There are two big lies we keep telling ourselves — and our school communities — about school safety.
The first is: “School safety is our number one top priority.”
The second is: “You can’t put a cost on school safety.”
Both sound good. Both feel good. And both are false.
The Budget Reality
School safety is, without a doubt, the number one priority in the hearts of school leaders, teachers, support staff, and school safety officials.
But if school safety were truly our number one top priority, it would be our number one line item in the budget. It isn’t — and that’s not hypocrisy; that’s reality. The purpose of schools is to educate, so it’s natural that curriculum, instruction, and personnel drive most of the spending.
But we need to stop saying what isn’t true. Saying “safety is our number one priority” may make for a good quote, but it sets up unrealistic public expectations and erodes credibility when the numbers don’t match the message.
And it’s not just in money that school safety is not the “number one top priority.” It is also not the “number one top priority” in time allocated for school safety. Getting time on school district leadership team agendas, professional development training programs, school safety/emergency planning, and related tasks is more difficult than getting money for school safety, in most schools.
And as for “You can’t put a cost on school safety”? We already do — every year.
Budgets for school safety and public safety are finite. We make choices within limits. Every camera, access control system, and training session comes with a cost — and those dollars compete with other educational needs. Pretending there’s no price tag on safety doesn’t make us safer; it makes us less strategic.
Why School Security and Emergency Preparedness Assessments Matter
Because resources are limited, schools must make data-driven and best practice decisions about where and how to spend safety dollars.
That starts with comprehensive school security and emergency preparedness assessments to identify real risks, vulnerabilities, and needs.
These assessments help answer questions like:
- What are our actual risks and vulnerabilities?
- What safeguards already exist — and how effective are they?
- Where can limited resources have the greatest impact?
The Danger of “Security Theater”
When tragedy strikes or fear spikes, school leaders often rush to buy something visible — a product they can point to and say, “We’re doing something.”
But visibility isn’t the same as effectiveness.
This kind of “security theater” can waste money, divert focus from deeper human and procedural issues, and create a false sense of safety.
The Candid Conversation We Need
It’s time for a more honest message:
We care deeply about safety — but we have limited resources. There is no blank check.
What we can do is invest those limited resources wisely, based on assessments and priorities, not slogans or sales pitches.
Let’s stop repeating feel-good phrases and start leading with facts and candor.
Transparency builds trust. Assessments build strategy. Together, they build safer schools — not through emotion or marketing, but through honest, informed decision-making.
Dr. Kenneth S. Trump is President of National School Safety and Security Services
National School Safety and Security Services
Experts You Can Trust!
Connect with Dr. Ken on Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/kentrump/
Follow Dr. Ken on X(Twitter) @safeschools
Visit and “Like” Our Facebook School Safety News Channel at: www.facebook.com/schoolsafety
💯 Facts!
Unfortunately, this problem will not be resolved without some level of legislative action. Fire safety has improved dramatically over the last 50 years thanks to advancements in technology, better construction techniques, and strong regulatory standards. There is no guesswork about what fire-protection systems are installed, where they are located, or how they are tested and maintained.
I could reference the common “set-up” question used by many security technology providers when pitching the latest WDS, VGD, or behavioral-monitoring platforms—“When was the last fatal fire in a school?”—but to what end? We already have the answers needed to improve the safety of our schools. The real challenge is that the risk equation (probability × outcome) has fostered an “it can’t happen here” mindset.
Parkland shifted that mindset not only because of the horrific loss of life, but because it was the first major liability case that resulted in a multimillion-dollar settlement. The technology to reduce vulnerabilities and improve outcomes during critical incidents in schools exists today. However, without legislation that mandates compliance with meaningful standards—and without tactically knowledgeable solution providers—we will continue to see a hodgepodge of technology deployments that drive bottom lines rather than resilience.
The liability shifts are definitely occurring.The legislatures are increasingly influenced in the wrong direction by lobbyists for vendors. This point you make is key: “We already have the answers needed to improve the safety of our schools.” We just need to implement them.
Ken
You have some great insights. It’s reasonable to take issue with the “lie of priorities” – why not advocate for the guidance offered by Dr Scott Geller? (Ret. VA Tech distinguished scholar and practitioner). And when it comes to how much money schools allocate for different elements of safety management, why not include risk intelligence education? Let’s please talk. Sincerely, Lee
Interesting and timely comment, Lee. My colleague, Bobby Kipper, is implementing the work of Dr. Geller. Shifting school leader thinking to more strategic and risk-focused decision making has been a lifelong journey of mine and there is still a lot of work to be done as the vendor and political noise increases in this field.