School Active Shooter Preparedness: 7 Critical Mistakes Districts Make (And How to Fix Them)
- CrisisWire 
- 6 days ago
- 15 min read
By Warren Pulley, BTAM Certified | CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions
No school administrator wants to imagine their campus becoming the site of the next tragedy. Yet every time a school shooting makes headlines, the same question echoes through boardrooms and faculty meetings: "Could this happen here? Are we prepared?"
The uncomfortable truth? Most schools aren't as prepared as they think they are.
After four decades protecting lives—from nuclear weapons facilities to combat zones to university campuses—and now consulting with K-12 districts and universities nationwide on campus safety programs, I've observed consistent patterns in how schools approach active shooter preparedness. Some get it right. Most don't.
The schools that fail aren't necessarily under-resourced or uncaring. Often, they're making critical strategic mistakes that create the illusion of preparedness while leaving students and staff dangerously vulnerable.
This article identifies the seven most common—and most dangerous—mistakes schools make in active shooter preparedness, and more importantly, provides actionable solutions to fix them before tragedy strikes.

The Current State of School Safety in 2025
Let's establish baseline context. School shootings remain statistically rare—students are safer at school than almost anywhere else. But when they occur, the devastation is catastrophic, and the legal, financial, and emotional aftermath can destroy communities and careers.
The Numbers:
Between 2000 and 2023, the FBI documented hundreds of active shooter incidents across all locations, with educational institutions representing a significant portion. These incidents demonstrate consistent patterns:
- Most perpetrators are current or former students 
- Warning signs were observable in advance in the vast majority of cases 
- Bystanders knew about concerning behaviors but often didn't report them 
- Response time from initial shots to resolution averages 10-15 minutes—too long to rely solely on law enforcement 
The Regulatory Landscape:
States are increasingly mandating specific school safety measures:
- Active shooter drills: Now required in most states, with varying specifications on frequency and format 
- Threat assessment teams: Growing number of states requiring formal threat assessment programs 
- Safety audits: Regular security assessments becoming standard requirements 
- Reporting systems: Anonymous reporting mechanisms required in many jurisdictions 
The ASIS International School Security Standard—expected to be finalized in 2025—will provide comprehensive framework for K-12 security, creating de facto national standard even without federal mandate.
The Liability Reality:
Schools can be held liable for foreseeable violence they failed to prevent. "We didn't think it could happen here" is not a legal defense. Courts expect schools to:
- Implement reasonable security measures 
- Train staff on emergency response 
- Conduct threat assessments on concerning behaviors 
- Maintain and practice emergency plans 
- Document security decision-making 
Understanding this context, let's examine where schools go wrong—and how to correct course.
Mistake #1: Focusing Only on Response, Not Prevention
The Problem:
Walk into most school security planning meetings, and the conversation immediately turns to response: lockdown procedures, evacuation routes, communication systems, law enforcement coordination. All important—but fundamentally reactive.
Schools invest heavily in what to do after shots are fired while investing minimally in preventing someone from deciding to shoot in the first place.
This is backwards. As my experience conducting threat assessments for schools and universities has proven repeatedly: the best response to an active shooter is preventing them from becoming one.
Why This Happens:
Response is tangible. You can buy door barricades, install panic buttons, conduct lockdown drills. Prevention is harder—it requires changing culture, training staff, establishing systems, conducting investigations. Response feels like doing something. Prevention feels like... talking about doing something.
Additionally, response addresses the dramatic, terrifying scenario that dominates public imagination. Prevention addresses the mundane, uncomfortable work of monitoring concerning student behavior—less cinematic, but infinitely more effective.
The Fix:
Implement comprehensive behavioral threat assessment programs that identify concerning students before they reach crisis point. This requires:
1. Establishing Threat Assessment Teams:
Create multidisciplinary teams including:
- School administrators 
- Mental health professionals (counselors, psychologists) 
- School resource officers or security personnel 
- Teachers who can provide classroom observations 
- Legal advisors who understand student rights 
These teams don't just respond to threats—they proactively identify students showing warning signs and coordinate intervention before situations escalate. My Campus Under Siege book provides detailed frameworks for establishing and operating school-based threat assessment teams.
2. Training All Staff on Warning Signs:
Every teacher, counselor, coach, cafeteria worker, and bus driver should recognize behavioral indicators:
- Social isolation combined with grievance 
- Fixation on violence or previous school shooters 
- Communications suggesting violent intent 
- Research into weapons or attack methods 
- Pathway behaviors (planning, preparation, surveillance) 
- Concerning social media posts 
- Dramatic behavioral changes 
Training isn't one-time—annual refreshers ensure continued vigilance.
