School Violence Prevention Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Hayes, Jahana [D-CT-5]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 12, 2025
Bottom line
This bill establishes a federal grant program to fund comprehensive school-based violence prevention initiatives aimed at reducing gun violence among at-risk youth through targeted interventions and community engagement.
What it actually does
This bill authorizes the establishment of a comprehensive school-based violence prevention program, providing federal grants to eligible partnerships of educational agencies and community nonprofits. These grants are intended to fund evidence-based, trauma-informed strategies aimed at assisting youth at the highest risk for involvement in gun violence in local communities and schools. The bill also includes technical amendments to the Public Health Service Act to renumber certain sections.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill provides much-needed federal resources to address the urgent issue of gun violence by focusing on prevention and intervention for the most vulnerable youth in school settings. They emphasize the bill's commitment to evidence-based, trauma-informed, and culturally competent approaches, as well as the importance of community partnerships and robust data collection to ensure program effectiveness and accountability.
Opponents contend
Potential opponents might argue that violence prevention is primarily a local or state responsibility, or that the federal government should not be involved in school-based programs. Some might question the effectiveness of such social programs in preventing gun violence, preferring alternative approaches like stricter gun control measures or increased law enforcement presence. Others might raise concerns about the scope of federal involvement in local education and community affairs.
The bill is concise and can be read and understood quickly, allowing ample time for informed evaluation.
Section 2(b), amending Section 581(a) of the Public Health Service Act
Authorization of Comprehensive School-Based Violence Prevention Grants
This provision authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in collaboration with the Secretary of Education, to provide grants. These grants are intended for eligible partnerships to create or expand comprehensive school-based programs aimed at preventing violence, particularly gun violence, among high-risk youth in local communities and schools, including those funded by the Bureau of Indian Education.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision directly addresses the root causes of gun violence by investing in preventative measures for at-risk youth within their educational and community environments, fostering safer schools and neighborhoods.
Critics contend
Critics might contend that this approach is too broad or that federal intervention in local school safety is an overreach, suggesting that resources might be better spent on other forms of violence prevention or direct law enforcement.
Tradeoffs
The tension lies between a federal, comprehensive approach to violence prevention and arguments for local control or alternative strategies for addressing gun violence.
Section 2(b), amending Section 581(b) of the Public Health Service Act
Permitted Activities and Evidence-Based Strategies
This section outlines the specific activities and strategies that grant funds can support. These include implementing school-based prevention programs for K-12 students or youth under 19, using evidence-based, culturally competent, trauma-informed approaches. Strategies focus on promoting healthy development, healing trauma, strengthening interpersonal skills, connecting youth to mental health professionals and mentors, fostering community engagement, and preventing escalating violence. Funds can also support technical assistance, community partnerships, and professional development for school personnel in trauma support and social-emotional learning.
Section 2(b), amending Section 581(c) of the Public Health Service Act
Targeting High-Risk Communities
This provision defines which entities are eligible for grants, requiring a partnership between a State or local educational agency and at least one community-based nonprofit organization. The educational agency must be located in a municipality or local government area that has experienced high rates of homicides (35+ per year, or 20+ per year with double the national average), high rates of violent injury or recidivism among youth, or a juvenile arrest rate for violent crime double the national average, for at least two of the three preceding years. Alternatively, an entity can demonstrate a unique and compelling need.
Section 2(b), amending Section 581(i) and 581(f) of the Public Health Service Act
Program Funding and Accountability
This provision authorizes an appropriation of $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2025 through 2031 to carry out the grant program. It also mandates a robust evaluation process, requiring the Secretary (HHS) and Secretary of Education to develop outcome measures, collect data from grantees (including disaggregated data), and submit regular reports to Congress. Grantees must use up to 20% of their funds for evaluation, and the Secretary can reserve up to 5% for independent research evaluations, which must be publicly available.
Redesignates the second part G of title V of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290kk et seq.) as part J, and sections 581 through 584 as sections 596 through 596C, respectively.
Section 2(a)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to ensure proper statutory organization and avoid conflicting section numbers when inserting new provisions or moving existing ones.
Case for: Ensures the Public Health Service Act remains organized and avoids confusion with new or existing sections, maintaining legal clarity.
Case against: No specific case against, as it's a technical, non-controversial amendment.
Estimated impact: No direct policy or fiscal impact, purely administrative.
Mandates that outcome data collected from grant programs be disaggregated by specific student subgroups as defined in section 1111(c)(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). These subgroups typically include major racial and ethnic groups, economically disadvantaged students, students with disabilities, English learners, and homeless students.
Section 2(b), amending Section 581(f)(1)(B)(ii) of the Public Health Service Act
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to avoid redundancy by referencing existing definitions from other statutes, rather than listing all subgroups explicitly.
Case for: Ensures that the program's impact on various vulnerable student populations is specifically tracked and understood, promoting equity and allowing for targeted improvements.
Case against: Some might argue that extensive disaggregation could increase reporting burden for grantees, or that the specific ESEA categories might not perfectly align with all relevant risk factors for gun violence.
Estimated impact: Enhances data granularity for program evaluation, potentially leading to more equitable and effective interventions.