A.L.I.C.E. training — teaching students to attack armed gunmen — is “an overreaction and potentially dangerous,” according to Dr. Stephen Brock of the National Association of School Psychologists.

The A.L.I.C.E. program, which stands for Alert-Lockdown-Inform-Counter-Evacuate, is described as “controversial” in a March 28th article by Mother Jones writer Deanna Pan entitled, “Schools are training second-graders to attack mass shooters.”

An Ohio eight-year-old describes being told to “start throwing stuff” including pencils, chairs, boxes, books, and markers.

Brock, the school psychologist, reportedly says that teaching such tactics may cause unnecessary anxiety and stress for students, especially young kids who are more easily traumatized.

The article provides a link to an A.L.I.C.E. training booklet that recommends rearranging classroom layouts to create a “minefield” and instructs to gain a “tactical advantage” by throwing items.

“While he’s busy ducking and covering his head from our air assault, we can now begin the ground assault,” the booklet continues, calling for “a small number of the attacked to become attackers.”

The Mother Jones article identifies the Burleson (TX) school district as where the program’s creator Greg Crane launched the program until parents reportedly complained about the “Counter” component of teaching kids to attack shooters. The article cites a Fort Worth Star-Telegram article from 2006 indicating the district dropped the “Counter” procedure. It also notes that Crane, a former police officer whose wife was an elementary school principal in the district, was believed to have been “reassigned” from his high school teaching position.

The article also cites an Ohio A.L.I.C.E.-trained 17-year-old student who reportedly was told by her high school teacher that the plan for evacuating her second-story classroom through a window would involve having students tie their jeans together to form a rope.

The student was quoted as calling the idea “weird” because no one would then be wearing pants.

I have long agreed that the concept is “weird” and is a high-risk, high-liability proposition for the many reasons outlined on my web site and in prior blog articles.

It is a good to see that A.L.I.C.E. training and its history are getting a second, more critical look.

Ken Trump

School security expert says federal leaders failed to provide meaningful steps to improve school security after Sandy Hook

Trump calls for restoring cut federal programs, new state school safety academies

[CLEVELAND] Elected officials have failed to provide meaningful legislation, funding, and resources to help school administrators better secure their schools and prepare for mass shootings, according to a national school security expert who is calling upon Congress and the Obama Administration to restore eliminated federal programs for school security, emergency preparedness, and violence prevention.

“Special interest groups and politicians have pushed their political issues such as gun control and gun rights under the guise of school safety. Congress and the Administration have been tone deaf to educators’ need for restored federal programs that were eliminated for school security and emergency preparedness. It is a national embarrassment and disservice to students, teachers, and school staff across the country,” said Kenneth Trump, president of National School Safety and Security Services.

Trump identified six major school safety programs eliminated by Congress and the Administration over the past four years including Department of Education grants for school emergency planning, support to schools like Sandy Hook Elementary School that experienced mass shootings, and safe and drug free school violence prevention funding. The Department of Justice failed to fund the Secure Our Schools security equipment grant program in 2012 and has done nothing to support the COPS in Schools Program, according to Trump. The Education, Health and Human Services, and Justice Departments also stopped funding school mental health programs under the Safe Schools, Healthy Students grant program, Trump said.

For details on eliminated federal school safety programs, see Trump’s blog at www.schoolsecurityblog.com/2012/12/obama-congress-eliminated-critical-school-safety-funding-prior-to-sandy-hook-shooting/

Trump, who testified three times in 2007 and 2009 to Congress on strengthening federal school safety policy and funding, called upon President Obama and Congress to immediately restore and expand these eliminated grants.

Trump also said Congress should jointly fund state school safety specialist academies modeled after the Indiana School Safety Specialist Academy where each school district in Indiana is required by law to have a designated school safety specialist who receives basic training and annual advanced training to take back to their local school districts. The program was created by Indiana state law after the Columbine shootings and has trained thousands of educators and safety officials for more than 12 years with an unchanged annual state budget of $750,000.

“If the State of Indiana can operate a successful safety specialist academy that reaches into every school district in the state, including many charter and private schools, and does so without expanding its budget for more than a decade, why can’t this become a national model for every state in the nation?,” Trump asked.

