We appreciate the various concerns expressed about this regulatory change, and want to acknowledge that VNPP had a pivotal role in the initial legislation upon which this regulation is based.  For a number of years the General Assembly has grappled with how to prevent “bad actors” from simply moving around from one provider to another.  JCHC looked at the issue as have others.  Each proposed solution was not a solution:

• Having DBHDS create a registry based on the CHRIS system might be possible, but would not capture all of the information and would require other identifying data about the employee to be maintained in the system
• Creating a roster of eligible staff based upon their application (and no doubt a fee) would still require that current and former employers provide information and that if there was cause to remove someone from the roster, the employer would have to provide the justification and information
• Utilizing a CPS type system (there is yet another bill this year to create that kind of data set) would be ideal, but expensive and a major shift in how APS approaches findings (the individual is in need of protection vs an individual is at fault for abuse/neglect etc)

The protections for employers who provide references is already in the Code of Virginia at §8.01-46.1, but most providers are unaware and are generally cautioned by their attorney to say as little as possible.  The concept of placing the “permission” in regulations is to address that issue. 

This is certainly not the perfect fix and may be replaced in the future with something better, but it seemed at the time to be the best alternative that would not impose greater cost, or be a barrier to recruitment.  It is, of course, still true that it is a challenge to know if a prospective employee lists all of their current or previous positions.  Unlike some careers, DSPs often have multiple positions and therefore a “gap” is not detectable.  And, yes, some do not want their current employer to know they are looking for another position; given that regulation already requires reference checks, this should not pose a greater barrier. This will not solve all of the issues, but we hope you have a better grasp of the intent.