September is National Campus Safety Awareness Month!
Posted In School Safety on September 2nd, 2010
Security on Campus has announced that National Campus Safety Awareness Month is celebrating its 6th anniversary this September with the theme NCSAM 2010: Coming Together to Strengthen Campus Communities.
Security On Campus, Inc. is working to create safer, more supportive campus communities and encouraging students and administrators to work together with local law enforcement and national and local organizations to ensure campuses will be more secure, students will be more informed, and victims will be better supported.
In celebration of National Campus Safety Awareness Month, Awareity we would like to offer all college campuses the opportunity to sign up for a Free 30 Day Trial of our MOAT (Managed Ongoing Awareness and Trust) tools and TIPS (Threat Assessment, Incident Management and Prevention Services).
Connecting the dots is critical as lessons learned from schools around the world clearly reveal that gaps and disconnects between faculty members, staff, administration, community members, students, parents, third-parties, policies, plans an
d procedures lead to expensive and tragic incidents.
Awareity’s innovative tools are currently helping colleges and universities implement lessons learned and connect the dots while reducing budgets and improving campus safety, risk management, threat assessment, incident reporting, prevention, security awareness, documentation, CYA and more.
To sign up for your free 30 Day Trial, please visit www.awareity.com.
We would also love to hear what your campuses are doing this month to improve student safety and security; please share your stories in the comments section below.
No Comments
Email This Post
Are Your Security Cameras Mobile, Capable of Making Incident Reports?
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, School Safety, Workplace Violence on August 17th, 2010 Tags: Incident Reporting, NASRO, school resource officer, School Safety, School Security, security cameras, threat assessment, TIPS
I met some really outstanding people this month while presenting at the NASRO national conference and I deeply appreciate how school resource officers (SROs) and school security officers (SSOs) are striving to make a difference with students and with schools.
Before and after my presentations I had some interesting conversations with several SROs from schools all across the U.S. One of the SROs I spoke brought up an ongoing challenge with cameras. He would like to replace outdated analog cameras that do not give him the clarity he needs to recognize and identify people. He also wants to add more cameras for better coverage in problem areas. He went on to say that he was having a difficult time getting school Administrators to understand his concerns and he also cited budget limitations too.
So I suggested a new and different approach. What if you “connected” hundreds or even thousands of existing “security cameras” that are mobile and capable of reporting incidents too?
The SRO looked at me a little funny and said what do you mean?
What if the eyes of every student and every teacher became your security cameras?
And what if the students and teachers were also able to provide details about suspicious activities that are taking place at school, even in the places at school where cameras aren’t allowed and away from school where you will never have cameras?
Lessons learned clearly show that if we want different results…we have to start trying different solutions.
For example, new and different tools like TIPS (Threat Assessment, Incident Management and Prevention Services) empower students, teachers, faculty, counselors, janitors, bus drivers, parents and others to become your mobile cameras that also report incidents…but only if you have the tools to “connect” them.
Are you ready for different and better results?
No Comments
Email This Post
Blueprints Do Not Build Skyscrapers
Posted In Business Continuity, Human Resources, Regulatory Compliance, Risk Management, School Safety, Workplace Violence on August 11th, 2010 Tags: Anti-Bullying, policy and procedure management, preparedness program
In my previous blog I suggested that building a successful preparedness campaign is like building a skyscraper…and in some cases it seems like building a skyscraper may actually be easier than building a successful campus-wide or organization-wide preparedness effort.
I mentioned that building a skyscraper and building a campus-wide or organization-wide preparedness effort have a lot in common and one of those common items is blueprints.
Blueprints can be a technical drawing, a mechanical drawing, an architectural plan, a model, a prototype, a detailed plan of action and etc. Blueprints can also include programs, policies, procedures, processes, guidelines, checklists and etc.
But blueprints are not skyscrapers.
Lessons learned continue to reveal that many organizations are extremely vulnerable because they purchase blueprints (emergency plans, anti-bullying programs, checklists, and etc.) and schedule a meeting or training session and post their blueprints on an intranet/portal and think they have built their “skyscraper”.
More and more organizations are learning the hard way that having blueprints is not enough.
