Bombs and School Security

Are your schools prepared for
bomb threats and bombs?

High-profile school violence cases and other national incidents, along with easy access to formulas for homemade bombs on the Internet, have contributed to the growth of bomb threats, suspicious devices, and homemade bombs in schools, on school grounds, and even on school buses. The increase in these types of incidents was observed by National School Safety and Security Services and incorporated into our training programs over two years prior to the Columbine High School tragedy. 

A number of high-profile incidents involving bombs and bomb threats took place prior to Columbine including:  

A January, 1999, explosion in a high school locker in Kansas City sent 11 students to the hospital.

An irate parent took the deputy superintendent and an associate superintendent of a California education office hostage in late November of 1998.  The standoff resulted in police killing the parent, who had a gun and seven bomb devices as a part of his siege.

Ten bombs, fireworks strapped to aerosol cans, forced the closure of a California elementary school.

One Maryland school district experienced more than 150 bomb threats and 55 associated arrests in one school year.

Up to a pound of ammonium nitrate was brought to school by a Nevada middle-school student.

Eight boys confessed to making three homemade bombs, two of which were placed at a Minnesota elementary school.

Immediately following Columbine, schools across the nation experienced a spike in bomb threats and related incidents.  While the spike in these type of incidents leveled off in the months and years following Columbine, there are still a number of incidents each school year involving bomb threats, suspicious devices, plans to use bombs in school violence plots, and the actual use of explosives (see individual school year incidents linked on our site at http://www.schoolsecurity.org/trends/school_violence.html).  School buses have also been the target of terrorist bombings in the Middle East, so it would be wise for school officials to include school bus and transportation facilities in their bomb threat and suspicious device planning and training.

Unfortunately, many schools historically handled bomb threats rather poorly, so it is not difficult to understand why we found some potential life-threatening mishandling of actual suspected bombs found in our schools. School staff ranging from custodians to principals, and even some security and former police officers, have reportedly picked up suspected devices and moved them around school property, delayed calling police, and taken other dangerous steps which could have possibly been prevented through adequate training, crisis planning, and related measures.

One major issue facing most school districts is whether to evacuate schools on bomb threats.  Many school bomb threats have been made by students seeking to disrupt the school day and to get out of school.  Still, all threats must be treated seriously and thoroughly investigated and managed.

Many schools across the nation do not automatically evacuate their schools upon receiving a bomb threat.  Many still do, however.  Decisions and protocols on these issues should be determined by school officials and their public safety (police, fire, etc.) partners as a part of their emergency planning process and prior to an actual incident.

Another major issue for schools involves conducting of searches following bomb threats.  Many teachers and support staff have been advised by school and public safety officials to conduct searches of their area for suspicious items when a bomb threat is received by the school.  The rationale for this request is that the facility users (teachers, support staff, administrators, etc.) are most familiar with what does and does not belong, and therefore are best equipped to recognize what is and is not suspicious where public safety officials are not that familiar with the school and individual classrooms.

School employees are understandably hesitant to this request, but it seems that the tension on this issue typically centers around what is meant by a "search" by school staff.  Public safety officials typically mean a visual search, not a physical search involving moving around boxes or suspicious items.  And public safety officials certainly do not want school officials touching or moving suspicious items detected by a visual search.  Instead, they simply ask employees to look around and report suspicious items or things out of place so public safety responders can then follow-up with those particular items.

School safety and emergency preparedness guidelines should include strategies such as:

Treat each and every threat seriously.  Work with local law enforcement authorities from the jurisdiction of your individual school to determine protocols for evaluating bomb threats and procedures for evacuations. Develop procedures for actual evacuations (short and distant evacuations, alternative sites, transportation procedures, reunification with families, etc.).

Providing training to school personnel, including support personnel such as bus drivers, custodians, and secretaries, who are likely to encounter bomb threats and homemade bombs.

Incorporating issues related to checklists, search procedures, crime scene management, evacuations, and recovery into training and crisis guidelines.

http://popcenter.org/problems/problem-bomb_threats_p3.htm

School bus drivers and transportation supervisors should play an integral role in bomb threat and suspicious device training. Plans and training should include issues related to bombs threats focused upon school buses, suspicious devices on buses and at transportation facilities, and actual explosions aboard and around school buses.  Transportation facility and bus security issues should also be built into school security plans.

Place caller ID on school phones to help identify bomb threat callers.  Consider blocking incoming calls made from phones using caller ID block. Some schools have put messages on their school phone voice mail directories indicating that calls may be recorded for security purposes.

Ban student use and possession of cell phones from school campuses. A number of cases have occurred nationwide where bomb threat calls were made by students using cell phones.

Assess the location of school pay phones and consider reducing, limiting, and/or relocating the number of pay phones.  Students have been known to make bomb threat calls and fake 911 calls on these phones. 

Avoid evacuating students into school parking lot areas to reduce the risk of potentially exposing them to additional explosive devices placed in vehicles and/or easily hidden in parking areas.

Recognize that some bombers, terrorists, and related offenders who plant bombs also place secondary explosive devices to harm first responders and others after an initial bomb is located and/or exploded. 

Consider extending the school day or school year to make up for lost instructional time may be another necessity in managing such threats.  In fact, discussions of such strategies alone has reportedly resulted in decreased bomb threats at some schools. 

Maintain filters to school computers to reduce the risks of students gaining access to bomb-making web sites.  Also secure science lab chemicals and custodial cleaning materials to reduce risks of unauthorized access to chemicals for making homemade bombs.

For additional considerations, download an article on How to Handle Bomb Threats and Suspicious Devices by our president, Ken Trump, in the February, 1999, issue of School Planning & Management magazine.

School officials can download a copy of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms' Bomb Threat Checklist (F 1730.1, 6/95) and their guide to Bomb Threats and Physical Security Planning (P 7550.2, 7/87) from the ATF Publications section of their web site.