School-Law Enforcement Partnerships Module I.

slide1. School-Law Enforcement PartnershipsModule I. Establishing and Implementing Partnerships Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services<br>
slide2. Module I Establishing the school-law enforcement partnership at school division/law enforcement agency level
Steps and considerations in establishing the partnership
Elements of Virginia’s model MOU
Key partner roles and responsibilities
Establishing operational specifics at the school level

SLEP Guide – Primary resource
Resources “To Learn More”<br>
slide3. Partnerships: Nationally & in Virginia Nationally,
Widespread in past 20 years
Between 17,000 and 20,000 SROs in U.S. (U.S. Congressional Research Service estimate)

In Virginia, full-time SROs
84% of Virginia’s 315 high schools,
73% of the 337 middle schools,
4% of the 1,111 elementary schools, and
31% of the 198 “other” schools<br>
slide4. SROs in Virginia – Full & Part-time Source: 2016 Virginia School Safety Audit Survey Results, Virginia DCJS<br>
slide5. Community Policing in Schools Definition of community policing:
A philosophy that promotes organizational strategies that support the systematic use of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear.
Programs are tailored to the schools and employ proactive, solution-based, and community driven strategies to address problems identified at the particular school.

In schools:
Looks at improving the quality of life by maintaining order, reducing fear, and contributing to an environment conducive to learning and positive youth development.<br>
slide6. Traditional & Community Policing: Comparison<br>
slide7. Comparison, continued<br>
slide8. Rationale for Partnerships Contributions to safe and supportive schools
Safe and Supportive Schools Model – 3 main elements<br>
slide9. Contributions of SLEPs to Safe and Supportive Schools SROs bring expertise of a public safety specialist.
immediate response to life-threatening situations
laws are enforced when illegal activities occur
collaboration to resolve problems that threaten the safety of schools
presence has deterrent effect on illegal and disruptive behavior and communicates that the school and larger community have made school safety a priority.
 
SROs reinforce clear expectations for appropriate behavior through enforcement of laws, law-related education, and involvement of students in crime prevention activities.
 
Helps schools to focus on their central mission - educating - by reducing crime and violence in and around schools and reducing victimization and fear.
 
Reduce crime & increase perceptions of safety so school leaders can focus more effectively on their central instructional leadership role.<br>
slide10. Evidence Supporting SLEPs SLEPs are popular and perceived as effective:
Increase feelings of safety among students, teachers, and administrators
Deter aggressive behavior, and empower school staff to maintain order and address behavioral issues in timely fashion
Improve school safety and reduce school-based crime
Increase the likelihood that students report witnessing a crime and help reduce community-wide criminality
Improve relationships between law enforcement and youth

*Additional, more rigorous research needed<br>
slide11. Conclusions Evidence to date suggests that properly selected, trained, and governed SROs can achieve positive outcomes and avoid the pitfalls linked to some school-based law enforcement programs.
Of particular importance is to clearly define and differentiate the roles and responsibilities of law enforcement officers and of school administrators, particularly related to student misconduct.
SLEP Training and SLEP Guide designed to support high standards, avoid pitfalls & clearly define policies and procedures<br>
slide12. Concerns about SLEPs Highly publicized incidents of inappropriate involvement of SROs in school disciplinary situations.

