|
Since the tragic school shooting that claimed 17 lives in Parkland, Florida in 2018, Sheriff Bob Gualtieri has worked hard to improve school safety. As chair of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission, Sheriff Gualtieri has been at the forefront of the effort to improve school safety here in Pinellas County and statewide. Thanks in large part to his contributions, a new Florida Model of school based threat assessment went live in Florida on January 1, 2024. The modernized system is more comprehensive and adaptable, and will ensure that school districts can share information.
Before this year, school districts in Florida used an older model for vetting threats in their schools. Crucially, they also used 12 different software systems, while some districts even relied on pen-and-paper records. Sharing information between – and even within – districts was difficult.
The older model had its good points, but had limitations too. “Essentially when you saw something, you had to go through the entire process from beginning to end,” said Captain Jose Camacho of the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office (PCSO) Threat Management Division. “It didn’t allow an assessor to objectively look at the individual circumstance.” This could take valuable time and resources away from more legitimate threats. Under this new system all threats are still taken seriously, but there is more room for educators, administrators, counselors, and law enforcement to make a rational decision if an event doesn’t amount to a credible threat.
“For instance, say you have two best friends, kindergarteners who point finger guns at each other and say I want to kill you.” There’s no history of aggression or mental illness, no ability to act on the threat, no actual intent to carry out that threat. Under the old system the finger-gun scenario would occupy multiple people for many days, when it was clear from the beginning that it was not a credible threat. “There was no mechanism to look at the situation early on in the process and determine that there’s nothing there.”
But when there is a threat, the new Florida Model has a rigorous but flexible system to evaluate it. If a student sees something threatening in Snapchat, for example – another student posts a photo of a firearm and a cryptic message like watch out – they may take a screenshot and report it to their teacher. The moment that threat is reported it initiates a series of steps.
If the threat isn’t imminent, the next step is to report it to the Chair of the School Based Threat Management Team (SBTMT). “The Chair is the point person who assesses and triages each threat to determine whether it has a factual basis, and whether it should be summarily closed as unfounded, or reviewed by the entire SBTMT.” If it is determined to be unfounded, the school principal still has to concur. There are checks and balances so no one person makes a unilateral decision about a threat.
The new Florida Model also takes into account the possibility of self-harm. “That’s where this model is different,” Captain Camacho said. “The student is referred to a mental health professional, not to a full-blown threat management team. Now the kids who need help for self-harm can get it right away. We still need to make sure we’re getting them the help. We have to protect the others, but if a kid is threatening to harm another student or faculty and also threatening to harm themselves, you can’t forget about the self-harm.”
The Chair determines whether a full review by the SBTMT is appropriate. The multidisciplinary team must have at least four members with expertise in counseling, school instruction, school administration, and law enforcement. Unique to the Florida Model is the requirement that the team must have at least one member with personal knowledge of the student.
“This gives you a baseline for that kid,” Captain Camacho said. If someone reported that a student is talking about guns, a teacher who has known the student all year might have information that the student’s family was planning their annual hunting trip. A student talking about a hunting rifle as part of a long-standing family tradition is different than a student suddenly talking about acquiring a rifle out of the blue. “Of course if you see something like that you need to tell someone. But sometimes there is a reason that doesn’t amount to a threat.” The team can still talk to the student, as well as their family and friends to be sure no threat exists.
The team will collect information from a variety of sources, including the student, teachers, parents, and other students. From that they determine whether the threat is Low, Medium, or High. “I always say when you have a threat, right away you know if it’s High, and you know if it’s Low,” Captain Camacho said. “It’s the Medium ones that are more concerning because you don’t know which way they can go. I’m concerned about Highs because we have to fix them, but I’m never concerned that we’re not going to identify a High. There are so many things that stick out – it’s obvious.”
PCSO analysts research everything they can about the student in question, from criminal history to the student’s social media, and give it to the SRO. Based on all the information they gather, the team comes up with a School Support Management Plan (SSMP) for that student. If the threat is Medium or High, the SSMP is mandatory, but the team may also implement one for a Low level threat.
A Low threat could be based on a psychological issue – for example if a student is hearing voices. “Maybe there’s no self-harm, no threat to others right now,” Camacho said. “But it’s a situation that, if not acted on, could develop into something else.” An SSMP might involve talking to a counselor once a week, parent conferences, anti-bullying programs, assigning a mentor, or resiliency support.
A Medium or High threat might arise if someone reports that a student showed them a knife on campus. If the student has a plan of attack or specific target, the threat might be High. But if a thorough investigation by the team reveals that the student brought it for protection against a perceived threat from another student it might be a Medium. There is no immediate plan of attack, but steps have to be taken to prevent eventual violence. In addition to counseling the plan might mandate daily searches, a clear backpack, rescind locker privileges, or change their class schedule to avoid another problematic or targeted student.
Another benefit of the Florida Model is that unlike the previous method, it imposes a timeframe on action. As soon as the threat is reported the clock starts ticking, and the team has to take prompt action.
Though the model was in place statewide on January 1, Florida school districts have until August 1, 2025, to all get on the same software system. “2025 is going to be a game changer for school safety,” Captain Camacho said. “We won’t have to go through four or five different systems to get information. When a student comes to Pinellas County schools, their information from another Florida school district will follow them.”
Every school shooting starts somewhere. The origin might be from unaddressed mental health needs, or bullying, or radicalization. The Florida Model of school based threat assessment is designed to tackle problems from the very first sign, and prevent tragedy. The ultimate goal is to take the student off the pathway to violence, get them the help they need, and keep our schools safe.
If you become aware of a threat or suspicious activity involving a student or a school, you can report it through FortifyFL, a tool that instantly relays the information to both law enforcement and school officials. You can submit information, including screenshots, photos, or videos, online or through an app, and you have the option to remain anonymous.
| 
