities in away-from-home destinations.  Some camps are day time only while others include sleep overs.  Such camps and programs can be great experiences for kids and a time to learn more about themselves and how to get along with others.  However, whenever there is an occasion where adults spend unsupervised private time with children the threat of abuse exists.

Summer camps are filled with a wide variety of activities, locations, and possibilities.  From weeklong sleepaway camps to localized day camps, children of all ages will find something to do.

In light of all the good aspects of summer camps the concern of child abuse at such a location is very real.  It is difficult enough for a parent to let go of their child for any extended stay away from the family, but the concern of an adult abusing their child is of even greater concern.  This is why parents should demand that the individuals working at an organization or camp their child is going to be attending go through a thorough and reliable background check.  This first line of defense is critical to a parent and must be met before entrusting their child to such individuals.  This background screening criteria also needs to include all volunteers as well.  When it comes to the safety of children volunteer background checks are just as important as performing background checks on full time staff and employees.

Parents need assurance that the individuals who interact with their children are not criminals or sex offenders or exhibit other malfeasant tendencies.  It is also important to note that many camps rely heavily on volunteers who prove invaluable to the successful operation of a summer camp.  Overlooking background check requirements on these people would be a huge oversight and a big mistake.

Any person that works with an at-risk individual, either youth or elderly, should be background checked, regardless if it is a volunteer or paid position.

In Massachusetts local government is facing pressure to expand background screening for volunteers and has developed plans to implement expansion.

From the Eagle Tribune (Apr. 12, 18):

Workers at summer camps, preschools and day care centers that get federal grants may soon need to be fingerprinted and subjected to national criminal background checks.

A plan filed by Gov. Charlie Baker expands background check procedures for the Department of Early Education and Care to comply with new federal rules, which require a check on the National Sex Offender Registry.  eagletribune.com/news/state-under-pressure-to-expand-background-checks/article_83c3c960-0c9b-56ae-8a63-047e27ce4124.html

Background screening is an invaluable tool to assist Camp Program managers in protecting children from potential predators.

Often a well-defined and well-publicized pre-volunteer or employment background check can prove a first line of defense against predators.

Organizations that take the extra step with a thorough volunteer background check are providing that line in the sand against potential malfeasance.  Often understanding that a camp performs background checks on its volunteers is enough of a deterrent to give a predator pause before pursuing a volunteer role.

From the American Camp Association’s website:

Performing criminal background checks on the people who will be working with the children in your care is not only a standard of the American Camp Association (ACA); it is your obligation to the families that have entrusted you with their kids.  acacamps.org/resource-library/campline/criminal-background-checks-staff-volunteers

Ultimately a best practice remains for all summer camps and related organizations to conduct thorough pre-volunteer or pre-employment background checks.  A background check can potentially act as a first line of defense against would-be predators.  Further, organizations should work with a well-qualified third-party background screening agency to develop screening options.

It is essential that parents ask the summer camp or organization they are leaving their children with about the background screening program in place and demand thorough criminal background checks and other essential background checks on not just full time staff and employees but volunteers as well.  Children are considered an at-risk population and making sure due diligence is performed helps protect the youth from malfeasant individuals.

To read more about why volunteer background checks should be a must in summer camp programs and how a thorough and reliable background screening program can help thwart malfeasant individuals from getting unsupervised access to children read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release:  Avoid Summertime Blues and Conduct Volunteer Background Checks

All over the USA today States and other jurisdictions are discussing or enacting new laws regarding the fair, legal, and lawful use of criminal history reports in the employment screening process.  Recurring headlines presents another example of a state or city enacting a new law governing the use of criminal history reports and how they are utilized as part of pre-employment background screening.

Quite frequently over the past few years new cities or States have either considered or enacted new laws governing the use of criminal background records in employment screening or tenant screening.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission otherwise known as the EEOC released guidelines in 2012 on the lawful use of criminal background reports in the employment screening process.  Additionally the so called “ban-the-box” laws have been adopted all over the country making employers remove the box on their job application form that asks the applicant if they have a criminal record.

However, the actions of the EEOC and changes in legislation regarding the ban-the-box movement have created considerable confusion with many employers over the actual fair, legal, and lawful use of criminal history reports in the employment screening process.  Also the legalization of recreational marijuana in some States further complicates the hiring process in many States across the USA.

Whenever a city or state passes any form of legislation governing background screening employers should take immediate notice and review and possibly update any existing employment screening practices.  The actions of the EEOC and the enforcement of ban-the-box policy could be detrimental to an employer should they fall out of compliance.   It is in these instances when partnering with a professional third party employment screening agency becomes a wise decision for any employer in the country.

Just a short time ago in Washington, Idaho and Missouri legislators have either enacted new laws or are attempting to engage new laws governing the use of criminal history reports.

In the state of Washington the question of Criminal History has been put to a vote and the state House of Representatives passed a measure restricting the use of the criminal history question.

From The Chronicle; www.chronline.com (Jan. 08, 18):

A bill prohibiting the criminal history question on job applications passed the Washington state House of Representatives with a 52-46 vote.

