Norfolk staff report broad support for SRO program but students raise concerns about school climate
Loading...
Summary
A division evaluation of the school resource officer program reported high approval among surveyed school respondents and recommended continued partnership with the Norfolk Police Department while exploring additional partners; student speakers said officers can improve safety but also said heavy security can feel ‘prison‑like’ and urged more mental‑health supports.
Division staff presented an evaluation of Norfolk’s School Resource Officer (SRO) program and the associated memorandum of understanding required by state code, reporting largely positive survey responses from participants at six schools where SROs are assigned.
The presenter said the evaluation drew on discipline data, a school climate survey and the current and proposed MOU. Across the surveyed schools staff, students and administrators generally rated SROs highly for visibility, accessibility and professionalism; the presenter said approximately 89% of respondents approved of the program while about 6% disapproved. The presenter identified the program’s lowest impact score as its effect on vaping incidents (reported at about 64% in the survey).
The presentation noted that six full‑time sworn SROs are currently assigned to specific secondary schools (listed in the division materials provided to the board); the MOU contemplates 19 SRO positions but staffing shortages at the Norfolk Police Department have limited deployment. The presenter recommended continuing the partnership with the Norfolk Police Department, and said administrators have held preliminary discussions about possible partnerships with the Norfolk Sheriff’s Office to expand coverage if needed.
Board members asked who participated in the surveys; the presenter said principals were surveyed separately while staff and students were combined in the broader sample (roughly 40–50 respondents per school on average, per the presenter). Several board members asked for disaggregated data (staff vs. students, demographics) for future reporting. The presenter said SROs must complete specialized SRO training and that the MOU requires completion of the Department of Criminal Justice Services SRO program within six months of assignment.
Student speakers provided on‑the‑record perspectives: one student said, "having the officers there definitely make me feel more safe," while another warned that too much visible security can make a school feel "prison‑like" and urged additional mental‑health supports alongside security staff. Administrators said SROs are not intended to handle routine discipline and that the MOU clarifies the distinction between criminal responses and school administrative discipline.
Next steps discussed on the record included revisiting the MOU every two years (as required) and providing more detailed survey breakdowns, including separate student and staff responses and demographic cross‑tabs, to inform future placement and training decisions.
