FORTRESS MENTALITY Analysis: Security biz gives schools hard sell
Security companies spent years pushing schools to buy more products — from “ballistic attack-resistant” doors to smoke cannons that spew haze from ceilings to confuse a shooter.
But sales were slow, and the industry effort to free up taxpayer money for upgrades had stalled.
That changed last February, when a former student shot and killed 17 people at a Florida high school.
Publicly, the rampage reignited the U.S. gun-control debate. Privately, it propelled industry efforts to sell school fortification as the answer to the mass killing of American kids.
Since that attack, security firms and nonprofits linked to the industry have persuaded lawmakers to elevate oftencostly “hardening” of schools over other measures researchers and educators say are proven to reduce violence, an Associated Press investigation shows.
The industry helped Congress draft a law that committed $350 million to equipment and other school security over the next decade. Nearly 20 states have come up with another $450 million, and local school districts are reworking budgets to find more money.
Most everyone agrees schools can be more secure with layers of protection, such as perimeter fencing, limited entrances and hiding spaces inside classrooms.
But there’s no independent research supporting claims that much of the high-tech hardware and gadgets will save lives, according to two 2016 reports prepared for the Justice Department.
However, that has not stopped industry representatives from rushing in, some misusing statistics on school violence to stoke fears that “soft target” schools could be victims of terrorist attacks or negligence lawsuits.
“School safety is the Wild, Wild West,” said Mason Wooldridge, a security consultant who helps school districts assess their vulnerabilities. “Any company can claim anything they want.”
Educators worry hardening will siphon money from programs that prevent bullying and counsel at-risk kids. Industry representatives say they support other solutions to preventing school gun deaths, but insist hardening deserves a chance.
“There really needs to be a change in thinking that recognizes security is a primary need in schools,” said Jake Parker, director of government relations for the Security Industry Association, which has been central to the hardening effort.
Also, he acknowledged, “The more schools protect themselves, the better it is for industry.”
There are no widely accepted, independent standards for school building security, as there are for the plumbing, fire protection and even bleachers. Revenue for school security companies would grow even more than projected if the industry succeeds in crafting state legislation that would set minimum standards for campus equipment purchases.
Industry-written guidelines set a steep price for cashstrapped districts. According to a nonprofit formed by a major lock manufacturer, upgrading an elementary school with basic security equipment costs at least $94,000 and a high school at least $170,000. If every U.S. public school were to follow those guidelines, the cost would total at least $11 billion, according to industry calculations.
Hardening advocates acknowledge mass upgrades would not eliminate shootings. Many shooters are students whose familiarity with a school’s layout and security could help them outsmart even elaborate safeguards.
“If we’re just expecting technology to solve all these problems, I think we’re going to fall short,” said Ronald Stephens, executive director of the California-based National School Safety Center, created originally as a federal program under the Reagan administration. “And we may not like the climate we create.”
Hardening proponents have asserted big increases in school gun violence in recent years. Some have done so by including mass shootings that happened any place, not just those at schools. Others used data that included incidents that weren’t attacks on students or employees, but were instead accidental discharges, suicides or violence that spilled onto campus, sometimes after hours.
But many experts say schools remain among the safest places for children.
Rob Evans, a retired state police captain who is the Vermont education agency’s school safety liaison, calls school shootings “low-probability events” and noted kids are more likely to die in other ways — including, data show, crossing a street. But the horror of shootings jolts public policy.
“We’ve got to take the passion out of it,” Evans said. “If we’re going to spend a dollar, let’s spend a smart dollar.”
Education security revenue in the U.S. was about $2.5 billion in 2017, about 60 percent generated by elementary and secondary schools, according to researcher IHS Markit. After Parkland, revised its forecast to $3 billion by 2019.
The flow of money has created opportunities for businesses new to school security.
The Ohio man dubbed “Joe the Plumber” during the 2008 presidential campaign is working with a company that incorporated two months after Parkland to sell a $139.99 “SwiftShield” that slides around a classroom door handle so a shooter cannot enter.
Wurzelbacher acknowledged skepticism at those conferences but said his concern is genuine: His adult son is a teacher, and he has three children 5 and younger.
The SwiftShield barricade device, invented by a roofer,
sells for one-twentieth of some bullet-resistant doors or high-tech locking systems. Companies selling higherpriced alternatives are protecting their turf when they say barricade-style devices violate safety codes in many states, he said.
“There’s going to be a lot of money to be made here,” Wurzelbacher said. “There’a lot of people who are offering school systems an illusion of security, as opposed to real security.”