Targeted Threat Assessment - School Shooting Prevention

Below please find our synopsis of the training seminar we participated in on March 10, 2003. The training session was held for educators and personnel responsible for the prevention of violence in schools. The program was based on the joint efforts of the Secret Service and the US Department of Education’s collaborative effort, "The Safe School Initiative”. The Safe School Initiative focused on students who carried out school attacks by examining the thinking, planning and other behaviors engaged in prior to the attacks. The critical benefit of the study to Districts is the ability to pass along the knowledge on “pre-attack behaviors and communications” that might be detectable and could aid in the prevention of future attacks.

The materials published by the Secret Service are over 140 pages in length. While I have injected some of my own experience and interpretation into this document, the large majority of material is taken directly from the training received. This document represents my effort to consolidate the lengthy document to a more manageable length for busy administrators.

The findings of the Safe School Initiative suggest that some future school attacks may be preventable. The fact that most attackers engaged in pre-incident planning behavior and shared their intentions and plans with others, suggests that those conducting threat assessment inquiries or investigations could uncover these types of information. I hope you will find the summary informative.

Threat Assessment Program Definitions

“Targeted” School Violence – School based attacks where the school was deliberately selected as the location for the attack and was not simply a random site of opportunity. “Targeted Violence” – Evolved from the Secret Service’s five-year study of individuals who carried out, or attempted lethal attacks on public officials or prominent individuals.

Making a Threat – student tells people they intend to harm someone

Posing a Threat – Student engages in behaviors that indicate an intent, planning, or preparation for an attack.

Inquiry – A threat assessment controlled by school officials. Law enforcement may or may not be involved at this stage.

Investigation – A threat assessment that is controlled by law enforcement. May have started as an inquiry and progressed to an investigation due to initial findings by school officials.

Incidents of targeted violence at school rarely are sudden, impulsive acts.

The process of thinking and planning that leads up to an attack potentially may be knowable or discernible from the attacker’s behaviors and communications. To the extent that information about an attacker’s intent and planning is knowable and may be uncovered before an incident, some attacks may be preventable. However, the Safe School Initiative found that the time span between the attacker’s decision to mount an attack and the actual incident may be short. Consequently, when indications that a student may pose a threat to the school community arise in the form of information about a possible planned attack, school administrators and law enforcement officials will need to move quickly to inquire about and intervene in that possible plan.

Prior to most incidents, other people knew about the attacker’s idea and/or plan to attack.

First and foremost, this finding suggests that students can be an important part of prevention efforts. A friend or schoolmate may be the first person to hear that a student is thinking about or planning to harm someone. Nevertheless, for a variety of reasons, those who have information about a potential incident of targeted school violence may not alert an adult on their own. Schools can encourage students to report this information in part by identifying and breaking down barriers in the school environment that inadvertently may discourage students from coming forward with this information. Schools also may benefit from ensuring that they have a fair, thoughtful, and effective system to respond to whatever information students do bring forward. If students have concerns about how adults will react to information that they bring forward, they may be even less inclined to volunteer such information. In addition, this finding highlights the importance in a threat assessment inquiry of attempts to gather all relevant information from anyone who may have contact with the student. Efforts to gather all potentially relevant pieces of information, however innocuous they may appear on their own, from all individuals with whom the student has contact may help to develop a more comprehensive picture of the student’s ideas, activities, and plans. In the end, investigators likely will find that different people in the student’s life may have different pieces of the puzzle.

Most attackers did not threaten their targets directly prior to advancing the attack.

This finding underscores the importance of not waiting for a threat before beginning an inquiry. School administrators, of course, should respond to all students who make threats because the lack of response could be taken by the threatener as permission to proceed with carrying out the threat. In the end, however, it is important to distinguish between someone who makes a threat–tells people they intend to harm someone–and someone who poses a threat–engages in behaviors that indicate an intent, planning, or preparation for an attack. Those conducting threat assessment inquiries should focus particular attention on any information that indicates that a student poses a threat, regardless of whether the student has told a potential target he or she intends to do them harm.

There is no accurate or useful "profile" of students who engage in targeted school violence.

The use of profiles to determine whether a student is thinking about or planning a violent attack is not an effective approach to identifying students who may pose a risk for targeted violence at school or–once a student has been identified–for assessing the risk that a particular student may pose for targeted school violence. Reliance on profiles to predict future school attacks carries two substantial risks: (1) the great majority of students who fit any given profile of a "school shooter" actually will not pose a risk of targeted violence; and, (2) using profiles will fail to identify some students who in fact pose a risk of violence, but share few if any characteristics with prior attackers. Rather than trying to determine the "type" of student who may engage in targeted school violence, an inquiry should focus instead on a student’s behaviors and communications to determine if that student appears to be planning or preparing for an attack. Rather than asking whether a particular student "looks like" those who have launched school-based attacks before, it is more productive to ask whether the student is on a path toward a violent attack, if so how fast the student is moving toward attack, and where intervention may be possible.

Most attackers engaged in some behavior, prior to the incident, that caused others concern or indicated a need for help.

This finding highlights the range of behaviors in a student’s life that may be noticeable to adults and that could prompt some additional probing by a caring adult. As was true in some of the incidents covered in the Safe School Initiative’s study, individuals in contact with the attacker each may have observed something of concern about that student’s behavior, but not of sufficient concern for them to notify anyone in a position to respond. Educators and other adults can learn how to pick up on these signals and make appropriate referrals. By inquiring about any information that may have prompted some concern, an investigator may be able to develop a more comprehensive picture of the student’s past and current behavior, and identify any indications that the student is intent on or planning to attack. However, discretion should be exercised in determining whom to talk to about the student, so as not to alienate or stigmatize the student of concern.

Most attackers had difficulty coping with significant losses or personal failures. Many had considered or attempted suicide.

In cases where there is concern about the possibility that a student may engage in targeted violence, an inquiry or investigation should include attention to any indication that a student is having difficulty coping with major losses or perceived failures, particularly where these losses or failures appear to have prompted feelings of desperation and hopelessness. An inquiry or investigation also should anticipate changes in the life of a troubled student, and consider whether these changes might increase–or decrease–the threat that the student poses.

Many attackers felt bullied, persecuted, or injured by others prior to the attack.

The prevalence of bullying found by the Safe School Initiative’s examination of targeted school violence and in other recent studies should strongly support ongoing efforts to reduce bullying in American schools. Educators can play an important role in ensuring that students are not bullied in schools and that schools not only do not permit bullying, but also empower other students to let adults in the school know if students are being bullied.

Most attackers had access to and had used weapons prior to the attack.

Access to weapons among some students may be common. However, when the idea of an attack exists, any effort to acquire, prepare, or use a weapon or ammunition, including bomb-making components, may be a significant move in the attacker’s progression from idea to action. Any inquiry should include investigation of and attention to weapons access and use and to communications about weapons. The large proportion of attackers who acquired their guns from home points to the need for schools and law enforcement officials to collaborate on policies and procedures for responding when a student is thought to have a firearm in school. In particular, schools should be aware of the provisions of the Federal Gun-Free Schools Act, which generally requires a minimum one-year expulsion of students who bring a gun to school and that all violations be reported to local law enforcement officials.

In many cases, other students were involved in the attack in some capacity.

This finding highlights the importance of considering what prompting or encouragement a student may receive from others in his life that influences any intent, planning, or preparations for a potential attack. Any inquiry or investigation of potential targeted school violence should include attention to the role that a student’s friends or peers may be playing in that student’s thinking about and preparations for an attack. It is possible that feedback from friends or others may help to move a student from an unformed thought about attacking to developing and advancing a plan to carry out the attack. This finding speaks to the importance of school officials paying attention to the "settings" and climates of their schools. Peers exert enormous influence over their friends and schoolmates. And principals, teachers, counselors, coaches, and other adults at school may make all the difference in preventing violence. An environment in which it is clear that violence doesn’t solve problems, but only makes them worse may help prevent tragedy. A climate in which a young person is seen as a "snitch" or a "rat" for telling an adult about a student in distress differs from one in which young people know that they can call on adults to help students who are in pain.

Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most attacks were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention and most were brief in duration.

The short duration of most incidents of targeted school violence argues for the importance of developing preventive measures in addition to any emergency planning for a school or school district. The preventive measures should include protocols and procedures for responding to and managing threats and other behaviors of concern. In summary, the findings of the Safe School Initiative suggest that some future school attacks may be preventable. The fact that most attackers engaged in pre-incident planning behavior and shared their intentions and plans with others, suggests that those conducting threat assessment inquiries or investigations could uncover these types of information.

Implementation Strategies

The findings from the Safe School Initiative suggest that school officials may wish to consider focusing their efforts to formulating strategies for preventing these attacks in two principal areas:

Developing the capacity to pick up on and evaluate available knowable information that might indicate that there is a risk of a targeted school attack; and

Employing the results of these risk evaluations or “threat assessments” in developing strategies to prevent potential school attacks from occurring.