Concerns
criminalization of relative minor misconduct
disproportionality with students of color and students with disability experiencing more sanctions
addressed in a September 2016 “Dear Colleague” letter from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services citing potential for negative impacts on students.<br>
slide13. Concerns USED/DOJ “Dear Colleague” letter - key paragraph:
“If SROs are not properly hired, trained, evaluated, and integrated into the school community—or if they are given responsibilities more appropriately carried out by educators— negative outcomes, including violations of students’ civil rights, can and have occurred. It is therefore incumbent upon all of us, including law enforcement and education leaders, to do everything we can to directly address these concerns and reduce the potential for problems.”<br>
slide14. SECURe Rubrics USED and DOJ Safe, School-based Enforcement through Collaboration, Understanding and Respect (SECURe) Rubrics
For use by SLEPs to review and, if necessary, revise SRO-related policies to improve school safety and improve outcomes for students
See Table of Action Steps and Policy Recommendations
See Supplement 1 Implementation Checklists<br>
slide15. SECURe Action Steps Step 1. Create sustainable partnership & formalize in MOU
Step 2. Ensure MOUs meet constitutional & statutory civil rights requirements
Step 3. Recruit and hire effective SROs and school personnel
Step 4. Keep your SRO and school personnel well trained
Step 5. Continually evaluate SROs and school personnel & recognize good performance<br>
slide16. SECURe Rubric Checklist – Supplement 1<br>
slide17. Virginia Studies Two National Institute of Justice-funded studies examining school-law enforcement partnerships in Virginia.
Earlier study by advocacy organization - Virginia erroneously ranked “worst in the nation” for referrals to the juvenile justice system.
Actual referral rate - 2.3 per 1,000 students rather than the 15.8 per 1,000 reported; Virginia well below the national average rate.
About 14 percent of incidents reported to law enforcement resulted in an appearance before a juvenile court intake officer.
Ongoing analyses are examining the degree to which SROs contribute to exclusionary and/or disparities in disciplinary outcomes.
Second NIJ-funded study - investigating school resource and school safety programs, policy, and practice in Virginia.<br>
slide18. Steps in Establishing the SLEP Establishing leadership commitments – School Superintendent & Police Chief/Sheriff commit their involvement and organizational resources.
Formalizing commitments in an MOU that establishes framework for partnership operation
Developing partnership relationships among leadership
Developing operational procedures addressing broad range of issues
Clarifying key issues including disciplinary and law enforcement responses to student misconduct<br>
slide19. Ongoing Leadership Strategies Keeping in mind:
Collaboration is not an event but an ongoing process.
Collaboration requires communication and builds trust.

In the early stage of partnerships: 
Invest time in relationship building among school division and law enforcement agency leaders establishing shared vision and “ownership” for school safety.
Conduct joint training to help build rapport & common understandings.
Clearly communicate the purpose of the SLEP and how it fits within the current relationships and practices.
Remember that the partnership is a process, not an event. Mistakes may occur but can be overcome when there is shared commitment.<br>
slide20. Leadership Strategies In maintaining ongoing support for the partnership:
The superintendent of schools and police chief/sheriff continue to actively & visibly express support and positive expectations
appear jointly at meetings of community groups, citizen advisory councils, and staff meetings.
Review MOU and operational procedures at least annually -- even when “things are going fine”
Review process will acknowledge successes, uncover issues that can be clarified or resolved before a problem occurs, and reaffirm interagency commitments.

Numerous available resources to learn more<br>
slide21. Virginia Model MOU Establishes the operational framework
Provides “ground rules” for implementation

Virginia Model MOU –
Developed in accordance with recommendations of Virginia’s Children’s Cabinet
Process involved extensive consultation with a broad range of education and law enforcement officials, recognized experts, and professional and advocacy organizations.

MOUs may be “basic” or contain detailed procedures
Critical: policies and procedures are clear and of sufficient detail to guide successful implementation<br>
slide22. Elements of Virginia’s Model SLEP MOU<br>
slide23. MOU Elements & SLEP Guide Content: An Example<br>
slide24. Virginia Model MOU: Parties to the Partnership Majority between school divisions and law enforcement agencies (Police Departments and Sheriff’s Offices).
A few MOUs are between local school board and law enforcement
No controlling laws or regulations
No operational difference<br>
slide25. Virginia Model MOU: Preamble Overarching purpose of forming a SLEP
Emphasizes building positive and safe school environments in which the “vast majority” of student misconduct, often arising from students’ lack of maturity and judgment, can be best addressed through classroom and in-school strategies without law enforcement involvement.<br>
slide26. Supportive Responses to Student Misconduct Schools making every effort to handle routine discipline within the school disciplinary process without involving SROs in an enforcement capacity unless absolutely necessary or required by law. T

To this end, school division policies, administrative guidance, training, and ongoing oversight must clearly communicate that school administrators and teachers are ultimately responsible for school discipline and culture and that law enforcement should not be involved in the enforcement of disciplinary response.<br>
slide27. Supportive Responses to Student Misconduct SROs not becoming involved with routine school matters unrelated to any law enforcement or security function and to avoid criminalizing adolescent misbehavior by exercising discretion and judgment in response to school-based incidents.

