(The Center Square) - The Executive Director of the Washington Schools Risk Management Pool said they are taking a closer look at how some school districts in the state are handling behavior interventions involving students who are “flagged” following personal questionnaires, as premiums see huge increases.
WSRMP “exists in partnership with its members to provide their staff and student communities a safe and protected educational environment, while protecting member financial resources,” according to the WSRMP website.
WSRMP is not insurance, but rather a pool of financial resources to protect school districts that end up getting sued.
“Let's make sure it helps, and does no harm,” said WSRMP Executive Director Deborah Callahan in an interview with The Center Square.
Callahan was reacting to a recent article published in City Journal titled “Washington Public Schools Know How to Prevent Sexual Abuse—But Many Choose Not To.”
The author, Manhattan Institute Research Associate Forest Romm, noted that this past spring, WSRMP “stunned its members with an average premium increase of 45 percent.
The primary driver: the rising cost of educator sexual misconduct claims. According to the Department of Education, Washington has one of the highest rates of sexual violence in K–12 schools nationwide,” wrote Romm.
Romm's article noted that several school districts in Washington participate in Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SB-SBIRT), a school-based behavioral health program being used in dozens of middle and high schools across at least 13 school districts.
“Seattle Public Schools is a major participant: SB-SBIRT operates in all 12 of the district’s comprehensive middle schools and nine of its high schools. Since its launch in 2018, the program has screened more than 75,000 students.
Students are given a “Check Yourself” survey, which includes personal questions screening for psychological issues, substance use, gender-identity confusion, and more.
A “Prevention and Intervention (P&I) Specialist” then looks over the questionnaires and based on responses, students are flagged for additional support.
Nearly half of all students are put into that follow up category.
In addition to questions about drug use and family life, questions include:
"- I am most likely to have a crush on: (You can choose more than one) with options that include “all genders” “both males and females”.
- If self-harm endorsed: When did you last hurt yourself on purpose?
- If suicidal ideation endorsed: Have you ever tried to kill yourself?"
Based on scores for responses, students determined to need follow up are paired with an “intervention” specialist, who according to Romm, may or may not have any actual training in mental or behavioral health.
“Would you want your child to be seeing an adult man that you don't know in one-on-one settings? They have the capability to pull them out of class if they want to,” said Romm in an interview with The Center Square.
Grant documents state that the SB-SBIRT program “will be staffed by licensed behavioral health specialists.”
However, SB-SBIRT relies on knowledge of “equity and social justice principles and practices,” according to one job posting…with supporters stating SB-SBIRT should “reflect the community” it serves, citing a “pro-equity basis for not requiring specific licensure or clinical training.”
“If you look at the internal documents and internal communications, you see a very concerted effort to sort of whitewash this to parents…while still claiming that you're trying to get parents involved," said Romm.
She told The Center Square SB-SBIRT’s procedures are in total contradiction with WSRMP and state guidelines for protecting children from grooming behaviors that could put them at risk.
“The interventionist (is) asking students for a private line and a private way to contact them. You don't do that with K through 12 students. It's extremely dangerous and irresponsible behavior,” Romm said.
The Center Square asked Callahan at WSRMP if any of the SB-SBIRT protocols were inappropriate or put school districts at greater liability for future lawsuits.
“I would say there could potentially be red flags for how the program is run,” Callahan said. “I wouldn't say they're grooming behaviors, but I'm not up on how the program works and I'm not up on what kinds of mental health responsibilities school districts undertake as they're dealing with these issues with kiddos.”
Callahan said she would be following up with Seattle Schools and Spokane County Schools which are using the SB-SBIRT intervention model, among other districts.
“We would look and check into that and perhaps there's some recommendations that WSRMP can make to the districts on how they might do it in a different way.”
Romm’s article noted that some interventionists hired to work in Seattle Schools have criminal backgrounds.
“Very quickly, I found two individuals with extensive criminal records. One is definitely currently employed as a P&I specialist, and honestly, I stopped counting at some point because there were so many arrests and charges and convictions,” she said.
The Center Square is not naming either employee, and could not independently confirm their employment status with the district.
Neither Seattle Public Schools nor any of the Spokane County School Districts using the SB-SBIRT intervention model responded to requests for comment on the program from The Center Square.
In Spokane County, the following districts are using SB-SBIRT:
Centennial – West Valley SD
West Valley High School - West Valley SD
Cheney – Cheney SD
Three Springs High School – Cheney SD
East Valley High School – East Valley SD
Freeman High School – Freeman SD
Freeman Middle School – Freeman SD
Riverside High School – Riverside SD
The Spokane Public Schools district is not using SB-SBIRT and Craig Namata with the district emailed The Center Square noting he wanted that made clear in the article to differentiate from Spokane County districts.
“All of the named schools in the report are schools in surrounding school districts in Spokane County, but none are part of Spokane Public Schools,” wrote Namata.
Romm reiterated that aside from concerns about some of the individuals being hired as intervention specialists, SB-SBIRT practices are in conflict with WSRMP best practices.
“WSRMP calls 'Special Relationships' between staff and students the 'essence' of sexual grooming; SB-SBIRT calls them a 'protective factor'—indeed, the 'intended outcome' of its brief intervention. P&I specialists are expected to discuss 'sensitive' and 'uncomfortable' subjects with students during a brief intervention, including their Check Yourself responses about sexuality."
"By contrast, WSRMP considers discussions of 'sexual topics that are not related to a specific curriculum' an 'inappropriate boundary invasion,'" noted Romm’s article.
Callahan told The Center Square she will be finding out a lot more about SB-SBIRT and working with districts that are using it.
“Most educators and people that work in school districts are wonderful, and they are not out there to have children as their drug of choice. They're not there to predate.”
“I need to get into the districts and take a look at that and talk to them about the program and help make sure that the best risk management practices are put in place,” Callahan said.