Kenneth S. Trump, M.P.A., is the President of National School Safety and Security Services, a Cleveland-based national firm specializing in school security and emergency preparedness training and consulting. Ken served as an officer, investigator, and youth gang unit supervisor for the Cleveland City Schools’ safety division, and as a suburban Cleveland school security director and assistant gang task force director. He has authored three books and more than 80 articles on school security and crisis issues.

As one of the leading U.S. school safety experts, Ken has 25 years experience in the school safety profession and has worked with school and public safety officials from all 50 states. Ken is a four-time invited Congressional witness testifying on school safety and emergency preparedness issues, and testified on the role of the federal government in bullying at a May 2011 hearing of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

—————————————-

Ken Trump

The national association representing school-based police officers does NOT endorse the idea of teaching students to throw objects and attack armed intruders, its executive director confirmed earlier today.

The association also does NOT endorse the idea of teaching school-based police officers to teach students to throw objects and attack armed intruders.

Mo Canady, Executive Director of the National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO), provided written confirmation of NASRO’s position in an email to me this morning. NASRO has more than 3,000 members from across the United States and internationally.

NASRO position conflicts with ALICE training company statements

Canady’s message directly conflicts with public statements attributed to Greg Crane, head of the Texas-based company Response Options that provides “A.L.I.C.E.” training which includes teaching students to throw objects at armed gunmen. The company’s 2007 staff booklet states that after throwing objects, “While he’s busy ducking and covering his head from our air assault, we must now begin the ground assault.”

A.L.I.C.E. stands for Alert-Lockdown-Inform-Counter-Escape. The “Counter” component has created significant debate and some controversy with experienced school safety professionals and educators who question the concept and implementation behind teaching students to throw objects at and attack armed intruders.

In a series of online posts on the web site of a Boston news talk radio station, a Wednesday post attributed to Crane stated:

“Did you know that NASRO (National Association of School Resource Officers) is now going to offer enhanced lockdown strategies training for SRO’s? We have been contracted to conduct that training.”

Late Thursday, another post attributed to Crane stated:

“We have a contract with NASRO to teach Enhanced Lockdown Strategies. What do you think those strategies will be? The same ones that I have presented to them at 3 different annual conferences. ALiCE strategies.”

But on Wednesday, NASRO’s President Kevin Quinn wrote in an email:

“NASRO has entered into a  agreement to have Greg Crane develop a new curriculum for us regarding Enhancing Lockdowns. As of right now, we do not have a draft of the course so I can’t speak to the details as of yet.”

The Canton (MA) school board and superintendent on Thursday rejected moving forward with training students to attack armed intruders under what a Boston Globe article called a “controversial new security protocol” known as A.L.I.C.E. training.

“We are not ready to go beyond the point of training staff,” the Globe quoted Superintendent Jeffrey Granatino as saying at the Canton School Committee meeting. The article says Granatino stressed that the district is “under no time constraint” to implement the A.L.I.C.E. program as only staff had quietly received the training before questions arose from school board members who apparently were unaware of the program being implemented in their district.

A.L.I.C.E. stands for Alert-Lockdown-Inform-Counter-Evacuate. The “counter” component of teaching students to throw objects and attack armed intruders has generated concerns from experienced school safety professionals, parents, and others.

In an earlier Globe article, parent Suzanne Hegland, a Canton mother and an assistant dean of students at the New England Conservatory, reportedly told the Globe that telling students to toss staplers, books, and other items at an armed intruder is “absurd.” Hegland blogged on A.L.I.C.E. training in a recent article for the Huffington Post, where she is a contributor.

“I would make the argument that we all need to be comfortable,” school board chairman John Bonnanzio was quoted as saying. He reportedly said school board members and others need to know how the protocol works and that it would be introduced to children in an age-appropriate manner.

The town’s police chief and a school resource officer encouraged the board to adopt the program.

Advocates for A.L.I.C.E. training have recently stepped up efforts to encourage some schools to adopt the program. However, the vast majority of schools across the nation do not provide A.L.I.C.E. training and a number have said they would not even consider doing so.

Ken Trump

Deputies did not conduct a full search of a troubled Texas high school senior and missed a gun that he used to shoot himself police said on Thursday, according to Houston Chronicle newspaper article.