To this end, SROs should reserve petitions to juvenile courts for serious offenses and only after considering alternative consequences that divert students from court involvement.<br>
slide28. Supportive Responses to Student Misconduct School administrators and SROs using a collaborative process to consider the totality of circumstances to determine what responses to misconduct best serve the interest of the student and the welfare of the school community. Parties may not achieve full agreement in balancing these interests in all cases, but a good faith effort to exercise discretion within their respective spheres of authority is more likely to balance the interests of the school community and the student.<br>
slide29. Virginia Model MOU: Purpose 2 simple statements:
To facilitate effective, timely communication and coordination of efforts
To establish a mutually beneficial framework that both schools and law enforcement can work within to achieve shared goals
Legal Importance: courts have found actions justified when related to legitimate educational and school safety interests consistent purposes defined in the MOU.
NASRO advises:
“The courts now take the contents of the MOU very seriously when resolving the issues that arise from the presence of a SRO on campus. Every jurisdiction with a school-law enforcement partnership should have such an agreement. The key to the resolution of many of the legal disputes has been found in the language of the MOU itself . . . A flawed MOU is either one that does not accurately state the intentions of the safe schools team, or one that has not kept up with the changing duties of the SRO after its original implementation. Both instances can create liability for the team or the individuals implementing the plan.” (p.48, To Protect and Educate).<br>
slide30. Virginia Model MOU: Goals 2 main goals and related actions:
to promote positive and supportive school climates
increasing law-related education, expanding school safety and crime prevention efforts, reducing conflict, and supporting effective interventions for students.

2) to create and maintain safe and secure school environments. Actions associated with each of the two goals are cited
collaboration to reduce and prevent crime, violence, victimization, and fear in and around schools and minimizing youth involvement with the juvenile and criminal justice systems.

Guide provides background, examples of best practices and/or strategies for implementation and numerous lists of related authoritative resources.<br>
slide31. Virginia Model MOU: Evaluation of SLEP Establishes an expectation for jointly developing measurable objectives of the partnership and jointly reviewing and reporting progress at least annually.
Prescribes the use of available school discipline, crime, and violence data, school climate survey data, and other data deemed to be relevant.
May also establish additional school-specific goals and objectives
Evaluation tools in SLEP Guide Supplement 1.<br>
slide32. Virginia Model MOU: Law Enforcement Roles & Responsibilities Designate a point of contact for the law enforcement agency
addresses operational and administrative issues
maintains an especially deep understanding of school rules and regulations and related laws
POC varies
SRO supervisor/coordinator needs to be an experienced SRO.
SROs fully under the purview of the law enforcement agency chain of command, but allows for input from the school community on personnel matters and on policies and procedures affecting schools.
Specifies that SRO will receive relevant training prior to or within 60 days of assignment as well as ongoing joint training with school administrators.<br>
slide33. Virginia Model MOU: School Division Roles & Responsibilities Designate a primary division-level point of contact
School administrator support for the partnership and workspace for SROs
Strongly reinforce the understanding that school disciplinary matters will be handled by school division personnel while avoiding unnecessary involvement of SROs
School administrators with an assigned SRO will receive relevant training prior to or within 60 days of SRO’s assignment and ongoing joint training with SROs
Points of contact vary greatly; often division-level administrators responsible for school safety and/or school discipline<br>
slide34. Virginia Model MOU: SRO Roles and Responsibilities SROs defined as active members of their assigned schools
Specifies channels of communication, the need to provide coverage, and key roles
May include additional information about SRO qualifications, selection, training, duty schedule, and supervision.
Identifies 3 key roles: 1) law enforcement officer, 2) law-related educator, and 3) informal mentor and role model.<br>
slide35. Virginia Model MOU: School Administrator Roles and Responsibilities Cites responsibilities for “effective school management that promotes positive student achievement, a safe and secure environment in which to teach and learn,” enforcement of the school division’s student code of conduct, and maintaining a safe and secure school environment.
Specifies school administrators review the SLEP MOU with SROs and establish school-specific operational procedures.<br>
slide36. Virginia Model MOU: Operational Procedures Basic operational procedures in the Model MOU:
Differentiating Disciplinary Misconduct from Criminal Offenses
Information Sharing
Investigation and Questioning
Searches
Arrests
Physical Restraint by School Personnel
Physical Intervention by School Resource Officers
Crime Reporting
Threat Assessment
School Safety Audits<br>
slide37. Virginia Model MOU: Review of MOU Parties will review the MOU annually and amend as necessary to meet identified needs
Quarterly meetings to support successful implementation of the partnership
Allows withdrawal by either party with 45 days written notification