Even though financial organizations have policies, government entities have plans, schools have procedures, healthcare organizations have checklists and organizations have been offering general training on an annual basis for years… tragedies, failures, bullying and lawsuits continue to escalate.
Do your organization’s leaders understand that building organization-wide preparedness efforts or a culture of safety or an anti-bullying environment requires more than disseminating blueprints?
No Comments
Email This Post
Building A Preparedness Program…like Building a Skyscraper?
Posted In Business Continuity, Emergency Management, Human Resources, Regulatory Compliance, School Safety, Workplace Violence on August 9th, 2010 Tags: campus preparedness conference, Compliance, Ethics, safety, Security
I attended the Virginia Governor’s Campus Preparedness conference last week and had an interesting discussion with one of the attendees. We were talking about how building preparedness across an organization or an entire campus is becoming more complex and more difficult due to escalating challenges, regulations, obligations, liabilities and much more.
As our discussion continued, we started talking about how important tools can be when building campus-wide preparedness programs. In reference to whether tools can make a difference, I offered the following analogy:
Could a skyscraper be built using a hammer, a saw and some nails?
The attendee responded quickly, yes the skyscraper could be built but she wouldn’t go inside it!
Next we discussed how building a skyscraper and building a campus-wide or organization-wide preparedness program have a lot in common:
- Both require blueprints
- Both are complex and require planning
- Both require specialized tools to build
- Both have a lot of parts or “dots to connect”
- Both require specialized tools to maintain
- People will not trust poorly built skyscrapers or preparedness programs
Are you building your __________ program [preparedness, compliance, business continuity, safety, security, ethics, etc.] with old outdated tools such as binders, intranets, shared drives and general training?
No Comments
Email This Post
Perceptions of Campus Safety – Are You Helping Your Students Feel Safe?
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, School Safety on August 3rd, 2010 Tags: Active Shooter, Campus Safety, Campus Security, columbine, incident prevention, Incident Reporting, public safety training, Virginia Tech
While tragic incidents like Columbine and Virginia Tech have created an increased awareness of campus safety and security, most college students reveal they still feel fairly safe on campus. A recent study by three Southern Illinois University scholars has revealed most students are not particularly worried about encountering an active shooter on campus.
The survey of more than 5000 students discusses attitudes towards on-campus crime, perceptions of risk and safety, personal experiences and understanding of campus safety measures.
What was perhaps most interesting 
about the report was the recommendations by the students to reinforce public safety training and communicate emergency procedures with students, faculty and third-parties. One safety director revealed that although students may understand their school has safety plans in place, they don’t really know what the plans are. It is critical for colleges and universities to implement and communicate emergency response plans, safety policies, evacuation routes, call lists, etc. to all appropriate personnel and students.
Several other recommendations include:
- Educating students on public safety components during orientation
- Making public safety training ongoing (not just annually)
It is critical for administrators to ensure all individuals (faculty, administration, staff, students, parents, first responders, mental health, campus law enforcement, etc.) understand and have acknowledged their individual roles and responsibilities. Many colleges have emergency plans tucked away in binders on dusty shelves or posted to an intranet site, but how can administrators ensure these plans have been read, understood, or updated as risks, threats, regulations, etc. change? Colleges must utilize effective tools for sharing, communicating, implementing and updating plans, policies and procedures on an ongoing basis. Once-a-year general training is not enough and students agree.
The study also suggests students are in favor of campus counseling staff sharing concerns about specific students with campus public safety personnel, and indicated that students believe both they and faculty have “a responsibility to report dangerous students.”
Schools must provide students and faculty with the tools needed to report suspicious incidents, threats, bullying harassment, violence, etc. so red flags do not continue to fall through the gaps. By documenting incidents across all campus departments (HR, IT, Mental Health, Campus Safety, etc.) campus administrators can connect the dots and take actions to prevent violent, expensive, embarrassing and tragic incidents from occurring.
As students are voicing their concerns…how is your campus planning to respond?
“Perceptions of Campus Safety Initiatives: Assessing Views of Critical Incident Prevention and Response” is available online at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/index.cfm?metaSection=Publications&metapage=campuscrimehome
No Comments
Email This Post
Improving Campus Safety – Prevention and Intervention – Part 2
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, School Safety, Workplace Violence on June 23rd, 2010
If you did not read Part 1…you may want to do so before reading Part 2.
