Safety in Schools and Other Educational Institutions: An Overview of the Current Global Situation, First Half of 2026.

 
The first half of 2026 has come to a close, so it’s time to take stock and draw some preliminary conclusions. The first conclusion is that my forecast, made based on the results of 2025 and published in an article, did not come true. At that time, I predicted that in 2026 there would be a 25–30% decrease in the number of crimes committed, based on key indicators. I reached this conclusion by comparing the sharp spike in crime rates in 2025 with a similar spike in 2014, after which the figures for the following several years were even slightly below average. Based on this comparison, I concluded that in 2014 and 2025, there was a sort of «release of accumulated excess pressure», followed by several years of relative «calm» and then another rise to a new record high. The forecast did not materialize.

The situation in the first half of 2026 became much more complicated, with growth across virtually all indicators.

 

Statistics for the first 6 months, a brief overview:

In total, 72 serious and particularly serious crimes were committed in schools and other educational institutions, which is 35.8% more than during the same period last year (hereinafter referred to as «s.p.l.y.») - 53.

There were 43 crimes involving mass murder and acts of terrorism; during the same period last year, there were 22 such crimes, representing an increase of nearly double, or 95.4%. Below are the specific figures for this category of crimes.

The proportion of crimes committed with firearms decreased slightly to 41.8% (s.p.l.y. - 45.5%), however, the proportion of crimes committed using chemical poisons rose significantly to 11.6% (s.p.l.y. - 4.5%), incendiary devices and mixtures to 9.3% (s.p.l.y. - 4.5%), and explosive devices 4.6% (s.p.l.y. - 0%). The proportion of attacks committed by groups rose slightly to 9.3% (s.p.l.y. - 9.1%), as did that of terrorist attacks 2.3%( s.p.l.y. - 0%).

The percentage of crimes in which vehicles were used as weapons decreased significantly to 0% (s.p.l.y. - 9.1%), and the percentage of crimes in which the perpetrators managed to flee the scene was halved to 18.6% (s.p.l.y. - 36.3%).

Total number of victims (under Section 2, «Crimes with characteristics of mass murders and terrorist acts2): 218 (s.p.l.y. - 143), of whom:

- 46 were killed (s.p.l.y. - 39);

- 172 were injured (s.p.l.y. - 104).

Despite the increase in these figures, the public danger coefficient for attacks in the first half of 2026 decreased to 3.06; in the same period of 2025, it was 4.1.

 

Geography of Crime:

There have been sharp, negative changes in two countries: Turkey and the Philippines.

In Turkey, the situation deteriorated sharply in the spring. The first attack took place on March 2 at a school in Istanbul; a month and a half later, two attacks occurred one day apart: on April 14 in Siverek and the following day in Kahramanmaraş, resulting in 38 victims—10 dead and 28 wounded. In terms of scale, these crimes exceeded the figures for the previous 25 years. Prior to this, mass killings at educational institutions in Turkey had occurred twice: 

- November 22, 2005, in Nusaybin: an attack on a school, 5 victims (1 killed, 4 injured);

- April 5, 2018, in Ankara: an attack on a university, 7 victims (4 killed, 3 injured).

 

In the Philippines, events in June sent shockwaves through the country, with three consecutive attacks occurring within one week:

- June 16, 2026, General Trias, Philippines;

- June 19, 2026, Cavite, Philippines (stabbing, 1 injured, male, 18 years old, student);

- June 22, 2026, Tacloban, Philippines;

Two of the incidents showed signs of mass killings. There were 16 victims, including 3 fatalities and 13 injured.

Prior to this, over the past 25 years, there had been only one similar incident in the Philippines, on October 22, 2010, in Zamboanga; however, that was a single external attack on an elementary school carried out by a perpetrator over 50 years old. In 2026, the picture is completely different: one attack was carried out by a group, two were internal (carried out by students at these schools), and one was of a mixed nature; the oldest of the attackers was 18 years old.

It is still difficult to say exactly what caused such drastic changes in the situation, specifically in these two countries, where, until 2026, such crimes were the exception rather than the rule. There are several theories, but none of them is backed by direct evidence; for now, everything remains at the level of speculation, and more definitive conclusions can be drawn at the end of the year.

As for positive developments, the situation in China shows a positive trend. I’m not sure exactly what this is due to, but for the first half of 2026, there is not a single mention of China in open sources in the context of serious and particularly serious crimes committed in educational institutions. This is unusual, as China typically ranks among the top three countries in terms of the number of such attacks. By comparison, last year saw four crimes in China that met the criteria for mass murders and terrorist acts, two of which occurred in the first half of the year.

