Source: boston25news.com 9/15/21
BOSTON — The state agency that oversees the granting of professional licenses for hundreds of thousands of Massachusetts workers is falling short when it comes to criminal and sex offender background checks on those applicants, according to a newly-released audit.
Auditor Suzanne Bump’s report finds the the Division of Professional Licensure (DPL), which is now referred to as the Division of Occupational Licensure, has been unable to determine whether its boards and commissions were performing Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) and Sex Offender Record Information (SORI) checks before professional licenses were issued, and it’s been a problem for years.
“DPL’s failure to ensure criminal background checks were being conducted by its boards and commissions is a glaring failure in administration, one which the agency has now acknowledged. Now that DPL is in the process of an organizational overhaul, the time is ripe to address deficiencies in the licensure and background check process,” according to Bump. “While this is not the first time that our office has identified the need for corrective action at DPL, it is my hope that our recommendations from this audit are acted upon swiftly to ensure the safety of patrons and residents” Bump said.
That would be a real shame if these people went to school, earned credentials, studied and got a license as a professional, rebuilt there lives and contributed to society. Now if they had just robbed people at the ATM are sold crack to kids then they would be fine, but oh, when when the penis is involved, that is inexcusable and unforgivable.
Imagine this fooey! The most glaring failure ever was just recently remembered. The events of 9\11 was an indictment our federal defense agencies. All those institutions dropped the ball but were not held accountable for their failure to protect the nation. Personally i think it is incredible that no head of agency were fired based on their dereliction. I’ll bet noone gets fired over these errors, but we’ll see.
So why should anyone think they can depend on bureaucrats to get the job done. Ultimately it is up to the individual to keep themselves and their people safe.
Why have two systems? I get that for some jobs you want someone who has never had a sex offense (like child psychologist) while you might care less about some other felonies (like embezzlement), but what about hate crimes? Attempted murder of a former patient? Fraud involving a vulnerable person? There seems to be absolutely no way you could separate relevant criminal history into “sex” and “non-sex” categories for any job requiring licensure. Is there any evidence that people with criminal histories are a specific threat in any professional context? Or is this some trade unionism nonsense about keeping their ranks smaller, prestige higher, and demand maximal?
Or how about this: Once a person has served their sentence, regardless of the offense, they get to pick up and move on, period — No conditions.
Sounds like added punishment.
Cutting off a sex offenders financial support is one of the main tactics the DOJ applies on people force to register, forcing them to go under ground and live like savages on the side of the freeways all across America then one by one their hunted down like anmals and thrown into prison for FTR
Good luck