3. Creating Reporting Cultures:
Students typically know about concerning peers before adults do. But they won't report unless:
- Multiple, accessible reporting mechanisms exist (hotlines, online forms, in-person options) 
- Anonymous reporting is available 
- They trust that reports will be taken seriously 
- They see consequences when threats are real but support when peers are struggling 
4. Integrating Prevention with Response:
Prevention and response aren't separate—they're integrated. Threat assessment informs emergency planning. Who are the highest-risk students requiring enhanced monitoring? What scenarios are most likely given known threats? How do security measures address specific identified risks?
Prevention-focused schools don't abandon response planning—they enhance it with intelligence about actual threats rather than hypothetical scenarios.
Mistake #2: Inadequate or Non-Existent Threat Assessment Protocols
The Problem:
Many schools either lack formal threat assessment protocols entirely or have procedures that exist only on paper without actual implementation. When concerning behaviors arise, responses are ad-hoc, inconsistent, and often inadequate.
Without structured protocols, schools miss opportunities for early intervention. Students exhibiting warning signs may receive informal conversations but no systematic assessment, monitoring, or intervention. By the time situations become critical, options have narrowed significantly.
Research Evidence:
The Secret Service's study "Averting Targeted School Violence" analyzed plots against schools and found that in most cases:
- Someone knew about the student's concerning behavior 
- Warning signs were observable weeks or months in advance 
- No formal threat assessment was conducted 
- Opportunities for intervention were missed 
Research on school threat assessments consistently shows that structured assessment protocols identify high-risk situations earlier and more accurately than informal approaches.
The Fix:
Implement evidence-based threat assessment protocols following FBI, Secret Service, and Department of Homeland Security guidelines:
1. Adopt Structured Assessment Frameworks:
Use validated threat assessment tools such as:
- Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines (CSTAG): Developed by University of Virginia researchers, widely adopted 
- Salem-Keizer System: Evidence-based protocol used successfully across multiple districts 
- Behavioral Threat Assessment Framework: FBI-recommended approach 
These frameworks provide systematic processes for:
- Receiving and triaging reports 
- Conducting investigations 
- Evaluating risk levels 
- Determining appropriate interventions 
- Monitoring ongoing cases 
2. Define Clear Thresholds:
Establish specific criteria for:
- What behaviors trigger assessment: Direct threats, conditional threats, concerning communications, pathway behaviors, concerning social media 
- Assessment urgency levels: Immediate (imminent danger), priority (24-48 hours), routine (one week) 
- Risk classifications: Low (monitoring), moderate (intervention), high (intensive management), imminent (emergency response) 
Clarity prevents both over-reactions to minor concerns and under-reactions to serious threats.
3. Document Everything:
Comprehensive documentation protects schools legally and improves program quality:
- Initial report details 
- Investigation findings 
- Assessment methodology and conclusions 
- Intervention decisions and rationale 
- Monitoring activities 
- Case outcomes 
Documentation demonstrates that schools took reasonable steps to assess and manage known threats—critical for liability protection.
4. Coordinate with Law Enforcement:
Schools shouldn't conduct threat assessments in isolation. Establish protocols with local law enforcement for:
- When to notify police (imminent threats, weapons possession, criminal activity) 
- Information sharing procedures (balancing student privacy with safety) 
- Joint threat assessment when appropriate 
- Coordinated intervention planning 
My experience as an LAPD officer taught me that early law enforcement coordination often prevents situations from reaching criminal threshold while maintaining student privacy when appropriate.
Mistake #3: Poorly Trained Staff and Traumatic Drills
The Problem:
Many schools approach active shooter preparedness with two extremes: either minimal training that leaves staff unprepared, or hyper-realistic drills that traumatize students and staff without improving actual preparedness.
The Training Gap:
Staff receive one-time active shooter training during orientation, then nothing for years. When emergencies occur, they've forgotten procedures, don't know their specific roles, and make critical errors under stress.
Alternatively, some schools conduct elaborate lockdown drills complete with simulated gunshots, fake blood, and actors playing wounded victims—traumatizing students while providing minimal actual learning.
Research on Drill Trauma:
Recent studies show that overly realistic active shooter drills can:
- Create anxiety and fear in students 
- Trigger trauma responses in students with PTSD or prior violence exposure 
- Reduce sense of school safety 
- Provide minimal improvement in actual response capability 
The goal is preparedness without trauma—possible but requiring thoughtful design.
