Underly was invited by the committee to deliver testimony and answer questions last week, but she sent other representatives, including Deputy Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy, for the agency in her stead on Thursday. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Exmainer)

State Superintendent Jill Underly didn’t show up to answer questions from Wisconsin lawmakers about the process the Department of Public Instruction uses for investigating reports of sexual misconduct by educators and for determining licensing.

Underly was invited by the committee to deliver testimony and answer questions, after a report from The Capital Times last week found that DPI investigated over 200 cases of Wisconsin teachers, aides, substitutes and administrators accused of sexual misconduct or grooming behaviors toward students from 2018 to 2023. Underly sent other representatives for the agency in her stead on Thursday. According to WisPolitics, Underly was out of state to accept an alumni award from Indiana University. 

The conversation surrounding the agency’s handling of sexual misconduct and grooming allegations and licensure was sparked by the CapTimes report, which  detailed a number of questions related to the system the agency uses to track data on cases, suggested the agency wasn’t making information readily available to the public and noted the few resources that the agency has to investigate cases and track information. 

In a YouTube video posted Thursday, Underly said lawmakers, law enforcement, educators and families would need to come to the table to build a “stronger system that protects every child and respects the rule of law.”  

“Let me be absolutely clear: the safety, dignity, and well-being of Wisconsin’s children is — and will always be — our first and most important responsibility,” Underly said. “We investigate every single complaint we receive. These investigations are conducted thoroughly, professionally, and within the legal authority given to us. Licensure actions — whether it is a suspension, revocation, or voluntary surrender — are not made lightly. They are based on evidence, not speculation; on due process, not headlines.” 

Last week, Underly called the report “misleading” in a letter and requested a retraction or correction from the CapTimes. In response, CapTimes Editor Mark Treinen said the paper  stands by the reporting. 

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) announced that she is working on a set of bills in response to the article. 

One bill focuses on implementing a criminal penalty for “grooming” of children by sexual predators in state statute. Nedweski also said she is drafting a bill to require school districts to adopt clear policies outlining appropriate communication boundaries between staff and students and a bill to prohibit DPI  from allowing teachers under investigation for sexual misconduct to surrender their teaching license to avoid further scrutiny. 

Lawmakers expressed concern at Underly’s absence, noting the seriousness of the issue. 

At the start of the hearing, Rep. Mike Bare (D-Verona) said he was “disappointed” by Underly’s absence. 

“I am deeply, deeply disappointed that Superintendent Underly could not bring herself to the meeting,” Nedweski, who chairs the committee, said. “These are very, very serious issues.” 

Nedweski said she had a meeting with DPI staff on Monday, but the Underly never reached out to her to ask to reschedule the hearing. She said she would have gladly accommodated a different date.

“I guess she just couldn’t find it important enough,” she added.  

At a press conference after the hearing, Nedweski, Sen. John Jagler (R-Watertown) and U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who is running for governor in 2026, criticized Underly for her absence. 

“I would call on [Gov. Tony Evers] at this point… do you find this acceptable? Is this acceptable what has gone on here in the state of Wisconsin?” Tiffany asked. “I think it’s time for the governor to call on Jill Underly to either do her job or step aside.”

Tiffany said he would ensure proper investigations and create a public dashboard showing why teachers lose their licenses if he is elected governor. 

DPI representatives and law enforcement discuss lack of “grooming” statute

The hearing began with testimony from Kenosha Chief of Police Patrick Patton, Deputy Chief of Police Joseph Labatore and officer Kate Schaper, who addressed  the difference between investigations conducted by law enforcement and the role of the DPI. 

DPI Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy delivered testimony and answered questions on behalf of Underly and the agency. He was joined by Rich Judge, who serves as DPI’s assistant superintendent of government and public affairs, and Jennifer Kammerud, who serves as the educator licensing director. 

McCarthy began his testimony by laying out the role of the agency in handling sexual misconduct and grooming allegations. He said the agency’s main role is in the state’s licensing system, which is how they can draw attention to people who shouldn’t be in the classroom. 

“When we hear about allegations … we are deadly serious,” McCarthy said. “We use all of the tools that we have available. We do not have subpoena power, but we do attempt to get information from anybody that can support a license investigation case, and given how sensitive these things are, we try to work as thoroughly and quickly as possible.” 

