Why we exist
In 2026, teachers are using AI tools faster than most districts can evaluate them. The result is a split: districts either ban AI outright and leave teachers without tools that genuinely help students, or they look the other way while teachers use consumer products nobody has vetted.
Most AI tools used in schools aren't trying to cause harm. Many vendors have done serious privacy work. But figuring out which ones are responsible falls entirely on district IT teams already stretched across hundreds of other tools. That's not a reasonable ask.
K12SafeList does that research once, publicly, so every district benefits. We review every major AI tool against a consistent methodology and publish our findings in plain language. Our goal is simple: give district leaders a real starting point so they can make faster, more defensible decisions.
Five things we won't compromise on
Independence is everything
Our work is funded by vendor relationships. Our findings never are. We publish negative verdicts. We publish conditional ones. Vendors don't see our assessments before they go live. Our credibility with districts is the only thing that makes this work, and we protect it accordingly.
Districts come first
Research is always free for schools. The business model runs on the vendor side. A tool cannot pay to improve its assessment. That's not a policy we'll revisit.
Plain language, always
We write for IT directors and superintendents, not attorneys. If a finding requires a law degree to understand, we haven't done our job.
Freshness is a responsibility
Privacy policies change. COPPA enforcement changed in 2025. Products ship new versions with different compliance postures. We date every assessment and update them when things change.
We're researchers, not certifiers
No one can certify FERPA compliance. Not us, not the Department of Education, not anyone. Every assessment makes that clear. Compliance responsibility stays with the district.
How we're funded
Transparency on our model
K12SafeList is free for districts and always will be. We're a commercial company. Our revenue comes from the vendor side of the market, not from schools. That structure is intentional: districts shouldn't have to pay for information that helps them protect students.
Vendors don't pay for positive assessments. They don't see our findings before publication. We've issued and will continue to issue Not Appropriate verdicts regardless of any commercial relationship. Our value to districts depends entirely on that independence.
Who is behind this
K12SafeList was founded by someone who spent years inside edtech, close enough to district procurement to feel the compliance friction firsthand, and then built experience in scaled media and technology. Understanding the problem and knowing what it takes to solve it at scale are two different things. We needed both.
Our team has real relationships with district IT directors and curriculum coordinators built over years of working in and around K-12. Right now, those relationships are our most valuable asset.
Want to be part of building this from the ground up?
We'd like to hear from you. Whether you're a district leader, a vendor, or someone who just cares about getting this right.