Blog Post [ELM#1143] School Safety Planning That Follows Evidence

How do we lead threat assessment and safety planning in a way that is disciplined, legally sound, and not driven by fear or headlines? I hear this question after every national tragedy. It arrives with a screenshot, a worried parent, and a phone that will not stop buzzing. Leaders feel pressure to act fast and act big.

Some leaders answer fear with new hardware and a zero-tolerance rule that treats every threat the same. Others hand staff a warning-sign checklist and call it prevention. Yet the U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) found no profile of a student attacker. Its researchers warned that profiles and checklists do not yield accurate or useful results (NTAC, 2019).

Fear also distorts judgment inside the meeting room. In a Virginia study of 1,865 threat cases, teams judged only 30.5% serious, and just 3.3% were attempted (Cornell et al., 2018). Threats to kill were more often labeled serious, yet less often attempted. The researchers suggest those disturbing words may carry extra weight with teams.

According to Dewey Cornell, “Sometimes a threat like, ‘I’m going to kill you,’ is nothing more than an expression of anger and frustration.” Cornell, who developed the Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines, shared that view in a 2024 interview (Hausman, 2024). He still expects every reported threat to be examined. He wants facts to set the response before adrenaline does.

A Lesson From a Hurricane Shelter

I learned the value of steady structure during Hurricane Irma in 2017. My worksite in Florida had been activated as an evacuation shelter. Protocol said the Red Cross would staff and run it. When I arrived, 30 evacuees and several volunteers were waiting. Two hours later, word came that the Red Cross was not coming.

Every eye in the room turned to me. A sealed Red Cross shelter box sat nearby. I could wring my hands and complain, or I could step up and lead. I broke the seal, and we opened our doors.

We kept serving after the power failed, working under emergency lighting from backup generators. By the time we closed, we had hosted more than 1,200 evacuees (Moore, 2022). Security officers, EMS personnel, custodians, food service staff, and volunteers all rose to the occasion.

Irma taught me that a plan on paper assumes help will arrive. Your threat assessment process must be one your own people can run when help does not. The leader’s calm becomes the team’s calm. Families notice, and trust grows.

A Disciplined, Defensible Answer

So what does disciplined practice look like? The NTAC (2018) operational guide lays out eight steps for school threat assessment programs. I group them into five commitments.

1. Build a standing team before you need it. Include an administrator, a mental health professional, and a law enforcement partner (NTAC, 2018). Train together using realistic scenarios. A team that meets only during a crisis exists only on paper.
2. Define what triggers an assessment. List behaviors that demand immediate action and those that need a closer look. Set a clear threshold for calling law enforcement. Give students and staff a monitored way to report concerns.
3. Ask whether the student poses a threat. Interview the student and witnesses, review records, and examine context before deciding. Separate expressions of anger from evidence of planning. Serious cases need a protective plan; the rest need resolution and support.
4. Document your legal reasoning. FERPA allows disclosure without consent when there is an articulable and significant threat to health or safety (Family Educational Rights and Privacy, 2025). Schools must record that threat and who received the information. Because 34.6% of Virginia threat cases involved students in special education, include IEP and 504 teams (Cornell et al., 2018).
5. Follow up and audit. Assign someone to monitor each serious case until the concern is resolved. Review your data yearly for patterns by race, disability, and grade. Fair outcomes protect students and the process’s credibility.

Your Next Move

Think about the last threat report that reached your desk. Did your team respond to the facts or to the fear? Would your documentation hold up if an attorney asked to see it? Who on your team could lead if you could not show up?

This week, gather your threat assessment team, walk through one real case from start to finish, and fix the first gap you find.

#EducationalLeader,
Kim

When schools are well led, students learn well.

References

• Cornell, D., Maeng, J. L., Burnette, A. G., Jia, Y., Huang, F., Konold, T., Datta, P., Malone, M., & Meyer, P. (2018). Student threat assessment as a standard school safety practice: Results from a statewide implementation study. School Psychology Quarterly.
• Family Educational Rights and Privacy, 34 C.F.R. pt. 99 (2025).
• Hausman, S. (2024, March 21). UVA experts offer free threat assessment program for schools. WVTF Radio IQ.
• Moore, K. D. (2022, September 27). 5 leadership lessons I learned during a crisis. Dr. Kim Moore.
• National Threat Assessment Center. (2018). Enhancing school safety using a threat assessment model: An operational guide for preventing targeted school violence. U.S. Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security.
• National Threat Assessment Center. (2019). Protecting America’s schools: A U.S. Secret Service analysis of targeted school violence. U.S. Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security.

The views shared herein are solely those of Dr. Kim D. Moore and do not necessarily reflect the positions of her employer, the school district, or any local, state, or federal government entity.