Connecticut’s revised school climate laws, found in Public Act 23-167, broaden the focus from “bullying” to “challenging behavior” and require new reporting forms and improvement plans. While these changes modernize language and emphasize restorative practices, gaps remain that put students—especially LGBTQ+ students, students of color, and students with disabilities—at risk.
Effective July 1, 2025, these laws overhauled how districts respond to “challenging behavior,” bullying and harassment. While the reforms expand the concept of school climate and emphasize restorative practices, several gaps in reporting, investigation, response, data, and scope undermine protections for students—particularly those most vulnerable to discrimination and harm. This brief identifies areas of concern and offers policy recommendations to strengthen accountability, ensure equity, and protect student safety.
Background
Public Act 23-167 repealed earlier statutes governing school climate coordinators, specialists, committees, and bullying definitions, replacing them with a broader framework centered on “challenging behavior.” Districts must now designate a Safe School Climate Specialist and develop school improvement plans. However, the statute lacks explicit requirements for how reports are received, how investigations are conducted, and how families and the state are informed of incidents. A separate statute creates what is known as “tiered response” requirements but is specific to incidents that require clearing a classroom, threats of violence, or serious or multiple injuries. This statute was also updated by Public Act 23-167 to include the language of “challenging behavior” but its structure and origin do not reflect the stated commitment to restorative and trauma informed practices.
Key Issues
Reporting
Terminology barrier: The required “Challenging Behavior Reporting Form” may confuse families who wish to report bullying or harassment, obscuring the seriousness of those harms.
Concentration of authority: Each school’s Safe School Climate Specialist acts as both the intake officer and investigator, which in practice results in broad discretion to determine which reports are investigated as bullying, particularly if a student verbally reports an issue. This creates risks of inconsistent documentation and bias.
Staff misconduct gap: The statute does not clarify whether students and families can use the form to report incidents involving school employees, leaving accountability unclear.
Investigation
Lack of process guidance: Statute and policy do not define what an investigation must include, resulting in inconsistent practices across districts.
Civil rights risk: Because Title VI lacks a grievance procedure, students of color may face discriminatory incidents without assurance of a thorough, standardized process. Grievance procedures found in Title IX and Section 504 are burdensome, take months to complete, and leave students with few options outside the district for objective investigation.
Ambiguity in forms: Internal forms list categories (bullying, cyberbullying, assault, Title IX, etc.) without defining them. For example, cyberbullying is not distinguished as part of bullying, and verification of Title IX violations may take months. Without clear standards, districts struggle to categorize and address incidents consistently.
Documentation: The model form includes an investigation form that remains internal, but does not require staff to explain how they investigated. This form does not become part of the student’s educational record.
Staff reporting: Staff are only required to report challenging behavior they have witnessed if it meets the specific definitions used in the tiered response section.
Response
No mandated safety plans: Students subjected to bullying or harassment are not guaranteed a safety plan, leaving them potentially exposed to repeated harm even after reporting. Safety plans are not required under the Tiered Response section either.
Notification and Data
Limited parental notification: Statute does not require that parents be informed when their child is involved in a bullying or harassment case. The only notification requirement comes from the Tiered Response statute, and only after the second incident do parents need to be invited to meet with the school.
Weak state oversight: Districts are not required to submit substantiated bullying data to the State Department of Education (SDE). School climate survey results are collected locally but not analyzed statewide, limiting Connecticut’s ability to track systemic trends and ensure accountability.
Scope
No definition of harassment: The statute omits a clear definition of harassment, making it difficult to apply consistent protections.
No explicit nondiscrimination language: The framework does not affirmatively prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, or other protected characteristics within the school climate statute.
Policy Recommendations
Clarify reporting mechanisms
- Rename or supplement the “Challenging Behavior Reporting Form” with a Bullying and Harassment Report Form to ensure accessibility and clarity.
- Establish reporting pathways for staff misconduct to ensure students can safely report abuse by adults.
- Ensure that verbal and anonymous reports are investigated.
- Require staff who witness bullying and harassment to make a verbal report within 24 hours and a written report within 48.
Standardize investigations
- Issue statewide investigation protocols that define timelines, evidence collection methods, and reporting obligations.
- Provide training for school climate specialists in civil rights compliance, including Title VI, Title IX and Section 504.
- Require districts to document how categories (bullying, harassment, discrimination) were applied in each case.
- Require districts to include an explanation of investigation in the student’s educational record and to make available a summary to the person submitting the complaint.
Strengthen responses
- Mandate individualized safety plans for students subjected to bullying, harassment, or discrimination.
- Require restorative practices to be offered alongside—not in place of—protective measures.
Enhance notification and data collection
- Require parent notification when bullying or harassment is substantiated.
- Require districts to submit bullying and harassment data to SDE annually, disaggregated by race, gender, disability, and other demographics.
- Mandate that SDE aggregate and publish climate survey data statewide, enabling monitoring of equity and effectiveness.
Expand the scope
- Incorporate clear statutory definitions of bullying, harassment, and discrimination aligned with federal civil rights law.
- Explicitly prohibit discrimination within the safe school climate statute to ensure consistent protections across all districts.
Connecticut has taken a significant step by modernizing its safe school climate laws, but without clear reporting, investigative standards, and accountability measures, vulnerable students remain at risk. Adopting the recommendations above would close critical gaps, bring state policy in line with civil rights protections, and ensure that every student in Connecticut has access to a safe, equitable, and supportive learning environment.