SAFETY AND SECURITY
This chapter reviews the Austin Independent School District's (AISD) safety and security functions in three sections:
- A. Discipline Management
- B. Security
- C. Safety
B. SECURITY
Law enforcement in AISD's jurisdiction is provided by two different city police forces, the Austin and Sunset Valley Police Departments. In addition, the Travis County Sheriff's Department provides law enforcement for schools located outside of these two cities' limits. Finally, AISD's own Police Department provides a law enforcement presence throughout the school district.
The AISD Police Department's mission statement is as follows:
Promote a safe and secure learning and working environment for all citizens participating in programs and activities sponsored by the Austin Independent School District.
The police chief reports directly to the chief financial officer, whose office supervises all police and electronic safety and security. These functions includes the installation and maintenance of fire alarms, burglar alarms, access control devices, and video surveillance for the district. Locks and all non-electric security and safety are supervised by the Maintenance Department. The department consists of 79 full time equivalents (FTEs).
Two other critical functions of safety and security on the school campuses are the in-school suspension monitors and hall security monitors, who are supervised by the school principals or their designee. AISD's crossing guards are hired, trained, and funded by the City of Austin's Department of Transportation.
Exhibit 12-4 illustrates the current organization structure of AISD's Police and Security Department.
Exhibit 12-4 Source: AISD Police Department.
AISD Police and Security Department
Current Organization Structure
FINDING
The AISD Police and Security Department, Travis County Sheriff's office and Capital Area Crime Stoppers Inc. jointly sponsor a community program in the schools called Campus Crime Stoppers. Begun in Austin in 1995 and originally known as Weapons Watch, the program's mission is to reduce the number of firearms and other weapons brought onto area campuses.
Before this program was in place, AISD averaged from 20 to 25 firearm incidents a year on district campuses. However, from 1996-97 through 1998-99, AISD reported an average of only three or four firearms confiscated a year.
In 1997-98, AISD began to hold membership drives in hopes of enrolling more students into the program and issued cards to approximately 600 students during the first year. In 1999-2000, some 8,000 students belonged to the organization. Campus Crime Stoppers encourages students to use an established hot-line to call in tips for various offenses. Rewards are given for tips that result in arrests. Students who join the program receive a membership card with the "TIPS" telephone number and discounts to area stores such as bowling alleys and music stores.
In 1999, the district received 194 crime tips that resulted in 60 cases being cleared. All rewards are paid from crime watch program funds provided by businesses and other donors. This program helps schools take control of criminal activity on their campuses without placing students in harm's way.
COMMENDATION
Campus Crime Stoppers effectively helps schools take control of criminal activity by encouraging students to report offenses.
FINDING
AISD is part of a project being conducted by the Travis County Constable's Office where school bus drivers are allowed to write "frustration tickets" on motorists who fail to stop for school buses that are loading or unloading students. The frustration tickets are turned over to AISD police who pass them on to a constable. The constable's deputies then determine which bus routes encounter the most violations and assign a deputy to follow buses on that route, seeking to help curtail violations.
AISD police officers work with the constables in enforcing this traffic law. AISD officers have been empowered by statute to enforce these city ordinances. They have done so since the board policy was adopted in 1993-94.
Presently the City of Austin has an ordinance that sets fines for offenses related to school buses at $1,000, but an Austin Police Department officer must write the ticket. If a violator commits a second violation, the incident is upgraded to a Class B felony that can result in jail time. Constable's deputies are not restricted to the city limits as Austin police officers are and can therefore cover the entire AISD school district.
Two unanticipated benefits of this enforcement program are that students in the buses are better behaved when they see the deputy following the bus, and the deputies can monitor the bus drivers to ensure they flash their lights with enough time for vehicles to stop. Deputies will report bus drivers who fail to warn motorists of the bus stopping in a timely manner to the AISD police. The Constables' Office has applied for federal and state grants to expand this enforcement service to the entire district.
