Consensus Study Report

NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

This activity was supported by a contract between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of Education (91990023C0052). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-99198-8
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/29105
Library of Congress Control Number: 2025946877

This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242; https://nap.nationalacademies.org.

The manufacturer’s authorized representative in the European Union for product safety is Authorised Rep Compliance Ltd., Ground Floor, 71 Lower Baggot Street, Dublin D02 P593 Ireland; www.arccompliance.com.

Copyright 2025 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. School Active Shooter Drills: Mitigating Risks to Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/29105.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. Tsu-Jae Liu is president.

The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.

The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.

Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.

Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.

Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.

Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.

For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.

COMMITTEE ON THE IMPACT OF ACTIVE SHOOTER DRILLS ON STUDENT HEALTH AND WELLBEING

RICHARD J. BONNIE (Chair), Harrison Foundation Professor of Medicine and Law Emeritus; Director Emeritus of the Institute of Law, Psychiatry and Public Policy; University of Virginia

MELISSA J. BRYMER, Director of the Terrorism and Disaster Program, UCLA/Duke University National Center for Child Traumatic Stress, National Child Traumatic Stress Network

NATHANIEL G. HARNETT, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School; Director, Neurobiology of Affective and Traumatic Experiences Laboratory, McLean Hospital

KRISTEN HARPER, Vice President for Public Policy and Engagement, Child Trends

JUSTIN HEINZE, Associate Professor, School of Public Health, University of Michigan

STEPHANIE M. JONES, Gerald S. Lesser Professor in Early Childhood Development, Harvard University (until September 2024)

SHERYL KATAOKA, Professor Emeritus, Department of Psychiatry, UCLA Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior

CELESTE MALONE, Associate Professor of School Psychology, Howard University

ANTHONY PEGUERO, Foundation Professor of T. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics & School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Arizona State University

ANDREA PULSKAMP, Health and Safety Implementation Coordinator, Colorado Department of Education

SONALI RAJAN, Professor, Department of Health Studies & Applied Educational Psychology, Columbia University Teachers College

DAVID J. SCHONFELD, Founder/Director, National Center for School Crisis and Bereavement, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles; Professor of Clinical Pediatrics, Keck School of Medicine

NATALIE SLOPEN, Assistant Professor, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

JEFF R. TEMPLE, Professor, Associate Dean for Clinical Research, Betty and Rose Pfefferbaum Chair in Child Mass Trauma and Resilience, School of Behavioral Health Sciences, University of Texas Health in Houston

Study Staff

REBEKAH HUTTON, Study Director

SUNIA YOUNG, Research Associate

TARA NAZARI, Senior Program Assistant

EMILY BACKES, Deputy Board Director

Consultant

LUCY GUARNERA, Assistant Professor, Institute of Law, Psychiatry and Public Policy, University of Virginia

BOARD ON CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND FAMILIES

JONATHAN TODRES (Chair), Georgia State University College of Law

DEBRA FURR-HOLDEN, New York University

TAMMY CHANG, University of Michigan

ANDREA GONZALEZ, McMaster University

NIA HEARD-GARRIS, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine

NANCY E. HILL, Harvard University

CHARLES HOMER, Economic Mobility Pathways

MARGARET KUKLINSKI, University of Washington

MICHAEL C. LU, University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health