The 17-year-old male student was in intensive care after officers performed a quick pat-down on Wednesday following concerns that the high school senior might cause harm to himself, according to reports.

The male attended North Shore High School in the Galena Park Independent School District, where a concerned friend alerted school officials that he threatened harm to himself.

Police reported that the student was resisting and tried to run. He was taken into custody and a deputy performed a quick pat-down, but not a more intrusive search, before putting the student in a police car.

Details are online in the Houston Chronicle story.

As I explained to the Houston Chronicle reporter, this incident is a sobering reminder that law enforcement officers must maintain the same level of caution and thoroughness when dealing with juveniles and at schools as they do with adult suspects out on the streets. There is always a risk, especially in today’s hyper-sensitive and politically-driven climate in which police interventions in schools are viewed, that officers may be a bit less cautious in dealing with kids as they would be with adults.

This well-intended officer will likely carrying the psychological burden of this incident for the rest of the officer’s career and lifetime. We need to support the reasonable actions of police officers working at schools so they feel comfortable in taking prudent steps to protect student suspects, other students, school staff, and themselves.

The incident also reminds me that we need to do a better job of training our school principals, assistant principals, deans, and school safety /security / police officers on best practices in student searches, safely responding to reports of students with guns and other weapons, etc.  I continue to be amazed that we do not have more tragedies resulting from well-intended, but poorly trained, school administrators who intervene with students suspected of having guns, knives, and other weapons in schools.

What training do your school administrators and safety officials receive on safely managing reports of students with weapons?

Ken Trump

A new generation of superintendents, principals, teachers, school resource officers, and other school-community leaders embarked on their first round of training on Wednesday at the Indiana School Safety Specialist Academy (ISSSA).

A record number of more than 330 participants learned best practices in school law, managing bullying without new programs and expenses, and managing media and parent communications on school safety and crisis issues.

The ISSSA was created in 1999 by state legislation initiated by then-Governor Frank O’Bannon. My colleague, Chuck Hibbert, and I had the honor of working with the Governor and his staff to help craft the Academy concept. One representative from each school district across the state serves as a designed school safety specialist who received basic and advanced academy classes on an ongoing basis.

I had the pleasure of following a presentation by the legendary Dr. Bernie James, one of the nation’s premiere experts in school law. Bernie is, in my opinion, nothing short of a genius and one of the most knowledgeable, dynamic presenters on school safety-related law in our nation.

After presenting a brief overview of current school safety and emergency / crisis preparedness trends, we spent the afternoon talking about practical, cost-effective strategies for managing bullying without hiring new consultants, paying motivational speakers, buying vendor-driven products, and creating new anti-bullying programs. We then spent the remainder of the afternoon talking about under-utilized but inexpensive, realistic ways school leaders can communicate proactively on school safety issues while also preparing a crisis communications strategy for responding to a major event.

Participants were exceptionally attentive, interested, enthusiastic, and engaged to the very end of my presentation block. “You nailed it,” one principal told me in response to my emphasis on being practical while “calling it like it is.” The reality is that they nailed it, not me, as their enthusiasm and interest motivated me.

Program coordinator Dave Woodward and I talked about how we now have a whole new generation of new administrators, SROs, and other safety specialists now that we are more than a decade past the Columbine tragedy.  Once again, we find ourselves focusing on the “fundamentals” and “best practices” of school safety as many school safety specialists are not only new to the Academy, but are also new to overseeing school safety management in their district.

The ISSSA is unique in many ways. It was a first of its kind in the nation and professionals from other states continue to look to the Academy as a model. And most importantly, it has remained strong since 1999 by providing relevant training, free access to national school safety expert speakers, publications and resource materials, and most of all a professional network for Indiana-specific information-sharing and collaboration.

In today’s world of decreasing budgets for school safety, the ISSSA continues moving forward. I am as proud to be a part of it now as I was at the time I helped create the concept.

Are your state and local education and safety organizations providing training and support on school safety, security, and emergency /crisis preparedness for your schools?

Ken Trump

Some schools and police are teaching students to attack armed gunmen. But are they soft-pedaling the program and misleading parents in the process?

