Parents and teachers press Warrick County School Corp. to revisit after-school pay, insurance rules

Warrick County, Ind. — Parents, teachers and district leaders debated new district guidelines for staff-run, paid after-school programs at the Warrick County School Corp. Board of School Trustees meeting on Jan. 13, 2025, with speakers urging the board to delay implementation and revise requirements on insurance and pay limits.

The issue drew the largest public turnout of the evening after Superintendent Dr. Abby Redmond described the district’s aim: "We are simply asking teachers to follow the necessary guidelines," she said, adding the rules were intended to protect staff, students and families. Parents and program providers told the board the rules as written would make many enrichment programs impractical or inaccessible.

The new guidelines require instructors who receive personal income for work on district property to complete facility-use paperwork and obtain liability insurance separate from the district’s coverage. The district also set a maximum hourly rate for compensated instruction — described at the meeting as $30 per hour — with the option for instructors to request a higher rate if they serve six or more students. The guidelines allow teachers to embed supply costs above their hourly rate and direct teachers who do not want to meet the rules to provide programs off campus.

Why it matters: Parents and presenters said the combination of insurance requirements, a capped hourly rate and administrative steps will discourage teachers from offering after-school tutoring, art, STEM classes and other enrichment that parents said improve student outcomes and access. Several parents asked the board to add a public discussion item to the next meeting and explore district-level solutions to reduce teacher costs.

Kristen Bernick, a parent, told the board: "Dictating what a teacher should be able to charge for their professional services is something that should never have been up for discussion." Corinne Selby, another parent, told trustees the policy "places an unreasonable financial burden on our teachers" and warned it could worsen disparities for families who rely on on-campus programs.

Several parents and a number of speakers requested more detail about how the $30 cap was calculated, whether supply and insurance costs can be amortized across a semester, and whether PTOs or grants could subsidize programs. Michael Hancock asked whether the guidelines are publicly available and whether an appeals process exists for facility-use denials; the superintendent said the finalized written guidelines were distributed to staff before winter break and that administrators will provide avenues for questions and assistance.

Board discussion and next steps: Trustees and administrators acknowledged communication gaps between district leadership and staff and parents. Several board members urged a measured response. A board member proposed a work session to review the questions raised; the administration agreed a work session would be scheduled and said it would entertain adjustments where warranted. Dr. Redmond said the district moved the implementation target date to Feb. 1 to allow more time for questions and support, and that staff are available to help instructors who need assistance securing insurance or completing facility-use steps.

District officials also noted two policy goals behind the guidelines: (1) standardize access across school buildings so students in different schools have comparable opportunities, and (2) avoid exposing the district’s insurance to paid third-party activity. Dr. Redmond said: "We were trying very hard to create a situation to allow our staff to continue offering these services during after-school hours in our buildings rather than saying we can't do it at all." She encouraged teachers to work through principals and the teachers’ union if they need help.

What remains unresolved: Parents pressed for clarity on whether insurance riders or district-level policy changes could reduce costs for instructors, whether PTOs or grants could legally subsidize programs, and whether the Feb. 1 implementation should be paused. Trustees committed to scheduling a public work session and to notifying staff and families when that meeting is posted. No formal board vote or policy change occurred at the Jan. 13 meeting.

The school district asked parents and instructors with specific questions to contact building principals, the district collaboration team, or district administration; the board said it will post a work-session agenda item to revisit the guidelines and potential modifications.