COMMENDATION
The "frustration ticket" program is an innovative approach that assists the district in enforcing traffic laws that have been violated by motorists who do not stop for school buses loading and unloading students.
FINDING
The Absent Student Assistance Program (ASAP) is used in Austin by the Travis County constables to deter unexcused absences and truancy cases. The ASAP is a community-based collaborative effort involving AISD and the Del Valle and Pflugerville school districts and the Travis County constables. Its purpose is to improve student attendance by notifying parents when their children are absent, keep children in school and prevent their involvement with the juvenile justice system.
Schools refer students who are absent without an excuse to the county constables, who telephone parents upon the student's first absence. On subsequent absences, constables may visit the students' homes and investigate the reason for the absence. The home visit also allows the district and the constable to talk with the students' parents about the students' absences; determine if the factors causing the absences can be addressed, prevented or eliminated through the use of school or other community programs; and provide students and parents appropriate referrals to school or community programs to help deal with attendance problems.
Schools are requested to file compulsory attendance violation and failure-to-attend cases with a justice of the peace court after 10 unexcused absences. The next step involves a court appearance arranged with the justice of the peace in the student's district. Normally, the student and parent are provided with a contract that states that the parent and student are on a probationary period. During the probationary period, the student must attend school. If the justice of the peace believes it necessary, the parents or students can be given counseling in parenting, conflict management, and on such issues as drug abuse. Should the student's truancy persist, fines can be assessed and the justice of the peace may refer the case to another court. Each constable's deputy receives four hours of training on actions required under the Texas Education Code for dealing with family problems.
In 1995, ASAP began with a goal to "improve school attendance by providing the earliest possible response to student absenteeism." In 1998-99, the constables filed 1,700 reports with the justice of the peace court. The program began in the middle schools; after a successful implementation, it was eventually moved into the elementary schools and finally expanded to the ninth grade.
The ASAP program increased school attendance rates in Travis County school districts. In turn, AISD and other districts benefit from an increase in state funding for increased "average daily attendance," or ADA. Through an interlocal agreement with Travis County, AISD offsets 50 percent of the costs of operating ASAP in its schools.
COMMENDATION
The Absent Student Assistance Program reduces truancy, and constables have been trained to recognize family problems with intervention by the proper authorities when necessary.
FINDING
AISD's security program is centered on its school resource officers (SROs). SROs are certified peace officers that assist students in dealing with conflicts, resolving problems, handling peer pressure and avoiding criminal activity. As law enforcement officers, they can take police action related to incidents on or around schools, but are not responsible for security. AISD employs 29 SROs who are stationed at one per high school or middle school throughout the district. In addition, they also provide classroom instruction on law enforcement to students.
The SRO program has provided benefits beyond what other school systems have tried to achieve with metal detectors and x-rays at each entrance, at a lower cost and in an environment much more conducive to education. The department originally employed only security guards with very basic training. Now, all SROs and patrol officers are certified peace officers. The police department has worked carefully with the schools in assigning SROs who work well with the staff of their respective schools.
Surveys conducted by AISD over the last few years have shown consistent growth and professionalism in the force, with a positive response from the community, students, and faculty. When victims of crime were asked by AISD how the AISD police handled their situation, a 1998-99 survey found that 74.7 percent were strongly satisfied and 22.4 percent considered themselves satisfied.
COMMENDATION
AISD's school resource officer program effectively reduces the cost of overall security operations and provides an important asset to the AISD community.
FINDING
While ASAP is an exemplary program, AISD administrators lack specific performance measures that could support the district's efforts to identify schools with truancy problems, increase attendance rates, and prevent at-risk students from dropping out. Specifically, the district and constables do not track and analyze data on dropout and attendance rates by grade level and correlate it with school ASAP participation rates. Additionally the district also does not track and analyze excused or "documented" absences, data that could in turn show referrals as a percentage of undocumented absences.