McCarthy noted that DPI typically receives accusations from law enforcement agencies, required reporting from local school districts, complaints from members of the public and from news media reports, which McCarthy said the agency scans frequently. 

Both McCarthy and the law enforcement officers spoke to concerns about the lack of a definition for grooming in Wisconsin state statute.

According to RAINN, grooming is the “deliberate act of building trust with a child, teen, or at-risk adult (such as an adult with a cognitive impairment) for the purpose of exploiting them sexually.”

DPI recommended in its testimony that a definition for grooming should include patterns of flirtatious behavior, making any effort to gain unreasonable access to or time alone with any student with no discernable educational purpose, engaging in any behavior that can reasonably be construed as involving an inappropriate relationship with a student and engaging in any other special treatment not in compliance with generally accepted educational practices.

McCarthy said lawmakers should consider requiring an annual training should they adopt a definition of grooming.

“We need to be reminding folks of the types of behaviors and things that we expect from them. It doesn’t matter what type of school,” McCarthy said. 

Questioning by lawmakers was tense and combative at times. 

Nedweski said she was unclear about why there is confusion over whether grooming can be used to remove a teacher’s license.

Current state law says that a teacher’s license can be revoked due to “immoral conduct,” which is defined as “conduct or behavior that is contrary to commonly accepted moral or ethical standards and that endangers the health, safety, welfare, or education of any pupil.” 

“Do we have to explicitly write the word ‘grooming’ in this law to spell out that grooming is not commonly accepted moral at ethical standards? I tend to believe that most Wisconsinites would think the law is comprehensive. Any kind of behavior that resembles grooming in any definition is already covered there,” Nedweski said. 

McCathy said the statute right now is “vague and ambiguous.” 

“When we find these things we go after them,” McCarthy said. “The department is using all of its authority to put its foot down in the spaces and revoke licenses. We’re doing that in a space right now where the authority doesn’t necessarily back us in every instance.” 

The Assembly Government Oversight, Accountability and Transparency (GOAT) committee voted unanimously to approve a motion to request that Attorney General Josh Kaul provide an opinion on two questions: whether grooming is “contrary to commonly accepted moral or ethical standards” and does grooming “endanger the health, safety, welfare or education” of a pupil. 

Voluntary revocations and information on license status

McCarthy also told lawmakers that they view voluntary surrenders as an important tool for them. He said they will ask educators under investigation to do so throughout the process. 

The agency has noted that it often gives several opportunities for teachers to voluntarily surrender their licenses.

McCarthy said that voluntary surrenders related to a sexual misconduct investigation are most often lifetime surrenders, meaning that in a legal agreement they won’t be able to apply for an educator’s license again.

Revocations and voluntary surrenders are also reported to the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) — a national database that state education agencies can access that includes information about the misconduct. That database is not accessible to the public. 

McCarthy noted that information is available on the DPI website on the status of a teacher’s license, though one needs to know a licensee’s name in order to check. The information will say whether an educator’s license is under investigation, has been revoked or voluntarily surrendered, though it doesn’t include information on why. He said the agency is working with old, rigid software that makes it difficult to add additional information. 

Nedweski said she didn’t “buy” the explanation that the agency was giving.

“It’s remarkable because the Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services can show you the reason for a license revocation for anyone,” Nedweski said, including explanations for manicurists. “It’s easier for me as a member of the public to find out why a cosmetologist lost their license and why it was revoked than it is for me to find out why a teacher license was revoked… Why is it so hard for us to find out critical safety information?” 

The agency requested $600,000 in the most recent state budget process to modernize its online background checks and licensing platform — a request that was rejected by the Republican-led Legislature.

The agency also suggested that lawmakers consider increasing reporting requirements to all school types and all individuals who are present in schools. McCarthy noted that the agency doesn’t have the ability to revoke licenses of people that don’t have to be licensed — including paraprofessionals and teachers in taxpayer-supported private schools. 

Lawmakers said they plan to provide Underly with other opportunities to speak in public forums about the issue. 

Jagler said the Senate Education Committee, which he chairs, will have an informational hearing on Nov. 4 where Underly will be the only invited speaker.

The Joint Audit Committee also noticed a hearing on Nov. 5 to launch an audit of educational licensure revocation, suspension, restriction and investigation at DPI.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE