BEFORE THE THREAT

null null
11 minutes ago
14 min read

BEFORE THE THREAT

Building Bridges, Not Walls

A National School Safety and Violence Prevention Brief for the 2026–27 School Year

Youth Peace & Justice Foundation (YPJF)

Also known as The Uvalde Foundation For Kids

August 2026

WHY YPJF IS ISSUING THIS BRIEF

The Youth Peace & Justice Foundation (YPJF), also known as The Uvalde Foundation For Kids, is a national student advocacy and violence-prevention nonprofit established following the May 24, 2022 shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.

The foundation was created with a straightforward belief:

Responding after violence occurs is not enough.

Since its inception, YPJF has developed its work around violence prevention, student advocacy, crisis response, trauma support, youth empowerment, community intervention, and assistance to individuals and communities affected by violence and other emergencies.

Its work has included supporting students and families affected by violence and disasters, developing prevention initiatives, supporting student programs and scholarships, responding to communities following traumatic events, and advocating for practical community-based safety solutions.

The foundation's work has increasingly focused on an important period that can be overlooked:

The time before a crisis becomes an emergency.

That experience is directly relevant as schools across the country begin another school year.

Since schools began returning for the 2026–27 school year, YPJF has identified, monitored, or received reports concerning a growing number of threats and other school-safety concerns nationwide.

Those reports involve different circumstances and should not be treated as though they are all the same.

A report may involve a credible threat.

It may involve a hoax.

It may involve swatting.

It may involve a student in crisis.

It may involve escalating conflict.

Or it may involve conduct that requires intervention without ever becoming an act of violence.

Responsible prevention requires schools to distinguish among those circumstances rather than treating every report the same.

FROM UVALDE TO A NATIONAL MISSION

YPJF was established following the Uvalde tragedy, but its mission has never been limited to responding to individual tragedies.

The foundation has developed its work around four connected areas:

PREVENTION

Helping schools, students, families, and communities recognize concerns before they become emergencies.

INTERVENTION

Connecting people with appropriate resources when concerning behavior, conflict, trauma, or threats emerge.

HEALING

Supporting individuals and communities following violence, threats, disasters, and other traumatic events.

EMPOWERMENT

Giving students and communities practical tools to participate responsibly in their own safety and well-being.

These areas are not separate.

They are parts of the same continuum.

A student who is struggling may need prevention and intervention.

A school that experiences a threat may need intervention and healing.

A student affected by a lockdown may need support long after the immediate incident has ended.

And students who know how to recognize and report concerns become part of prevention.

This has led to one of the foundation's central beliefs:

The best time to intervene is before a concern becomes a crisis.

THE FOUNDATION'S PERSPECTIVE

YPJF does not believe that every warning sign predicts violence.

A student who is angry is not automatically dangerous.

A student who is struggling is not automatically dangerous.

A student who is isolated is not automatically dangerous.

A student who has been bullied is not automatically dangerous.

A student who expresses an unpopular opinion is not automatically dangerous.

And a student who makes one inappropriate statement should not automatically be labeled a threat.

The foundation does not advocate profiling students based on mental-health status, disability, race, religion, political beliefs, personality, appearance, popularity, or other protected or personal characteristics.

Instead, YPJF advocates for:

Observable behavior.

Context.

Responsible reporting.

Professional assessment.

Appropriate intervention.

Continued support.

The purpose of recognizing warning behavior is not to create a list of students to fear.

It is to create opportunities to help students before a situation becomes more serious.

This approach is consistent with current federal behavioral-threat-assessment guidance, which emphasizes behavior rather than student profiles and calls for concerns to be assessed in context with appropriate student supports. (United States Secret Service)

BUILD BRIDGES, NOT WALLS

The foundation's central concept is simple:

Build bridges, not walls.

That means building bridges between:

Students and teachers.

Students and counselors.

Families and schools.

Schools and law enforcement.

Schools and community organizations.

Crisis responders and school personnel.

Crisis response and long-term recovery.

Students in distress and the people who can help them.

A wall separates.

A bridge creates a path.

YPJF believes schools can be both secure and compassionate.