Numerous resources to learn more<br>
slide38. Roles and Responsibilities: Law Enforcement SRO
Legal definition, qualifications and selection
Training & supervision
Key SRO Roles
Law Enforcement Officer
Law-Related Educator
Informal Mentor & Positive Role Model
SLEP Guide, Chapter II<br>
slide39. Fundamental Roles and Responsibilities: SRO § 9.1-101, Code of Virginia: defines “school resource officer” as:
a certified law enforcement officer
employed by a local law enforcement agency.
providing law enforcement and security services to public elementary or secondary schools.

Note the SRO is defined as providing both law enforcement and security services.
Where there is both an assigned SRO and an SSO, activities much be well coordinated.<br>
slide40. Qualifications Fully qualified and certified law enforcement officers who have demonstrated success in carrying out basic law enforcement duties.
In addition, they should demonstrate:
Desire to serve as a SRO based on a sound understanding of roles and responsibilities associated with the assignment
Ability to work well with children and youth either as a law enforcement officer or in other substantive roles (e.g., volunteer work, coaching, church youth activities)
Character traits known to be associated with SRO success (e.g., calm, approachable, patient, empathetic, flexible, mature, able to work with people from diverse populations)
Evidence of dependability, sound judgement, and ability to work hard and independently

It is helpful for SROs to have knowledge of the juvenile code and juvenile court procedures and to be skilled in conflict resolution
Additional guidelines: SECURe Local Implementation Rubric in Supplement 1<br>
slide41. Selection Important but no clear consensus about a preferred process for selection; multiple approaches in use.
Final selection typically remains with the law enforcement agency but is greatly influenced by the views of school personnel informing the selection process.
Approaches reported
having the school division safety/security director and school administrators of affected schools review personnel files
having key school administrators participate in formal interviews of finalists<br>
slide42. SRO Training Critical for SLEP effectiveness in operation and success in achieving partnership goals and objectives
Prior to selection, SROs must already be well trained and demonstrate proficiencies in law enforcement basics.

Key areas for additional training include these:
Mental health. To understand mental illness and mental health problems, recognize signs of emotional disturbance
Adolescent development and communication. Brain development & related decision-making and reactive & risk-taking behavior<br>
slide43. SRO Training Implicit bias. Understanding of unconscious bias, how to recognize and its impacts 
Trauma-informed care. Adverse experiences (e.g., domestic violence, neglect, physical and sexual abuse) and its harm  
De-escalation techniques. Communication and behavioral techniques  
School-specific topics. Bullying, school discipline, substance abuse, truancy, dropout prevention, and school crisis planning
Cultural competence. Work with diverse cultures<br>
slide44. SRO Supervision Immediate supervisor can facilitate the success or ensure failure

