Let’s all stop using the terms “Vulnerability Assessment” and “Threat Assessment” interchangeably, because they are VERY different things!

Let’s all stop using the terms “Vulnerability Assessment” and “Threat Assessment” interchangeably, because they are VERY different things!

A “Threat Assessment” is about people. They are conducted when the need arises,  respond to “threatening situations in which there is concern about a particular student who has come to the attention of school administrators or other authorities.” –US Secret Service and US Dept of Education “THREAT ASSESSMENT IN SCHOOLS - A GUIDE TO MANAGING THREATENING SITUATIONS AND TO CREATING SAFE SCHOOL CLIMATES”

A “Vulnerability Assessment” is about things.  A vulnerability assessment is the “ongoing process through which school districts and schools identify and evaluate potential risks and areas of weakness that could have adverse consequences for schools and school systems.”  -US Dept of Education “A Guide to School Vulnerability Assessments”

Schools can schedule vulnerability assessments.  Districts often will contract with us to come and look at the physical school building, conduct an intruder assessment, and examine the daily operating procedures in their schools and provide mitigation recommendations.

A threat assessment management system requires the proper training for staff, and the proper adopted school policies. A threat assessment is conducted as the need arises.

Schools should be conducting BOTH vulnerability and threat assessments as components of an all-hazard approach and a comprehensive crisis plan.

Multi-hazard school safety planning for schools.

4. A written K-12 plan that addresses multiple hazards including evacuation, shelter-in-place, and lockdown situations. Fire drill and tornado drills alone do not meet this standard.

The final element we’ll examine in the Save the Children report is a K-12 multiple hazard plan. We talked earlier about the importance (and often absence) of an evacuation plan. But evacuation is only one element in an EOP that comes from an all hazards perspective. FEMA recommends that EOPs contain specific response protocols for evacuation, reverse evacuation, lockdown, shelter-in-place (for technological, chemical, and biological hazards), and severe weather. The June 2013 FEMA publication, Guide for Developing High Quality School Emergency Operations Plans is a comprehensive, free resource for schools to use in developing, reviewing, and revising their EOPs for an all hazards perspective. This document is available in the resources section of www.eschoolsafety.org.

We’ve discussed the need to revise and enhance school lockdown procedures in previous entries. Given the new FEMA guidelines issues in June 2013 regarding lockdown, it is quite likely that your school’s lockdown procedures need to be re-examined. 

School Safety Planning for Special Needs Students

3. A written plan specifically accounts for special needs children in emergency situations.

Let's talk today about the most gaping hole in our crisis preparation efforts – planning for the unique concerns of our students with special needs. In examining the 29 states that did not meet the four standards in the Save the Children report, 76% had an all hazards disaster plan mandate, 45% had a parent reunification plan requirement, 41% required evacuation plans, but only 17% addressed the needs of special education students during emergency events. In other words, the most significant area of deficit identified in the report was in the area of planning for special needs students.

It is critical that educators and planners acknowledge that there are a significant number of students in our schools who do not have the physical, emotional, cognitive, or behavioural capabilities to respond to emergency situations the same way as their typical peers. Emergency planning must address ways to provide for the safety and well being of special needs students in preventing, responding, and recovering from crisis events. Review your school’s crisis protocols and/or EOPs with this in mind. Is there even a single notation or plan for dealing with the unique concerns of special education students during the crisis events that we know will occur in the building?

The importance of parent reunification planning

2. A written family or parent reunification plan for emergency notification and reunification of students with parents.

Now let’s examine the second critical component referred to in the Save the Children report card – a family or parent reunification plan. In the aftermath of a significant crisis event such as a shooting, tornado, chemical spill, fire, or other traumatic event, the school must ensure the timely reunification of parents with their children. While this sounds simple enough, this task must be done in the harshest of conditions – during a chaotic, emotional, stressful situation with which few people have any familiarity. Oh, and did I mention that this will most likely be occurring under the microscope of media attention?  The process of reuniting hundreds of scared, emotional students with their equally hysterical parents is not something that can be done “on the fly”. It requires methodical, strategic logistical planning and practice done well in advance.

The critical considerations of parent reunification are to ensure that all students are accounted for and that they are returned to their custodial parent or guardian in the most efficient manner possible. Not preparing in advance for this difficult task ignores the school’s legal and ethical responsibilities for (1) accountability of students, (2) addressing post-event mental health concerns, and (3) maintaining the chain of custody.

Still don’t think that parent reunification should be a priority? Alissa Parker, parent of a Sandy Hook Elementary student sees it differently: "One of the most stressful things that day was reunification. We were told by three different people to look for our daughter at three different places. The chaos made it so much worse for us all." 

The good news is that developing and implementing a parent reunification plan is not an insurmountable task. It simply takes time and attention. The better news is that thanks to the I Luv U Guys foundation, almost everything you need is available in a free download. Go to http://iluvuguys.org/srm.html and get started - today.

Most schools' evacuation plans are insufficient-how does yours stack up?

Now that we’ve examined the state-by-state implications of the Save the Children report, let’s take some time to talk individually about each of the components and how these critical elements might apply to your school or organization.

