Back to School: Navigating Campus Safety in a New Threat Environment

Across the United States, campus security leaders are preparing for the return of students and another academic year. While campuses once again fill with excitement, opportunity, and promise of a new semester, they do so against the backdrop of heightened concerns over campus violence, targeted attacks, and an increasingly complex threat landscape. For students and their families, anticipation is often accompanied by questions about safety and the institution’s ability to prevent and respond to emerging risks.

Incidents by the Numbers

Higher education institutions and K-12 schools have faced increased incidents of swatting, hoax bomb threats, and hoax active shooter calls over the past three (3) years. Swatting incidents have intensified, becoming more challenging to mitigate, and reinforcing the need for intelligence-informed institutional operating procedures and preparedness plans.

Sentinel reviewed a cross section of incidents within a 6-month window aligning with the first half of the academic year (August 2025 to February 2026), revealing several reported shootings and bomb threats were subsequentlydetermined to be swatting or hoax threats. While the incidents occurred across the U.S., there appeared to be more incidents across the northeast and southeastern parts of the U.S., with concentrated areas in Georgia, Ohio, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Maryland.

Institutional Targeting Trends

Swatting incidents have targeted educational institutions of all types across the U.S., affecting both private and public universities, as well as K-12 schools. Institution size does not appear to influence target selection, as both large and small campuses have been victimized. Fringe online communities and social media platforms also likely play a key role in facilitating target selection and enabling the commercialization of these attacks through “swatting-as-a-service” offerings. While no consistent pattern has emerged regarding the motivations of those commissioning swatting incidents, likely drivers include ideological, personal, financial, and coercive grievances.

The Impact

Swatting incidents, campus shootings, and online threats have become increasingly frequent and sophisticated, often outpacing law enforcement response capabilities, investigative resources, and institutional preventionefforts. Colleges and universities remain attractive soft targets due to their open environments, high population density, and the potential for a single incident to impact many individuals. Perpetrators can often blend into campus settings and, where security measures are limited, gain access to buildings with minimal resistance. As the threat landscape continues to evolve, higher education institutions face a growing need to adopt intelligence-informed operating strategies, proactive threat detection capabilities, and comprehensive preparedness measures to better prevent, identify, and respond to potential acts of violence.

Swatting and other hoax incidents carry significant operational, financial, and psychological consequences that extend well beyond the immediate response. Even when no credible threat exists, these incidents disrupt campus operations, strain public safety resources, and can have lasting effects on the campus community. Key impacts include, but are not limited to:

• Diversion ofemergency resources: Law enforcement, fire, emergency management, and emergency medical personnel are redirected from legitimate emergencies,reducing response capacity elsewhere.
• Increased risk during emergency response: Rapid response operations can inadvertently place students, faculty, staff, visitors, and first responders at greater risk of injury.
• Operational and financial disruption: Campus closures, evacuations, and emergency responses interrupt academic operations while consuming significant institutional and public safety resources.
• Psychological impact: Students, faculty, staff, and visitors may experience fear, anxiety, and lasting trauma, even when the threat is determined to be a hoax.
• Erosion of confidence: Repeated incidents can undermine trust in an institution’s safety and security, affecting campus morale, reputation, and overall sense of community.

Preparation is the Key to Prevention

The outlook is not entirely bleak. Colleges and universities across the U.S. have made meaningful investments in campus safety to address an increasingly complex threat environment. Many institution leaders are investing in security operations centers, expanding camera and detection capabilities, strengthening behavioral threat assessment programs, and integrating intelligence to support early threat identification, creating a more proactive security posture.

At the same time, many institutions continue to face challenges securing adequate  funding, leadership support, and campus-wide buy-in for these initiatives. The threat landscape underscores the importance of sustained investment in prevention rather than reaction. Students should be able to focus on their education – not become preoccupied with their personal safety.

To achieve this goal, institutional leaders should partner with experienced security and intelligence professionals to develop comprehensive security strategies, conduct physical security and vulnerability assessments, establish intelligence and threat management programs, strengthen emergency preparedness and response plans, and provide leadership with information needed to make informed, risk-based decisions. Proactive planning and intelligence-driven security are no longer optional – they are essential components of a safe and resilient campus.