Info

Safe Harbor Resources is a nonprofit corporation for safer selection of children's workers. Its goal is to thwart undetectable sexual predators who infiltrate youth and children's programs, and do so without naming or shaming anyone. Only 3% of abusers ever get caught. The rest are known to harm up to a hundred children each. Thwarting one hundred such serial predators protects many thousands of children. more ... Only 3% of child sexual abusers are caught. The rest are sophisticated, appear trustworthy, plan diligently, act "normal", and thoroughly understand how to do their own background checking. Worse, program leaders are stakeholders in their own programs, can't be objective as they pray nobody whom they selected, "flunks" the tests. Cookie-cutter "minimum checks" have been put forth to avoid liability and avoid alienating volunteers. But such simple screening tends to screen abusers IN, instead of out. All agree that violent criminals and sex offenders, especially against children, must not be allowed on children and youth program staff, or even have foreseeable opportunity to be alone with those children. But only 3% of those who endanger children through child sexual abuse were caught before. Theirs are the records whose convictions appear in pre-packaged background data sold by computer firms and warmly endorsed for their low cost by religious leaders. Screening for obvious convictions greatly increases protection from negligence claims, but removing only 3 out of 100 predators doesn’t increase the protection of children very much. SHR asks, What duty do we owe the children on the remaining 97%? Homeland Security asks similarly, What is our duty to innocent airline passengers regarding terrorists who have not been caught before? Program leaders fervently wish that no bad data emerge for beloved and trusted volunteers. Screening budgets are tiny. That wish to not-discover, coupled with the added costs of digging deeper, create a powerful incentive to limit screening inquiries. In addition to lacking incentive and budget, program leaders are stakeholders in their programs, under pressure to recruit volunteers and eager to show they did not select any bad people. Finally, predators are smart. Expert at interpreting background-check data, they constantly monitor these data packages themselves and groom their histories to conceal or camouflage past complaints. Superficial screening is their opportunity to win by being screened-IN instead of out. Thorough screening requires the freedom to pursue data wherever the hints lead, the experience to detect those hints, and the independence to make frank inquiries. SHR provides all three. SHR's Seal of Safer Selection Practices indicates where youth-serving groups use modern background screening methods in anticipation of qualifying for superior insurance coverage of the molestation risk. The process includes program leaders' evaluating SHR's trademarked "Appearances of Potential for Complaint" based on conflict of interest concepts, not criminal evidence concepts. SHR's inquiries look for the appearance of a match in applicable categories of concern. If this background checking turns up the appearance of something which in our experienced interpreters' opinions might generate a complaint in the future, it is noted for discussion with the individual, inclusion in their dossier, and discussion with the program leader. SHR provides this complete dossier solely to the worker. more ...