1. A written evacuation or relocation plan for moving children to an alternate site that addresses multiple hazards.

The first critical element is an evacuation or relocation plan. A written plan for moving children to an alternate site should be one of the response protocols of a school and/or district’s emergency operations plan or crisis plan. This plan should include primary and secondary evacuation sites, evacuation routes, and procedures to ensure for the accountability and safety of students en-route to the site. Evacuation is an appropriate response in the event of bomb threats, damage to the building, or in any circumstance where it is unsafe to stay in the building. This requires consideration of multiple hazards when developing plans and protocols.

Does your school have a specific evacuation plan that speaks to (1) the situations in which evacuation would occur (2) the evacuation sites to go to and (3) the route and procedures to get there? More significantly, do all staff members know these things as well? Are the evacuation sites open and accessible at all times? Have arrangements been made in advance for the use of these sites? While most EOPs address evacuation in some fashion, as evidenced by the Save the Children report card findings, few of them are truly comprehensive and multi-hazard in nature. 

National Commission on Children and Disasters

In the last 12 months alone, we have seen a series of disasters and tragedies that have impacted our nation's schools. The most notable of these were the violence at Sandy Hook Elementary and the destruction of schools in Moore and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Just as significant is the myriad of smaller crisis events that directly impacted schools but were not widely covered by the media The common denominator is the reality that no school is immune from crisis events and disaster. This week's series of blog postings will examine the implications of a report on disaster preparedness in schools that was recently released by the worldwide organization, Save the Children.

Save the Children is the leader of The National Commission on Children and Disasters, which was formed after Hurricane Katrina. The commission examines regulations and licensing laws in states to evaluate the level of disaster preparedness in K-12 schools and child care facilities and recommends four standards they deem essential for basic preparedness and child safety. These standards are:

1. A written evacuation or relocation plan for moving children to an alternate site that addresses multiple hazards.

2. A written family or parent reunification plan for emergency notification and reunification of students with parents.

3. A written plan specifically accounts for special needs children in emergency situations.

4. A written K-12 plan that addresses multiple hazards including evacuation, shelter-in-place, and lockdown situations. Fire drill and tornado drills alone do not meet this standard.

A state meets a given standard if the standard is mandatory, meets national guidelines, and is applied to all providers or schools.

In 2008, only 4 states met all of the four standards listed above. That number has increased to 22 in the current 2013 report. The states that met all the required standards were Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Among the significant findings:

• Twenty-eight states and the District of Columbia failed to meet the minimum standards to protect children recommended by the National Commission on Children and Disasters. This means that they met 3 or fewer of the standards.

• Six states as well as the District of Columbia don't require schools to have a disaster plan that addresses multiple types of hazards. These states include: Missouri, North Dakota, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, and the District of Columbia.
• Four states do not meet any of the commission standards: Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, and Michigan.

Go to savethechildren.org/Get-Ready to see the specifics of how your state scored. In the next series of entries, we’ll examine each of these four standards more in depth.

Self-assessment: visitor engagement and access control

Today let's look at the notion of visitor screening and access control. There really are three important issues to be considered:

1. Does your school have an access control system such as a buzzer or other device that controls who comes into the building?

Post-Sandy Hook, this is increasingly a given in most schools. The vast majority of schools today have some sort of camera or buzzer-type system that requires visitors to be "buzzed in" or admitted into the building. While access control is critical, remember that the buzzer system at Sandy Hook Elementary was easily breached by the intruder. The problem here isn't just whether or not your school has a buzzer system, but how effectively that access control is implemented beyond just the purchase of hardware.

 2.      Have staff members received training in effectively screening and engaging with visitors and have they taken ownership of those responsibilities?

A buzzer system is only an effective security measure if there are adequate secondary defense systems in place. Staff members who are responsible for engaging and screening visitors using the buzzer system should have adequate training to be able to determine who has a legitimate purpose in the school and who is a potentially violent intruder as well as how to respond to such a threat. 

Staff members should also be trained to actively engage with visitors who are in the building to detect potential intruders. Every staff member has a responsibility to greet and engage with visitors to the school regardless of their position or who the visitor is.

 3.      Do access control problems in the daily operation of the school compromise the existing buzzer system?

The best access control system in the world is rendered useless if an intruder can easily enter the building through propped open doors, unlocked entrances, or when let in by unsuspecting students or staff.  Maintaining a secure facility is another crucial second line of defense. Do not be lulled into a false sense of security that "We have a buzzer system, so we don't need to be concerned about security."

A concerned parent in a Connecticut middle school made the news this week with what he discovered at his daughter's school and their lack of access control: http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/East-Haven-Father-Arrested-After-Walking-Into-Daughters-Middle-School-228874191.html.

Parents and community members are welcome additions to a school and are vital school stakeholders. In addition, we are running schools, not prisons. That being said - not every person who comes into your school should have free and unencumbered access to every part of the "public" school. The challenge is to be a welcoming environment for those who are visiting our schools while at the same time presenting a significant deterrent for those with malicious or violent intent. An access control system combined with a well trained staff can effectively accomplish these seemingly incongruous objectives.