New supervisor
SRO experience strongly preferred but not always possible in smaller organizations
Understand and preferably be experienced in community policing
Having defined qualifications helps ensure quality
Orientation
Written information on partnership purpose, philosophy, operation
Visits and opportunities to observe<br>
slide45. Approaches to Effective SRO Supervision Regular reviews and discussions of SRO records such as activity logs and incident reports;
Meeting with SROs as a group which promotes sharing, discussion of common issues and trends, and promotes a esprit de corps among SROs;
Regularly visiting schools allows for observation of SRO interaction with students and staff and communicates to schools how important the law enforcement agency considers the SRO Program to be;
Maintaining frequent telephone and/or radio communication with SROs, particularly during periods when problematic conditions may be occurring (e.g., gang activity, racial tension, recent critical incident); and
Seeking school administrator feedback on the SRO program and any school safety-related issues.<br>
slide46. SRO Key Roles & SLEP Goals SRO roles are interrelated rather than entirely separate, discrete sets of activities.<br>
slide47. Law Enforcement Officer Primary responsibility for handling all calls for service from the school & coordinates the response of other police resources to the school
Liaison between the school and the police
Advised of all situations where other units within the law enforcement agency have provided services to the school.
Provides information to appropriate investigative units of crimes or leads that come to the attention of the officer.
Is kept advised of all investigations by other units that involve students from his/her assigned school.
Ensures school administrator safety by being present during incidents that may involve weapons, controlled dangerous substances or in such cases that, the student’s emotional state may present a serious risk to the administrator.<br>
slide48. Law Enforcement Officer Role SROs may also serve as members of schools’ threat assessment teams and assist in monitoring of subject students as well as determining the need, if any, for law enforcement action.
Expertise in crime prevention - Using problem-solving to address school crime and disorder in collaboration with members of the school community.
Skills and expertise in school and public safety – school safety and security assessments; school crisis, emergency management, and medical emergency response plans & preparation; first responder<br>
slide49. Law-Related Educator Role Teaches students the fundamental principles and skills needed to become responsible citizens
SROs draw on their expertise about the law and their law enforcement experiences
Both formal law-related education programs and topical classroom presentations that complement the school’s curriculum.
forensics for a science class, on ballistics for a physics class, or on crime scene photography for a photography class
Virginia Rules - State-specific program
More resources in Supplement 1 SLEP Toolkit<br>
slide50. Informal Mentor and Positive Role Model Through formal and informal interactions with students
Adolescents can be strongly influenced by the messages—both spoken and unspoken—
Setting limits—Being clear about what is acceptable and what is not; & related consequences/rewards
Setting an example—Handle stress, resolve conflicts, celebrate successes, and be a friend
Being honest—Accurate information about risks
Showing respect— Treating with respect; high expectations
Providing resources—The word “resource” in SRO<br>
slide51. School Partners: Division Level Local School Boards – highest authority; policymaking
Executive Leadership - Superintendent, Deputy/Assistant

Emergency Manager - Critical role in school safety planning and coordination with first responders.

Disciplinary Hearing Officer – Conducts disciplinary hearings; much influence on policies and procedures.<br>
slide52. School Partners: Division Level Instructional Supervisors/Coordinators – supervision or coordination of academic instruction

Support Services Supervisors/Coordinators – counselors, social workers, psychologists, nurses, therapists

