Can We Actually Supervise This?
A Practical SB 848 Evaluation Checklist
This page is not legal advice. It’s a practical evaluation tool to help schools think through how staff–student electronic communication is managed in practice — and where their current environment sits between passive logging and meaningful supervision.
1. Routine visibility
Can administrators easily see staff–student electronic communication on a regular basis — including one-to-one interactions and smaller group messages — without involving IT, exporting data, or requesting logs?
2. Two-person group chats
Do administrators have visibility into group messages that function like one-to-one communication—such as groups with only one staff member and one student—or do those conversations depend on policy and perfect behavior?
3. Regular review
Does the district or school routinely review staff–student communication in a structured way (especially individualized interactions and small group conversations), or only after a concern is raised?
4. Named responsibility
Is there a clearly defined role (not a department) responsible for supervising staff–student electronic communication — particularly individualized exchanges — and do they actually have access to do so?
5. Routine visibility
Can communication activity be observed as part of routine governance, or does someone need a specific reason before access becomes possible?
6. Continuity through turnover
When a coach or advisor leaves mid-season, does administrative visibility into prior communication continue automatically, or does it require manual recovery?
7. No IT dependency
Can school or activities administrators answer communication oversight questions independently, or does governance depend on IT staff pulling records or stitching together exports?
8. Coherent supervision
Can administrators easily understand and oversee staff–student extracurricular communication across all approved tools—or does reconstruction become fragmented across systems?
9. Audit readiness
If asked today, could the school confidently demonstrate that its defined limits on staff–student electronic communication are being followed?
10. Behavior-independent design
Does compliance still function when onboarding is imperfect, reminders are missed, or staff default to convenience — or does it rely on ideal behavior to remain effective?
This checklist isn’t about catching mistakes or assigning blame.
It’s about whether visibility and supervision are built into the communication environment itself — or whether enforcement depends on reconstruction, exceptions, and perfect behavior.
Schools that can answer these questions clearly are typically in a strong position. Those that cannot often discover the gaps only after something has gone wrong.
.svg)