Strong security and strong relationships are not competing objectives.

They reinforce one another.

Compassion does not mean ignoring dangerous behavior.

Accountability does not mean abandoning a student.

Law-enforcement involvement does not mean prevention has failed.

The objective is to make sure the right response reaches the right situation.

STUDENTS ARE PART OF THE SOLUTION

One of the areas that distinguishes the Youth Peace & Justice Foundation is its emphasis on student-led initiatives supported by adults, rather than programs designed for students without meaningful student participation.

YPJF believes students should have a voice in the safety and well-being of their schools.

That does not mean placing responsibility for school safety on students.

It means recognizing that students often understand their own school culture in ways adults cannot always see.

They know where conflicts develop.

They know when bullying is occurring.

They know when someone is isolated.

They know when a rumor is spreading.

They know when someone is struggling.

And they often know which adults students trust.

The foundation therefore believes the strongest student initiatives are student-led but adult-supported.

Students can help identify needs, develop ideas, mentor peers, promote positive behavior, and strengthen connections—while school staff, parents, counselors, community members, and other responsible adults provide oversight, guidance, boundaries, and access to professional resources.

The student has a voice. The adult provides the bridge.

Student leadership should expand the circle of support around a young person, not shift responsibility for that young person's safety onto the student.

ANCHORPOINT: RELATIONSHIP AS PREVENTION

One example of this philosophy is the foundation's AnchorPoint Mentoring Initiative.

AnchorPoint is built around the idea that students benefit from consistent, positive points of connection with trusted adults and mentors who can help them navigate challenges before those challenges become a crisis.

Mentoring can provide something that a security measure cannot:

Relationship.

A mentor can notice when something changes.

A mentor can listen when a student is reluctant to approach an administrator.

A mentor can encourage a student to seek help.

A mentor can reinforce positive choices.

And a mentor can help connect a student with the appropriate adult, counselor, family member, school resource, or professional when a concern goes beyond the mentor's role.

AnchorPoint is not intended to replace school counselors, mental-health professionals, administrators, parents, or law enforcement.

It is designed to strengthen the network surrounding the student.

That distinction is important.

YPJF believes prevention is strongest when students are participants, not simply subjects of prevention programs.

Student-led initiatives can take many forms:

· Peer mentoring.

· Student peace and conflict-resolution initiatives.

· Anti-bullying campaigns.

· Student-created awareness programs.

· Peer support and referral initiatives.

· Community service.

· Violence-prevention projects.

· School-climate initiatives.

· Youth leadership programs.

· Student participation in community safety efforts.

But those initiatives work best when adults are actively involved.

Students provide perspective.

School staff provide structure.

Parents provide support.

Community members provide additional relationships and resources.

Professionals provide specialized intervention when needed.

Together, those relationships create another bridge.

THE BEHAVIOR BEFORE THE THREAT

School violence should not be viewed as something that simply appears without warning.

There is no single profile of a school attacker, and concerning behaviors must be considered in context.

That creates an opportunity for early intervention.

A teacher may see a change in a student's behavior.

A counselor may hear a grievance repeated over and over.

A parent may notice that a child has withdrawn.

A friend may see a disturbing post.

A coach may notice a student suddenly stop participating.

Another student may hear something that adults never hear.

Those observations matter.

Schools should pay particular attention when behaviors become persistent, escalating, connected, and increasingly focused on violence, revenge, grievance, or preparation.

Examples can include:

· Increasing isolation from friends, classmates, or activities.

· A significant and unexplained change in academic performance.

· Escalating anger or aggression.

· Persistent grievances against a person, group, school, or institution.

· Repeated talk about revenge.

· Increasing fixation on previous acts of violence.

· Statements, writings, drawings, videos, or online activity involving violence.

· Threatening statements or communications.

· Expressions that violence is the only solution.

· Significant behavioral changes following humiliation, rejection, bullying, disciplinary action, or another major setback.

· Concerning changes in online behavior.

· Statements indicating that a student may harm themselves or somebody else.

· Behavior suggesting movement from fantasy or discussion toward planning or preparation.

These are not a stand-alone checklist for identifying a dangerous student.

