This article originally appeared in the June 2023 issue of Security Business magazine. When sharing, don’t forget to mention Security Business magazine on LinkedIn and @SecBusinessMag on Twitter.
A year has passed since the Robb Elementary tragedy struck the community of Uvalde, Texas, and the scars have far from faded. Memories of those lost live on. Concern and compassion for those who survived and still recovering continues. So does the search for answers why and solutions for the future.
As in similar horrific events of the past, it is understandable and logical that an overwhelming sense of urgency emerges from the fallout and outrage, resulting in anxious calls for immediate remedial and preventive action. Time is of the essence, but addressing the complex factors surrounding school violence and determining the best paths forward needs to be done both carefully and expeditiously.
Developing an appropriate plan and identifying the right mix of technology, processes, and responsibilities takes intensive commitment, momentum, and a solid understanding of the possible.
While expediency may be top of mind, it is also necessary to become aware of pitfalls, to avoid rash decisions. Too often, the outcry to “just do something” in the wake of violence can lead to hasty choices about quick fixes. Some barricades and door hardware gimmicks, for example, have unintentionally ended up impeding student safety instead of protecting it.
How Texas Acted
In response to Uvalde, Governor Greg Abbott quickly charged the Texas Education Agency (TEA) with assessing public school safety across the state and creating rules to ensure a minimum level of safety on all K-12 campuses. The Texas legislature has also taken swift action, creating bills in both the House and Senate to strengthen school safety and funding. House Bill 3 and Senate Bill 11 have both successfully passed in their respective chambers.
All these efforts are well-intentioned, well-focused, and a step in the right direction. While more time to do surveys and research would have been beneficial to gather the most thorough and accurate data, what Texas is accomplishing is significant. Because school safety is always a work in progress, further revelations and requirements will unfold, and issues will continue to be resolved in even better ways. The urgent action of creating new rules and bills for improving best practices is a good base to build upon.
What Texas Identified
In an audit released in 2020 prior to Uvalde, the Texas School Safety Center found that most of the 1,022 Texas school districts reported having active shooter plans; however, further assessment revealed that more than half – 626 – did not have plans in place at all. Another 196 districts had negligible guidance beyond “call 911.” Just 200 of the 1,022 districts audited had policies that followed best practices.
The findings tend to indicate that Tier 1 school districts, which average 20,000 students and make up only 15% of school districts across the country, are typically the only districts large enough to be sufficiently well-staffed and funded for full student safety and security. The other 85% of school districts that generally serve less than 6,000 students are likely budget constrained and dealing with keeping up with the basics of facility and education needs. That does not mean that safety is not a priority, but developing a comprehensive plan is probably a heavier lift for them than it is for larger public school districts.
The Proposal
The Texas Senate legislation would create a safety and security department within the TEA and give it the authority to compel school districts to establish active shooter protocols. Under SB 11, the TEA would work with the Texas School Safety Center to audit the active shooter plans of districts on a regular basis. It also gives the TEA the authority to provide guidance to help districts create or improve emergency plans.
The bill would authorize the TEA to conduct in-depth vulnerability audits on campuses once every four years to ensure all facility access controls, emergency operations procedures, and other school safety requirements are being followed. Regional safety review teams will conduct intruder detection audits for each campus in their region on an annual basis. They will also be able to provide technical assistance to help districts with compliance.
A substantial increase in funding to support the programs is included in both the House and Senate bills. Governor Abbott had already earmarked an additional $400 million last fall for school districts to upgrade doors, windows, fences, and other safety equipment. Untapped Federal Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds are also potentially available.
If a district fails to comply with TEA safety requirements, the agency’s commissioner would be able to assign a conservator to oversee the school board and superintendent to make sure they resolve issues. If non-compliance persists, the state can decide to take over management of the district.
The Senate bill also tightens Texas truancy laws. Truancy is considered a red flag for school officials that a student might need a school counselor. In the case of the Uvalde shooting, the gunman had a history of being chronically absent from school for years. SB 11 proposes that if a child has six or more unexcused absences within an eight-week period in the school year, parents are subject to prosecution, and the child could be sent to court.
The bill would also require all district police officers to complete an active shooter training program with the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University.
Texas House Bill 3 offers many of the same proposals. It also calls for hiring at least one armed security officer at every campus. In addition, HB 3 includes a provision for installing silent panic alert buttons in every classroom.
Other Security Technology
Last fall, the TEA released a formula grant program to provide funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) to purchase silent panic alert technologies. Such technology is generally defined as a silent system that can be activated by a device manually or through a software application when there’s a life-threatening event or emergency that requires law enforcement and other first responders.
The TEA also proposed a number of updated standards. Among the suggested rules, there was a strong focus on access control relating to exterior school perimeter doors and exterior classroom doors. The rules state that such openings should operate as fully intended, which means they should remain closed, latched, and locked to prevent unauthorized entry while still allowing ready egress in case of emergency.
The proposal further recommended exterior door sweeps be conducted weekly to ensure they’re working and locking properly. This rule grew out of an investigation that revealed the Robb Elementary shooter entered a door that should have been locked at all times but was likely faulty, making it difficult to secure.
Good Solutions Don’t Have to Be Perfect
It would be ideal if the perpetrators’ tactics were consistent and/or limited. Then, a single, best permanent solution set could be defined and implemented. Likewise, if security was the sole objective of public and private education, and school resources were unlimited, security professionals could specify solutions with impunity. Unfortunately, neither scenario is close to becoming reality.
There can be unintended consequences, for example, universal lockdowns – where all classroom doors could be locked from a central control location with one push of a button – seems like a good idea. However, it does not account for times when students are transiting a hallway during breaks or between activities. Where do they go if they cannot access a classroom that’s been locked?
The truth is that there is no perfect, fixed solution or panacea. The question really is how well the benefits outweigh the risks. It is a decision districts have to thoroughly and thoughtfully consider. If, in the end, a solution makes sense and the district can justify it by demonstrating due diligence and accepting potential liability, then it can feel confident enough to make the best decision.
Local education agencies (LEAs) and administration leadership can accomplish this by committing to a cross-discipline safety and security team. These collaborative teams should be charged with being responsible for seeking trusted advisors from the full breadth of security disciplines.
They should be tasked with learning and staying current on proven security solutions and innovations. This requires evaluating solution effectiveness and educational impact, identifying and reconciling unintended consequences, selecting and testing the most viable options, and implementing them with proper training and procedures. Teams should also be prepared to create and enforce necessary education-friendly security policies, continuously evaluate solution efficacy, and adapt to emerging issues. Of course, this is where security integrators can be a valuable resource.
Success will depend on how dedicated a team is. Enforcement and assistance at the level that states like Texas are enacting will be critical in ensuring planning, processes, compliance, and progress become consistent.
School safety and security will always be a work in progress. Rules will be updated, debate over gun legislation and mental health programs will continue, and technology and processes overall will improve. Fortunately, with enough passion and commitment, significant progress is being made. Sometimes it advances incrementally, sometimes by leaps and bounds. What’s happening in Texas and other states provides hope.