During my EduComm presentation, I identified numerous school related incidents and lessons learned and multiple new ways to improve campus safety, reduce costs, protect reputations and save lives.
Then after reviewing multiple lessons learned I asked the group another question:
What does each of these well-documented incidents have in common?
- Columbine
- Virginia Tech
- Fort Hood
- University of Alabama-Huntsville
According to expert reviews and reports, each of these incidents could have been prevented.
Let me repeat….each of these incidents could have been prevented.
Each of these incidents could have been prevented had the organizations implemented Prevention and Intervention Plans with tools/systems to ensure incident reporting, red flag management, proactive action teams (prevention, intervention, behavior analysis, threat assessment, etc.) and documentation resources were accessible on-demand.
If your goal is to improve safety on your campus or within your organization or across your community, isn’t it better to prevent incidents from happening at all?
Based on lessons learned and based on costs, lawsuits, reputation damage, emotional damages and loss of lives, my guess is that if each of these organizations (and numerous others) had the opportunity for a do over, they would all vote for preventing their incident rather than reliving their incident.
Does your organization have the right tools to connect the dots and prevent incidents from happening?
No Comments
Email This Post
Improving Campus Safety – Prevention and Intervention – Part 1
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, Risk Management, School Safety, Workplace Violence on June 21st, 2010 Tags: Campus Safety, crisis management, EduComm, Intervention, Prevention, Virginia Tech
Just recently, I had the honor of presenting at the EduComm 2010 conference in Las Vegas. The title of my presentation was ‘Connecting the Dots to Improve Campus Safety’ and was selected as a featured presentation.
Presenting at conferences is definitely one of my favorite things to do. I get to share ideas, successes and lessons learned with other people who are coming from many different locations and I have the unique opportunity to ask questions and learn what challenges other people face.
During my presentation I asked the following questions:
How many of your organizations have a Crisis Management Plan?
(Everyone raised their hand)
How many of your organization have an Emergency Management Plan?
(Everyone raised their hand)
How many of your organizations have a Prevention/Intervention Plan?
(Only a couple people raised their hand)
WOW! You should have seen the faces of the attendees…and probably mine too.
This quick survey along with hundreds of other lessons learned continue to show that organizations are too focused on ‘reactive response plans’ rather than ‘proactive prevention actions’.
Maybe this explains why so many schools rushed out and purchased mass notification response systems after the Virginia Tech tragedy?
What do you think?
Should more schools invest in tools and systems for prevention and intervention efforts?
Stay tuned for Part 2…
No Comments
Email This Post
You Have an Emergency Notification System…OK, Then What?
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, Risk Management, School Safety on June 17th, 2010 Tags: crisis management, Emergency Management, mass notification system, Social Networking
I recently came across a blog in Emergency Management Magazine discussing the need to use multiple forms of emergency notifications. Lessons learned and recent studies reveal that the public won’t likely take action unless they receive their directions from at least two trusted sources. A study on evacuations during the San Diego wildfires found that residents generally wouldn’t leave their homes until they had received confirmation from a second source (like the news or a personal contact).
Thankfully, in today’s networked environment, people have information coming at them from all sides (friends, media, online news, social networking sites, etc.) and will most likely be able to verify a threat if they receive initial notification. However, there is always that risk that an employee, friend, neighbor, student, etc. was not notified. Or their source was not credible or trusted? How can you ensure all individuals have received and verified an emergency notification?
And, once an individual does understand there is a threat (violence, natural disaster, etc.), then what? Where should they go? What do they need to do? Should they notify others?
Emergency mass notification systems are only effective if each and every individual sending and receiving the alert is fully aware of specific policies, procedures, roles and responsibilities – people must understand what they HAVE TO DO and NEED TO DO if an incident occurs.
Lessons learned have shown that many safety and security programs do not put enough emphasis on the implementation of crisis management plans, emergency plans, code of conduct manuals, staff procedures manuals, SOPs and other processes after organizations have spent time and money performing assessments, performing general training, purchasing mass notification technologies and developing their plans, procedures and policies.
