HB 1189
In CommitteeHouse
School volunteers/conviction
Addressing parental involvement through volunteering in schools after a criminal conviction.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill changes how schools evaluate volunteer applications from parents and other family caregivers who have criminal convictions. It requires schools to consider evidence of rehabilitation or innocence, apply specific factors before denying applications, and provide clear reasons and appeal rights when denying a volunteer role. It also updates background check rules for volunteers and employees.
- Schools must inform volunteer applicants about how to submit documents proving criminal conviction rehabilitation or innocence (e.g., pardons, expungements, certificates of restoration).
- If a parent submits such a document for all prior convictions and confirms no new convictions since, the school must approve their volunteer application—unless new information arises.
- If a parent does not submit such documents, the school must consider how long ago the last conviction occurred, whether the crime involved a minor victim, and other factors before deciding whether to approve the application.
- Schools must notify applicants of approval or denial within five days, and if denying, must provide specific reasons and information about the appeal process.
- Parents denied volunteer status may appeal to the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, which must create formal appeal rules by July 28, 2025.
- Background checks for volunteers with unsupervised access must still follow existing state and federal fingerprinting procedures, but now include special rules for parents and other family caregivers.
Who is affected
- Parents and other family caregivers with criminal records — Parents, grandparents, guardians, or legal custodians of students who have criminal convictions and wish to volunteer in schools must now follow a new process to present evidence of rehabilitation or innocence, and schools must consider specific factors before denying their applications.
- School districts and educational service districts — School districts and other educational entities must update their volunteer screening processes to include new requirements for reviewing volunteer applications from individuals with convictions, including providing clear reasons for denials and offering appeal options.
- Current and prospective school volunteers — Volunteers who have previously undergone background checks within the past two years may continue to serve without repeating the check, but must now sign a statement confirming no new convictions occurred since their last check.
- Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction — The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction must adopt new rules to manage appeals of denied volunteer applications and administer the background check system, including collecting fees.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Parents with convictions who obtain formal rehabilitation documents (e.g., pardons, certificates of restoration) gain a clear, enforceable right to volunteer unless new convictions occur—reversing prior de facto bans and recognizing legal rehabilitation as a matter of due process.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(b)Requiring schools to consider time elapsed since conviction and whether the offense involved a minor victim ensures decisions are based on objective, risk-proportional factors—reducing arbitrary or overly punitive denials based on outdated records.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(c)(i)Mandating written denial reasons and a formal appeal process to OSPI gives parents due process rights and a meaningful path to contest denials—addressing prior lack of transparency and accountability in volunteer screening.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(d) & Sec. 1(2)(a)Requiring schools to proactively inform applicants about how to submit rehabilitation documents increases accessibility and awareness of legal pathways to reintegration—supporting parental engagement and reducing unintentional disqualifications.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(a)By exempting family caregivers from standard volunteer background check procedures (and instead applying the new rehabilitation-focused standard), the bill reduces barriers for low-income, transient, or incarcerated-adjacent families to remain involved in their children’s education—supporting stability and equity.
HousingLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(3)(b)
Potential Concerns (5)
School districts must implement new administrative processes—including 5-day decision timelines, written denial reasons, and appeal handling—which increase staffing, training, and operational burdens on already-constrained local education agencies.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(1)(d)Schools must now distinguish between “parents/family caregivers” and other volunteers in background check procedures, requiring additional training, policy updates, and case-by-case determinations—increasing administrative complexity without additional state funding.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(2)(b) & Sec. 3(3)(a)Schools may pass background check costs to volunteers—including parents—potentially creating a financial barrier for low-income families seeking to volunteer, especially if the fee is non-waivable.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 3(5)Mandatory approval for parents who submit rehabilitation documents (e.g., pardons, certificates of restoration) without requiring schools to independently verify the *nature* or *relevance* of prior convictions to school volunteer roles may reduce accountability for certain high-risk offenses (e.g., fraud, theft, or non-violent property crimes involving children).
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 1(1)(b)Allowing schools to limit unsupervised access as a compromise for applicants with convictions may create inconsistent, subjective standards across districts—potentially undermining transparency and equal treatment of applicants.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 1(1)(c)(ii)(C)
Who Is Most Affected
Parents and caregivers with criminal records—especially those with older, non-violent convictions or those who have completed rehabilitation—gain a fairer, more transparent path to volunteering. However, those with recent convictions or without access to legal rehabilitation tools may still face barriers due to procedural complexity or fees.
School districts face new administrative and legal responsibilities—including appeals, documentation, and individualized assessments—which may strain resources. However, the bill also provides legal clarity and reduces exposure to liability for arbitrary denials.
OSPI gains new rulemaking and appeals adjudication duties, increasing its workload and requiring new staff or systems. However, the fee structure allows cost recovery, and the role enhances OSPI’s oversight in educational equity.
Low-income families and communities of color—disproportionately impacted by criminal records—benefit from reduced exclusionary barriers to school engagement. However, fee-based background checks may still deter participation if not waived for those in need.
Volunteer coordinators and school administrators face added workload and training needs, but gain clearer legal standards and appeal protocols that reduce arbitrary liability risk.