They are reasons to look closer and seek appropriate assessment.

LEAKAGE: THE WARNING STUDENTS MAY SEE FIRST

One important concept in violence prevention is leakage.

A person may communicate violent thoughts, fantasies, intentions, or plans without making a conventional direct threat.

It can appear in:

· Text messages.

· Social-media posts.

· Videos.

· Drawings.

· Stories.

· Classroom assignments.

· Gaming conversations.

· Private group chats.

· Conversations with friends.

· Repeated jokes that become increasingly specific.

· Statements about revenge.

· Statements suggesting that people will "remember" the student.

· Repeated admiration or identification with previous attackers.

Students may encounter this information before adults do.

That makes students an important part of the prevention system.

But students should never be expected to investigate another student.

They should not determine whether something is credible.

They should not confront the person.

They should not spread the material.

They should report it.

That is where the foundation's student prevention philosophy comes in:

RECOGNIZE. REPORT. REFUSE.

Recognize concerning behavior.

Report it to a trusted adult or appropriate reporting channel.

Refuse to participate in bullying, harassment, retaliation, threats, humiliation, or the glorification of violence.

A THREAT IS NOT ALWAYS THE BEGINNING OF THE PROBLEM

One mistake schools can make is waiting for a student to cross the line into making a direct threat before beginning intervention.

By then, an earlier opportunity may already have been lost.

The question should not simply be:

"Did this student make a threat?"

It should also be:

"What happened before the threat?"

Was the student being bullied?

Was there a major conflict?

Was the student increasingly isolated?

Was there a grievance that nobody addressed?

Was the student experiencing a personal crisis?

Had friends noticed changes?

Had teachers noticed changes?

Had the student attempted to tell someone?

Were there previous reports?

Was there online activity showing escalation?

The answers do not automatically establish violent intent.

But they can provide the context necessary to understand what is actually happening.

SWATTING: WHEN A FALSE REPORT CREATES A REAL EMERGENCY

Schools also face the challenge of swatting.

Swatting involves making a false emergency report intended to cause a significant law-enforcement response at a targeted location.

The report may be fabricated.

The response is not.

Officers responding to a report of an active shooter or other violent emergency cannot simply assume the information is false.

A swatting incident can result in:

· Lockdowns.

· Evacuations.

· Police deployments.

· Emergency notifications.

· Traffic disruptions.

· Fear among students and staff.

· Significant use of public-safety resources.

And a false report can create the conditions for a real confrontation.

YPJF therefore urges schools not to dismiss threatening communications simply because they appear online, anonymous, or potentially false.

At the same time, a suspected hoax should not automatically be treated as proof that the person responsible is preparing an actual attack.

Investigate. Assess. Communicate. Coordinate.

That is the appropriate approach.

A GROWING NUMBER OF REPORTS SHOULD NOT BECOME A GROWING NUMBER OF LABELS

The foundation's experience since schools began returning for the current school year has reinforced an important point:

A growing number of reports does not mean there is a growing number of dangerous students.

It means people are seeing things.

And increasingly, people are reporting them.

That is a positive development if schools have the capacity to respond appropriately.

A culture in which students report concerns is healthier than a culture in which students see something disturbing and decide:

"It's probably nothing."

But reporting must be followed by responsible assessment.

Otherwise, students may learn that reporting accomplishes nothing.

Or worse, they may believe that reporting automatically results in punishment without anyone asking what is happening.

That is not the culture YPJF wants to see.

We want students to know:

If you report something, someone will listen.

THE FOUNDATION'S CURRENT EXPERIENCE

YPJF is not approaching the 2026–27 school year simply as an outside commentator.

Since its inception, the foundation has worked around violence prevention, student advocacy, crisis response, trauma support, youth empowerment, emergency assistance, and community-based intervention.

The foundation has also developed its STOPNOW community safety initiative, which emphasizes visible, nonviolent community engagement and communication with appropriate authorities.

STOPNOW is not a replacement for sworn law enforcement, school security, or established emergency procedures.

It reflects the same philosophy found throughout YPJF's work:

People who are connected to their communities are better positioned to recognize concerns, communicate them, and help prevent problems from escalating.