STEPHEN W. PATRICK, Vanderbilt University Medical Center

STEPHEN RUSSELL, The University of Texas at Austin

JENNY S. RADESKY, University of Michigan Medical School

JANE WALDFOGEL, Columbia University School of Social Work

JOANNA L. WILLIAMS, Search Institute

Staff

NATACHA BLAIN, Senior Board Director

EMILY P. BACKES, Deputy Board Director

COMMITTEE ON LAW AND JUSTICE

ROBERT D. CRUTCHFIELD (Chair), University of Washington

JOHN M. MACDONALD (Vice Chair), University of Pennsylvania

MONICA BELL, Yale University

ANTHONY BRAGA, University of Pennsylvania

ROD K. BRUNSON, University of Maryland, College Park

ELSA CHEN, Santa Clara University

JENS LUDWIG, The University of Chicago

SAMUEL L. MYERS JR., University of Minnesota

EMILY OWENS, University of California, Irvine

ALEXIS R. PIQUERO, University of Miami

JESENIA PIZARRO, Arizona State University

LAURIE O. ROBINSON, George Mason University

ADDIE ROLNICK, University of Nevada, Las Vegas

VINCENT SCHIRALDI, Maryland Department of Juvenile Services

CHRISTOPHER UGGEN, University of Minnesota

EMILY A. WANG, Yale University

Staff

NATACHA BLAIN, Senior Board Director

EMILY P. BACKES, Deputy Board Director

Reviewers

This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.

We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

MARGARITA ALEGRIA, Departments of Medicine and Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital

MO CANADY, Executive Director, National Association of School Resource Officers

G. MARIUS CLORE, Section of Molecular and Structural Biophysics, Laboratory of Chemical Physics, National Institutes of Health

ROBIN COGAN, School Nurse Specialty Program, Rutgers School of Nursing–Camden

JENNIFER L. FREEMAN, Special Education, Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut

EMILY HOTEZ, Division of General Internal Medicine & Health Services Research, Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles

AARON KUPCHIK, Sociology and Criminal Justice, University of Delaware

JEFFREY LIEW, Educational Psychology, College of Education & Human Development, Texas A&M University

AMY LOWDER, School Psychologist, Cabarrus School District, NC

AMANDA B. NICKERSON, Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention, School Psychology, Graduate School of Education, University at Buffalo, SUNY

TARA C. RAINES, Deputy Director, Children’s Advocacy Alliance, Las Vegas, NV

MELISSA A. REEVES, Past-President, National Association of School Psychologists and Senior Advisor, Safe and Sound Schools

Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report, nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by ALI ROWHANI-RAHBAR, Study and Prevention of Violence, University of Washington, and ELLEN CLAYTON, Pediatrics, Law, and Health Policy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.

Acknowledgments

The committee thanks the U.S. Department of Education, which sponsored this study, for its support. We would also like to thank the following organizations and individuals for their support of the mission of the Board on Children, Youth, and Families: The Burke Foundation, the New Venture Fund, the Renaissance Charitable Foundation/RCF Giving Fund, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, David V. B. Britt, Tammy Chang, Greg J. Duncan, Sherry Glied, Andrea Gonzalez, Nia Heard-Garris, Nancy Hill, Charles J. Homer, Kay Johnson, Margaret Kuklinski, Michael Lu, Daniel Menelly, Linda A. Nelson, Stephen Patrick, Jenny Radesky, Stephen Russell, Nisha Sachdev, Jonathan Todres, Jane Waldfogel, Joanna Williams, and Barbara L. Wolfe.

This report would not have been possible without the contributions of many people. Special thanks go to the members of the committee, who dedicated extensive time, expertise, and energy to the drafting of the report, and the committee chair, Richard Bonnie, for his skilled leadership in guiding the committee throughout the study process. The committee also thanks the members of the staff of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine for their significant contributions to the report: Rebekah Hutton for her expert direction of this study and contributions to the writing and editing of this report; Emily Backes for her many contributions to the conception, writing, and editing of the report throughout the study process; Sunia Young for her research, editing, and writing support and assistance with fact checking of the report; and Tara Nazari for providing essential administrative and logistical support to the committee’s work.

The committee is also grateful to Stacey Smit, Pamella Atayi, Javed Khan, Elise Mialou, Faye Hillman, and Lisa Alston for their administrative and financial assistance on this project. From the Office of Reports and Communication of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (DBASSE), Kirsten Sampson Snyder, Douglas Sprunger, and Kimberly Halperin shepherded the report through the review and production processes and assisted with its communication and dissemination. Dana Korsen and Solomon Self, of the Office of News and Public Information, and Sandra McDermin, of the Office of the Congressional and Government Affairs, were instrumental in the release and promotion of the report. The committee also thanks Clair Woolley of the National Academies Press and Bea Porter of DBASSE for their assistance with the production of the final report, and Anne Marie Hoppert, Christopher Lao-Scott, and Rebecca Morgan in the National Academies research library for their assistance with literature searches. We also extend our gratitude to Rona Briere and Allison Boman for their skilled editing of the report.