A.L.I.C.E. stands for Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate. The “counter” component of teaching school students to throw objects at armed intruders and to physically attack them is being question by many experienced educators and safety professionals.

However, A.L.I.C.E. training is being promoted in some law enforcement circles and schools as “enhanced lockdown procedures.” Given teaching students to attack armed gunmen is objectionable to many parents, how the program is being described raises questions as to whether A.L.I.C.E. training is being soft-pedaled  in a misleading manner to parents who do not take a closer look and ask questions.

For example, in the Sycamore Community Schools in the Cincinnati, Ohio, area:

• In a February 25, 2011, letter to parents on A.L.I.C.E. training, the superintendent and two principals never make any direct reference to the “Counter” component of ALICE or that this program component calls for teaching students to attack armed gunmen.  Instead, they refer to it as “additional training on how to respond to threatening situations” and “presentations will strengthen your child’s awareness of their safety and well-being.” However, district officials provided a “Participation Waiver” for parents who chose to exclude their child from the training.
• The Sycamore High School PTO meeting minutes for March 9, 2012 (ALICE Training in Sycamore High School PTO meeting minutes) documents in the Principal’s Report section an explanation to parents on the A.L.I.C.E. program. The minutes list A.L.I.C.E. as Avoid, Lockdown, Information, Communicate, Evade. It also says that, “Reviewed this concept and training with the students during the Lockdown drill The concept is what to after a lockdown takes place. How to be proactive to be able to get out of the building or reach other safe spots rather than just sitting a waiting.”  Interestingly, the standard “Counter” component of A.L.I.C.E. training is replaced in this description to parents with “Communicate” — an inaccurate explanation of the A.L.I.C.E. acronym.

While the district affords an evening workshop on the program for parents, what about the majority of parents who likely would not attend and would never know if the “counter” component of teaching their kids to attack armed gunmen is part of the district’s plan?

And if the program was simply on how to “strengthen your child’s awareness of their safety and well-being” without teaching students to attack armed intruders, why would parents need a “Participation Waiver” to opt-out?

A similar observation can be found in a letter to Kankakee Valley High School parents in Indiana (see ALICE parent letter) that refers to A.L.I.C.E. as ”enhanced the lockdown procedures.”  The “Counter” component of A.L.I.C.E. is described as “Apply skills to barricade, and if necessary, distract, confuse and gain control.” It fails to more clearly and accurately describe “Counter” as what it really is: “Teaching your child to attack an armed gunman.”

The letter goes on to say, “In NO WAY are we asking or teaching our students or staff to make any attempt to subdue an armed gunman outside of their secure area. However, we will provide them with options that if faced with a life or death situation, can be applied to greatly enhance their chance of survival. These options include escaping, barricading the door, and protecting oneself by any means necessary should an armed intruder enter the room.”

“Any means necessary”??? Translated: “We’re teaching your kids to throw objects and attack armed gunmen.”

Parents may not be the only people not provided with full disclosure and transparency on the “Counter” component of A.L.I.C.E. training in their districts.

In Canton, Massachusetts, school board chairman John Bonnanzio was quoted in the Boston Globe as asking, “Is this age-appropriate?” His questions arose after a reporter questioned the program’s implementation in his district, which he says was something the board was “a little behind the information curve on all of this time.” Translated: It sounds like the board didn’t know the full details of the program.

A closer look into the origin and history of the A.L.I.C.E. training program shows that the program came under intense scrutiny when it gained international attention in 2006. In fact, the school district in Burleson, Texas, where the program originated dropped the “Counter” component of teaching students to attack armed gunmen after media coverage and questioning of the concept. The concept disappeared off the radar screen but has been recently resurrected, only this time with softer descriptions such as “enhanced lockdown procedures.”

If schools feel confident enough to take on the potential safety and liability risks associated with A.L.I.C.E. training, shouldn’t they be fully transparent with parents and not sugarcoat their description of how school and police officials are authorizing students to be taught to attack armed gunmen (often in one brief hour or less training session)?

Ken Trump

A veteran national expert on school-based police today called teaching school students to attack armed intruders a safety and liability risk for school boards and superintendents, as well as law enforcement agencies.

