Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Superintendent: district safety assessment averages 81% and will yield school‑specific corrective plans
Summary
Superintendent reported that the Center for Safe Schools’ districtwide safety and climate assessments placed all schools in the 60–90 band and produced an average score of 81%; the district will publish the final report in June and develop school‑level corrective action plans.
Cheltenham School District Superintendent delivered a report May 12 summarizing safety and climate work with the Center for Safe Schools and described next steps to address findings.
The superintendent said the district’s security and safety assessment uses five domains — emergency preparedness, access control, physical security, behavior/health/student support, and training/climate/policy — and that Cheltenham’s schools landed in the third band (60–90 percent). "When you look at the specific scoring breakdown by school, you will see that, as a district, for the safety and security assessment, we had an average score of 81%," the superintendent stated. He added the goal is to reach the next band, set at 90% or higher.
Why it matters: the assessment identifies where individual buildings need targeted improvements and lays out a phased implementation approach. The Center for Safe Schools’ methodology is grounded in Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) standards and uses banded scoring to flag critical versus developing needs.
Administration said the review will produce a finalized report in June and that the district plans to develop corrective action plans for each school building. The superintendent said the district had held two administrative trainings — one on the investigation process and another on incident reporting procedures — and has scheduled small‑group sessions with community stakeholders to gather input on communications and supports.
Board members and committee chairs who discussed the assessment emphasized the district’s accountability as it moves from diagnosis to implementation. The superintendent acknowledged the district is not yet where it needs to be and framed the Center’s recommendations as a roadmap for prioritized investments in safety, student supports and operations.
Next steps: the administration will post the Center’s report on the district website when it is finalized; school‑by‑school corrective action plans will follow. The board did not take an action vote on the assessment during the May 12 meeting.
