The state Department of Education on average places one employee a week on paid leave while it investigates various complaints of alleged misconduct, and roughly 1 in 4 of those investigations takes longer than a year to complete.
Fifty-six DOE employees were on paid leave while under investigation as of Oct. 31. Eleven of those cases have dragged on for more than a year, human resources officials told the Board of Education on Tuesday.
The data raise questions about the department’s criteria for placing employees on leave and its ability to conduct timely reviews.
"At the end of the day, we have one of two scenarios: We have 11 individual people sitting at home, fully paid, who either are guilty — so taxpayers paid a year of salary for someone who’s guilty — or they’re innocent, and their reputation’s been damaged for that 12 months that they were sitting basically at home," board Chairman Don Horner said. "Either way, that’s not a very good situation."
Horner said he wasn’t aware of any board or department policy outlining specific types of allegations that warrant investigations and what determines whether an employee is placed on paid leave. He said by contrast the Los Angeles Unified School District, the nation’s second-largest public school district, lays out specific misconduct that would trigger administrative leave and has a 120-day time limit to complete investigations.
State Deputy Attorney General James Halvorson, who deals with human resources issues, said some allegations automatically trigger investigations under state law, such as child abuse. He said the attorney general’s office sometimes advises departments on when to place employees on paid leave.
"One of the most common reasons to put a person on leave pending investigation is if their continued presence in the workplace is going to interfere with the conduct of the investigation," Halvorson said. "Another one would be safety."
Citing confidentiality concerns, officials did not disclose the nature of the pending investigations or say how many of the cases involve teachers, principals or other employees.
DOE spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said, in general, examples of allegations that could be investigated include sexual or other harassment or discrimination; violence or threats; bullying or assault; possession, use or sale of illegal drugs or alcohol; inappropriate staff-student relationships; disclosure of confidential information; misuse of state funds or facilities; falsification of contracts, reports or records; and conflicts of interest.
Barbara Krieg, the DOE’s assistant superintendent for the Office of Human Resources, said when a complaint of misconduct is received, the employee’s supervisor — typically a school’s principal — is responsible for deciding whether an investigation is warranted. If an investigation is launched, the supervisor then determines whether the employee should be placed on leave.
"From what we could tell, there wasn’t much awareness of those being two separate issues," said Krieg, who was hired in late October.
She said her office has drafted an investigation manual, which is being reviewed by the attorney general’s office, with guidelines on what circumstances warrant an investigation and when it’s appropriate to put an employee on leave.
"There may have been instances where employees could have been placed on leave when they didn’t necessarily have to be, so after this manual is issued, (we) will be conducting training so that individuals who are responsible for doing investigations have the training and are aware of the issues," Krieg said.
Senior Assistant Superintendent Amy Kunz said the department is considering requesting state funds to beef up its investigation staff to help with the backlog. The DOE, with close to 25,000 employees, has two full-time investigators within the HR office.
In addition to staffing issues, Kunz said some cases take longer than others because of the complexity of investigations. Due-process rights for unionized employees can also prolong cases.
With the exception of employees who are arrested or indicted for criminal activity, the public rarely hears about employees under investigation.
The department’s procedures came under fire for lacking transparency after John Sosa, former principal of Kaiser High School, was abruptly placed on leave last fall as the department conducted an investigation.
Sosa retired last December, three months after the DOE launched an investigation, ending his 44-year career with the department. He maintains that he hasn’t been told of the accusations against him.
Without naming Sosa at Tuesday’s board meeting, Halvorson disputed that claim.
"A specific case comes to mind, where the person made an announcement to the press that he didn’t know why he was placed on leave. He was given a letter that spelled it out," Halvorson said.
Sosa said he received only a general notice-of-investigation letter.
"The situation hasn’t changed at all," Sosa told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser on Tuesday. "I haven’t talked to anybody with the DOE since I was put on leave."
He previously told the newspaper that he chose to retire in part because he believed the school could not move forward as long as he was on leave and being paid.