Otherwise, no other significant changes were recorded on the world map during the first half of 2026. However, the overall trend is that the list of countries where such crimes are committed is growing every year. As of today, based on statistics for the past six months, the geographic distribution of attacks on educational facilities is as follows: the United States, Russia, Turkey, the Philippines, Brazil, Mexico, Chile, Argentina, South Africa, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, the United Kingdom, Canada, Thailand, India, the Netherlands, Finland, Uganda, and Lithuania.

I won’t make any predictions for the end of the year, but so far everything indicates that the all-time high set in 2025 will most likely be surpassed this year.

Over the next one and a half to two months, we can expect a lull, as most educational institutions around the world close for summer break. It’s still hard to say what will happen in the fall, when the school year begins. There is a high probability that an already difficult situation could become even more complicated due to the growing activity of online extremist communities and movements, which have shifted to more aggressive tactics and ideologies and have begun actively promoting ideas of misanthropy - but that is a topic for a separate discussion. 

Author – Roman Grishin.

#2026 #statistics #overview #schoolsafety #schoolsecurity #educationalsecurity #educationalsafety #violenceprevention #massshooting #schoolshooting #research #criminology #schoolcrime #educationalcrime #terrorism #schoolterrorism #educationalterrorism #massmurder #k-12 #threat

A new article titled “Ensuring Safety in Educational Institutions.”

 

 I worked on it for four long years, during which time I gathered materials and prepared and published two additional studies on a similar topic.

The work took so long because I was looking for more than just practical solutions to existing safety issues in schools and other educational institutions. The main objective was to build a system out of them—a unified mechanism where everything is interconnected, where there are no superfluous details, and  each element complements and reinforces the others, where technology enhances and expands human capabilities rather than replacing them. 

The primary condition for working on the system project presented in this article—designed to ensure comprehensive security for educational facilities against criminal, terrorist, and other threats—was that a school must remain a school, not turn into a prison or a military base. It was difficult, but I managed to find such solutions.

The article begins with an analysis of the current situation, the results of conducted research, and an assessment of existing and potential threats. Subsequently, based on effective global practices for preventing and countering such threats, as well as public demand, I outlined my practical solutions, each of which is aimed at addressing specific vulnerabilities in the existing system for organizing security and safety at educational institutions, as identified during the study of actual crimes.

The project includes: administrative and legal measures, proposals for changes and additions to the system of technical fortification and security of educational institutions, the organization of security, monitoring, and response to direct threats, the use of technical security and access control measures, as well as many other issues and areas. 

In conclusion, I presented the results of a hypothetical experiment on the application of all proposed solutions, using the example of a real attack on an educational facility.

I am fully aware that the framework I propose has not yet been tested in practice, and it is premature to speak of its effectiveness; many of the proposals outlined in it are controversial. However, I believe I have achieved the main goal: to create a format, a basic foundation that can be used as a starting point to work on, improve, make changes and additions to, enhance capabilities, and increase effectiveness. To strive for excellence and create a safe space for our children.

As always, I welcome your reviews, feedback, comments, and constructive criticism. 

Read more

#schoolsafety #schoolsecurity #educationalsecurity #educationalsafety #violenceprevention #K-12 #massshooting #schoolshooting #research #criminology #schoolcrime #educationalcrime #terrorism #schoolterrorism #educationalterrorism #massmurder #article #threat

Announcement: Ensuring Comprehensive Safety in Schools and Other Educational Institutions: From Problem Analysis to Practical Solutions.

 

Note: it should be borne in mind that the author lives and works in Russia, so in this article, he considers the situation on the example of his country. Measures to ensure the safety of schools, other educational institutions and places with a mass stay of children that he proposes are developed by him for use in Russia, taking into account the existing law enforcement system and the situation there.

I am pleased to announce that I have finally completed the main part of my work on the article «Ensuring Comprehensive Safety in Schools, Other Educational Institutions, and Facilities and Locations Frequented by Large Numbers of Children Against Threats of a Criminal, Terrorist, and Other Nature».

All that remains are purely technical details: combining the separate sections into a single whole, making corrections, formatting it, and preparing it for publication on the portal’s main website. There is no exact date yet, but tentatively - late May to early June of this year.

This article is of a practical nature. I am not interested in discussing the problem or stirring up the atmosphere around it—crime statistics in schools, kindergartens, colleges, and universities do that much better. I am also not interested in the motives of criminals. I do not believe, nor do I even entertain the thought, that the mass murder of innocent people could have any justification whatsoever.

My interest lies in finding answers to other questions: can this be stopped? And if so, how exactly can it be done?

