This bill focuses on prevention, not punishment after the fact.
HB 4 allows intervention before abuse occurs by recognizing grooming as the warning sign it is.

Grooming is a documented, well-understood pattern of behavior.
Research and survivor testimony consistently show that abuse is rarely spontaneous—it is preceded by boundary-testing, isolation, secrecy, and manipulation.

Clarity protects everyone.
Clearly defining prohibited conduct helps protect students, while also giving educators and administrators clearer boundaries and expectations.

HB 4 supports—not replaces—existing mandatory reporting laws.
It complements current statutes by addressing conduct that often precedes reportable abuse but has historically fallen into a gray area.

This is a child-safety issue, not a partisan one.
Protecting children from exploitation is a shared responsibility and a shared value.

Kentucky has an opportunity to lead.
By naming grooming explicitly, Kentucky can set a standard for proactive, survivor-informed child protection legislation.

This bill focuses on prevention, not punishment after the fact.
HB 4 allows intervention before abuse occurs by recognizing grooming as the warning sign it is.

Grooming is a documented, well-understood pattern of behavior.
Research and survivor testimony consistently show that abuse is rarely spontaneous—it is preceded by boundary-testing, isolation, secrecy, and manipulation.

Clarity protects everyone.
Clearly defining prohibited conduct helps protect students, while also giving educators and administrators clearer boundaries and expectations.

HB 4 supports—not replaces—existing mandatory reporting laws.
It complements current statutes by addressing conduct that often precedes reportable abuse but has historically fallen into a gray area.

This is a child-safety issue, not a partisan one.
Protecting children from exploitation is a shared responsibility and a shared value.

Kentucky has an opportunity to lead.
By naming grooming explicitly, Kentucky can set a standard for proactive, survivor-informed child protection legislation.

HB 102 focuses on accountability and prevention, not punishment without due process. It strengthens systems and procedures so concerns are handled consistently and responsibly.

The bill helps prevent misconduct from being quietly hidden or transferred. By limiting nondisclosure agreements and improving hiring transparency, HB 102 closes gaps that have allowed risk to follow students from one school to another.

HB 102 protects both students and educators. It requires investigations to be completed and clearly documents outcomes, including removing records when allegations are false or unsubstantiated.

False allegations are addressed, not ignored. The bill preserves due process while ensuring concerns are not dismissed prematurely or left unresolved.

Clear rules reduce liability and confusion for school districts. HB 102 replaces informal practices with defined, consistent standards for reporting, documentation, and record-keeping.

Student safety should not depend on discretion or silence. Transparent processes build trust with families and reinforce the integrity of the education system.

HB 102 complements existing child protection laws. It strengthens how schools carry out their responsibilities without changing criminal standards or evidentiary thresholds.

SB 196 closes the post-graduation loophole.
Under current law, accountability becomes harder once a student graduates—even if grooming behavior began while the student was enrolled.

Professional boundaries do not expire at graduation.
The bill reinforces that the educator-student power imbalance does not simply disappear at commencement.

Grooming is now clearly defined in statute.
By defining grooming behavior in law, SB 196 gives regulators and school leaders clearer standards for evaluating misconduct.

Accountability does not depend on a criminal conviction.
The bill ensures the Education Professional Standards Board can take disciplinary action based on professional conduct standards, even when criminal charges are not filed.

This is about professional ethics, not private relationships.
SB 196 addresses conduct that stems from a school-based power dynamic—not consensual adult relationships unconnected to a school setting.

The bill preserves due process.
Educators retain the opportunity to present evidence and respond during disciplinary proceedings.

Clear rules protect students—and protect educators.
When expectations are explicit, there is less ambiguity about appropriate conduct and fewer gray areas.