Interviewed districts that do allow it aren’t using state safety grants to do it. Photo from Getty Images.

By Leslie Bonilla Muñiz and Arnolt Center For Investigative Journalism Staff
Indiana Capital Chronicle

INDIANA — It’s been more than a decade since Indiana lawmakers authorized school districts to arm teachers but it’s nearly impossible to tell how many are packing.

Requests to at least three state agencies and offices ended in denials and secrecy.

The Arnolt Center for Investigative Journalism and Indiana Capital Chronicle instead called 440 school districts and charter schools in Indiana over six months. Just 51 superintendents responded to reporters’ requests for comment; eight declined to speak to reporters and 381 did not respond to calls or emails.

The investigation found that the vast majority of respondent school districts haven’t authorized staff carry — and don’t want to — even as Indiana’s General Assembly offers up funds for training. And several districts that do allow it aren’t using the proffered money.

But dozens of superintendents said they wanted more state help paying for school-stationed law enforcement officials known as school resource officers. Legislators have put more money into K12 education the last several budget cycles although an individual district might see cuts if its enrollment is dropping.

Lawmakers in 2023 approved House Enrolled Act 1177, creating an opt-in firearms training program for Indiana schools. The law lets schools apply to fund the training with Secured School Safety Grant dollars, as long as they meet state training curriculum requirements. The grant requires a school match.

Seven districts applicants won a combined $101,979 allocation for staff firearms training in August 2023. The Governor’s Office and the Department of Homeland Security declined to divulge the districts’ name.

Indiana Code keeps confidential the identities of people who’ve done the training — although the Capital Chronicle requested only district names — and gives agencies discretion to block the release of school safety pins.

DHS spokesman David Hosick said districts “are certainly within their rights” to talk about the program, but said that information wouldn’t come from his agency.

House Enrolled Act 1177 author Rep. Jim Lucas, R-Seymour, said his intent was to “recognize the constitutional rights of teachers and staff to be able to defend themselves in the event of an active shooter situation.”

Indiana’s Constitution, he continued, “does not say except for in a school.”

Lawmakers gave school districts the authority to let their employees carry firearms at school a decade ago, but offered no training protocols until the 2023 change.

A 2013 law — the same one establishing the school safety grants — lets anyone who can legally possess a firearm and who’s been authorized to carry by a school board or charter administrator carry a firearm in a school and on school property. Previously, only security guards could do so.

The grant money can be used for a variety of safety efforts: employing SROs, purchasing student safety management technology or — now — training teachers to use firearms, according to the Indiana Department of Homeland Security.

Around 30 states allow at least certain non-law enforcement school staff members to carry firearms, according to groups from all sides of the debate: the anti-gun violence Giffords Law Center, the nonpartisan National Conference of State Legislature and the pro-gun rights U.S. Concealed Carry Association.

In Indiana, just five respondent districts allow at least some non-security employees — administrators, teachers or others — to carry firearms on their campuses.

Superintendent Tania Grimes of Southeast Fountain School Corporation in Veedersburg is among them. Her district has authorized staff carry but has not funded training via the law. Instead, she said the district pays for training costs through the school’s operating budget or through separate competitive grants.

Southeast Fountain’s policy, which was first adopted in 2013 and revised in 2023, allows “authorized carriers” — defined as “school safety specialists” and “law officers” — to carry firearms on school grounds.

Grimes said only a few teachers have undergone certification to become authorized carriers. She did not disclose what specific staff members are armed, citing safety.

Because the district does not use state money to fund training, it does not need to follow state training requirements. Instead, the district’s authorized carriers are responsible for maintaining certification to remain in compliance with board policy.

Still, Grimes said some employees within the district have voiced discomfort about being near firearms, regardless of whether they are intended for protection.

Johnny Budd, superintendent at Borden-Henryville School Corporation in Memphis, said he is interested in potentially arming staff because he wants to have people on school grounds who can more quickly stop an attacker.

Not Teachers’ Jobs?

Board members for Matchbook Learning School Board, a charter school in Indianapolis, didn’t like the idea of teachers toting guns on campus.

Dozens of interviewed superintendents said they didn’t think teachers should have the burden of carrying a firearm as a school safety strategy and that the task is better left to trained police officers.

Alva Sibbett, of Cannelton City Schools, said his decision to forgo firearms for staff was informed by Indiana State Police, who warned that arming teachers could cause innocent lives to be lost. Police told him accuracy suffers in high-pressure situations and training requirements don’t measure up to the experience level of law enforcement, he said.

Lucas said he intended the training requirements to mimic a police officer’s academy training.

Superintendent Jeremy Riffle, of Triton School Corporation in Bourbon, said teachers chose not to go into law enforcement for a reason.

Jim White, of Bremen Public Schools, said he feels personally and professionally that authorizing staff members to carry firearms in schools sends the “wrong” message.

Lucas, however, rejected the argument that carrying is outside employees’ job descriptions.

Are School Resource Officers Enough?

A whopping 37 of the interviewed Hoosier superintendents said they weren’t interested in state funds to train and arm staff members. Instead, they wanted to maintain or increase the presence of school resource officers.

He said the state has provided grant money for school resource officers and he’d like to see more of those positions in his district. He said the problem is a lack of available officers.

He said officers are not only essential for crises but also to have as mentors for students.

Tommy Reddicks, the CEO of Paramount Schools of Excellence, a charter school in Indianapolis, said teachers already have enough responsibilities without worrying about firearm training.

He thought arming teachers combines two jobs that should remain separate.

Superintendent Matt Rhoda, of Community Schools of Frankfort, feared authorizing staff carry would open the district to potential liabilities. He said he thinks school resource officers are effective enough.

But school resource officers are expensive.

That depends on how many volunteer. Even those supportive of staff carry prioritized their SROs for grant money.

Jay School Corporation Superintendent Jeremy Gulley was among the first to adopt staff carry. The district is using local operating dollars to pay for initial training and quarterly brush-ups, he said in a follow-up email. He estimated the cost at nearly $32,000 in July 2023.

The district’s safety grant money went “almost exclusively” to its single SRO, Gulley said at the time, for an estimated $80,000 annually. And he dreamed of adding more: one for each of his six schools.

Todd Hitchcock, the superintendent of Shelby Eastern Schools in Shelbyville, said his district was paying for grant dollars itself while maxing out the grant on SRO work.

Districts Want More

Multiple school districts said the General Assembly could better leverage safety money to support existing initiatives, whether sustained funding for school resource officers or mental health counseling for students.

Grimes, of Southeast Fountain School Corporation, said safety is the district’s top priority and wanted the state to pitch in more. She said her district added keyless entry to school doors, fences around the playground and allocated an additional $65,000 from its rainy day fund for other improvements.

More funding for mental health services would be helpful, said Superintendent Keith Nance of West Washington School Corporation in Campbellsburg. The district has contracted mental health professionals by using COVID-19 relief funds, but Nance said it is only paid through September 2024.

But districts are likely to find a skeptical crowd at the Statehouse. Lawmakers will put together the state’s next biennial budget during a long legislative session that begins in January, but they’ve been tight-fisted following the reveal of a $1 billion error in Medicaid forecasting.