The RSU 5 Board of Directors on June 4 approved second reading of volunteer and several related policies and heard clarifying detail about the volunteer background‑check process used by the district.

During the policy committee section, Cynthia Alexander (assistant superintendent) and Kelly (administrator) explained that the volunteer application process already triggers a criminal history check through the state system the district uses and that the board language formalizes the practice.

“Once an application is submitted a background check and sexual‑offender registry check are completed by the RSU 5 human resources coordinator,” Cynthia said while reviewing the policy language.

Why it matters: The policy clarifies existing practice and standardizes how volunteers are vetted across RSU 5 schools. Board members asked about last‑minute volunteers and whether ad‑hoc event volunteers are covered; administrators said schools must ensure volunteers are vetted and that the district does not make ad‑hoc exceptions for unscreened adults who will have regular contact with students.

Details from the meeting

- The policy being approved codifies practices already in place: schools submit volunteer applications and staff run a criminal‑history/registry check using the state’s vendor system (described by administrators as a rapid check that commonly returns within 24–48 hours).

- If a search returns records or a possible match, the report is forwarded to the superintendent for review; administrators said outcomes may require discussion and that some matches are misidentifications.

- Board members raised timing and logistics questions. Administrators said the district keeps a centralized volunteer list so people who volunteer at multiple buildings need not reapply each time; the district aims to tighten renewal cadence (for example a two‑year recheck) and to avoid last‑minute exceptions when adult supervision requires vetted chaperones.

Board action

The board approved second reading and adoption of the policies IJOC (school volunteers), IKC (transcripts and achievement) and JLF (reporting child abuse and neglect) on a voice vote; no substantive changes were made after first reading. The motion advanced without recorded opposition.

Implementation and next steps

Administrators will continue to manage the volunteer list and screening process. Board members asked administrators to ensure volunteer procedures and timelines are clearly communicated to families so last‑minute needs do not result in unscreened adults supervising students.

Attributions in this article are to people who spoke at the meeting or to district staff whose roles were stated at the meeting.