Authored By Rick Murdock, Michigan ACE Initiative Grant Coordinator

School safety is, without a doubt, among the most urgent new programs that state legislatures across the country are addressing this year—and rightfully so. Nothing is more important than ensuring students school don’t have to worry about their safety before, during or after school. Nationally, initiatives that are being considered run the gamut from creating study groups or task forces to full blown school safety and enforcement programs and related resources.  Of course, the issue of gun safety/gun control and regulation are treated as separate issues with the national and state politics driving decisions as to when and what may be considered over time.

Advocates who promote programs that are intended to address and reduce adverse childhood experiences (ACE) should ask—is there a relationship between what Michigan may do in “school safety” legislation currently under consideration and what Michigan should do to advance efforts to reduce adverse childhood experiences? (Our recommendations are on the Michigan ACE Initiative website and summarized in a previous blog).

In my mind, the answer is absolutely—there is and should be a strong relationship.

To be clear….at this point there is no clear program that has been articulated in discussions on school safety.  Rather, the conversations have related to having the presence of law enforcement, perhaps more school counselors, and increasing access for behavioral services.  While well intended, there does not appear to be any details regarding operation and implementation—nor consideration of the potential of leveraging federal dollars.

If we start with interventions for ACEs the conversation should be in the context of creating and sustaining awareness, increasing well child visits that include screening for adverse childhood experiences and creating opportunities for mentoring and opportunities for the safe adult relationships that are shown over and over again to make strong differences for children with high ACE scores.

The school setting is a perfect nexus for ACE programming.  Target populations are present (children) and parent and guardians are expected to play significant roles in the education of their children. The issue is opportunity to take advantage of the school setting and a call to action for school safety may be the “path forward”.

Michigan has been a leader in the development of school-based services that have been supported by Michigan’s Medicaid program.  Occupational, physical and speech therapies are provided by many of Michigan’s Intermediate and local districts for those adolescent students in need.  School based health centers have multiplied over the past decade—mainly as a result of Medicaid match support administered through Michigan’s Medicaid Health Plans. But more can be achieved by stepping back an imagining a different concept:  School Health Home.

Rather than moving forward with yet another “silo” in the school setting—Michigan policy makers should embrace an effort to develop a “school health home” similar to what is common across all of health care: “patient centered medical homes”—or “health homes”.  Again, Michigan has been a leader in this concept in both the commercial and medical settings.  A school health home is simply expanding that concept and would be inclusive of a “team” that would be at least: school nursing, school behavioral services, and a school safety officer.  This point appears to be the at core of the discussion on school safety but the resources being discussed could be easily doubled or tripled with this concept that uses a “school health home” supported by Medicaid funding.

This effort would address adverse childhood experience in several ways:  First, the school health team could augment the well child visits and we could have additional ACE screenings; second, the school health team could very well be the additional “adult” presence that results in positive relationships that counter the toxic stress faced by those children with high ACE scores; and third, the initiative could help develop the relationship with community based programs and interventions using Michigan’s 2-1-1 program and an electronic template for contact.

To go back to the beginning of this blog:  There is a relationship to be made that makes sense and is responsive to the public need for school safety and the larger issue of ending the cycle of adverse childhood experiences.  A win/win strategy.