I began searching for answers to these questions back in 2018, when I was working on my first article about safety in schools and other educational institutions. I started that work almost immediately after the tragedy at the Kerch Polytechnic College, where 20 people were killed and another 67 were injured.

At the time, as I studied the timeline of that tragedy, I tried to understand: why was it so easy for the perpetrator to commit such a monstrous crime?

Here’s what I saw. A man armed with a gun, a large amount of ammunition, and homemade explosive devices leaves his home, walks to a public transportation stop, gets on a bus, rides to the right stop, walks to the college building, goes inside, finds an open, isolated room, prepares his weapon, arranges the ammunition for quick reloading, and sets the timers on the bombs. Then he goes out, heads to the emergency exit, tries to block it, walks toward the cafeteria, sets up an explosive device, goes back, grabs his weapon, and starts killing.

An explosion, panic. The killer moves calmly and, most importantly, unhindered through the college hallways, shooting at anyone who crosses his path or comes into view. He throws homemade grenades. Then he goes to the library, where he commits suicide.

It was all over before the first police car even arrived on the scene. No one stopped the criminal. No one stopped him. He killed himself when he considered his bloody mission accomplished. From start to finish, he had the situation completely under control.

 

It would be one thing if this were the first tragedy of its kind in Russia. But before this, there were Beslan, Moscow, Ivanteevka, Perm, Ulan-Ude, Shadrinsk, Sterlitamak, and Barabinsk. Wasn’t that enough to realize that the threat is real, and that a tragedy on the scale of the Kerch College attack is only a matter of time?

However, even this crime did not serve as a catalyst for recognizing the level of the threat and revising the entire security system. As always, everything was limited to talk and formal measures that had no real impact on the situation. Next came Kazan, Perm, Izhevsk, Bryansk—and these are only the largest crimes in terms of the number of victims. There were others, and quite a few of them.

The situation in other countries also clearly shows that there is no basis for optimistic forecasts. Statistics (link) clearly demonstrate a trend toward an increase in the number of similar crimes worldwide. The year 2025 set a kind of anti-record for their number. However, the first five months of 2026 clearly indicate that this record will be broken in the very near future.

All of this clearly demonstrates the complete vulnerability of schools and other educational institutions to criminals and terrorists. Every time there is another attack, meetings and discussions begin, task forces and commissions convene, plans and decisions are formulated, and high-profile statements are made to the media. However, very little time passes before new attacks occur and new victims emerge.

At the same time, even the simplest analysis of the chronology of these events shows that in most cases, the criminals exploited the same vulnerabilities that have long been known to everyone.

I was unable to get started right away. Difficulties arose, forcing me to postpone the work for nearly two years.

In the first area of research (the security situation at educational institutions in Russia and around the world), I encountered a lack of statistical data on crimes in this category that had been collected and systematized in a single source. I had to spend a tremendous amount of time and effort gathering information from dozens of different sources and cross-checking it.

Without these statistics, it is impossible to:

- gain an objective picture of what is happening;

- conduct a thorough (comparative and cross-sectional) analysis of the data;

- track developments over time;

- assess the true scale of the threat;

- explain ongoing criminological processes and identify the factors influencing them;

- predict how events will unfold.

Furthermore, there is a lack of understanding regarding the direction and specific characteristics of the threat’s development, which makes it extremely difficult to devise effective countermeasures. We see the result now, when, following yet another mass shooting or terrorist attack at an educational institution, experts, political analysts, law enforcement officials, educators, and journalists ask themselves: «Why didn’t the measures developed and implemented as part of the security strategy work?»

The answer is simple: they were developed based on incomplete data. And in many cases, this data was not only incomplete but also unreliable.

I myself have often come across statistics in media reports that are far removed from reality. For example, when commenting on yet another mass shooting at a school or university, the author would back up the article with general statistics on incidents at educational institutions—even though most of these incidents were not even indirectly related to mass shootings or terrorism. For the most part, these are general criminal offenses: committed due to personal animosity, or for financial gain (robberies, muggings, extortion), often out of hooliganism or even unintentionally.

Therefore, it is extremely important not only to know the statistics, but also to understand what lies behind these numbers. Proper data categorization is equally important.

The principles I used during data collection:

All collected cases underwent cross-analysis and comparison of information from various sources.

Preference was given to police press releases, reports, and court transcripts—these contain more facts than speculation.

All incidents were divided into groups and subgroups based on various criminological characteristics. This classification allows us to clearly see the nature of the situation’s development over a specific time period, both in comparison and in terms of trends.