Throughout the project, Natacha Blain, director of the Board on Children, Youth, and Families, and Carlotta Arthur, Patti Simon (until December 2024), and Amy Stephens, executive director and associate executive directors of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, provided valuable oversight and guidance.

The committee extends its sincere thanks to Lucy Guarnera (University of Virginia) for her substantial contributions to the drafting of the report, her thoughtful feedback to the committee throughout the study process, and her valuable assistance with information-gathering to inform the committee’s work. We also thank Kaelyn Sanders (Arizona State University) for her research and writing support.

Many individuals volunteered significant time and effort to address and educate the committee during our information-gathering sessions. Their willingness to share their perspectives, research, and personal experiences was essential to the committee’s work. We thank Kevin Armstrong (National Association of Elementary School Principals),

Sharnetta Boone-Ruffin (Parents Amplifying Voices in Education), Stephen E. Brock (California State University, Sacramento), Mo Canady (National Association of School Resource Officers), Michael T. Cappiello (New York City Department of Education), Robin Cogan (Rutger University), Christina Conolly-Chester (Montgomery County Public Schools, Maryland), Ayanna Cooper (Howard University), Matthew J. Cuellar (University of Alaska, Anchorage), Michael Dorn (Safe Havens International), Elizabeth M. Ducy (Sonoma State University), Verline M. Gaddis (School Social Workers Association of America), Keith Gambill (Indiana State Teachers Association), Brian J. Gerber (Arizona State University), Kristine D. Gile (Gallaudet University), Rose Emily Gonzalez (University of Virginia School of Medicine), Emily Goodman-Scott (Old Dominion University), Michele Gay (Safe and Sound Schools), Sunny G. Hallowell (Villanova University), Kassie Hameister (E-school Virtual Charter Academy), Anja Herrman (Student Researcher on Disability Rights, American University), Melissa A. Jackson (Hunter College), Cathy Kennedy-Paine (Springfield School District, Oregon), Joseph La Belle (Family Network on Disabilities), Gabriel I. Lomas (Gallaudet University), Heather Martin (Aurora Central High School), Isabel MavridesCalderon (White House Youth Policy Team), Donna J. Mazyck (National Association of School Nurses), Robert Murtfeld (former Community Education Council Member, New York City Public Schools), Zaria Naqvi (Maryland Association of Student Councils), George Roberts (Baltimore County Public Schools, Principal Recovery Network), Marissa (Apollo) Rodriguez (FEMA Youth Preparedness Council), Jennifer F. Samson (Hunter College), Jaclyn Schildkraut (Rockefeller Institute of Government), Laura Sharp (Lincoln Intermediate Unit, Pennsylvania), Andrea Warner Stidham (Kent State University), Laura M. Stough (Texas A&M University), Frank Straub (Safe and Sound Schools), Kenneth S. Trump (National School Safety and Security Services), Frederick Walton (Sandy Hook Promise Youth Advisory Board), La-Shanda West (Sandy Hook Promise School Advisory Committee, Cutler Bay Senior High School), and Lisa Wobbe-Viet (University of Southern California).

This page intentionally left blank.

Contents

Preface

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Summary

1 Introduction

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Interpreting the Study Charge

Study Process

FIREARM VIOLENCE AS A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE

SCHOOL SAFETY IN THE 21ST CENTURY

21st-Century School Shooting Events

DEFINITIONS AND TYPOLOGY

Pertinent Definitions

What are Active Shooter Events?

What are School Active Shooter Drills?

