New Federal Guidance Outlines How Schools Should Prepare for Swatting Threats

The U.S. Departments of Education and Justice have issued new joint guidance outlining steps schools and other educational institutions should take to prepare for and respond to swatting incidents and other anonymous threats.

Released Sept. 25, the guidance comes in response to recent swatting incidents across the country and describes anonymous threats as a growing problem for K-12 schools, colleges, and universities. Federal officials noted that swatting incidents often occur in clusters and can cause significant disruption and trauma while consuming law enforcement resources and instructional time.

Swatting involves deliberately making a false report of a serious emergency to trigger a law enforcement or emergency response at another person's or organization's location. Reports may involve claims of an active shooter, bomb threat, hostage situation, or other emergency.

The guidance emphasizes both the need to respond seriously to reported threats and the importance of having procedures in place to determine whether a threat may be a hoax.

"All threats should be treated as credible when received," the guidance states.

What the Guidance Recommends

The Education and Justice departments encourage schools and other educational institutions to prepare for swatting incidents before they occur rather than developing procedures in the middle of a response.

Among the recommendations, schools should:

• Educate staff and administrators about common characteristics of swatting incidents and establish procedures for evaluating anonymous threats.
• Establish partnerships and clear lines of communication among school officials, security personnel, and outside law enforcement.
• Consider using a multidisciplinary threat assessment team to help assess anonymous threats.
• Conduct tabletop exercises that include scenarios in which officials must determine whether a reported threat is legitimate or a hoax.
• Establish procedures for notifying and communicating with law enforcement throughout an incident.
• Review emergency communication protocols and establish specific communication procedures for swatting incidents.
• Designate officials responsible for campus-wide communications, law enforcement notification, and threat evaluation.
• Train staff members who may receive a swatting report, including on techniques for gathering additional information from a caller.
• Encourage a "Report, Don't Repost" approach when threats circulate on social media.

The last recommendation echoes guidance law enforcement agencies and school safety practitioners have shared in response to recent social media threats affecting schools. During the recent "Cat in the Hat" social media trend, School Security Leadership documented how NCSSD members were responding when the trend reached their schools, including coordination with law enforcement, student discipline, and efforts to make students aware of the potential consequences of sharing threatening content.

Law enforcement agencies responding to the trend also urged students and families to report concerning posts rather than continue circulating them. In Albany, Ga., police advised people to preserve screenshots, account names, dates, times, and other identifying information and provide it directly to law enforcement or school officials.

The joint guidance stresses that determining whether a threat is a hoax should not come at the expense of immediate safety measures. Schools should first take planned steps to protect students and staff, including using existing emergency protocols as appropriate, while continuing to gather information and work with law enforcement to determine whether the threat is real or a hoax.

School Safety Leaders Have Adjusted Protocols Following Repeated Incidents

The federal recommendations also reflect strategies school safety practitioners have described using in response to repeated swatting incidents.

In June, School Security Leadership reported on an NCSSD member discussion about how repeated false threats have influenced district response protocols. Practitioners described closer coordination with law enforcement and dispatch centers, gathering additional information about reported threats, and considering multiple pieces of information when assessing credibility.

One member noted that callers involved in false reports may provide vague, inconsistent, or nonresponsive answers when asked for specific information about a school. Another described working with local law enforcement to review procedures and clarify how information would be shared during future incidents.

Members emphasized that individual indicators should not be used in isolation to determine whether a threat is legitimate.

Earlier Federal Guidance Addresses Swatting and Hoax Threats

The new guidance also directs educational institutions to several existing federal resources on swatting and anonymous threats. Among them is Department of Homeland Security guidance on swatting and hoax threats, which includes recommendations for schools, law enforcement, public safety telecommunicators, and others who may receive or respond to anonymous threats.

The Education and Justice departments also point schools to federal training on responding to and investigating bomb threats and swatting hoaxes, as well as resources on information sharing and coordination with law enforcement.

The Sept. 25 guidance is advisory and is not legally binding. Federal officials said educational institutions can tailor their response procedures to their individual needs.