The Fix:
Implement graduated training and age-appropriate drills:
1. Comprehensive Staff Training:
All staff should receive annual training on:
- Run-Hide-Fight/ALICE protocols: Understanding response options 
- Communication procedures: How to alert others, communicate with law enforcement 
- Evacuation vs. lockdown decision-making: When to evacuate, when to shelter-in-place 
- Special needs considerations: How to assist students with disabilities 
- Post-incident procedures: What happens after threat resolution 
Training should include:
- Classroom instruction 
- Tabletop exercises 
- Hands-on practice with doors, locks, barricades 
- Decision-making scenarios 
2. Age-Appropriate Student Training:
Different developmental stages require different approaches:
Elementary (K-5):
- Focus on listening to adults 
- Simple concepts: "safe spaces," "quiet game" 
- No mention of guns or shooters 
- Practice through games and stories 
Middle School (6-8):
- Age-appropriate discussion of why drills occur 
- Basic Run-Hide-Fight concepts 
- Emphasis on options and decision-making 
- De-emphasis on graphic details 
High School (9-12):
- Comprehensive discussion of active shooter realities 
- Full Run-Hide-Fight/ALICE training 
- Scenario-based learning 
- Student leadership in emergency response 
3. Trauma-Informed Drills:
Conduct drills that prepare without traumatizing:
Never:
- Use simulated gunfire or explosions 
- Use fake blood or staged injuries 
- Surprise students with unannounced drills 
- Force students to participate if they have trauma history 
- Conduct drills right before holidays/weekends when students can't process 
Always:
- Announce drills in advance 
- Provide opt-out options for traumatized students 
- Debrief after drills 
- Focus on successful actions, not fear 
- Make drills routine, not dramatic 
Training videos and resources can supplement live training, providing consistent messaging across all staff.
4. Multiple Drill Formats:
Vary drill formats to build different skills:
- Tabletop exercises: Verbal walkthrough of scenarios 
- Evacuation drills: Practice orderly evacuation 
- Lockdown drills: Practice shelter-in-place procedures 
- Communication drills: Practice alert systems 
- Full-scale exercises: Comprehensive simulation with law enforcement (staff only, after hours) 
Frequency matters—quarterly drills maintain skills without creating constant anxiety.
Mistake #4: Weak Physical Security and Access Control
The Problem:
Many schools have invested in security technology—cameras, door locks, visitor management systems—but implement them ineffectively or inconsistently. Others lack basic physical security measures entirely, relying primarily on policies and procedures.
Physical security won't stop determined attackers alone, but it creates critical delays, limits movement, and provides warning time that enables effective response.
Common Failures:
- Locked exterior doors routinely propped open for convenience 
- Visitor sign-in procedures not enforced 
- Back and side doors left unsecured 
- No vestibule or screening at main entrance 
- Security cameras installed but rarely monitored 
- Interior classroom doors that can't be locked from inside 
- No visual barriers blocking view into classrooms 
These gaps transform security systems from effective barriers into expensive window dressing.
The Fix:
Implement layered physical security:
1. Perimeter Security:
Create clear boundaries and control points:
- Fencing: Define school property, direct visitors to main entrance 
- Signage: Clear wayfinding to designated visitor entrance 
- Monitoring: Cameras covering all exterior doors and approaches 
- Limited access points: Single controlled entrance during school hours, other doors locked and alarmed 
2. Entrance Security:
Main entrance should include:
- Secure vestibule: Visitors cannot access main building without screening 
- Visual screening: Staff can see visitors before buzzing them in 
- Visitor management: ID scanning, badge printing, background checks 
- Duress alarms: Panic buttons for reception staff 
- Hardened design: Reinforced glass, secure door hardware 
3. Interior Security:
Once inside perimeter, additional measures:
- Classroom door locks: Operable from inside without keys (compliance with fire codes) 
- Visual barriers: Ability to cover door windows during lockdown 
- Hardening options: Door barricades, reinforced door frames (with fire marshal approval) 
- Communication systems: PA, intercoms, mass notification 
- Safe zones: Identified locations for shelter-in-place 
4. CPTED Principles:
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design improves security through:
- Natural surveillance: Design that enables observation (windows, sightlines, lighting) 
- Natural access control: Design that guides traffic flow and restricts access naturally 
- Territorial reinforcement: Clear distinction between public and private space 
- Maintenance: Well-maintained facilities signal care and attention 
My book Locked Down: The Access Control Playbook provides comprehensive guidance on implementing effective physical security measures in educational environments.