KEY CONCEPTS FROM CHILD AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THIS REPORT

ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT

REFERENCES

2 The Landscape of School Active Shooter Drills and Other School Security Measures

CONTEXT OF SCHOOL SAFETY

The Importance of School Climate

Social-Emotional Learning

Restorative and Trauma-Informed Practices

Access to Mental Health Services

THE LANDSCAPE OF ACTIVE SHOOTER DRILLS

State Mandates for School Active Shooter Drills

Implementation of School Active Shooter Drills

LANDSCAPE OF OTHER SCHOOL SECURITY MEASURES

Physical Security Interventions

Surveillance Interventions

Personnel Interventions and Training

EXPOSURE TO SCHOOL ACTIVE SHOOTER DRILLS AND SECURITY MEASURES

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

3 Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health Effects of School Active Shooter Drills

INCLUSION CRITERIA AND SEARCH STRATEGY

OVERVIEW OF THE AVAILABLE RESEARCH BASE

MENTAL, EMOTIONAL, AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH OUTCOMES OF DRILLS

Research Designs

Review of Empirical Studies

Insights from Qualitative Studies

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

4 Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health Effects of Selected School Security Measures

ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH DESIGNS

Quasi-Experimental Studies

Cross-Sectional Studies

Longitudinal Studies

Systematic and Integrated Reviews

Qualitative Studies

CHARACTERISTICS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE EXISTING EVIDENCE BASE

REVIEW OF EVIDENCE ON PHYSICAL SECURITY INTERVENTIONS

Perceived Emergency Preparedness or Knowledge

Perception of Safety or Fear

Student Trauma and Mental Health Concerns

Student Perceptions of School Connectedness

Student Behavior

REVIEW OF EVIDENCE ON METAL DETECTORS

Perceived Emergency Preparedness or Knowledge

Perception of Safety or Fear

Student Trauma and Mental Health Concerns

Student Perceptions of School Connectedness

Student Behavior

EVIDENCE ON THE PRESENCE OF SCHOOL SECURITY PERSONNEL

Perceived Emergency Preparedness or Knowledge

Perception of Safety or Fear

Student Trauma and Mental Health Concerns

Student Perceptions of School Connectedness

Student Behavior

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

5 School Active Shooter Drills and Other School Security Measures: Developmental Contexts

CONSIDERATIONS FOR STUDENTS BY DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE

Early Childhood: Pre-K and Kindergarten (Ages 3–5)

Elementary School: Grades 1–5 (Ages 6–10)

Middle School: Grades 6–8 (Ages 10–13)

High School: Grades 9–12 (Ages 14–18)

CONSIDERATIONS RELATED TO UNIQUE IDENTITIES OF STUDENTS, CAREGIVERS, TEACHERS, AND OTHER STAFF

Individuals with Prior Trauma Histories and Adverse Life Experiences

Racially/Ethnically Marginalized Students and Teachers

Cultural Influences as Protective Factors

The Role of Immigration and Migrant Status

Multilingual Learners

Individuals Who Use Communication Aids and Supports

Individuals with Emotional and Behavioral Support Needs

Individuals with Intellectual, Developmental, and Learning Disabilities

Individuals with Physical and Other Health Conditions

Children Involved with Other Formal Social Systems

SUPPORTING RESILIENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF SCHOOL ACTIVE SHOOTER DRILLS

The Role of Teachers and School Support Staff

The Role of Caregivers and Families

Caregivers’ Responses and Perceptions

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

6 Best Practices for Protecting the Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health of Students and Staff

STRATEGIES FOR MITIGATING MENTAL, EMOTIONAL, AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH HARMS WHEN IMPLEMENTING SCHOOL ACTIVE SHOOTER DRILLS

PRACTICES LEAST LIKELY TO CAUSE MENTAL, EMOTIONAL, AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH HARMS

Best Practices When Planning for School Active Shooter Drills

Conducting School Active Shooter Drills

After School Active Shooter Drills Occur

Practices with High Likelihood of Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health Harm