Recommendation 155:
Develop performance measures to track the effectiveness of the Absent Student Assistance Program in increasing school attendance and preventing at-risk students from dropping out.
It is important that AISD show how participation in the ASAP program affects the dropout and attendance rates. AISD should work with all stakeholders involved in the ASAP program to develop measures that analyze and track excused or documented absence data as well as correlating the effects the ASAP program has on the dropout rates.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The assistant director of School to Community Programs works with the ASAP school coordinators, Travis County constables, the director of Accountability and site-based decision-making committees to develop performance measures for the ASAP program. October 2000 2. The assistant director of School to Community Programs seeks approval from the superintendent on the new performance measures that have been drafted. January 2000 3. The superintendent approves the performance measures. February 2001 4. Principals and ASAP coordinators begin using the performance measures to monitor progress and adjust the program to make it more effective. August 2001 and Ongoing FISCAL IMPACT
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
FINDING
AISD does not have a system in place that readily identifies visitors or other non-visitors to a campus; consequently, those who may not belong on these campuses may go undetected by staff or students.
Violence in Texas schools and in schools across the nation is a growing concern for parents, students, teachers, and administrators. No Texas community is completely immune from the potential of violence. Increasingly, many school districts have decided that it is vitally important to restrict access to students by outsiders. These districts believe that non-students of any age should not be allowed to enter school grounds unnoticed. To increase school safety, some Texas districts have adopted photo-identification badge systems for both students and employees. These badges must be worn at all times while on campus. Other Texas districts also require visitors to sign in and wear badges, which allow campus administrators and security personnel to readily identify outsiders who may be mingling with students. These districts instruct teachers and staff to stop anyone on the campus without a badge and direct the visitor to the main office.
In 1998 Killeen ISD (KISD) adopted a badge system for its students and employees, which has heightened security awareness throughout the district. All KISD employees, visitors, ninth grade and high school students are required to wear identification badges, and plans were under way to require all middle school students to wear badges. The KISD employee badge has a photo, bar-code, and magnetic strip, and the district plans to use the badges for documenting attendance at in-service training. For substitute teachers and visitors, KISD uses numbered, temporary badges without pictures. Waco ISD also adopted a badge system in January 2000.
Recommendation 156:
Establish a districtwide badge system for students, employees and visitors to promote greater security.
While several months may be needed to fully implement such a system after all necessary equipment and materials have been purchased, the added security should outweigh the expense and effort. Once the badges are initially distributed to students, AISD's Human Resources Department should issue new or replacement badges to employees. School principals should be responsible for issuing and maintaining student badges on campuses.
Each school's visitor badges should be sequentially numbered and created in such a manner that they cannot be easily duplicated. Each visitor to the school should be required to provide identification and then should sign a log noting the badge number. Badges should be maintained in an area not easily accessible to the general public. Administrative buildings also should establish visitor procedures and badges.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The superintendent directs the Chief of Police to implement a badge system. September 2000 2. The Chief of Police determines which badge system is best for the district. November 2000 3. The district purchases the selected system. January 2001 4. The deputy superintendents begin implementing the badge system with central office employees. February 2001 5. The deputy superintendents and police chief develop a badge system for visitors and substitute teachers and a school visitor procedure. March 2001 6. The principals and school staff implement the badge system for visitors and substitute teachers. April 2001 7. The principals and school staff begin implementing the badge system among school-based employees. June 2001 8. The principals and school staff begin implementing the badge system among students. August 2001 FISCAL IMPACT
The major expense for a badge system is the initial outlay for equipment. The district would need an identification system including a camera, printer, and computer. Killeen ISD purchased its system for $21,698, with an annual $2,000 maintenance contract starting with maintenance in 2001-02. Expenses for the badges and badge holders are estimated at $2,000 for the first year and $1,000 each year thereafter, ($2,000 maintenance contract + $1,000 for badges and holders =$3,000 for years 2002-2005.)
Recommendation 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Establish a districtwide badge system for students, employees and visitors to promote greater security. ($21,698) $0 $0 $0 $0 Cost of annual maintenance contract, cards, and ribbons ($2,000) ($3,000) ($3,000) ($3,000) ($3,000) Net Costs ($23,698) ($3,000) ($3,000) ($3,000) ($3,000) FINDING
From 1997-98 to 1998-99, AISD experienced a sharp increase in the number of students referred for disciplinary action, or arrested for offenses, related to the possession, sale or use of tobacco, alcohol, or other drugs (Exhibit 12-5). During this period, drug-related incidents resulted in disciplinary actions increasing by 115 percent and student arrests climbing by 154 percent.
Exhibit 12-5 *TAOD = Tobacco, Alcohol, and Other Drugs
Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Community Act
State of Texas Annual Evaluation Report
Program Specific Indicators
Austin ISD Incidents 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1 Students referred for disciplinary action related to the possession, sale, or use of TAOD* 0 585 1,256 2 Student arrests for offenses related to the possession, sale or use of TAOD* 0 190 483 3 Incidents of school-related gang violence 0 2 0 4 Students placed in alternative education due to possession, sale, or use of TAOD* 12 480 530 5 Other students placed in Alternative Education (excluding line 4 above) 0 1,136 1,103 6 Out-of-school suspensions related to possession, sale, or use of TAOD* 0 585 726 7 Other out-of-school suspensions (excluding line 6 above) 569 9,275 9,290 8 Expulsions related to possession, sale, or use of TAOD* (does not include students placed in an alternative to expulsion program) 0 8 12 9 Other expulsions (does not include students placed in alternative to expulsion program) (excluding line 8 above) 0 21 38 10 Assaults against students 0 216 187 11 Assaults against teacher/staff 0 93 90 12 Acts of vandalism/criminal mischief against school property 2 11 10 13 Acts of vandalism/criminal mischief against student property 0 11 1 14 Acts of vandalism/criminal mischief against teacher/staff property 0 8 1 15 Number of firearms confiscated 0 4 2 16 Number of other weapons confiscated 0 21 34 Total Number of Incidents 583 12,646 13,763
Source: Texas Education Agency - Student Support Program.Possession or use of drugs or weapons on a school campus are serious offenses. Detection and intervention are critical to protecting students, and these steps can take several forms. Some school districts have found that periodic, unannounced inspections of lockers can discourage students from bringing drugs or weapons to school. More than half of all districts responding to a survey conducted by the Texas Center for Education Research for the Texas Senate Interim Committee on Education use drug-sniffing dogs on campus. According to AISD police department staff, the district does not have or use drug detection dogs. The only use of dogs at AISD was when a bomb detection dog was borrowed to assist the district during a bomb threat. The district does not have a defined method or policy regarding the detection of weapons or drugs on campuses.
In October 1997, the El Paso Independent School District's (EPISD) board approved the implementation of a canine (K-9) program as a deterrent to alcohol, drugs, and weapons possession and use. EPISD contracted with a private vendor to provide K-9 units to search campuses during the 1997-98 school year. The K-9 units, consisting of a dog and a dog handler, performed random searches at nine high schools, 11 middle schools, and four elementary schools. Schools were randomly selected and visits were unscheduled, although the vendor was required to ask principals for permission before searching school grounds.
During school searches, dogs were allowed to sniff only lockers and vehicles (not students). The dogs sniffed for various drugs and other contraband. During the 1997-98 school year, K-9 units conducted 294 unscheduled visits at EPISD elementary and middle schools and 173 unscheduled EPISD high school visits. Alcohol, drugs, or weapons were found in 99 instances. Drugs, alcohol, or weapons were found 2 percent of the time in middle schools and 54 percent of the time in high schools. In all, the EPISD K-9 program found contraband in 21 percent of its unscheduled visits. A Canine Program evaluation conducted in September 1998 reported that discipline referrals related to alcohol, drugs, or weapons fell by 5 percent as a result of the program.
