Report 2012-103 Recommendation Responses

Report 2012-103: Los Angeles Unified School District: It Could Do More to Improve Its Handling of Child Abuse Allegations (Release Date: November 2012)

Recommendation for Legislative Action

The Legislature should consider establishing a mechanism to monitor classified employees who have separated from a school district by dismissal, resignation, or settlement during the course of an investigation for misconduct involving students, similar to the oversight provided by the commission for certificated employees. If such a mechanism existed, school districts throughout the State could be notified before hiring these classified employees.

Description of Legislative Action

N/A

  • Legislative Action Current As-of: February 2014

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Legislation Proposed But Not Enacted

Assembly Bill 375 (Buchanan, 2013), if enacted, would have revised various procedures related to the dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee of a school district, including authorizing a notice of dismissal or suspension to be given at any time of year. The bill would have required, in a dismissal or suspension hearing against a permanent employee for unprofessional conduct or unsatisfactory performance, if a hearing is requested by the employee, that the hearing be commenced within 6 months of the employees request, and be completed by a closing of the record within 7 months from the date of the employees request. The bill was vetoed by the Governor.

Senate Bill 160 (Lara, 2013), if enacted, would require a school district or charter school to notify the State Department of Education when a classified employee is dismissed, suspended, or terminated from employment as a result of misconduct against a child. The bill would require the department, upon request by a school district or charter school, to provide that information only for the purposes of verifying previous employment of a classified employee. The bill would require that information to be kept confidential and would require the department to remove the information upon proof of acquittal or factual innocence.


All Recommendations in 2012-103


Report type

Report type
















© 2013, California State Auditor | Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Download Adobe PDF Reader