Based on high-quality, systematically organized statistical data, it is possible to create more accurate (than currently available) criminological models and forecasts. Most importantly, these models can be used to develop truly effective measures for preventing and combating threats.

This requires reliable source data—verified, organized, and compiled into a single repository. But such data did not exist.

It became clear that a unified information and reference resource was needed, containing information on crimes in this category and at least a brief (minimal) set of factual data about their perpetrators and circumstances. Realizing this, I set out to create it.

As a format for presenting the data, I chose a format similar to a police incident report: a brief summary of the circumstances containing such information as the date, time, place, method, object, perpetrator, victims, consequences, outcome, and other reliably established facts.

In February 2024, the first edition of the Handbook of Crimes and Terrorist Acts in Schools and Other Educational Institutions was published on the «Public Order and Safety» portal, containing statistical data spanning 24 years (from 2000 through 2023).

The information has since been updated and expanded. The fifth edition is now available for download, containing data spanning 26 years. One of the main objectives has been achieved: an informative, user-friendly, and, most importantly, publicly accessible reference and analytical tool has been created for researchers and specialists in school safety.

For me, the main outcome of working on the handbook was that I was finally able to see a fairly objective picture regarding the first area of research. And as it turned out, this picture is far from optimistic. I won’t delve too deeply into the details—you can review the statistics and analytics for yourselves. The most important thing is that the year and a half spent on this was not wasted.

While studying materials on crimes in educational institutions, I noticed that experts often use the term «safety level» in their assessments, adding various adjectives to it: high, low, satisfactory, unsatisfactory, adequate, minimal, and so on. This raised a question for me: what exactly do they mean by this concept, and how do they define it?

After reviewing the information available in open sources, I have concluded that there is currently no unified (or even widely used) system in our country for assessing the safety levels of educational institutions based on formal criteria. Most reports containing such assessments are based on the personal opinions of the experts who compiled them.

An analysis of international experience also revealed nothing concrete—the situation there appears to be similar.

This situation struck me as, to put it mildly, strange. It is clear that there is a need for such a tool. Although I am not a proponent of total standardization in safety matters, I consider this area an exception. Since there was no evaluation system that could objectively calculate the safety level of an educational facility based on formal criteria (with minimal human influence), and I needed such a tool for my work, I decided to create it myself.

The result is a table in which evaluations are based on 64 criteria covering:

- characteristics of the educational facility’s grounds and its location;

- characteristics of buildings and structures;

- the presence of physical security and its features;

- technical security measures and their capabilities;

- additional active and passive security measures.

Each item, if present and operational, is assigned a number of points, which are then totaled. A final score is calculated. In addition to the total score, there are factors that negatively impact the final score.

Once completed, the table clearly shows:

- the level of security at the educational institution;

- its capabilities;

and most importantly—obvious shortcomings and vulnerabilities in the security system.

Based on the resulting assessment, measures and costs can be planned to improve the facility’s security level. Using annual data on such assessments of one or more facilities, it is easy to conduct comparative and dynamic analyses, clearly assessing the situation in a specific school, city, region, or even country over a given time period. You can compare both overall assessments and individual indicators or sections.

The result is a convenient and, most importantly, objective tool for monitoring the situation, where even a one-point drop in the rating compared to the previous period immediately indicates that the situation is deteriorating and action must be taken.

Even while collecting data for the handbook and developing the assessment table, I increasingly came to the conclusion that the model of a comprehensive security system for educational institutions that I had previously developed and outlined in my first article was ineffective and unpromising.

Solving the problem would require a completely different approach.

I began work on this at the end of 2023. In May 2026, I finally managed to complete it (though I assume it is not yet final).

In my new development, I was guided by public demand, which is as follows: schools, other educational institutions (including preschools), as well as facilities where large numbers of children gather, must be reliably protected from criminal, terrorist, and other threats, but at the same time, they must not be turned into something resembling a prison or a military base.

Is this realistic? I believe it is.

What needs to be done to achieve this, why, and exactly how—I will address these questions in the main article.

The publication is scheduled for late May to early June of this year on the «Public Order and Safety» portal.

Author – Roman Grishin.

Has the number of school shootings decreased in 2025?

Note: English is not my native language, so I use an automated translation system to communicate. I apologize in advance if the meaning of some phrases is conveyed incorrectly. 

Not long ago, one of the leading American experts in school safety, Dr. Kenneth S. Trump, published an interesting post on social media stating that in 2025, the number of attacks on schools had fallen to its lowest level in five years, and the number of victims of such crimes had also fallen to its lowest level.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/17sPNNL7j5/

First, I would like to say that I have great and sincere respect for Dr. Kenneth S. Trump. I consider him one of the world's leading experts and practitioners in school safety issues, and I highly value his personal contribution to applied criminology. Thanks to his work, many children have saved their lives and health. However, in this case, I completely disagree with the assessment expressed by Dr. Kenneth S. Trump.

