School security

My colleagues and I with school-age children received notifications from our respective schools to ensure us that our children were fine in the wake of Friday's horrific event in Newton, Conn.

Some were contacted by robocall, most by email. Some messages came in as early as Friday morning, before details were even made clear.

The messages spoke of the schools' precautions and emergency management drills already in place, how often their security policies are revisited.

Here in Maine, coincidentally, the state's School Emergency Planning Committee is meeting tomorrow to discuss proposed changes to its emergency management law. One proposal before the committee requires schools to conduct lockdown drills in addition to evacuation drills, which are already mandated.

There will be more school-to-parent communication to come, I'm sure, in the aftermath of Newtown. You can read what a school security expert has about it here.

As a “retired” school principal and lead analyst of NewDawn Security, I have visited at least 200 schools ranging from Pre-K to college, public and private, have read more than 2,000 articles, briefs and research reports related to current/past safety and security events in schools, attended over 100 security/safety training seminars and exercises, and either authored and/or presented more than 35 lectures or seminars. I provide that as reference to the following claim:

Expecting schools to educate children and keep them safe is no longer a combination that only school personnel should be responsible for.

The point of this article is that without the strong intervention of security professionals in the day-to-day safety and security operations of both private and public schools, we will see not only school shootings happen again, but we will see the continuation of schools being unprepared to handle the multitude of crises they are bound to face.

An example can be found in Chardon, Ohio. The tragedy that befell Chardon also provided a good barometer of the current state of safety and security in education. Superintendent Bergent was on CNN in a timely manner detailing the tragedy as best as possible; his staff said nothing to the press, which is the way it should be; and he stated that the Geauga County Sheriff's office responded in a short amount of time, just the way the training exercises had dictated. The response was there, it was correct, and it was effective. (Not to discount the heroics of Coach Frank Hall, who chased T.J. Lane from the building.)

The problem, and what proactive security personnel can help prevent, is that a student who did not attend Chardon High rode a Chardon School District bus to his alternative school, but got off at the Chardon High stop, walked into Chardon High with a loaded weapon, made his way to the school cafeteria and then began his rampage.

Using this tragedy, or any other, as an example is by NO MEANS a criticism of any school district or staff, or an armchair-quarterback example. The students and staff at Chardon High did the best they could with the tools they had. My point is they needed more tools and the people who know how to use them.

Expecting that schools will be able to progress towards prevention with their current situation of security funding, grants (the Safe School Grant program provided $32.8 million to 18 states in 2009; it provided $0 in 2011), training, and staff levels being drastically cut is almost preposterous. Add in the fact that schools are having to be more and more accountable for student learning, which obviously is a good thing, by overhauling and adding additional duties without new positions or financial support is enough to make it completely preposterous.

Let me clarify:

1) Schools do not have the training or time to correctly identify risk factors in their buildings and/or operations. Expecting them to find the time, or be trained in a field that is so much more detailed and foreign vs. current post secondary education (K-12) curriculum is an expectation that the general public should no longer possess.

2) What training school staffs are provided usually happens at a rushed meeting prior to the start of the school year, when all the staff is still preoccupied with getting rooms ready, analyzing class lists, and preparing lessons. Very rarely are their follow-up meetings devoted solely to improving safety and security techniques—unless, of course, an unexpected negative event demands it takes place.

3) Schools are now doing a better job of meeting monthly with “Safe School Teams," but to expect that the information and even the training that takes place gets to the entire faculty as an embedded action is not likely—again, unless a tragedy occurs.

4) Here is the most important point: Since the Columbine High School shooting took place on April 20, 1999, what we expect from teachers and school administrators in terms of providing an increased level of safety and security has grown beyond what is possible. If we want these people to be able to succeed at their core mission, which is to provide the best learning environment possible for every student, they need the support and services of security professionals.

With the above information, and the school shooting at Chardon High as a guide, the following is just a LIMITED example of how an embedded safety and security professional team can make a difference:

1) Any good security professional knows how to not only administer risk and threat assessments, but they also know how to analyze the data produced by such assessments. Specific risks at schools exist when there are entrances/exits that are common, but not manned by adult personnel that greet each student, and identify persons who do not belong at the school. Same standard for bus drivers allowing students to enter and exit at irregular stops.

2) Security professionals know that all schools are at risk for school shootings. It may be miniscule, but it is still a risk. There is no proven profile of a school shooter, but there are observable patterns: School shooters have always been boys; more than 75% have felt bullied, persecuted, or injured, and suffer from some sort of actual or perceived loss. (Sources: Eric Madfis' dissertation on school shootings [March 20, 2012; Northeastern Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology] and the Safe School Initiative, a collaboration between the U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Secret Service.) Having this pattern in the forefront would allow for better analysis of: A) Incident Reporting System data B) Crisis Hotline Anonymous information C) Teacher/Counselor concern reports. This analysis should be done by a security professional due to the training and time it takes to compile. The goal of these reports would be to compile the data from all three reporting systems, and identify students who stand out so that support services and heightened supervision can be prescribed.

There are many more benefits a school would receive with active participation of security professionals, especially since Active Shooter Response and Prevention is just one of the 26 Safe School Standards security professionals can analyze and improve. However, that doesn't mean school administrators and teachers should be expected to have their schools at the necessary level of prevention and preparedness without outside help. We should expect our school professionals to educate to the highest level possible, and allow security professionals to secure their schools to the highest level possible. One doesn’t happen without the other.

Sean Spellecy is the CEO of NewDawn Security.

Interested in writing a colum for Industry View? Send your pitch to wrichardson@securitydirectornews.com.