“A.L.I.C.E. training should be a huge red flag for school and police administrators, especially in the liability arena. Both the legal staff and insurance carriers may wisely decline,” said Curt Lavarello, Executive Director of the School Safety Advocacy Council.

A.L.I.C.E. stands for Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate. The “counter” component of teaching school students to throw objects at armed intruders and to physically attack them is coming into question by experienced educators and safety professionals.

Lavarello is a veteran Florida-based former school police officer who went on to serve for years as the Executive Director for the National Association of School Resource Officers. He has consulted on school-based police training for the U.S. Department of Justice and as a litigation consultant on school-based police issues.

“While much of what is contained in the A.L.I.C.E. training is already in use by a great many schools across the nation, the part of the training that draws the most controversy is the part that involves about an hour-long component on teaching students to engage in a coordinated, timed attack on an armed intruder in the classroom.   As a 25+ year law enforcement executive and national trainer on school safety, I know first-hand that law enforcement agencies train for weeks and months on coordinated, timed response attacks to armed suspects. Now in less than an hour we are going to show a group of 7th graders how to attack a gunman?,” Lavarello questioned.

Lavarello says the training falsely assumes that every person who enters a classroom armed is going to kill students Columbine-style, which school safety experts know is simply not the case.  In many cases where an armed intruder entered a classroom, the intruder has left without firing the weapon, he said.

“Had four to five students tried to attack the armed person, the results may have been much different,” Lavarello noted.

Lavarello also expressed concern that school and law enforcement officials may not be disclosing to parents with full transparency that they are teaching their children to attack armed intruders.

“Parents should be very concerned over this training being taught to their child.  The school itself should absolutely review this training tactic for students with both the legal staff and insurance carrier as both may wisely decline,” Lavarello said.

Ken Trump

Visit School Security Blog at:  www.schoolsecurityblog.com

Follow Ken on Twitter @safeschools

Visit and “Like” Our Facebook Fan Page at: www.facebook.com/schoolsafety

As A.L.I.C.E. training advocates work to sell their program to school boards and superintendents, five myths continue to circulate about the program and its concept of teaching children to attack armed intruders.

A.L.I.C.E. stands for Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate. The “counter” component of teaching school students to throw objects at armed intruders and to physically attack them is garnering more media attention. Reporters, parents, and school board members also appear to be asking some tougher questions on the implications and implementation of the program.

Five myths about A.L.I.C.E. training occur in various news stories and other conversations on the program:

• Myth 1:  A.L.I.C.E. training for schools is endorsed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and/or other federal agencies.

Reality: No written evidence has been found of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the U.S. Department of Education, or any other federal agency endorsing the A.L.I.C.E. program specifically, or the concept of teaching preK-12 school children to “counter” or attack armed intruders in general.  DHS has a booklet on active shooters which is focused on a workplace violence context and adult-oriented settings. There is no reference in this document, including in its section on last-resort efforts of physically responding to active shooters, about school-specific settings or the application of the booklet’s content to children. To suggest that A.L.I.C.E. training is specifically “endorsed” by DHS, and to extrapolate what DHS has published for adult workplace settings to also apply to child-centered preK-12 school settings, is a misrepresentation of DHS’s materials and is misleading.

• Myth 2:  The A.L.I.C.E. training program is research-based.
  • Reality: No formal, independent academic or other research can be found on this specific program. No research is cited in the A.L.I.C.E. Training staff booklet (copyright 2007) in circulation as recently as at least 2010. If such research exists, its advocates should cite and produce it.

• Myth 3: A.L.I.C.E. training is age and developmentally-appropriate.
  • Reality: The aforementioned A.L.I.C.E. Training Staff Booklet makes no mention of age and developmental implementation issues. Advocates for A.L.I.C.E. training often waffle when pressed on age and developmental appropriateness, typically “caving in” and saying that they will only teach the “counter” (attacking armed intruders) component to middle and/or high school age students. Excluding certain grade levels and ages of students does not automatically equate to “age and developmental appropriateness” for the remaining students who are trained.  The reality is that all students, preK-12, have age and developmental considerations different from adults.