On the day I read this message, I was just finishing the final edits to the updated version of my annually published Handbook of Crimes and Terrorist Acts in Schools and Other Educational Institutions. In the published 5th edition, the main addition was the statistics for 2025. I can say right away that the past year set a kind of anti-record for all the previous 26 years of observations, so I even highlighted it in a separate section for comparison. In the entire history of observations since 2000, there has only been one similar sharp rise in all indicators, in 2014. In short, for example, the total number of crimes increased by more than 60% compared to 2024, and by more than 70% compared to the average for the previous five-year period (2020–2024). For crimes involving mass murder and terrorist acts, the increase was more than 43% compared to 2024, and more than 64% compared to the average for the previous five-year period. If we compare the number of people killed and injured (in absolute terms), the situation is similar.

These are global statistics. If we take the data for the US separately, the situation is as follows: in 2025, 32 crimes classified as serious and particularly serious were committed in US educational institutions, 16 of which were mass murders and terrorist acts. Compared to 2024, when there were 12 crimes classified as serious and particularly serious, including 7 crimes with signs of mass murder and terrorist acts.  If we take the average statistics for the previous five-year period from 2020 to 2024 (rounded up), the figures will be even lower:

- crimes classified as serious and particularly serious – 9;

- crimes with signs of mass murder and terrorist acts – 4.

However, one significant change did occur in 2025: 9 of the 16 incidents  with signs of mass murder took place not in schools but in universities, with this proportion (56.2%) of crimes in higher education institutions recorded for the first time. For comparison, in 2024 this proportion was 42.8%, and in 2023 it was 40%.

I cannot say for sure, but it is too early to talk about a decrease in the number of crimes; in fact, there has been no decrease, just a change in the principle of target selection. It is difficult to say exactly what this is due to, but the shift in threats from schools to higher education institutions has been observed worldwide. Between 2000 and 2024, it showed an average increase of 2.7%, and in 2025, the increase in this indicator was immediately more than 10%.

In essence, Dr. Kenneth S. Trump is right in saying that while it is not yet clear what exactly has influenced this situation and how it will develop further, it would be criminal to be complacent about the security of educational institutions.

author: Roman Grishin

#Schoolshootings #schoolsafety #schoolsecurity #DrKennethSTrump #K12 #K-12

Handbook of Crimes and Terrorist Acts in Schools and Other Educational Institutions, 5th edition

 

Dear readers and colleagues! I am pleased to announce that work on the fifth edition of the Reference Book has been completed. The file has already been posted on the website and is available for download. The new edition includes statistics for 2025, as well as additional data for previous periods, corrections of some errors and inaccuracies in previous editions, and a total of about 30 revisions and additions.

New data systematization and analytics tools

In addition to the existing ones, several new evaluation parameters have been added to the comparative and dynamic data analysis tables:

1. In the «Total victims» section, in addition to information about those killed and wounded, a subsection «Kidnapped» has been added, and the section «Involving hostage-taking» has been supplemented with a subsection «For the purpose of kidnapping.» This is related to crimes that occurred in November 2025 in Nigeria, where two organized, group, armed attacks on schools were carried out within four days of each other. In both cases, the aim of the attacks was to kidnap a large number of students and staff from these educational institutions (in both cases, more than 300 people were kidnapped, most of them children) for subsequent use as hostages in order to obtain ransom or satisfy political or religious demands from the authorities.

This section will include information on the number of people kidnapped at the time of the crime.

2. In category «2. Crimes falling under the criteria of mass murder and terrorist attacks,» an additional section «Suspect fled the scene» is created, with information about crimes where the suspect managed to leave the scene after committing the crime, and they were detained or found (in cases of suicide) outside the educational institution they attacked, or the crime remained unsolved.

Statistics in this section will allow (albeit not fully) an assessment of the level of protection of educational facilities from criminal and terrorist threats, as well as the responsiveness of law enforcement agencies. If a criminal was able to freely enter an educational institution, carry weapons, commit a crime, and then leave the scene unhindered. Such facts, and especially the increase in the proportion of such incidents (in comparative and dynamic analysis) in the total number of crimes, give grounds for certain conclusions. 

3. In category «2. Crimes falling under the criteria of mass murders and terrorist attacks,» an additional section «Suspect committed suicide (including attempts)» is created, with information about crimes in which the suspect committed suicide, either at the scene of the crime or within 24 hours after it.