Edmonton police say they are looking for Travis Brandon Baumgartner as a "person of interest" in last night's attempted armored-car robbery at the University of Alberta that left three G4S security officers dead and a fourth wounded. Here's a photo of Baumgartner from his Facebook page. Judging by his profile picture, the attempted robbery looks premeditated rather than a crime of convenience gone terribly wrong.

Here's a photo of Travis B. Baumgartner that the Edmonton police released at a press conference this morning.

Just a few weeks ago I wrote this story, about lawmakers in Texas considering a bill that would allow students and faculty to carry concealed weapons on university and college campuses. I wrote that Texas would be only the second state to adopt such legislation, behind Utah. Well, it looks like Oklahoma is giving Texas a run for the number two spot.

According to this article, the Oklahoma measure was narrowly approved by a state House committee yesterday (9-8) and is on its way to the House floor. But, similar to the legislation in Texas, many educational advocates and university administrators oppose the legislation:

"This is not a good idea," said Roger Webb, president of the University of Central Oklahoma in Edmond and the state's former commissioner of public safety. Webb said the presence of guns on college campuses will create unsafe conditions for students and faculty and that campus security should be the responsibility of trained law enforcement officers.

But the bill's author, Rep. Randy Terrill, said the measure would provide a way for college professors and administrators to protect themselves and others during campus violence like the mass shootings in 2007 at Virginia Tech and 2008 at Northern Illinois, according to the article.

Even if this bill passes, university and colleges will still be able to ban handguns on campus.

Do you think allowing faculty to carry concealed weapons will help keep students safe or does such a law increase the chance of more gun-related incidents happening on campus?

By Jeff Floreno, Wren

School administrators generally approach security from a perspective of managing issues that present themselves during routine school activities. This approach seems to make sense, as it captures most of the issues at hand. However, a security professional would say that this approach captures only the low hanging fruit, while missing safety and security risks that may arise during special events.

In corporate America, businesses are typically prepared and have plans in place to deal with special events such as retails’ Black Friday, or a highly publicized new product release, or even a large shareholders’ meeting. Conversely, the same level of planning for special events in schools is not apparent. Part of the problem may be that if a school has a security plan, it probably only addresses daily activities and loses sight of special events.

Identifying a “Special Event”
The first step is identifying what might be considered a special event. Some triggers to get us thinking in the right direction would include the following;

Is space being used differently than it is typically used?
Is there an increase in population on campus?
Are there student activities off campus?
Off campus activities occurring in close proximity to the school?

This is not a complete list, but it provides a format for collecting information about special events. It is important to remember that special events bring larger than normal crowds, they are sometimes emotionally-charged, and don’t always involve just students and their parents. In all of these cases, providing adequate emergency response while protecting people, property and information requires additional planning and resources.

Planning for an Event
The first order of business is to review your emergency plans and ensure that they apply to the event at hand. If so, security personnel or administrators should notify the appropriate emergency responders of the scheduled event. This will enable them to provide routine assistance or respond more quickly to an emergency if the need arises. The trick in planning for special events is anticipating how people, property and information may be subject to greater-than-normal risk and what resources will be required to protect them.

For example, as attendance at sporting events increases, is there a greater risk of unwanted activities taking place in and around the school? Are security resources deployed to mitigate that risk? If an election is taking place in the community, and the elementary school cafeteria is a polling place, is there a plan to deal with traffic flow and crowd management inside the school? Consider utilizing resources such as off-duty law enforcement, security guards, volunteers, and video and access control as a means to manage the influx of people. Most importantly, develop a plan for your special event.

Examine the history of your special events and look for learning opportunities, benchmark with other schools in the area, and reach out to law enforcement or security professionals for assistance as needed. Doing your homework is the key to successful planning.

Communication
Advance communication with all stakeholders is crucial. Review roles and responsibilities, and set up a “dry run” to give everyone involved an opportunity to practice and ask questions. Also, the dry run should be used to test the functionality of communications gear and the accuracy of an emergency resource call list. Ensure there is an appropriate means to communicate with the crowd. For most schools, this is a PA system, loudspeaker, or bullhorn. Prepare messages in advance to communicate crisp and concise information. This practice will keep the speaker on message, communicating the correct instructions and reducing the need to adlib. Signage communicates important information such as the location of exits, first aid stations, fire extinguishers, rest rooms, etc. Remember, there will be many people at special events who are not familiar with the school’s lay out.

Managing Crowds and Traffic
Start the event off on the right foot by deploying a good traffic management plan. When large crowds are expected, reach out to law enforcement for assistance in directing traffic. Assess the parking situation and, when necessary, collaborate with neighboring businesses or residents to authorize overflow parking thus accommodating everyone. During nighttime events, adequate lighting is a must when it comes to reducing safety and security incidents.

Managing the crowd helps ensure safety and minimizes conflict. A best practice for crowd control at a sporting event is to provide separate entrances and designated seating areas for the home and visiting teams and their fans. This will help avoid conflict, fights, and other undesirable interactions. Managing queues may be necessary for some events. Lines should be controlled using crowd control barriers that are set up in the most direct route possible.
Crowd control on campus may also mean blocking access to certain parts of the school, ensuring classrooms and entrances are locked and monitored to avoid unwanted activities that could result in theft, vandalism, accidents, or other legal liabilities.

Make your special event “special” by taking the time to review and update plans, make sure the traffic plan minimizes frustrations, validate that the right resources are in place, and communicate roles and responsibilities to all the stakeholders. Remember, the key to providing security for a special event is planning.

Jeff Floreno serves as director of security operations and strategy for Wren, providers of physical security solutions that create safe learning environments. Floreno directs new product development efforts and provides security expertise to Wren’s education customers. Floreno can be reached at jeff.floreno@wrensolutions.com. To learn more about Wren’s solutions, visit www.wrensolutions.com.