Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Professional Standards topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Duval updates misconduct reporting, launches investigation review team and new tracking for personnel cases
Summary
Human resources and professional standards staff briefed the board on required trainings, the Know the Line campaign, an electronic misconduct reporting system, an investigation review team that meets weekly, targets for investigation timelines and the district's process for reporting legally sufficient complaints to the Florida Department of
District human resources and professional standards staff told the Duval County School Board that the district has expanded training, centralized misconduct reporting and created an investigation review team to standardize investigations and discipline.
Staff said they rolled out a "Know the Line" campaign to educate employees, students and parents on appropriate interactions and added or updated mandatory annual trainings including code of ethics, mandatory reporter, Title IX and harassment‑prevention courses. The professional standards office reported 522 internal misconduct reporting forms (MRFs) submitted in the first semester and an additional 96 reports submitted through an external web link during the same period.
"It was designed to promote safe and appropriate interactions between employees and students," a district presenter said of the Know the Line campaign.
Staff described the investigation workflow: initial intake and review, referral to DCF or law enforcement when appropriate, assignment as a school‑based or district‑level investigation, 24‑hour notice to the employee when a meeting is required, evidence collection and a written investigative report. Staff said the district’s target for completing an internal investigation is roughly 75 days but that timeline can lengthen when other agencies are involved.
District staff said the Department of Education must receive legally sufficient complaints within 30 days of the district becoming aware of the issue; staff said they err on the side of submitting more items rather than fewer for DOE review. The professional standards team said some allegations — including arrests or allegations of child abuse, sexual misconduct or illegal drug distribution — are routed to the district’s new Investigation Review Team (IRT) for higher‑level review; the IRT includes cross‑department representation and meets weekly, with at least two cabinet members present when the team convenes.
The district described progressive discipline in general terms: a verbal reprimand (recorded on the MRF but not placed in the personnel file), then a written reprimand that is placed in the personnel file, and suspension without pay as a step that requires board approval. Staff noted existing contract language allows skipping steps for certain egregious conduct and that the IRT may recommend skipping steps based on the severity and frequency of allegations.
Staff said the district is moving to an electronic tracking system that will allow professional standards staff and supervisors to see a staff member’s history of misconduct reports across schools, which staff said will reduce the risk that multiple minor reports at different schools go unconnected. The professional standards office said it currently staffs five field investigator positions, with one vacancy.
Board members pressed staff for more data and clarity: how many intake reports lead to full investigations, the categorical breakdown of reports (for example, sexual misconduct, abuse, criminal charges, personnel performance issues), and yearly counts of terminations. Staff said some of those numbers require a follow‑up report and that more detailed data and a cost breakdown for investigative staffing and potential facility changes would be brought back to the board.
No disciplinary actions were announced at the meeting. Staff said the new procedures are intended to increase consistency, fairness and transparency while protecting the integrity of ongoing investigations. They emphasized that investigators sometimes step out of IRT discussions to avoid compromising future investigative work, but that the team can re‑engage investigators if additional facts are needed.
Background: staff said the district has incorporated findings and recommendations from previous outside reviews and from the Council of Great City Schools; it has also updated hiring checks, added electronic MRF tracking and clarified district procedures for transferring staff and reviewing prior complaints before new hires or transfers are finalized.