It is critical for organizations to implement Lessons Learned at the individual-level to prevent and prepare for future incidents. Organizations need to ensure that all procedures, plans, guidelines, etc. have been assigned to all appropriate personnel (faculty, students, employees, law enforcement, board members, vendors, contractors, third-parties, etc.) and that all personnel have acknowledged and understand their roles and responsibilities before, during and after an incident occurs.
No Comments
Email This Post
Draft Anti-bullying Policy Released in South Hadley…Will it be Effective?
Posted In Incident Reporting, Risk Management, School Safety on April 29th, 2010 Tags: Anti-Bullying, bullying, Cyberbullying, Massachusetts, Pheobe Prince, school violence, South Hadley
The Massachusetts school district where bullied Phoebe Prince attended school before she committed suicide has revealed their draft anti-bullying policy and procedures that should be taken to prevent future incidents from occurring.
The draft policy outlines numerous procedures which include:
- Defining bullying as: severe or repeated use by one or more students of written, verbal or electronic communication, or a physical act or gesture or exclusion directed at another student having at least one of the following effects: Causes physical or emotional harm, creates a hostile environment, infringes on the person’s rights or disrupts the school.
- Detailing measures to intervene or prevent bullying, including the establishment of a process for students and staff to report bullying anonymously
- Prohibiting retaliation against those who report bullying
- Establishing clear procedures for responding to and investigating reports of bullying
- Protecting students and notifying parents or guardians of bullying
- Notifying law enforcement in cases where criminal charges may be pursued.
As multiple states (Massachusetts, Michigan, etc.) work to strengthen their anti-bullying laws, lessons learned continue to reveal that many schools are struggling to implement effective anti-bullying programs.
Bullying, Cyberbullying and School Violence are serious and systemic challenges and most schools – including administration, faculty, staff, students, parents, third-parties, first responders, etc. – are not prepared to proactively deal with these complex issues.
All appropriate personnel – administration, faculty, staff, students, parents and third-parties – must understand their responsibilities, including how to recognize and report suspicious incidents and red flags of bullying, cyberbullying, depression, violence, threats, etc.
South Hadley plans to update their bullying and intervention plan every two years and will also provide annual professional development training for staff to ensure all employees understand things like prevention, intervention, cyberbullying, etc.
Unfortunately, lessons learned clearly show that general training and once-a-year speakers are not enough. Because bullying is not a once a year incident, if school leaders want to protect their students and save lives, then school leaders will need to make their anti-bullying program ongoing with continuous situational awareness updates and individual level accountability.
Comment (1)
Email This Post
Study Finds Rise in Lone Wolf Terrorism – Empowering Individuals to Identify Red Flags
Posted In Emergency Management, Incident Reporting, Risk Management, School Safety, Workplace Violence on April 28th, 2010 Tags: Bystanders, Fort Hood, Lone Wolf, Red Flags, START, Terrorism, University of Maryland, Virginia Tech
A recent report from the University of Maryland’s National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) has revealed that since 1995, a much higher percentage (33%) of terrorist attacks in the United States were conducted by unaffiliated individuals, rather than by organized groups.
From the Oklahoma City bombing to more recent attacks like Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, and the University of Alabama, another commonality has also been revealed; in 80% of the incidents, red flags and warning signs exist, but are often not identified.
There are many reasons red flags go unreported. Victims or bystanders may fear retaliation or they may feel like their report will be ignored or they might think they are just being overly suspicious. And sometimes victims or bystanders make reports but the person receiving the report decides it is not serious or forgets or other.
However, in order to save lives and prevent incidents like this from occurring in the future, suspicious activities and other red flags must be reported to the appropriate personnel immediately and ongoing. By providing employees, victims, bystanders, responders and third-parties the ability to confidentially report suspicious behaviors, they will feel more comfortable and more likely to move from bystander to hero.
Many times one single behavior might not constitute a genuine threat, but when all of the dots are connected, a serious problem may be revealed. For example, maybe one employee hears that John Doe has threatened to “make everyone pay”. A different employee learns that John recently broke up with his girlfriend. A third employee sees John putting a suspicious bag in his locker. Each of these events separately may not be reason for concern, but when connected….
Organizations must ensure they are “connecting the dots” at the individual level and sharing the right information with the right people at the right time. And lessons learned show the right tools can help make the shift from “lone wolf” terrorists to “lone wolf” heroes.
Comment (1)
Email This Post