A separate block of analytics on suicidal cases among suspects remains; this section is created solely for the convenience of tracking and comparing general statistical indicators. 

Indication of information about attempted crimes

This issue has been discussed repeatedly, especially after the release of version 4.0, with opinions both for and against this parameter being expressed. As a result of the discussions, it was decided to include this information in the category «2. Crimes that fall under the criteria of mass murder and terrorist attacks» starting in 2025. Only those incidents where the crime has reached the stage of immediate execution but, for reasons beyond the perpetrator's control, the perpetrator was unable to carry it through to completion will be included in the list.

For clarity, let's look at two examples of such attempts in 2025:

January 10, Kursk, Russia: an attempted attack on a secondary school using cold weapons and incendiary mixtures. The suspect, a former student of the school, put on a mask to hide his face and prepared weapons (a hammer, knife, and incendiary mixture), used the hammer to break a window, and entered the school premises. However, his actions attracted the attention of a security guard, who pressed the alarm button and called the police, and also began to pursue the suspect. The criminal dropped the bag with the weapons and incendiary mixture and fled the scene before he could harm anyone.

September 17, Ostrogozhsk, Russia: attempted attack on a secondary school with cold weapons. The suspect, a former student of the school, had previously posted threatening messages on his social media page, prepared weapons (a knife and a hammer), brought them to school, took them out, shouted verbal threats, and attempted to attack those around him, but was quickly neutralized by a teacher and security guard before he could harm anyone.

Such attempts will be included in the list and taken into account, but in cases where the crime was prevented during its preparation, such incidents will not be taken into account.

Information about the presence of security guards at educational facilities under attack

This is a good analytical tool, but unfortunately, at the moment, this information will only be published in part, mainly data on incidents that occurred in Russia, where this feature of such crimes is highlighted in media publications and official releases from law enforcement agencies.

Foreign media pay little attention to this circumstance, and it is rarely mentioned in publications and releases. I tried to make inquiries myself, but they all went unanswered. I do not know the reasons for this, especially since this information is not classified.

Statistics for 2025, tools for data analysis

Due to the fact that five-year periods are used for comparative and dynamic data analysis, and in 2025 such a period is just beginning, three new analytical tools are introduced for the convenience of visual representation of the situation, to compare statistics for the current year:

1. with the same period of the previous year, i.e., in this case, with 2024;

2. with the average indicator of the previous period, in this case, with the period 2020–2024; to calculate this indicator, the arithmetic mean value for each estimated parameter for the five-year period is used. Example: the average number of crimes committed with the use of firearms in the period 2020–2024, we take the values for 5 years, 2020 – 3, 2021 – 8, 2022 – 21, 2023 – 15, 2024 – 14. We add them up to get 61, divide by the number of years – 5 – to get 12 (if the value after the decimal point is 5 or less, we round down; if it is 6 or more, we round up, in this case to 2). The average percentage of such crimes is calculated in the same way.

3. With the average value for the entire reporting period starting in 2000, the calculation of the indicator here is similar to the calculation for the previous period.

This will be presented in the form of a table, where you can clearly see the dynamics of the situation for each individual indicator.

That's all for the changes and additions.

As new data comes in, work will begin on additions to the current edition and, at the same time, data collection for the sixth edition. I would appreciate any help in working on the new edition. You can find out how to do this in the final part of the reference book, in the section «Prospects for new editions.»

My goal is to create a useful, reliable, informative, easy-to-use, and, most importantly, publicly available reference and analytical tool for researchers and specialists in ensuring the security of schools and other educational institutions from threats of various types and nature.

Once again, I would like to thank everyone who helped me collect new information, clarify and correct previously published data, form and edit sections, and do other work on the reference book.

Sincerely.

Author and editor-in-chief of the project – Roman Grishin

 

#SchoolSafety #SchoolSecurity #SafetySchools #school #kindergarten #university #college #analytics #crime #terrorism #handbook #statistics #criminology #security #safety

Safety of educational and childcare facilities in 2025, preliminary results, new threats, forecast for 2026

Note: it should be borne in mind that the author lives and works in Russia, so in this article, he considers the situation on the example of his country. Measures to ensure the safety of schools, other educational institutions and places with a mass stay of children that he proposes are developed by him for use in Russia, taking into account the existing law enforcement system and the situation there.

Work is currently nearing completion on an updated version of the Handbook of Crimes and Terrorist Acts in Schools and Other Educational Institutions, which will include some corrections and additions for previous periods, as well as statistics for 2025. Taking into account the opinions and wishes expressed by colleagues, the form for submitting certain statistical data will be supplemented. I will provide more details about the new edition of the Handbook in an accompanying article to its publication.