That is the bridge.

ATSM: CONNECTING PREVENTION, CRISIS RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY

The foundation's approach is also informed by Acute Traumatic Stress Management (ATSM) and crisis-intervention principles.

YPJF Founder and President Daniel Chapin brings professional experience in crisis response, CISM/ATSM, emergency-response chaplaincy, and hospital chaplaincy to the foundation's work.

That experience has influenced the foundation's understanding that an emergency does not necessarily end when the immediate danger is over.

A threat can be cleared.

A lockdown can end.

A swatting call can be determined to be false.

Police can leave.

Students can return to class.

But the emotional impact may remain.

ATSM provides an important part of the continuum:

Safety → Stabilization → Support → Monitoring → Referral → Treatment → Recovery

YPJF believes that continuum should connect with prevention.

After an incident, schools should also ask:

What did we learn?

Who needs additional support?

What relationships need to be strengthened?

What warning signs were missed?

What reporting pathway worked?

What did students experience?

What should change before the next incident?

That is how crisis response becomes part of prevention.

HOW YPJF CAN SUPPORT SCHOOL COMMUNITIES

YPJF is not asking schools to adopt another complicated program simply for the sake of having another program.

The foundation's role is to serve as an additional community partner where its experience and resources can be useful.

Depending on a school's needs and available resources, YPJF can work with school and community partners around:

Prevention Education

Student, parent, and educator education focused on recognizing concerning behavior, responsible reporting, bullying prevention, and the Recognize. Report. Refuse. philosophy.

Student-Led Prevention and Mentoring

Supporting student-led initiatives that promote positive school culture, peer connection, mentoring, violence prevention, and responsible reporting, while working alongside school staff, parents, counselors, and community members to provide appropriate adult support and oversight.

YPJF's AnchorPoint Mentoring Initiative reflects this approach by emphasizing meaningful relationships and consistent points of connection for students before challenges become crises.

Student Advocacy

Helping elevate student concerns and encouraging systems in which students have trusted avenues to seek assistance.

Crisis Response and ATSM-Informed Support

Supporting communities following traumatic incidents and helping connect affected individuals with appropriate crisis and recovery resources.

Post-Incident Support

Helping schools and communities think beyond the immediate emergency and address the continuing effects of threats, violence, lockdowns, swatting, and other traumatic events.

Community Partnerships

Helping connect schools with appropriate nonprofit, community, crisis-response, and public-safety resources.

Violence-Prevention Initiatives

Supporting practical prevention efforts that strengthen relationships among students, families, schools, and communities.

Resource and Referral Support

Helping identify appropriate outside resources when a school's existing resources are insufficient for a particular need.

YPJF's approach is intentionally broader than security alone. The foundation seeks to connect prevention, student leadership, mentoring, crisis response, trauma support, and community partnerships so that school safety is treated as an ongoing relationship rather than simply an emergency response.

YPJF does not replace a school's administration, counselors, threat-assessment team, behavioral-health professionals, security personnel, or law enforcement.

The foundation's goal is to strengthen the network around them.

That is what building bridges means.

WHAT YPJF IS ASKING SCHOOLS TO DO THIS YEAR

Before the school year gets further underway, every school and district should consider:

1. REPORTING

Do students and employees know exactly how to report a concern?

2. FOLLOW-THROUGH

Do students know what happens after they report?

3. ASSESSMENT

Does the school have access to a functioning multidisciplinary threat-assessment process?

4. SWATTING

Does the school have a plan for responding to suspected swatting or anonymous threats?

5. COMMUNICATION

Are there clear communication procedures among administrators, families, emergency responders, and law enforcement?

6. STUDENT RELATIONSHIPS

Do students have trusted adults they can approach?

7. STUDENT PARTICIPATION

Are students given meaningful, age-appropriate opportunities to help strengthen school culture and prevention efforts under responsible adult guidance?

8. TRAUMA RESPONSE

Does the school have a plan for supporting students and staff following threats, lockdowns, violence, swatting, or other traumatic incidents?

