State education officials outline School Security Act inspections, training and mapping requirements
Loading...
Summary
State education staff told the Alabama State Board of Education that the School Security Act requires periodic facility inspections, a statewide school-mapping program, designated district safety coordinators with annual training and a rubric-based rating system; inspectors must have security-related backgrounds.
State education officials on Monday summarized how the School Security Act will be implemented across Alabama schools, saying the law requires routine, rubric-based inspections, a statewide school-mapping system and designated district safety coordinators with mandatory training.
Dr. Jeter, the presenter leading the State Department of Education’s school safety team, told the State Board of Education that “all of this comes directly from the law,” and emphasized the statute’s broad reach: the School Security Act applies to all public K–12 schools, including charter schools. She said officials will use a board-established rubric to evaluate facilities on items such as cameras, door locks, alarm systems, intercoms and emergency escapes.
The presentation explained that inspectors must be nonbiased and have relevant security experience — for example, retired school resource officers, retired school administrators or former safety coordinators — and that each inspected facility will receive a color-coded rating (green, yellow or red) with recommendations for remediation. Dr. Jeter said the rubric and inspection criteria will be updated over time to reflect best practices.
Officials also described a school-mapping program the law assigns to the named mapping entity referenced in the presentation. Dr. Jeter said mapping data must be compatible with the software used by emergency-service agencies, available in printable and digital formats, and accessible without requiring local education authorities (LEAs) to buy additional proprietary software or pay a fee.
On staffing and training, the department said the law mandates that each LEA designate a district safety coordinator (the duties may be assigned to existing staff rather than creating a new position). Coordinators must complete listed trainings — including EOP implementation, lockdown best practices, evacuation/reunification, behavioral threat assessment, weather and sheltering, and facility security — within the first year of designation and annually thereafter. The department also told the board that coordinators must attend at least four safety training sessions each year; no more than one credit may come from a vendor-based session.
Dr. Jeter gave inspection counts to illustrate early implementation: she said 45 inspections were completed between November and May 2024, and 59 inspections had been completed so far in 2025. The department said 235 schools are on the compliance-monitoring schedule and that roughly 25% of those inspections were complete at the time of the presentation.
Board members asked about mental-health representation and documentation requirements for school safety meetings; Dr. Jeter said the law requires at minimum law enforcement, a local firefighter, EMA and a school mental-health coordinator (or a social-worker equivalent) to attend annual school safety meetings and that LEAs must provide documentation of those meetings to the department.
The board also discussed funding: Dr. Mackey noted the legislature provided about $15,000,000 for school safety this year, with some funds held centrally to address the most egregious inspection findings; he said that translated to roughly $9 per student distributed directly to districts after targeted allocations.
The department said the rubric, checklist and more detailed guidance are available for districts and that staff will continue outreach and trainings to support consistent implementation.