5. Regular Testing and Maintenance:
Security systems require ongoing attention:
- Monthly testing of door locks 
- Quarterly testing of camera systems 
- Annual testing of alarm systems 
- Regular staff accountability for security procedures 
- Periodic penetration testing (attempting unauthorized entry) 
Mistake #5: No Community Partnerships or Law Enforcement Coordination
The Problem:
Schools often operate security programs in isolation, treating partnerships with law enforcement, mental health agencies, and community resources as optional rather than essential.
When emergencies occur, schools discover that:
- Law enforcement doesn't have current building layouts 
- First responders don't know school procedures 
- Communication systems aren't compatible 
- Roles and responsibilities weren't clarified 
- No established relationships exist to facilitate coordination 
Crisis is the wrong time to exchange business cards.
The Fix:
Build comprehensive community partnerships:
1. Law Enforcement Coordination:
Establish formal relationships with:
- Local police departments 
- Sheriff's offices 
- School resource officer (SRO) programs 
- FBI field offices (for major threats) 
Coordination Activities:
- Facility tours: Annual walk-throughs providing current layouts, access points, evacuation routes 
- Joint training: Combined exercises between school staff and law enforcement 
- Communication protocols: Shared radio frequencies or systems, emergency contact lists 
- Threat information sharing: Agreements on when and how to share threat intelligence 
- Memorandums of understanding (MOUs): Formal agreements on roles, responsibilities, response protocols 
2. Mental Health Partnerships:
Connect with community resources:
- Local mental health agencies 
- Crisis intervention services 
- Hospital psychiatric departments 
- Private practitioners willing to provide consultation 
- Mobile crisis response teams 
These partnerships provide:
- Emergency mental health services 
- Consultation on threat assessments 
- Treatment referrals for identified students 
- Training on mental health crisis recognition 
3. Emergency Management Coordination:
Integrate with broader emergency systems:
- County/city emergency management agencies 
- Fire departments 
- Emergency medical services 
- Public health departments 
- Red Cross or equivalent organizations 
This coordination ensures:
- Schools included in community emergency plans 
- Access to emergency resources during large-scale incidents 
- Unified command structures during multi-agency response 
4. Business and Community Resources:
Engage local stakeholders:
- Security companies providing volunteer support 
- Medical professionals available for emergencies 
- Mental health professionals donating services 
- Faith communities offering counseling and support 
- Businesses providing emergency supplies or facilities 
These partnerships provide resources schools couldn't afford independently while strengthening community investment in school safety.
Regular partnership meetings—quarterly minimum—maintain relationships and update coordination protocols as personnel, procedures, and threats evolve.
Mistake #6: Ignoring Behavioral Warning Signs and Student Mental Health
The Problem:
School shooting prevention fundamentally isn't a security problem—it's a mental health and behavioral intervention problem. Security measures provide barriers and response capabilities, but addressing underlying causes prevents violence from occurring.
Many schools recognize this intellectually but fail operationally—treating security and mental health as separate domains rather than integrated systems. Security staff don't receive mental health training. Counselors don't receive threat assessment training. Neither coordinates effectively with the other.
Meanwhile, students exhibiting warning signs receive inadequate support:
- Limited counseling services with months-long waitlists 
- Disciplinary responses to mental health crises 
- Suspensions that isolate troubled students further 
- Insufficient crisis intervention capabilities 
- No systematic monitoring of high-risk students 
The Research:
FBI research consistently shows that school shooters exhibit observable warning signs:
- Social dynamics: Isolation, bullying (as victim or perpetrator), deteriorating peer relationships 
- Mental health: Depression, anxiety, psychosis, suicidal ideation 
- Behavioral changes: Academic decline, attendance problems, aggressive outbursts, rule violations 
- Communications: Direct or veiled threats, violent fantasies, identification with previous shooters 
- Pathway behaviors: Research, planning, acquiring weapons, surveillance 
These aren't just behavioral problems—they're cries for help that schools must recognize and address.
