Private schools: employees: criminal background checks.
Summary
(1) Existing law sets forth a method for providing special education and related services to pupils with exceptional needs. Existing law also permits, under certain circumstances, contracts to be entered for the provision of those services by nonpublic, nonsectarian schools or agencies, as defined. Existing law authorizes a master contract for special education and related services provided by a nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency only if the school or agency has been certified by the Superintendent of Public Instruction as meeting specified standards. Existing law requires the Superintendent, before certification, to conduct an onsite review of the facility and program seeking certification, as provided. Existing law further requires the Superintendent to conduct an investigation of a nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency onsite at any time without prior notice if there is substantial reason to believe that there is an immediate danger to the health, safety, or welfare of a child, as provided. This bill would authorize the Superintendent, when conducting an onsite review or investigation, to verify that the nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency has received a successful criminal background check clearance and has enrolled in subsequent arrest notice service, as specified, for each owner, operator, and employee of the nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency. (2) Existing law requires every person, firm, association, partnership, or corporation offering or conducting private school instruction on the elementary or high school level to require each applicant for employment in a position requiring contact with minor pupils who does not possess a valid California state teaching credential, or is not currently licensed by another state agency that requires a criminal record summary, to submit 2 sets of fingerprints to the Department of Justice for the purpose of obtaining a criminal record summary from the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Existing law requires a recipient of the summary to not disclose its contents or provide copies of the information, and requires the information received to be destroyed upon hiring. This bill would delete the exemption for applicants possessing a valid California state teaching credential or who are currently licensed by another state agency that requires a criminal record summary, from submitting 2 sets of fingerprints for the purpose of obtaining a criminal record summary from the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The bill would, notwithstanding the restrictions on sharing and destroying criminal background check information, require a nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency, upon demand, to make available to the Superintendent evidence of a successful criminal background check clearance and enrollment in subsequent arrest notice service, as provided, for each owner, operator, and employee of the nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency. The bill would require the nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency to retain the evidence, as specified. The bill also would make technical, nonsubstantive changes.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Sep 2013
Assembly Passage
Apr 2013
Senate Passage
Aug 2013
Signed into Law
Oct 2013
Introduced Feb 15, 2013
Signed Oct 10, 2013
Floor votes · Senate Aug 26, 2013 · Assembly Sep 6, 2013
How they voted
35–0
Passed
Total votes 35
Aug 26, 2013
D
Democratic25
100% Yea
R
Republican10
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
25
Key actions
9
Committee
9
Amendments
4
Oct 10, 2013
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Sep 6, 2013
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (62-0-1)
assembly
Sep 6, 2013
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 76. Noes 0. Page 2898.).
lower
Aug 26, 2013
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (35-0)
senate
Aug 26, 2013
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 28 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Aug 13, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (August 12).
upper
Jul 11, 2013
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jun 26, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: to consent calendar. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 26). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jun 19, 2013
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on ED.
upper
May 28, 2013
Upper · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
upper
May 2, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
upper
Apr 10, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. To consent calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 3).
lower
Apr 1, 2013
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Mar 21, 2013
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on ED. Read second time and amended.
lower
Feb 28, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Feb 19, 2013
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 21.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
DW
Das Williams
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 389
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 389. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline