Overview
Title
To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish Regional School Safety Development Centers to provide consultation for schools to develop or improve a school safety plan based on evidence-based best practices, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H. R. 2577 wants to create special safety centers to help schools make or improve their safety plans, and these centers will talk to schools but won't teach anyone how to use guns. The government will give some money to help, but schools might need to find a little extra money on their own.
Summary AI
H. R. 2577 seeks to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 by creating Regional School Safety Development Centers. These centers will help schools create or improve their safety plans using evidence-based best practices. The bill outlines how the centers will be funded and gives preference to entities with existing school relationships, focusing on rural, tribal, and minority-serving institutions. Additionally, it ensures these centers will not train schools or individuals in the use of firearms.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed legislation, titled the "Preparing Leaders to Assess Needs for School Safety Act of 2025" or the "PLAN for School Safety Act of 2025," seeks to enhance school safety across the United States. It aims to do this by amending the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish Regional School Safety Development Centers. These centers are intended to provide consultation and support to schools in developing and implementing safety and mental health plans based on evidence-based best practices.
General Summary of the Bill
The bill introduces the establishment of School Safety Development Centers, which will work with local schools to enhance safety and mental health policies through personalized consultations, training, and strategic support. These centers are expected to focus on creating and improving customized school safety plans, assisting schools in identifying and acquiring federal or state funding, and educating school communities. The bill emphasizes serving rural and underserved areas, ensuring that these communities have access to resources that promote school safety.
Significant Issues
Several issues are raised within the framework of this legislation:
Funding Limitations: The bill establishes a cap on annual funding at $25 million from 2026 to 2030. Given the scope of responsibilities and the potential demand across diverse regions, this amount might be insufficient, potentially limiting the effectiveness of the program.
Eligibility Concerns: The definitions of "eligible entities" include various broad categories, possibly leading to a wide range of applicants with differing capabilities. This diversity could result in inefficiencies in program implementation.
Financial Burden of Matching Requirement: The bill specifies that the federal share of funding may not exceed 95% of the total cost, which might impose a financial burden on entities unable to cover the remaining 5%.
Potential for Favoritism: The bill gives preference to organizations that have existing relationships with local schools. This provision could lead to bias, possibly excluding equally deserving but less connected entities.
Youth Advisory Council: The establishment and composition of the Youth Advisory Council is somewhat vague. The selection process for youth participants, particularly those who have experienced school violence, is not detailed, which could lead to biased or inconsistent representation and advice.
Consultations Related to Firearms: While the bill restricts the use of funds for consulting on firearm use, it does not prevent firearms training outside of these funds, creating a potential discrepancy between what is permitted and funded.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broad Public Impact: If effectively implemented, this bill could positively impact public safety by ensuring schools are better equipped to assess and mitigate various risks. Enhanced school safety and improved mental health awareness could contribute to safer educational environments and potentially reduce the incidence of violence, including self-harm.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders:
Schools and Educators: Educators may benefit from additional resources, training, and comprehensive safety plans. However, some may experience challenges related to meeting funding matching conditions or navigating program complexities.
Rural and Underserved Communities: These communities might receive much-needed support, improving safety measures where resources are typically limited. However, the effectiveness of implementation may vary depending on the capability of entities selected to manage regional centers.
Students and Families: Improved safety protocols could lead to a heightened sense of security for students and families, contributing to a healthier learning environment. However, an inefficient implementation could mean some students might not experience these benefits equitably.
Eligible Entities and Program Administrators: Navigating the application process and fulfilling program requirements could present administrative challenges. Efficient and transparent selection and operation processes will be critical in ensuring these entities can deliver on the program's objectives.
The legislation endeavors to take significant steps towards improving school safety, yet the realization of its goals will depend heavily on adequate funding, equitable participation, and clear implementation guidelines.
Financial Assessment
Summary of Financial Allocations
The bill authorizes the allocation of up to $25 million annually from fiscal years 2026 through 2030 to support the establishment and operation of Regional School Safety Development Centers. These centers are intended to aid schools in developing and improving safety plans based on evidence-based best practices. The allocation is designed to cover a significant portion of the costs associated with these centers, with limitations on certain uses of the funds.
Relation to Identified Issues
One of the primary financial constraints identified in the bill is the annual cap of $25 million. Considering the expansive role and diverse geographical reach envisioned for the Regional School Safety Development Centers, there is concern that this budget may be insufficient. The centers are expected to cater to a wide range of schools, including those in rural, tribal, and minority-serving institutions, which might strain the allocated budget and limit the program's effectiveness.
Further financial considerations arise from the matching requirement stipulated within the bill. The federal government will cover up to 95% of the costs, leaving a minimum of 5% to be covered by the entities receiving the grants or cooperative agreements. While this arrangement allows for substantial federal support, it presents potential challenges for entities that may struggle to secure their share of funding, possibly deterring participation or causing financial strain.
The provision of preference to entities with existing school relationships, particularly those in specific communities, could inadvertently lead to preferential treatment or bias, impacting fair access to funding across all eligible applicants. This issue highlights concerns about equitable distribution of the limited financial resources available under the bill.
Lastly, the legislation contains a restriction on the use of funds. Specifically, the bill prohibits using allocated funds for consulting or training in the use of firearms. Although this ensures that the primary focus remains on safety plans and mental health, it may also underscore a point of tension where schools might opt to seek additional, non-federal resources for firearms training, maintaining a separation between the provided funding and certain school safety measures.
Overall, the financial aspects of H. R. 2577 reflect both its strengths in offering substantial federal support and its potential limitations concerning funding adequacy and equitable access. The continuing evaluation of the centers' effectiveness will likely necessitate careful monitoring of both financial and operational metrics.
Issues
The authorization of appropriations is capped at $25 million annually from 2026 to 2030, which may be insufficient given the broad and potentially expanding scope of the School Safety Development Centers. (Section 2220F.(f)(1))
The definition of 'eligible entities' includes several broad categories, which might result in a wide variety of applicants with varying levels of capability, potentially leading to inefficiencies. (Section 2220F.(g)(1))
The matching requirement specifies that the Federal share may not exceed 95%, which may place a financial burden on some entities unable to meet the remaining 5% cost. (Section 2220F.(b)(4))
The provision gives an unspecified 'preference' to eligible entities with existing relationships with local schools, which might lead to favoritism or bias. (Section 2220F.(b)(2))
The allowance for the federal share of funds to cover 95% of costs could lead to minimal contributions from other sources and over-reliance on federal funding. (Section 2220F.(b)(4), Section 2220F.(c))
The language surrounding the 'Youth Advisory Council' and its role is somewhat vague, which might lead to inconsistency in its implementation or impact, and there is no explicit mention of how youth who have experienced school violence will be selected, potentially leading to biased representation. (Section 2220F.(c)(2)(C))
The restriction on the use of funds for consulting or training in firearms is clear, yet the construction allows for training in the use of firearms outside this funding, creating tension between what is permitted and what is funded. (Section 2220F.(f)(2))
There is no clear metric or criteria for assessing the 'effectiveness' of School Safety Development Centers, which could make evaluation subjective or inconsistent. (Section 2220F.(d)(3))
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section of the bill states that the Act may officially be called the “Preparing Leaders to Assess Needs for School Safety Act of 2025” or the “PLAN for School Safety Act of 2025”.
2. School safety development center program Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill establishes the School Safety Development Center Program, which awards grants to eligible organizations to help schools create and implement safety and mental health plans. It prioritizes communities with less access to resources and promotes practices that raise awareness, conduct consultations, and assist with funding applications, ensuring schools have the support they need to enhance safety and prevent violence. The program also allocates funds for training and technical assistance, but prohibits using them for consulting on firearm use or hiring school staff.
Money References
- “(f) Authorization of appropriations.— “(1) IN GENERAL.—To carry out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated $25,000,000 annually from fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
2220F. School Safety Development Center Program Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The School Safety Development Center Program involves grants to establish centers that help schools create and improve safety plans. The centers focus on consulting with schools about their safety and mental health policies, offering training and resources, and assisting in finding funding for safety plans, with a special preference for schools in rural or underserved areas.
Money References
- (f) Authorization of appropriations.— (1) IN GENERAL.—To carry out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated $25,000,000 annually from fiscal years 2026 through 2030.