The Fix:
Integrate mental health support with security operations:
1. Comprehensive Counseling Services:
Ensure adequate mental health support:
- Counselor ratios: Meet recommended ratios (1:250 is gold standard, many schools have 1:500+) 
- Crisis counselors: Designated staff available for emergency mental health situations 
- External partnerships: Contracts with community mental health agencies for supplemental services 
- Telehealth options: Virtual counseling expands access 
2. Training Integration:
Train both security and counseling staff on the intersection of their roles:
- Security staff: Training on mental health crisis recognition, de-escalation, appropriate responses 
- Counseling staff: Training on threat assessment fundamentals, warning signs, when to involve security/law enforcement 
- Joint training: Combined sessions building shared understanding and relationships 
3. Student Support Systems:
Implement proactive mental health support:
- Peer mentoring: Trained students providing support to isolated peers 
- Check-in systems: Counselors regularly connecting with high-risk students 
- Anonymous support requests: Ways students can request help confidentially 
- Positive behavioral interventions: Proactive approaches rather than purely punitive discipline 
4. Threat Assessment Integration:
Connect behavioral observation with formal assessment:
- Teachers report concerning behaviors to counselors 
- Counselors assess whether behaviors warrant threat assessment team review 
- Threat teams include mental health professionals in all assessments 
- Interventions prioritize treatment and support alongside security measures 
My training in behavioral threat assessment and management (BTAM) emphasizes this integration—effective threat assessment requires understanding both security operations and human psychology. Neither alone is sufficient.
Mistake #7: Insufficient Emergency Communication Systems
The Problem:
During active shooter events, seconds matter. Rapid notification can mean the difference between targeted response and mass casualty. Yet many schools rely on inadequate communication systems:
- PA systems only: Can't reach everyone, especially in noisy areas or during outdoor activities 
- Email/text delayed: Messages sent but not received immediately 
- No integration: Security cameras, door locks, and communication systems operate independently 
- Single point of failure: One system disabled renders school unable to communicate 
- No backup power: Systems fail when power is cut 
- Unclear messaging: Staff don't know what different alerts mean 
When lockdowns are ordered, staff discover that half the school didn't get the message, students are in transition between classes, and no one knows where the threat is located.
The Fix:
Implement redundant, integrated emergency communication:
1. Multi-Modal Alert Systems:
Combine multiple communication channels:
- PA announcements: Campus-wide audio notifications 
- Mass notification systems: Automated calls/texts/emails to all staff, students, parents 
- Desktop alerts: Pop-ups on all school computers 
- Mobile apps: Push notifications to school safety apps 
- Visual alerts: Flashing lights, digital signage displays 
- Sirens/horns: Outdoor audio warnings 
No single system reaches everyone—redundancy ensures comprehensive notification.
2. Clear, Standardized Messaging:
Develop specific, practiced alert messages:
- Lockdown: "Lockdown, lockdown, lockdown. This is not a drill. Secure all rooms immediately." 
- Evacuation: "Evacuate the building. Proceed to [designated location]." 
- Shelter-in-place: "Shelter-in-place for [hazard type]. Move away from windows." 
- All clear: "All clear. Resume normal operations." 
Staff must know these messages, understand what each means, and practice appropriate responses.
3. Two-Way Communication:
Enable staff to report back to administration:
- Panic buttons: Silent alerts from classrooms indicating distress 
- Check-in systems: Digital tools allowing staff to report status and location 
- Dedicated radio channels: Direct communication with security/administration 
- Emergency apps: Tools enabling reporting, status updates, two-way messaging 
Knowing where everyone is and whether they're safe enables better emergency management.
4. Integration with Physical Security:
Connect communication with security systems:
- Automated lockdown: Panic button activates both alert system and door locks 
- Camera integration: Alerts direct security to relevant camera feeds 
- Access control coordination: Lockdown automatically secures perimeter doors 
- Visitor management: Emergency alerts notify reception to secure entrance 
Integrated systems provide comprehensive security response from single trigger.
5. Regular Testing and Training:
Communication systems require maintenance and familiarity:
- Monthly testing: Verify all communication channels functional 
- Quarterly drills: Practice using systems under emergency conditions 
- Annual system evaluation: Assess effectiveness and identify needed improvements 
- After-action reviews: Learn from actual emergency activations 
Bringing It All Together: Comprehensive School Safety Programs
These seven mistakes aren't isolated failures—they're symptoms of fragmented, reactive approaches to school safety. Fixing one mistake while ignoring others provides minimal improvement.