Practices More Likely to Have Negative Than Positive Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health Impact

IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS

Guidance to Prioritize Health and Safety Across All School Settings

Training on School Safety Practices to Support Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health

Funding and Resources Needed to Implement Best Practices

Accommodations for Students and Staff with Disabilities and Functional and Access Needs

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

7 Future Research and Evaluation Needs

CURRENT RESEARCH LIMITATIONS

Challenges with Research Design and Funding

Data Needs

Limited Outcome Measures

Lack of Subgroup Analysis

Insufficient Focus on Individual Drill Components

Impacts on School Staff and Caregivers

Evidence on Impacts of School Security Measures on Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health Outcomes

RESEARCH PRIORITIES AND KEY QUESTIONS

Best Practices for Drill Implementation

Standardized Measures for Assessing the Effectiveness of Drills and Other Security Measures

Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health Effects on Students and Staff

Addressing Ethical Considerations

Funding and Cost of Implementation

Community and Population Context

IMPROVING DATA INFRASTRUCTURE

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

Appendix Committee and Staff Biosketches

Boxes, Figures, and Tables

BOXES

S-1 Summarized Statement of Task

1-1 Statement of Task

1-2 Key Components of the I Love U Guys Standard Response Protocol

1-3 Key Terminology

1-4 Overview of Options-Based Practices

2-1 School Resources Officers

3-1 A Reporter Investigates Students’ Perceptions of School Active Shooter and Lockdown Drills

5-1 Students’ Perspectives on Active Shooter Drills

5-2 Perceptions of Active Shooter Drills from School Staff

5-3 Providing Language Supports to Students During School Active Shooter Drills

5-4 Considerations for Students with Disabilities: Expert Perspectives

5-5 Teachers’ Perspectives on Active Shooter Drills

5-6 Caregivers, Parents, and Families’ Perspectives on Active Shooter Drills

6-1 General Emergency Preparedness Planning and Staff Training

6-2 Perspectives from School Social Workers, School Psychologists, and School Nurses

7-1 Schools Safety Resources

FIGURES

1-1 Conceptual framework for this report

2-1 States that require schools to carry out active shooter–related drills, as of February 4, 2024

2-2 Trends in percentage of U.S. public K–12 schools with security staff and law enforcement personnel, school years 2005–2006 to 2021–2022

TABLES

S-1 Strategies for Mitigating Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral (MEB) Health Harms When Implementing School Active Shooter Drills

2-1 Preventive Strategies for Ensuring School Safety

2-2 Frequency of School Active Shooter Drills Required by State Mandates, February 4, 2024

2-3 Percentage of Public K–12 Schools That Drilled Students on the Use of Emergency Procedures, School Year 2021–2022

2-4 Summary of K–12 School Security Measures

2-5 Percentage of Public K–12 Schools with Controlled Access Security Measures, School Year 2021–2022

2-6 Percentage of Public K–12 Schools with Various Surveillance Interventions, School Year 2021–2022

2-7 Percentage of Public K–12 Schools with One or More Full- or Part-time Security Staff Present at Least Once a Week, School Year 2021–2022

3-1 Overview of Studies About the Effects of Active Shooter Drills

4-1 Studies About the Effects of School Security Measures (Other than Active Shooter Drills)

6-1 Strategies for Mitigating Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral (MEB) Health Harms When Implementing School Active Shooter Drills

6-2 Selected Practices for Developmentally Appropriate Implementation of School Active Shooter Drills That Mitigate Adverse Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health Harms

6-3 TEAMS Framework of School Safety and Emergency Planning Considerations for Individuals with Functional and Accessibility Needs

This page intentionally left blank.

Preface

Every parent sends their child to school to learn, to mature, and to enjoy interaction with others, and with a simple expectation—that their children will return home safely and happily every day. Unfortunately, however, efforts to ensure student safety have taken a prominent place in school life in recent years, including widespread implementation of school active shooter drills and security measures in the vast majority of K–12 schools in the United States. These practices are intended to prevent tragedy and to prepare students and staff to respond successfully should one occur. Yet in the process of preparing for rare but worrisome events, we must also ask: What is the impact of these heightened worries on the mental, emotional, and behavioral health of students and school staff?