Spring ISD bought such a dog and saved more than $15,000 annually over the price of a contract service.
Recommendation 157:
Develop a policy for the detection of weapons or drugs on campuses, and acquire or contract for a drug and weapons detection dog to promote greater security.
The board should approve a policy for the detection of weapons or drugs on campuses. A trained dog is an appropriate and effective resource for a school district to assist in identifying the presence of illicit drugs or weapons on school campuses.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The Chief of Police drafts policy for the detection of weapons or drugs on school campuses. June 2000 2. The Chief of Police submits the policy to the superintendent for approval. July 2000 3. The superintendent approves the policy. August 2000 4. The police chief identifies the most cost-effective action to acquire the use of a drug-detection dog and makes a recommendation to the superintendent. August 2000 5. The superintendent seeks board approval to implement a drug-detection dog and program on AISD campuses. October 2000 6. The board approves the recommendation. November 2000 FISCAL IMPACT
Costs will depend on whether AISD purchases or contracts for a drug-detection dog. First-year costs of purchasing a dog, including kennel, maintenance, and training for handlers, are estimated at $12,000 based upon a purchase price for a dog of $5,000; kennel costs of $2,500; food and maintenance costs of $1,500; and $3,000 to train the handler. Ongoing maintenance costs are approximately $4,000 a year. Should the district decide to contract for these services, contracted services are estimated at $20,000 a year, based upon the contract fees experienced in other districts. To be conservative, TSPR assumes the maximum costs of $20,000 each year, but costs may be less.
Recommendation 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Develop a policy for the detection of weapons or drugs on campuses, and acquire or contract for a drug and weapons detection dog to promote greater security. ($20,000) ($20,000) ($20,000) ($20,000) ($20,000) FINDING
AISD's police department command structure has been weakened since it eliminated the position of the police lieutenant. As a result, there are fewer officers on duty. Prior to 1994, the chain of command included a police chief, captain, and lieutenant. Today, the department is run by the chief and three sergeants. One sergeant is considered to be the "lead" sergeant and serves as a de facto deputy chief, handling both administrative and training functions as well as oversight of the other two sergeants.
In 1998, the police department developed a new staffing plan that reduced police manpower during the most critical parts of the day. The plan was intended to reduce supervisor overtime and provide supervisory coverage over the weekend. To accomplish this goal, the department ceased assigning two sergeants to the south and north areas of the district and combined them into a split, watch-commander approach with two corporals assigned as north and south supervisors with added responsibility for report writing and oversight of the patrol officers and SROs in their respective areas. One sergeant serves as watch commander each day of the week including Saturdays and Sundays, which means this sergeant is in charge for that day and must remain available to handle day-to-day needs of officers and schools. The only overlap in schedules for these two sergeants occurs on Wednesdays, when the command structure is not clear to many field employees. In addition, the paperwork assigned to corporals takes them off the street for long periods of time.
While the new staffing plan achieved its intended goal of lowering supervisory overtime and providing weekend coverage, it also reduced the number of officers on duty in the field during the school week and relegated critical people to clerical and administrative functions. Interviews with officers regarding the command structure revealed some uncertainty as to whom officers should report to and which sergeant was their superior within their respective chains of command.
Recommendation 158:
Reevaluate the command structure of AISD's police department.
AISD's Chief of Police should reevaluate the 1998 staffing plan to ensure that adequate staff are available during the most critical parts of the day and that all staff members understand the reporting structure for all officers. In addition, the Chief of Police should relieve staff paperwork burden to maximize officers' ability to carry out their primary duties of safety and security for the district.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The Chief of Police reevaluates the 1998 staffing plan. June 2000 2. The Chief of Police makes changes on the staffing plan as well as, the structure of the staff, to include the reporting line of all officers. August 2000 3. The Chief of Police ensures that officers attend to their primary duties by reducing the amount of assigned paperwork. September 2000 FISCAL IMPACT
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
