Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety Threat Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Academics committee reviews new school-based behavioral threat assessment regulation
Summary
The committee discussed a new Student Services administrative regulation (SS62) that sets procedures for school-based behavioral threat assessment and management, clarifies team roles, allows limited disclosures of student information when a credible threat exists, and requires annual training for school threat-assessment teams.
The County Board of Education Academics Committee on Feb. 25 reviewed Administrative Regulation SS62, a new Student Services rule laying out how schools will identify, assess and manage behavioral threats. The regulation establishes procedures, team roles and annual training expectations for school-based behavioral threat assessment and management.
The regulation sets a two-step response for concerns: an initial screening by a school-based core team, then, if needed, a “full protocol” threat assessment. The core team must include at least an administrator and one school-based mental-health professional; the full protocol team must include at least three members and may include school social workers, counselors, school psychologists, behavior-management specialists, nurses and the school resource officer (SRO).
The regulation permits schools to share personally identifiable information from education records with school personnel when “the district determines an articulable and significant threat to the health or safety of students or others exists” and the recipient’s knowledge is necessary to protect safety. If a potentially imminent threat is found—for example, a specific threat involving a weapon—the core team is instructed to notify the SRO and call 911; if not, the team completes a threat-assessment screener. When the screener indicates possible intent or the core team cannot reach consensus, a full protocol assessment is required.
If the full protocol team finds the level of concern is moderate or high, members must develop and implement a management plan outlining intervention, supervision and monitoring, and identify who on the team will carry out each responsibility. If the level of concern is low and supports are needed, a plan may also be developed; if no level of concern is found, the case is closed. The regulation emphasizes documentation of contacts, rationale and follow-up actions.
The regulation requires annual training for principals, assistant principals, school counselors, school social workers, school psychologists, behavior specialists, SROs and other school threat-assessment team members; presenters said training is a full-day program (minimum about six and a half hours) that uses case-study role-playing and usually takes an afternoon to complete. The presenters emphasized that the training is intended to halt an escalation of risk earlier in the decision chain, with the stated goal of addressing threats at the ideation stage when possible.
Committee members asked about parental involvement and how the district handles incidents involving adults; presenters said parents must be contacted and included in the assessment process for students and that incidents involving an adult would generally be handled by emergency services or medical professionals rather than the school threat-assessment process.
The committee accepted the presentation and asked staff to return with implementation details and training schedules for upcoming sessions to be made available to principals and teams.