This congressionally mandated study, conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and supported by the U.S. Department of Education, examines the potential adverse effects of so-called active shooter drills and related security measures on students and staff. The committee was charged with evaluating the available evidence and recommending actions to mitigate potential harms, while ensuring healthy development and wellbeing in school environments.

In carrying out this important task, the committee faced a sobering reality: Although these protective practices have become ubiquitous in U.S. schools, there is remarkably little evidence to guide their design and implementation. While congressional enactment of the 1996 “Dickey Amendment” did not explicitly prohibit such research, it prohibited the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from using funding appropriated for injury prevention and control to advocate for or promote gun control. The chilling effect of the

Dickey Amendment on the use of federal funding for research on gun violence more broadly also left critical questions unanswered and opportunities to learn from school practices unrealized. For more than 2 decades—spanning a period during which the number of school shootings markedly increased and these drills became routine—public health research on gun violence and related prevention strategies was significantly constrained.

As this report makes clear, continuing gaps in current evidence leave many unanswered questions about the potential risks associated with school active shooter drills, as well as their effectiveness. Needless to say, this uncertainty does not absolve us of the responsibility to take preventive action. We know a great deal about what children and youth need to thrive. We also know that some well-intentioned practices, when implemented without proper attention to developmental needs, can produce unintended and potentially harmful consequences for many of the children who are essentially treated as experimental subjects. A central purpose of this report is to avoid these unintended consequences. Instead, the recommendations offered in this report draw upon established developmental science, trauma-informed approaches to stressful events, and a growing body of knowledge about resilience. Our aim is to help school leaders make informed decisions to protect student and staff well-being.

This important assignment presents both a challenge and an opportunity. The committee’s inquiry documented a broad and growing public interest in ensuring school safety. However, the nation lacks a unified research agenda, and few states or schools have the resources needed to undertake this work on their own. As a result, the work is fragmented and unsystematic: it is distributed across government agencies, state legislatures, professional associations, advocacy groups, researchers, and school districts. In the absence of a strong federal infrastructure designed to nurture child and adolescent development throughout the nation, state and regional collaboration will be essential so that evolving experience and knowledge is shared and emerging best practices are accessible to all. Key challenges include standardizing the collection of meaningful data,

evaluating policies already in use, and highlighting both successful and unsuccessful initiatives. By highlighting both innovation and failure, these jurisdictions are well positioned to lead the way in building the future knowledge base in a systematic and careful way. Indeed, without the development of a coordinated research enterprise, we risk losing yet another generation of opportunities to answer the questions that matter most: Which practices truly keep students and school staff safe, and which practices pose undue risks of harm?

The committee is hopeful that collaboration between state legislatures, universities, and other research organizations, supported by occasional national funding initiatives, will be able to nurture a long-term program of research and policy development. Our public sessions and interviews revealed an intense and growing commitment to act. The recommendations in this report aim to equip policymakers, educators, health professionals, and communities with the tools they need to make informed decisions that are grounded in evidence and that are appropriate for youth across the full range of development.

On behalf of the committee, we are pleased to offer this report to the nation as both a resource and a call to action. We are grateful to the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Department of Education, the staff of the National Academies, and the many individuals who contributed their expertise and insight over the course of our deliberations. Most of all, we are mindful of the students, families, educators, and school communities at the center of this work—those who are asking the right questions and who live with the consequences of these policies every day. Their experiences underscore the urgent need to act with care and clarity, ensuring that school safety measures support the well-being of the children and adults they are meant to protect.

Richard J. Bonnie, Chair
Committee on the Impact of Active Shooter Drills on Student Health and Wellbeing
July 2025

This page intentionally left blank.

Acronyms and Abbreviations

This page intentionally left blank.