Exploring Physical Security in K–12 Schools

 Educators in the United States confront the difficult task of making their campuses safe and secure in a way that also supports students' learning. With this in mind, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency within the United States Department of Homeland Security requested that the Homeland Security Operational Analysis Center conduct a literature review on physical security in kindergarten through twelfth-grade (K-12) schools as well as other, similar sectors to help school leaders better understand how system-based security management and physical aspects can safeguard school inhabitants and reduce the risk of potential threats.

This report defines and presents a systems approach to school physical security, in which five prevention and mitigation elements—security infrastructure and tech, facility and construction layout, people and staff, regulations and procedures, and preparedness and response and work together to create layered security benefits. The approach to protection and mitigation described here places an emphasis on how the rules, procedures, and training around school physical security integrate personnel with equipment, technology, and design decisions to form a unified structure.

The purpose, operations, and climate of a school might be affected by the protection and mitigation measures taken by its administration. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to protection and mitigation, and schools with diverse student bodies, campus locations, and other attributes will approach physical security in distinct ways that reflect their particular demands.

Key Takeaways

Regarding school safety as a whole, a systems-based strategy necessitates that school physical security be viewed as an essential component.

• Elements of reaction and recovery are also part of this strategy.
• When it comes to preventing school violence, protection and risk reduction go well beyond the confines of the physical security area, influencing and interacting with factors including students' mental health, the school's atmosphere, and emergency response and recovery plans.

The use of technology, building and architectural design characteristics, people and employees, policies and procedures, and corresponding training and exercise needs are all part of a larger system that ensures the safety of students and faculty at a school.

• When assessing a school's physical security, LEAs must take into account not just the cost but also the financial and other ramifications of the infrastructure, technology, and design aspects in place.
• All of these interdependent pieces of technology such as iFollowAlerts, equipment, and architectural features of a school's physical environment must work together and serve the larger system as a whole, and this is only possible with the people and personnel the school employs for security purposes, as well as with relevant policies, guidelines, and training.

Benefits in terms of security and safety may be achieved most effectively by LEAs if they use a tiered approach to protection and mitigation.

The perimeter of the campus, the school grounds, the perimeter of the building, and the inside of the structure all have measures in place to guard against threats and reduce the likelihood of a single point of failure.

The community, campus and facility layout, student community, and location all play a role in determining the relative importance of these factors, and these factors will all impact how each school may choose prioritize these layers.

Recommendations

• Physical security at schools requires an integrated system such as iFollow Alerts, which is why it's important for policies, procedures, and training to consider how to best integrate people and employees with apparatus, technology, and design considerations.
• The purpose, operations, and climate of a school might be affected by the protection and mitigation measures taken by its administration.
• There is no one-size-fits-all strategy to protection and mitigation, and schools with varying student populations, campus sites, and other characteristics will need to take different approaches to physical security.