House Education Committee hears bill to allow school liaisons with child protective services

The House Education Committee on a public hearing reviewed House Bill 1095, a measure sponsored by Representative Dwight Kiefert that would allow school districts to designate a child protective services liaison to serve as a formal point of contact between schools and the Department of Health and Human Services’ CPS units.

Representative Dwight Kiefert, the bill sponsor, said the measure is intended to “establish a line of communications between the school system and protective services.” He described situations in which school staff observe signs of possible abuse — “If Johnny comes to school with a black eye and a broken arm, the only thing they can do is submit another report” — and said the bill would give districts an optional tool to follow up without supplanting CPS authority.

Supporters included written testimony from school superintendents describing a lack of follow‑up after mandatory reports and arguing schools can act as the eyes on children who attend daily. Kiefert said the measure is voluntary for districts and that existing staffing (counselors, principals, superintendents) could fill the liaison role depending on local resources.

Opponents, including Lynn Fleet, director of the RSR Human Service Zone, told the committee the bill’s language, if read literally, risks “unintended, but ultimately harmful consequences.” Fleet said the proposal appears to blur statutorily defined roles: CPS assessments are a fact‑finding process led by trained CPS staff and field service specialists, she said, and delegating or designating a school employee as a CPS spokesperson or primary investigator could cause confusion, confidentiality concerns and inaccurate information gathering.

Brad Peterson, legal director for Protection and Advocacy Project, also opposed the bill in its current form and urged amendments if the committee moves it forward. Peterson said designating a faculty member as a liaison could impair impartiality and harm long‑term relationships between families and school staff; he recommended that a liaison not be a faculty member, counselor, administrator or district employee if the role is to interface with CPS investigations.

Witnesses from Human Services described current statewide intake and response procedures: a central intake unit that forwards reports to zone assessment workers (intake staff were described as a recently created unit with roughly 14 staff), and statutory response timeframes that can include immediate, 24‑hour or 72‑hour responses depending on severity. Lynn Fleet said those structural changes improved consistency but also reduced the informal local contact lines schools previously used, creating frustration and a sense that the system had become less communicative in some places.

Committee members asked about privacy, background checks for potential liaisons, and whether the draft bill applied to private schools. Kiefert and witnesses said the bill is intended as an optional tool for districts and could be amended to add background‑check or scope clarifications; Lynn Fleet and others urged a statewide coordinated approach — including legal, court and law enforcement partners — rather than the statutory changes proposed.

The committee closed the hearing on House Bill 1095 without a recorded committee vote. Committee staff were asked to provide statutory citations on confidentiality and what limited information CPS may legally share back with mandated reporters.