School Board Approves Continued Use of Substitute-Teacher Contract amid Background-check Concerns

The School Board of Manatee County voted 5-0 on Oct. 7 to continue using a Duval County contract for substitute-teacher employment services, an agreement estimated at $5,225,000 annually.

The decision followed public comment and an extended board discussion prompted by a recent arrest of an individual who had worked as a substitute in Manatee County after being hired through the contractor. Several residents urged the board to strengthen screening and oversight of substitute workers and to reconsider the contract.

Martha Jacobs, a full-time Manatee County resident who addressed the board during public comment, asked the board to reject the travel-expense item and also criticized using taxpayer funds for partisan trips. On the substitute issue she told the board: “I ask all board members to vote no when agenda item 14.1 is presented.” (Public comment related to a different agenda item; her remarks reflected overall community concern about district spending and accountability.)

Martin Hyde, a resident, pressed the district for immediate action on hiring and background checks after the arrest: “You must make your superintendent... accountable, and she must make her staff accountable. Three things to do. First thing you need to do immediately is a full and complete background check on every single member of your staff.”

District officials and board members described the existing screening systems and recent steps to bolster oversight. Dr. Britton, Executive Director of Human Resources, said the contractor (ESS, operating under the Duval County contract) uses the same state fingerprint and background system the district uses. Associate Superintendent Kevin Chapman and human-resources staff said the state’s Agency for Health Care Administration background fingerprint database (AHCA) and federal E-Verify are part of the process, and that new legislation requires that all employees be rerun through the fingerprint system within the next two years.

“We were alerted the next morning” after the outside arrest, Dr. Britton said, describing alerts the district receives from the fingerprint and law-enforcement data feeds. She said the system will now rerun all employees’ fingerprints within the statutory window established by recent law change.

Board members pressed for stronger safeguards and for legislative changes to expand which offenses trigger an immediate alert. “I would strongly support you making that recommendation to the legislature,” Board Member Spray said, urging a change so that school-related misdemeanor arrests would flag more reliably in the screening system.

Board members split on whether to renew the multi-year contract if it can be re-bid. Several members said they support continuing the contract for a year while pursuing additional oversight and, if necessary, rebidding. Board members ultimately approved continuing the use of the Duval County contract for substitute services by a 5-0 vote.

The board asked staff to report back on specific enhancements: whether the contractor can add an additional layer of screening beyond the state checks, how often the criminal databases update, and whether district policy should require employees to self-report arrests. Staff also noted internal reviews of district hiring practices already underway.

Board Chair Chad Choate said the contractor has been a long-term partner and that the company’s local managers are working with the district; several board members said the contractor had generally provided needed help keeping schools staffed. At the same time, members acknowledged the community’s alarm over the arrest and supported pursuing stronger checks and legislative remedies.

The board’s action maintained immediate staffing continuity while directing staff to examine enhancements and legal options and to pursue legislative clarification on the screening systems.

Ending: District officials told the board they will present a plan for additional safeguards and report back on the status of statewide systems and possible statutory remedies at a subsequent meeting.