HB 1298 was passed with votes along party lines on Feb. 7 with Republicans largely against it.  chronline.com/business/proposed-bill-would-prohibit-criminal-history-question-on-job-applications/article_2ed0c4f8-103a-11e8-bb25-b37d22305500.html

Removing the question of criminal history is designed to improve the chances of employment within various protected classes.  Studies suggest that to alleviate the challenges of recidivism gainful employment is an obvious and important first step.

In the state of Idaho the question of criminal history has also come up and some legislators are looking to take action.

From www.idahostatesmen.com (Feb 12, 18):

About 95 percent of people in prison will re-enter society at some point.

“These people who have or will enter their communities need gainful employment to build stability and to find success after incarceration,” Sen. Cherie Buckner-Webb, D-Boise, told the Legislature’s Senate Judiciary and Rules Committee on Monday.

For most ex-offenders, the first step to rebuilding their lives is getting a job, which means filling out employment applications.  idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article199752454.html

Finally, in Kansas City, Missouri, City Council took action regarding criminal history and removing the box on all applications.

From a SHRM (Society of Human Resource Management) article discussing changes to Kansas City governance (Feb 12, 18):

Under the new ordinance, employers may not inquire about an applicant’s criminal history until after it has been determined that the individual is otherwise qualified for the position and only after the applicant has been interviewed for the position. The inquiry may then be made of all applicants who are “within the final selection pool of candidates.”

The ordinance, however, is not just about employment application content or criminal record inquiries. Like recent laws in other jurisdictions, the ordinance also limits employers’ substantive hiring decisions. Paralleling the EEOC’s guidance, the ordinance requires an employer basing a hiring or promotion decision on an applicant’s criminal history to be able to demonstrate that the decision was based on “all available information” including consideration of the frequency, recentness and severity of a criminal record.  shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/kansas-city-enacts-ban-the-box-ordinance.asp

Anytime there is substantive policy change or change in law all hiring managers and human resource personnel should take notice.  A best practice would be to work with a professional employment screening agency in order to maintain compliance with all existing law and prepare for changing law.

Knowing that 95 percent of people in prison will at some point re-enter free society it is imperative that they get a fair chance at employment.  The consequences of recidivism are harmful to society and one way to reduce this occurrence is with gainful employment.  Helping ex-offenders reentering free society get a decent job is believed to be a better course of action for the country and would have the benefits of helping overall economic growth and stability while aiding in the prevention of recidivism.

To read more about why more States are passing ban-the-box legislation and the philosophy they adhere too in regards to how employers should treat applicants and when they are allowed to perform criminal background checks read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release: Criminal History Reports in the News

Apartment owners, managers and landlords are commonly using evictions to be able to get new tenants that will pay higher rent amounts.  They also don’t want to spend money making their apartments better for existing tenants.  However, the cities of Boston and Detroit are fighting back.  They are definitely becoming pro-tenant cities and are cracking down on evictions.

Detroit is trying to prevent landlords from renting substandard homes including stopping them from collecting rent if they don’t comply with inspections.  While Boston just approved a set of regulations that could make it harder for landlords to evict tenants without just cause and the measure would require landlords to notify the city whenever they move to evict a tenant, for whatever reason.

Evictions are a common tool utilized by landlords and property managers to remove tenants for a variety of reasons, which could include non-payment of rent, property damage, or some similar breach of a rental contract.  Additionally, evictions are increasingly utilized in rental communities to clear properties for new tenants that could pay significantly more rent.  It is a long and costly process but one that landlords often pursue in not always the most scrupulous path.

Boston and Detroit are attempting to crackdown on evictions but it is a challenging prospect.

The City of Detroit

The rental market in Detroit is often plagued by scrappers and thieves.  It has become so bad that an informal “24-hour rule” has been put in place.

From The Detroit News website (Oct. 05, 17):

The dozens of working furnaces and water heaters sitting in Chris Garner’s warehouse sit idle because of what he calls his “24-hour rule.”

Within a day of a tenant moving out of one of his Detroit rentals, Garner, the owner of a Taylor-based property management company, has staffers remove the systems and board up the home. It’s all to deter scrappers and thieves. They won’t reinstall, he said, until 24 hours before a new tenant is scheduled to move in.  detroitnews.com/story/news/special-reports/2017/10/05/detroit-evictions-landlords/106351462/

Challenges are with property owners putting very little money into rental properties, often due to the demands and cost of stringent annual property inspections.  Due to low quality of properties tenants often refuse to pay rent thereby forcing the onset of the eviction process.

The Mayor of Detroit, as well as the City Council, seeks to correct the situation.

From The Detroit News website (Oct. 05, 17):

Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan and other city officials say part of the solution to improve city rental housing is a landlord crackdown, and last month pledged to launch a campaign to prevent landlords from renting substandard homes. That includes stopping them from collecting rent if they don’t comply with inspections.

The city admits most rentals haven’t been inspected.  detroitnews.com/story/news/special-reports/2017/10/05/detroit-evictions-landlords/106351462/

 

The City of Boston

In Boston steps are being taken to better manage evictions.