Some preliminary conclusions about the security situation in schools and other educational and childcare institutions can already be drawn.

1. The negative trend continues.

Even for the incomplete year of 2025, crime rates have increased compared to both 2024 and the average for the most recent period (2020-2024). The increase is observed both in the total number of serious and particularly serious crimes and in incidents with signs of mass murders and terrorist acts.

2. The level of security in educational institutions remains low.

The vast majority of crimes are committed directly on the premises of educational institutions using weapons or explosive devices. This circumstance clearly indicates that the criminals entered the premises of the educational institution unhindered, carried weapons with them, and carried out their planned crime.

3. Using teenagers to carry out terrorist acts.

So far, this phenomenon is more common in Russia. Teenagers, following instructions from anonymous «curators» in messengers and social networks, commit arson or mine energy facilities, transport, cars, and police premises, as well as other law enforcement agencies. There are no exact statistics, but according to Russian media reports, 47 such crimes were committed in the first quarter of 2025. The main motives for committing these crimes are threats of violence, blackmail, and the promise of financial reward.

Although most of these crimes are committed in Russia (although there are isolated cases in other countries), this practice is rapidly spreading to other countries. Terrorist organizations and criminal communities are quick learners and closely monitor such «cutting-edge criminal experience».

Earlier, in my articles on PMC Ryodan and Red Dolphin, I expressed my opinion and made predictions that such crimes would be committed more often, that these cases were only a test and assessment of the possibilities of using teenagers, both individually and in groups, to commit crimes and terrorist acts with the possibility of anonymous, remote control of their actions. Unfortunately, as practice has shown, this experiment has been successful.

4. Dangerous precedents have been set in Nigeria.

In November 2025, within a span of four days, two organized, group, armed attacks on schools were carried out in Nigeria. In both cases, the aim of the attacks was to take hostages.

In the first case, on November 17 in the city of Magha, during an attack on a school, the deputy director was killed and a security guard was wounded, and 25 students were taken hostage.

In the second case, on November 21, in the city of Papiri, there were no deaths or injuries during the attack on the school, but more than 300 students and 12 teachers were taken hostage.

These cities are located in border states, less than 200 kilometers apart. After the first kidnapping, the Nigerian government launched a police operation and tightened security measures. However, this did not prevent the criminals from carrying out an even more daring attack four days later and taking 10 times more hostages.

Similar attacks have been carried out in Nigeria before, but not on such a scale. The last similar case (in terms of the number of people kidnapped) occurred there 11 years ago, in April 2014, when militants from a terrorist group kidnapped 276 high school students, 94 of whom have still not been released.

All this indicates that educational institutions have been and remain an easily accessible target for criminals and terrorists. They perceive children as a resource (a tool) with which they can commit crimes and terrorist acts with impunity, while remaining hundreds and thousands of kilometers away.

Forecast: The current situation clearly shows that the existing system for containing this threat is not working, and no effective system for actively countering it has yet been created. This means that in 2026, we should not expect any positive changes; at best, the situation will remain at its current level.

Author and Editor-in-Chief of the project - Roman Grishin.

#schoolsafety #crime #terrorism #victims #threats #safety #security #children #schools #college #kindergarten #university #statistics #summarizingresults #forecast #future

Announcement of upcoming publications

Dear readers and colleagues.

An article entitled «A Unified Approach to Assessing the Safety Level of Educational Facilities» will be published shortly (planned date: July 2).

In this publication, the author argues that there is currently no unified (or even widely used) system for assessing the safety level of educational institutions based on formal criteria. Most conclusions with similar assessments and findings are based on the personal opinions of the experts who compiled them, based on compliance with regulatory requirements, as well as a large number of various methodological guidelines, recommendations, and other documents containing mostly general and often vague wording.

The author proposes his own development – a table for assessing the overall level of security of an educational institution against criminal and terrorist threats, based on 64 criteria. Using this table should make it possible to objectively calculate the level of security of a facility based on formal criteria, with minimal influence from the «human factor», as well as to more easily and quickly conduct security audits and analyze changes in the security system of educational institutions, both in a single municipality and across an entire region or country.

Sincerely.

Author and editor-in-chief of the project

#SchoolSafety #SafetyLevel #SafetyAssessment #school #university #kindergarten #technicalcollege #university #institute #crime #terrorism #analytics #SafetyStandard

New edition of the handbook. Why is statistics important?

