Before You Buy: Evaluating School Safety Technology

School safety technology is evolving rapidly. AI-enabled cameras can flag selected activity, weapons-detection systems promise faster screening, and silent panic alerts can connect staff with emergency responders in seconds.

But new technology does not automatically make a campus safer. Every security tool is part of a larger safety system, and its effectiveness depends on the:

• Problem it is designed to address
• People responsible for using it
• Procedures that guide the response

National and state school safety guidance recommends starting with a vulnerability assessment and a layered approach to campus security. Rather than beginning with a specific product, district leaders should first identify the hazard, threat, or operational challenge they are trying to address. From there, they can evaluate whether a technology solution meaningfully reduces risk and fits within existing procedures. The goal is not simply to add another security tool, but to determine how that tool supports the district's overall safety strategy and day-to-day operations.

3 Principles for Evaluating Security Technology

Whether evaluating AI-enabled video surveillance, metal detectors, weapons-detection systems, or silent panic alert technology, district leadership should keep a handful of principles in mind.

1. Technology Takes People

Technology cannot make decisions for the people responsible for acting on the information it provides.  For example, many tools generate alerts, but an alert is not the same as verified information.

Districts should consider:

• Who receives alerts?
• What information is needed to verify the event?
• How quickly must staff respond?
• What actions should follow?

Without clear procedures and trained personnel, even sophisticated systems may provide limited benefit.

2. Screening Requires More Than Equipment

When evaluating metal detectors or newer weapons-detection systems, districts should look beyond the hardware. Staffing, traffic flow, secondary screening procedures, supervision, and communication plans influence whether a screening process operates safely and effectively.

3. Reliability Matters

Silent panic alert systems, AI-enabled video surveillance, and other security technologies depend on networks, power, communications infrastructure, and trained users.

Districts should understand how systems will function during outages, disruptions, cyberattacks, or other unexpected conditions and ensure those contingencies are reflected in emergency planning.

Related resource: The Fund’s Cyber Planning for the Coming School Year offers additional guidance on cyber preparedness, backups, incident response, and recovery priorities. 

Technology as One Layer

Technology can improve awareness, accelerate communication, and support a coordinated response. It cannot replace secure facilities, attentive staff, effective supervision, behavioral threat assessment, emergency planning, training, exercises, or relationships with first responders.

Before investing in any security technology, district leaders should ask:

• What problem are we trying to solve?
• What action should occur when an alert is generated?
• Who will monitor, operate, test, and maintain the system?
• How will it function during disruptions?
• What privacy, records-retention, cybersecurity, accessibility, and equity concerns must be addressed? 
• What training will staff, substitutes, administrators, and responders need? 
• How will we know whether it is improving safety?

Fund members can access the full white paper, What to Consider When Evaluating Tech-Powered Security Tools, for a deeper look at AI-enabled surveillance, weapons-detection technologies, silent panic alert requirements, cybersecurity considerations, and a practical evaluation framework for district decision-makers.