From the Boston Globe website (Oct. 04, 17)

Boston’s City Council overwhelmingly approved a set of regulations Wednesday that could make it harder for landlords to evict tenants without just cause, while giving city officials better ways to track how many housing evictions are occurring and where.

Called the Jim Brooks Community Stabilization Act — named after the late social justice advocate — the measure would require landlords to notify the city whenever they move to evict a tenant, for whatever reason. The city and landlord would then have to alert the tenant to his or her housing rights, such as the ability to appeal to a state Housing Court, and the tenant could be directed to advocacy groups.  bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/10/04/city-council-bill-would-better-regulate-and-track-evictions/pZSRLVJbazy0pIxgWdDyTP/story.html

These steps are designed to help protect against speculators taking over properties and increasing rents until tenants can no longer afford the rent and either leave or are evicted for failure to pay.

Evictions will remain a challenge for Cities, Landlords and Tenants.  However it is an important tool that landlords need in order to protect their investment but it can be used more maliciously in order to remove existing tenants in favor of potential higher paying tenants.  Boston and Detroit are trying to redesign how evictions should work and are definitely on the side of the tenant.

Evictions and the eviction process will continue to be a complex tool and one that landlords and property managers should strongly consider before implementing.  A best practice for landlords is to work with a well-qualified third-party tenant screening company to remain current and compliant with law and to maintain a fair and compliant applicant selection decision making process.

To learn more about the eviction process and how Boston and Detroit are cracking down and dealing with this issue along with why and how landlords can be unfair to tenants as well as what tenant rights are available read recent TenantScreeningUSA.com press release:  http://tenantscreeningusa.com/tenant-screening-news/evictions-a-tale-of-two-cities-boston-and-detroit/

There have always been some issues and conflict between landlords and tenants over the history of the USA.  However, if expectations are set correctly at the beginning of the relationship and if it is clear as to how issues and conflicts will be resolved than that would result into a better housing situation for both parties.  Nonetheless, in recent history the country was struck by several large hurricanes and Harvey in particular has caused big landlord-tenant issues.

In September of 2017 Hurricane Harvey ripped through Houston, Texas causing countless millions and billions in damage as well as displacing tens of thousands of people.  Winds from Harvey caused significant damage but the record level rainfall created even greater damage.  Homes and apartments were rendered uninhabitable and could remain so for month’s even years.

In a recent article from the Huffington Post (Sep 05, 17):

Under Texas statutes, either a tenant or a landlord can break a lease for residences deemed “totally unusable.” If a property is partially useable, a court would have to determine if rental costs could be reduced.

Meanwhile, hundreds of residents who were forced to evacuate a flooded apartment complex in Katy, Texas, have been given eviction notices, The Houston Chronicle reported.

The residents have been given less than a week to retrieve whatever property they can, a letter from the property manager said. The letter also said rental charges for the last few days of August will be refunded, according to the Chronicle.

Disputes between landlord and tenants are among the first conflicts to emerge in the wake of a hurricane, lawyer Saundra Brown, a disaster manager at Lone Star Legal Aid, told the newspaper.  huffingtonpost.com/entry/harvey-landlords-rent-flooded-properties_us_59ae18a5e4b0354e440bfa95

Conflict between landlords and tenants can be avoided if the situation is handled properly from the very beginning of the relationship, which means when the tenant screening process begins.

From the point of the initial application through the tenant check landlords and property managers need to be very clear as to the exact expectations they have with the applicant as well as clearly define the process of how disputes, grievances and any other housing issues will be handled if they should arise.

This mentality may seem easy in words but implementation is another thing…  But for sure a clear outline of rules and requirements for a tenant is essential in starting off the housing relationship on the right foot.

In the initial application phase of the apartment renting process the landlord or apartment manager needs to conduct the same vetting procedure with each perspective tenant.  This continuity goes a long way in creating a positive relationship with future tenants and assists in maintaining a fair and compliant applicant selection decision making system.

Other than the general niceties of an interview process a landlord should explain what each document in a background check covers, what information is drawn, and how it is used. And an agreement should be in place as to conflict resolution, should it arise, and how to communicate any form of grievance.

Every state is different in recording conflict but a general rule of thumb is communicating in written form; generally through US Postal mail or email, where copies can be maintained and reviewed as needed.  And it is wise to always keep copies of written communication.

As the housing crisis in the US continues to grow, greater pressure is placed upon tenants and landlords.  Tenants worry that if they bring forth an issue they may face some sort of penalty or potential eviction and landlords are always looking for long-term stable tenants.  Each party has a vested interest in creating an amicable living arrangement and tenant-landlord relationship.

The landlord tenant relationship always begins with the applicant vetting process.

There are a number of documents reviewed as part of a tenant background check, from consumer credit reports, criminal background checks to eviction records and a sex offender registry search, and others.  Each is unique and should be explained to the applicant. Creating a comfortable environment goes a long way in creating a comfortable long-term landlord-tenant relationship.

To learn more about how landlord and tenant relationships can improve and why it is important to review this information from the very beginning of the housing relationship which starts with the applicant screening process read recent TenantScreeningUSA.com press release: http://tenantscreeningusa.com/tenant-screening-news/landlord-tenant-relationships-are-critical-to-a-successful-housing-relationship/