HR1335-119

In Committee

MSD Act

119th Congress Introduced Feb 13, 2025

Summary

What This Bill Does

The MSD Act adds school emergency response and parental notification procedures to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. As a condition of receiving funds, each local educational agency must develop and implement procedures covering students, faculty, and staff at public elementary and secondary schools and ensure parents and guardians receive timely notice of covered threats and emergencies on school grounds, transportation, or school-sponsored activities. Procedures must be developed with public safety agencies, use common alarm responses, identify the primary emergency response agency for each threat, and identify school personnel responsible for contacting that agency. Covered threats include weapons, active shooters, hostage situations, bomb threats, homicide, sex offenses, trespassing, fires, severe weather, natural disasters, harmful substances, and other local threats. Separately, within 90 days, CISA must convene a rulemaking advisory committee on interior and exterior school door installation or modification, including law enforcement, school safety, parents, teachers, ballistic shielding, structural engineering, and other experts; CISA must report within one year, issue a final rule six months later, and administer the rule under the Homeland Security Grant Program with an added $100 million authorized for the fiscal year of the final rule and each of the next nine fiscal years.

Who Benefits and How

Students and school staff benefit from required emergency response procedures and reinforced-door standards. Parents and guardians benefit from timely notification duties during covered school threats and emergencies. Local educational agencies benefit from clear federal safety procedure criteria and possible Homeland Security Grant Program support. School safety technology and construction firms benefit if reinforced-door rules create demand for approved upgrades.

Who Bears the Burden and How

Local educational agencies must develop procedures, consult public safety agencies, implement alarm responses, and identify emergency contacts. CISA must convene and chair the advisory committee, prepare a report, issue a final rule, and administer the door requirement. School districts receiving federal funds must comply with emergency notification and door-modification requirements. Federal taxpayers bear the cost of an additional $100 million per year for ten years for the Homeland Security Grant Program.

Key Provisions

  • Requires local educational agencies receiving ESEA funds to implement emergency response and parent notification procedures.
  • Requires procedures to cover active shooters, weapons, hostage situations, bomb threats, violent crimes, fires, weather, disasters, and hazardous exposures.
  • Directs CISA to convene a reinforced-door rulemaking advisory committee within 90 days.
  • Requires a CISA report within one year and a final reinforced-door rule six months after that report.
  • Authorizes an additional $100 million per year for ten years through the Homeland Security Grant Program.

Evidence Chain:

This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.

At a Glance

What This Bill Does

Conditions ESEA funds on school emergency response and parent notification procedures and directs CISA to create reinforced-door requirements backed by Homeland Security Grant Program funding.

Key Policy Areas

Education, School Safety, Homeland Security

Primary Purpose

Conditions ESEA funds on school emergency response and parent notification procedures and directs CISA to create reinforced-door requirements backed by Homeland Security Grant Program funding.

Policy Domains

Education School Safety Homeland Security

Resolution provisions

Identified Gains
  • Students
  • Parents and guardians
  • Local educational agencies
  • School safety firms
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: ih
Students: , ,
School safety firms: , ,
Parents and guardians: , ,
Local educational agencies: , ,
Identified Costs
  • Local educational agencies
  • CISA
  • School districts
  • Federal taxpayers
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: ih
CISA: , ,
School districts: , ,
Federal taxpayers: , ,
Local educational agencies: , ,

Legislative Progress

In Committee
Introduced Committee Passed
Feb 13, 2025

Mr. Moskowitz (for himself, Mr. Fitzpatrick, and Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick) introduced …

Feb 13, 2025

Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology.

Feb 13, 2025

Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.

Feb 13, 2025

Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in …

Feb 13, 2025

Introduced in House

Stakeholder Effects

cui bono?

How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.

Education
9 mentions across 3 clauses
+3 positive -3 negative ?3 uncertain

Local educational agencies, Parents and guardians, Students

Positive-direction: Students

Negative-direction: Local educational agencies

Government
3 mentions across 3 clauses
-3 negative

CISA

3/4
sections analyzed
Full impact breakdown

Bill Structure & Actor Mappings

Who is "The Secretary" in each section?

Domains
Education School Safety Homeland Security

We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.

Learn more about our methodology