Effective school safety requires comprehensive, integrated programs that combine:
Prevention:
- Threat assessment teams 
- Mental health support 
- Behavioral intervention 
- Student and staff training 
- Reporting systems and culture 
Physical Security:
- Access control 
- Perimeter security 
- Interior hardening 
- Technology integration 
- CPTED principles 
Response Planning:
- Emergency procedures 
- Communication systems 
- Law enforcement coordination 
- Evacuation and lockdown protocols 
- Medical emergency response 
Community Partnerships:
- Law enforcement relationships 
- Mental health resources 
- Emergency management coordination 
- Business and community support 
Continuous Improvement:
- Regular program evaluation 
- Incident analysis and lessons learned 
- Evolving threats and best practices 
- Training updates 
- System testing and refinement 
Schools that excel at safety don't do one thing well—they do many things competently and coordinate them effectively.
My work establishing comprehensive campus safety programs across educational institutions has proven repeatedly: integrated approaches prevent violence while fragmented approaches merely react to it.
Conclusion: Moving from Compliance to Excellence
Most schools approach active shooter preparedness as compliance exercise: check the required boxes, conduct mandated drills, file necessary reports. This produces minimal adequacy—better than nothing but far from excellence.
The seven mistakes outlined in this article represent the gap between compliance and excellence:
- Compliance schools focus on response; excellent schools emphasize prevention 
- Compliance schools have threat assessment on paper; excellent schools operationalize it 
- Compliance schools conduct traumatic drills; excellent schools train effectively without trauma 
- Compliance schools install security systems; excellent schools use them properly 
- Compliance schools operate independently; excellent schools build partnerships 
- Compliance schools address behavior punitively; excellent schools integrate mental health support 
- Compliance schools have basic communication; excellent schools have redundant, integrated systems 
Which type of school do you lead?
After forty years protecting lives in environments ranging from nuclear facilities to combat zones to educational campuses—and consulting with schools nationwide on safety programs—I can state unequivocally: excellence in school safety isn't about spending more money. It's about spending money strategically, training staff effectively, integrating systems thoughtfully, and maintaining vigilance consistently.
Schools that do these things prevent tragedies. Schools that don't become tragedies.
The choice—and the responsibility—rests with educational leaders willing to acknowledge where their programs fall short and commit to fixing them before crisis forces the issue.
The question isn't whether your school will face threats. The question is whether you'll have systems in place to identify and manage those threats before they materialize into violence.
Will you?
About the Author
Warren Pulley is founder of CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions and brings 40 years of continuous experience protecting lives across military, law enforcement, diplomatic, corporate, and educational environments.
Professional Credentials:
- BTAM Certified - Behavioral Threat Assessment & Management (University of Hawaii West Oahu) 
- 20+ FEMA Certifications - IS-906 (Workplace Violence), IS-907 (Active Shooter), IS-915 (Insider Threats), Complete ICS/NIMS 
- Former LAPD Officer - 12 years investigating violent crimes and organized crime 
- U.S. Embassy Baghdad Security Director - 6+ years protecting diplomats under daily threat (zero incidents) 
- Former Director of Campus Safety - Chaminade University of Honolulu 
- U.S. Air Force Veteran - 7 years nuclear weapons security 
- Licensed Private Investigator - California (former) 
Published Works:
Academic Research:
Additional research available at: Academia.edu/CrisisWire
Connect With CrisisWire
Email: crisiswire@proton.me
Social Media:
- LinkedIn: Warren Pulley 
- Twitter/X: @CrisisWireSec 
- Instagram: @crisiswire 
- Facebook: CrisisWire 
- Quora: CrisisWire Profile 
Training Videos:
Get Professional School Safety Consultation
CrisisWire provides comprehensive school safety services:
✅ School Safety Audits - Comprehensive assessment of current security measures, threat assessment programs, and emergency preparedness
✅ Threat Assessment Team Development - Formation, training, and operational support for school-based threat assessment teams
✅ Active Shooter Response Training - Age-appropriate staff and student training using trauma-informed approaches
✅ Physical Security Assessment - Evaluation of access control, perimeter security, interior hardening, and technology systems
✅ Emergency Planning - Development of comprehensive emergency operations plans and crisis response protocols
✅ Community Partnership Facilitation - Coordination with law enforcement, mental health agencies, and community resources
Contact CrisisWire Today:📧 crisiswire@proton.me🌐 bit.ly/crisiswire
Serving K-12 schools and universities nationwide with evidence-based school safety programs that prevent violence while maintaining positive learning environments.
Tags: #SchoolSafety #ActiveShooterPreparedness #SchoolSecurity #ThreatAssessment #K12Safety #CampusSafety #SchoolShooting #EmergencyPreparedness #StudentSafety #EducationSecurity
Related Articles:
© 2025 CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions. All rights reserved.





Comments