 

Dear readers and colleagues, I am pleased to inform you that the fourth, supplemented edition of the Handbook of Crimes and Terrorist Acts in Schools and Other Educational Institutions has been completed, albeit with a slight delay (originally planned for April 11). The file has already been posted on the website and is available for download. The new edition corrects some errors and inaccuracies in previous editions and adds new information sent to me by colleagues from the Republic of Kazakhstan.

When I first started doing research on the security of schools and other educational institutions, the first problem I encountered was the lack of statistical data on crimes of this category collected and systematized in one source. I had to spend a great deal of time and effort to collect information from dozens of different sources and recheck it, because the completeness, reliability and objectivity of the published information often raised reasonable doubts. It became clear that there was a need for a unified information and reference resource containing information on crimes of this category and at least a brief (minimum) set of factual data on their details and circumstances. Without this information, it is simply impossible to see an objective picture of what is happening and assess the real scale of this threat, as well as to conduct a qualitative analysis of data, comparative, cross-checking, to assess the development of events in dynamics. Without the results of such analysis it is extremely difficult to explain the criminological processes taking place, and most importantly, to identify and identify the factors that affect them, which in turn makes it very difficult to predict the likely development of events.

When there is no understanding of the vector and features of threat development, it is impossible to develop effective countermeasures. This can be clearly seen now, when after another mass murder or terrorist attack in an educational institution, various experts, political scientists, law enforcement officials, educators and journalists, discussing the tragedy, ask the question: «Why did the measures developed and implemented as part of the security strategy to prevent and suppress threats not work?». The answer is simple: they were developed on the basis of incomplete data, and in many cases the data was not only incomplete, but also unreliable.

I often come across statistics in media publications that are very far from reality. For example, when commenting on another mass murder at a school or university, the author supports the article with figures of general statistics of incidents at educational institutions, despite the fact that most of these incidents are neither mass murders nor terrorism. For the most part, these are crimes of general criminal orientation, committed on the basis of personal animosity between specific people, or related to material motives (robbery, robbery, extortion), committed with hooligan motives or even unintentionally.

Therefore, it is crucial not only to know the statistical numbers, but also to understand the meaning behind them. Proper sorting of data is equally important. All collected cases should be cross-analyzed, comparing information from different sources, with preference given to police press releases, reports and court records because these contain more facts than speculation. All collected incidents should be divided into groups and subgroups according to various criminological characteristics. Such a division will make it possible to clearly see the nature of the development of the situation in a certain time period, both in comparison and in dynamics.

On the basis of qualitatively collected and systematized statistical data, it is possible to create fairly accurate criminological models and forecasts, and most importantly, thanks to these models and forecasts, it is possible to develop truly effective measures for preventing and combating these threats. This is the main goal and primary objective of applied criminology: to understand the nature of the threat, assess the prospects for its development, identify vulnerabilities, develop a strategy to counter the threat and eliminate it. This requires reliable raw data, validated and systematized, collected in a single source.

In the fall of 2023, I set about creating it. As a form of data presentation, I chose a format similar to a police incident report, in the form of a summary of the circumstances of the event containing such information as: date, time, place, manner, subject, object, subject, victims, consequences, outcome, and other reliably established facts.

In February 2024, the first edition was published on the website of the Public Order and Safety Project, which included statistical data for 24 years (from 2000 to 2023 inclusive). Then I received a lot of feedback, recommendations, additions and edits from colleagues around the world, already 2 months later, in April 2024, the second edition was published, which contained more than 100 additions and edits. During 2024, taking into account the requests from readers and colleagues, the information was updated and supplemented, the third edition, published in January 2025, contained updated information for 25 years. Today, the fourth edition has been published, which contains additional information and edits. As new data becomes available, work will begin on the fifth edition, which I plan to publish by the end of 2025. I would welcome any help in working on the new edition, and you can find out how to do this in the final part of the guide, in the section «Prospects for new editions».

My goal is to make a useful, reliable, informative, user-friendly and, most importantly, publicly available reference and analytical tool for researchers and specialists in ensuring the safety of schools and other educational institutions from threats of various types and nature.

Once again, I would like to thank all those who assisted me in collecting new information, clarifying and correcting previously published data, creating and editing sections, and other work on the handbook.

With respect.

Author and Editor-in-Chief of the project - Roman Grishin.

#SafetySchools #CrimeCrimesInSchools #EducationTerrorism #CrimeStatistics #SecurityAnalytics #SafetyGuide #EducationSafety #EducationSafety #MassMurder #SchoolTerrorism #Criminology #ChildSafety #EducationSchools #CrimeResearch #PublicPolice #ResearchAnalytics