Operations Leadership – maintenance/engineering, food service, transportation<br>
slide53. But, how does it work at this school? Schools differ in challenges and opportunities
MOU says “shall notify” or “shall meet” but how in this school? Principal & SRO work it out –
Notifications: Via phone or text? Using a form? How documented? Depends on circumstances? What circumstances?
Meetings: When? Regularly scheduled? As needed? Depending on urgency of conditions? As part of already scheduled meeting of administrators or separate?
Ongoing process that builds the collaborative relationships<br>
slide54. School Implementation Strategies Essential: School Administrator-SRO Relationship
Meet/begin to build relationship in advance
Initial meeting:
Review of the MOU and any operational procedures established at the division/law enforcement agency level.
Discussion of the specifics of how the SRO program will operate in the particular school.<br>
slide55. Collaborative Nature of Relationship Collaborative relationship
SRO not school employee; functions independently
Example 1. The SRO, a trained law enforcement officer, retains the authority for independent decision making in carrying out duties. May decide to be visible in cafeteria or bus loading zones but is not “assigned” there as school employees may be.
Example 2. The school administrator may report an incident that he or she believes is a violation of law; SRO determines whether law enforcement action is appropriate.
Address issues in policy, reinforce with common sense & good will among partners.<br>
slide56. Strategies for Building Relationships Introductory meetings with staff and students – before & first weeks/months of school year
Use informational handout to communicate about person and role
Use social/electronics networks – school & parent organization newsletters
Sample Timetable<br>
slide57. Ongoing Communication Importance cannot be overemphasized
Examples of strategies to promote effective ongoing communication include:
Hold 10- to 15-minute conferences daily with the school administrators to keep them abreast of police-related matters and to receive updates
Meet weekly to discuss operational issues and to plan and monitor larger school safety activities
Place the SRO on the school’s distribution list for all memoranda and other notices
Do not overlook the value of informal, unscheduled daily communication<br>
slide58. SRO Location Model MOU: “Each school with an assigned SRO will provide work area(s) for the SRO that allow access to technologies, private interviewing of several persons, and locking storage space for securing physical evidence.”
Often function of space availability, layout of the school, technologies available, working relationships with administrators, and convenience.
Important: Access to school administrators, records, telephones, and an appropriate space to interview students.
Critical: integration into the school’s communication system.
Also consider locked storage area for securing evidence & contraband<br>
slide59. School-Specific Operations School Level Operational Specifics
Coordinating responses to student misconduct
Crime reporting
SRO role in school threat assessment team process
SRO involvement in crisis planning and critical incident response
SRO role in school inspections as part of school safety audits<br>
slide60. Establishing Operational Specifics: Criminal vs Disciplinary Matters Within provisions of the SLEP MOU, how will disciplinary and law enforcement responses to student misconduct be coordinated in the particular school?
Experience has taught:
Law enforcement officers are not school disciplinarians
The officer’s presence does not reduce the responsibility of teachers and of administrators to enforce school rules and student code of conduct
Classroom management rests with the teacher
Disciplinary responses remain the responsibility of school administrators
Focus of law enforcement involvement is properly centered on incidents that involve a violation of law<br>
slide61. Supportive Practices: A Repeat Schools making every effort to handle routine discipline within the school disciplinary process without involving SROs in an enforcement capacity unless absolutely necessary or required by law.
To this end, school division policies, administrative guidance, training, and ongoing oversight must clearly communicate that school administrators and teachers are ultimately responsible for school discipline and culture and that law enforcement should not be involved in the enforcement of disciplinary response.
 SROs not becoming involved with routine school matters unrelated to any law enforcement or security function and to avoid criminalizing adolescent misbehavior by exercising discretion and judgment in response to school-based incidents.
To this end, SROs should reserve petitions to juvenile courts for serious offenses and only after considering alternative consequences that divert students from court involvement.
 School administrators and SROs using a collaborative process to consider the totality of circumstances to determine what responses to misconduct best serve the interest of the student and the welfare of the school community. Parties may not achieve full agreement in balancing these interests in all cases, but a good faith effort to exercise discretion within their respective spheres of authority is more likely to balance the interests of the school community and the student.<br>
slide62. Crime Reporting Review of existing policies, MOU requirements, and applicable Code.
School-specific implementation
How? When? Conditions that determine?
VDOE has optional model form
Note: schools do not have discretion in reporting offenses, but SROs retain discretion re: juvenile court intake referral and juvenile court intake officers retain discretion in whether petitions will be filed.
Latest VA research – 14% of offenses reported to law enforcement resulted in appearance at intake.<br>
slide63. Threat Assessment Review of existing policies, MOU requirements, and applicable Code.
SRO - likely to serve as members of a threat assessment team and/or assist in monitoring and/or supervising a subject student as well as determining the need, if any, for law enforcement action.
In Virginia in 2015-16, 63% of schools reported conducting one or more threat assessments
Of assessments, 51% threatened others; 43% threatened self only, and 6% threatened others and self.
Numerous related guidelines and resources are available<br>
slide64. Crisis Planning and Critical Incident Response Review of existing policies, MOU requirements, and applicable Code.
SROs play a key roles in development of plans, conducting drills, and responding to critical incidents.
 School-specific logistics for critical incident must be established.
Numerous related resources and training opportunities are available.<br>
slide65. School Safety Audits School Safety Audits – 5 components. One is school safety inspection.
Determine role of SRO in the inspection process.
Checklist provided by the VCSCS that incorporates crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) principles.  
Additional information in Supplement 1 and through VCSCS/DCJS<br>
slide66. Review of Module I Features of and steps in establishing an effective SLEP
Contributions of SLEPs to Safe and Supportive Schools, evidence supporting partnerships, and concerns
Elements of Virginia’s Model MOU
Fundamental roles and responsibilities of the partners
law enforcement agency
SRO - qualifications, selection, training, & supervision<br>
slide67. Review of Module I SRO roles – as law enforcement officer, law-related educator, and informal mentor and positive role model
Roles and responsibilities - school division-level personnel
Collaborative relationship of SRO and school-level administrator
5 areas for critical, school-level operational procedures
Differentiating criminal and disciplinary matters, use of discretion, and supportive responses to student misconduct<br>