Authority to Conduct an Assessment

A policy should be established through normal processes on collecting and reacting to information on potentially threatening situations and determining whether this information merits further attention through a threat assessment inquiry and investigation. The policy should indicate threat assessment inquiry and investigation would be initiated if there were credible information that passes a critical threshold of concern¹. The policy should cover the following topics:

Purpose and scope of the policy

The role of educators and the threat assessment team vis a vis the role of law enforcement

The identity of, and delegation of authority to school officials concerning determination that a threat assessment inquiry or investigation should be pursued

The definition of the threshold of concern for initiating a threat assessment inquiry or investigation, i.e. a description of the nature and extent of behavior or communication that would trigger a threat assessment inquiry or investigation

The description of the types of information that may be gathered during the assessment

The designation of individuals or group of individuals who would be responsible for gathering and analyzing information

The steps and procedures that will be followed from initiation to conclusion of the threat assessment inquiry or investigation

Identification of Threat Assessment Team

A cross-functional team should be identified to aid in the inquiry of potential school attacks. The team should have an identified leader to whom all reports of concern should be directed.²

Threat Assessment Team Skills and Training

Threat assessment team should be staffed with members with the following skills³:

A questioning, analytical and skeptical mindset

An ability to relate well with parents, colleagues, other professionals and students

Familiarity with childhood and adolescent growth and development, the school environment, the need for safe schools and the community

A reputation within the school and the community for fairness and trustworthiness

Collection and evaluation of information from multiple sources

Discretion and an appreciation for the importance of keeping information confidential and of the possible harm that may result in the inappropriate release of information

Cognizance of the difference between harming and helping in an intervention

Six founding principles of the threat assessment process

Fundamentals of investigation / interviews

Differentiating between a student who makes a threat versus one who poses a threat

Elevating Awareness in the School Community:

Threat assessment is a tool for responding to threatening situation in which there is concern about a particular student who has come to the attention of school administrators or other authorities. It is critical to maximize the potential for recognition of students who may pose a threat of targeted violence (reference key findings 1,2,5 and 9). This will require awareness initiatives for staff, students and parents alike.⁴

It is important to advise students and adults about the kinds of information to bring forward. It s also advantageous to advise the community that the program has been put in place. This will create positive public relations and build confidence in Administration’s process to manage a potential threat.

Assessment of a Potential Threat

Once a report is received and passes an initial test of credibility, the assessment phase of the process is started. When school officials control the process, it is titled, an inquiry. In the inquiry phase, data is gathered to determine if the student in question appears to be on a path to violence, and if so where is he / she in the planning process. The threat assessment team should gather information in the following five areas:⁵

The facts that drew attention to the student, the situation and possibly the targets

Information about the student

Information about attack related behaviors

Motives

Target selection

Organization of information – Evaluation of information gathered from research and interviews conducted during a threat assessment inquiry should be guided by the following eleven key questions:

What are the student’s motives or goals?

Have there been any communications suggesting ideas or intent to attack?

Has the subject shown inappropriate interest in any of the following:

School attacks or attackers

Weapons

Incidents of mass violence

Has the student engaged in attack related behaviors? These behaviors might include:

Developing an attack idea or plan

Masking efforts to acquire or practice with weapons

Casing or checking out possible sites and areas for attack

Rehearsing attacks or ambushes

Does the student have the capacity to carry out an act of targeted violence?

Is the student experiencing hopelessness, desperation and / or despair?

Does the student have a trusting relationship with at least one responsible adult?

Does the student see violence as acceptable - or desirable - or the only way to solve problems?

Is the student’s conversation and story consistent with his / her actions?

Are other people concerned about the student’s potential for violence?

What circumstances might affect the likelihood of an attack?

Management of a Potential Threat

If an assessment results in a finding that a student is likely on a path to violence, a management plan will be required to prevent the attack and protect the targets. Successful management of a threatening situation requires substantial time and effort. Management of these situations comprises three related functions:

Controlling / containing the situation and / or student in a way that will prevent the possibility of an attack;

Protecting and aiding possible targets; and

Providing support and guidance to help the student deal successfully with his / her problems.

A management plan will require both a short term and a long-term component.

Summary

The findings of the Safe School Initiative suggest that some future school attacks may be preventable. The fact that most attackers engaged in pre-incident planning behavior and shared their intentions and plans with others, suggests that those conducting threat assessment inquiries or investigations could uncover these types of information. The threat assessment program is intended to assist school officials in implementing a process that will inform judgments and increase the likelihood that actions based on these judgments will prevent incidents of targeted violence in schools.

Instead of basing judgments of risk on student traits or whether the student made specific threatening statements, the threat assessment process focuses on evaluating that student’s behaviors and communications and determining whether those behaviors and communications suggest that the student has the intent and capacity to carry out a school attack.

BPS recommends schools adopt a process to make adjustments in their security programs comparable to the system used by the Department of Homeland Security. In the event the threat assessment process was activated due to a credible threat, adjustments should be made to the school physical security program in support of the protection of potential targets and to minimize collateral damage in the event of an attack. For more information on the implementation of threat response processes, contact us.

^1. Legal counsel should be consulted prior to finalizing policy
^2. Schools may already have cross-functional teams assembled for other safety / security initiatives.
^3. Potential gaps in skills should be fortified with training programs
^4. Reporting is eased with one point of contact on the threat assessment team.
^5. A critical aim is corroboration of information from multiple sources – which tends to lend credibility to an allegation or fact