• Myth 4: A.L.I.C.E. training is inclusive of, and applicable to, students with special needs.
  • Reality: As noted above, the A.L.I.C.E. training Staff Booklet does not delineate implementation for special needs students. Is the answer to critics’ concerns simply that special needs student will just be excluded from A.L.I.C.E. training? If so, how will that be implemented? And how many students have special needs — physically-challenged, behavioral disorders, autism, medically-fragile, etc.?

• Myth 5: A.L.I.C.E. training has a history of proven effectiveness on the “counter” component in schools.
  • Reality: No published information has been found documenting cases specifically where A.L.I.C.E. training has been provided in a school and the “counter” component was subsequently employed in a specific incident that clearly saved more lives than the number of lives saved using current methods and best practices.  “Would be” and “could be” claims by A.L.I.C.E. advocates are theories and opinions, and should not be represented (especially in news stories) as “research” and “demonstrated effectiveness.”

I have written extensively on my web site and in a series of blog articles about the implementation considerations, risks, and potential safety and legal liability posed by A.L.I.C.E. training.  The above myths and misrepresentations further suggest that while perhaps well-intended, A.L.I.C.E. training may not be well-thought-out by many preK-12 school leaders and program advocates.

Ken Trump

Visit School Security Blog at:  www.schoolsecurityblog.com

Follow Ken on Twitter @safeschools

Visit and “Like” Our Facebook Fan Page at: www.facebook.com/schoolsafety

School boards and administrators do not need new programs and expenses to manage bullying. In fact, most school districts already have strategies and services in place to adequately address school bullying.

Recently, I had the pleasure of sharing this message to about 100 school board members, superintendents and top school district administrators who registered for my Early Bird pre-conference workshop on “Managing Bullying without New Programs and Expenses” sponsored at the annual convention of the National School Boards Association in Boston.

The Hype on Bullying and Anti-Bullying Training

School board members publicly and privately acknowledged that the politicizing of bullying, media hype and increased parental questions about school anti-bullying efforts were all driving factors that brought them to sign-up and pay extra to attend my half-day workshop.

I was proud of those board members and administrators who felt it was important enough to double-check their current approaches and keep an open mind to make sure they are doing all they can to keep schools safe.

I was even more proud to learn most are handling anti-bullying efforts in a common sense manner and appreciated a voice of reason, along with the practical tips I shared on how to communicate their efforts with their school community.

Managing Bullying without New Programs and Expenses

My approach to the workshop was not like many of the self-serving speakers, cry-on-command presenters and opportunists who have exploited emotional parents and school officials to make a buck off the bullying craze. It is pathetic to hear about some presenters and anti-bullying consultants who  exploit (and likely embellish) their own childhood bullying experiences, the experiences of their children and family members, and the cases of those who have had legitimate bullying cases in the public eye.

A principal in a recent CNN story on a motivational “anti-bullying” speaker summed it up best when he said the best role models are not those one-shot speakers who come in to pull on the heartstrings and emotions of vulnerable kids and teachers to tell their embellished personal tales of bullying and alleged childhood victimization. The best role models are the adults the kids see and interact with each day.

If you stop and think rationally for a moment, the vast majority of school principals could reach out to their own faculty and staff to find a dozen people who could share the same (and probably less dramatic) personal story with children, if that is what they feel is really needed. Why waste thousands of limited dollars on an outside presenter to do the same thing?

Taking the “Bull” Out of Bullying

I was honored by the NSBA attendees who applauded my message that school leaders can manage bullying without new programs and expenses. Over the course of the three hour workshop, we talked about practical, cost-effective practices in my anti-bullying model (not a “program,” but a model using existing practices) that includes supervision and security, discipline, school climate strategies, mental health support, and other measures already in place in schools.

It’s time to take the “bull” out of bullying and school safety training. In times of tight budgets, school leaders should weed through the drama kings and queens on the presentation circuit, use their own local resources and when reaching to outside consultants, focus on those who can teach them how to maximize, and package and communicate their existing strategies and resources to do practical, meaning anti-bullying and school safety practices.

Do your school leaders manage bullying emotionally or with practical, cost-effective coordination of existing programs and resources?

Ken Trump

Visit School Security Blog at: www.schoolsecurityblog.com

Follow Ken on Twitter @safeschools

Visit and “Like” Our Facebook Fan Page at: www.facebook.com/schoolsafety