9. LONG-TERM FOLLOW-UP

Does support continue after the immediate crisis has ended, including appropriate referral and monitoring?

10. PARTNERSHIPS

Does the school know which community organizations and resources can assist when the school's own resources are not enough?

If the answer to any of these questions is no, the time to address it is now.

Not after the next threat.

WHAT STUDENTS NEED TO HEAR

You do not have to determine whether a threat is real.

You do not have to confront another student.

You do not have to investigate a social-media account.

You do not have to keep a dangerous secret because someone asked you to.

You do not have to become a hero

Tell someone.

If you see something concerning, report it.

If you are the person struggling, ask for help.

If your friend is struggling, help connect them with an adult.

If you believe someone is in immediate danger, use the appropriate emergency response available in your community.

WHAT PARENTS NEED TO HEAR

Parents should not try to diagnose their children or assume that a particular personality trait means a child is dangerous.

Instead, pay attention to meaningful changes.

Ask questions.

Listen.

Stay involved.

If a child suddenly becomes isolated, increasingly angry, intensely focused on revenge or violence, or begins communicating disturbing material, do not simply assume it is a phase.

Start a conversation.

Sometimes the most important question a parent can ask is:

"I've noticed that something has changed. What's going on?"

A bridge begins with a conversation.

WHAT EDUCATORS NEED TO HEAR

Teachers and school employees occupy a unique position.

You see students repeatedly.

You see changes that a single encounter may miss.

You may notice when a student who normally participates stops speaking.

You may notice a sudden decline in work.

You may hear a comment that does not sound right.

You may see a conflict escalating.

You may become the adult a student trusts enough to say something.

Do not assume someone else has noticed.

And do not assume you have to solve the problem yourself.

Recognize. Report. Connect the student with the people equipped to assess and respond.

WHAT LAW ENFORCEMENT AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS NEED TO HEAR

The Youth Peace & Justice Foundation strongly supports appropriate law-enforcement involvement when there is a credible threat, criminal conduct, or immediate danger.

But law enforcement cannot be expected to solve every underlying problem affecting students.

Police cannot replace counselors.

Counselors cannot replace parents.

Parents cannot replace threat-assessment professionals.

Threat-assessment professionals cannot replace the community.

And the community cannot replace law enforcement when a criminal threat exists.

The strongest system is a connected one.

Build bridges between those systems.

Do not build walls between them.

A PERSONAL STATEMENT FROM DANIEL CHAPIN

Daniel Chapin, Founder and President of the Youth Peace & Justice Foundation, said:

“The foundation was created following the tragedy at Robb Elementary because we believed there had to be more to the conversation than what happens after violence occurs. We have spent the years since then trying to turn that belief into practical work.”

“I have seen what crisis does to people. I have also seen what happens when someone reaches a person early enough to make a difference. Those experiences are a major reason I believe prevention and crisis response have to be connected.”

“We cannot wait until a student becomes a threat before we decide that student matters.”

“That does not mean we excuse threats or dangerous conduct. It means we take the behavior seriously enough to understand what is happening and involve the right people.”

“Our philosophy is simple: build bridges, not walls. Build the relationship before the emergency. Build the reporting system before the threat. Build the recovery plan before the crisis. And when something does happen, stay with the people affected afterward.”

CONCLUSION

The Youth Peace & Justice Foundation, also known as The Uvalde Foundation For Kids, was established following tragedy in Uvalde.

Its mission has grown into a national effort focused on prevention, intervention, healing, and empowerment.

As the 2026–27 school year begins, the foundation believes America's schools have an opportunity to make prevention part of everyday school culture.

Not by assuming every warning sign is a threat.

Not by labeling students.

Not by waiting for a direct threat.

But by creating relationships strong enough that students feel seen, heard, and able to ask for help—and systems strong enough to act when a legitimate concern is reported.

YPJF is not presenting itself as the organization with every answer.

It is offering schools another bridge—between prevention and response, students and adults, schools and families, crisis intervention and recovery, and communities and the resources available to them.

That includes recognizing that students themselves can be part of the solution when their leadership is supported by school staff, parents, mentors, counselors, and community members.