For more information on visitor engagement training for staff members, visit our website at www.eschoolsafety.org.

Self-assessment: Parent Reunification

Our self-assessment today focuses on the crisis after the crisis - parent reunification.

1. Does your school or district have a parent reunification plan: a means by which to reunify students with their parents after a traumatic event?

Schools do parent reunification every day as students are sent home from school via bus, walking, or parent transportation. There are times, however, when schools must reunite parents and students after crisis events such as fires, natural disasters, or acts of violence. In these circumstances, the situation is highly emotional, stressful, and chaotic and typically involves extensive media coverage. This is not the time to frantically decide locations and protocols for hundreds of traumatized students and their emotionally compromised parents while the media scrutinizes your every move.

2. Has your school's parent reunification plan been revised and/or tested in the last 2 years?

While many districts or schools do not have any plans for parent reunification, those that do often have rudimentary plans that have not been revised to reflect changes in facilities, technology, enrollment, or personnel. It is critical to put the plan to the test at least through a table top exercise that involves emergency responders and school administrators. While frequent full scale drills may not be feasible, at the least all staff members should understand their roles and responsibilities for parent reunification. A parent reunification plan that doesn't actually work isn't much better than no plan at all.

3. Do school staff members have family emergency plans in place that allow them to fulfill their professional responsibilities after a crisis event?

After a school or community wide crisis event, parent reunification will require all hands on deck. This is not the time for staff members to leave to pick up their own children or take care of their personal needs. Just as the fireman doesn't abandon the fire truck because his shift is over or he needs to go check on his family, school staff members have a moral and ethical responsibility to the children in their care to ensure their safe return to parents and fulfill their part of the chain of custody. All staff members should develop family emergency plans now so that the needs of their family are taken care of in advance.

Parent reunification is a critical, but often overlooked component of every school or district's emergency planning and response. Developing the plan is not difficult, but it requires time and advance planning. Luckily there are great resources to assist in this process. The I Luv U Guys foundation offers comprehensive resources to schools that will walk you through the plan development process. Go to http://iluvuguys.org/srm.html to download virtually everything you will need. Assistance in plan development and training is also available at our website, www.eschoolsafety.org.

EOP self-assessement

Today let’s do another brief assessment – this time of your school or district’s Emergency Operations Plan (often called a crisis plan). Just like yesterday, it’s a quick three questions:

1. When was the last time your school/district crisis plan was reviewed or updated? EOPs should be updated annually and given a through review at least every three years. A close examination of many crisis plans reveals outdated information such as incorrect phone numbers, people listed who no longer are employed in the organization or in that capacity, floor plans that do not reflect new construction or remodeling, and a host of other inaccuracies that can compromise an effective crisis response.

When revisions are undertaken, it is important to involve all relevant stakeholders in the process such as administrators, teachers, and local emergency responders.

2. Does your EOP contain all the necessary response protocols?

Crisis plans should contain specific instructions and procedures that reflect an all-hazards approach including lockdown, evacuation, reverse evacuation, severe weather, bomb threats, and shelter in place. Many EOPs address specific situations such as an active shooter, intruder, tornado, or fire rather than the response protocols to be enacted.

3. Is your crisis plan easy to use, easy to locate, and user friendly?

A thick binder of detailed checklists gathering dust on a shelf reflects a lack of planning, preparation, and ownership. EOPs should be active working documents that are consistently present in every room, easily accessible when needed, and most significantly, contains a concise description of relevant information that will quickly aid an individual in responding appropriately to a crisis event.

For additional information and step by step instructions on evaluating and updating emergency operation plans, see FEMA and the US Department of Education’s 2013 publication Guide for Developing High-Quality School Emergency Operations Plans at our website, www.eschoolsafety.org.

School safety week kick-off: FEMA Self-assessment

Let’s start #SchoolSafetyWeek with a self-assessment: according to FEMA’s newest guidelines for crisis planning in schools, these are three critical responsibilities of ALL school staff members. Have you had the appropriate training to answer yes to all three statements?

1. I can recognize the signs of a potentially volatile situation and I have been trained in ways to prevent escalation of the incident.

Note here that it is not enough to be able to recognize when things are getting out of hand – it is crucial to have the capacity to prevent and/or mitigate the incident.

2. I know the best steps for survival when faced with an active shooter situation.

This is a tricky question – you most likely know what used to be recommended – hide out and wait for law enforcement – but do you know what is currently recommended as of June 2013?

3. I know what to do to assist in a tactical law enforcement response.

Note this is not just staying out of the way, but rather working WITH law enforcement.

So how did you do? If you do not have the capabilities described above, then there is obviously a need for training in your school. Lockdown enhancement and violence prevention training is crucial for anyone working in a school.

Why does this matter?

We’ve had a lot of discussions about the June 2013 publication Guide for Developing High Quality School Emergency Operations Plans.  It’s important to note that this guide was a joint venture between FEMA, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the United States Department of Education.  Why does this matter? Well – these best practice recommendations are not just endorsed by emergency responders, but also by educational leaders.

For more information, contact us: www.eSchoolSafety.org

Schools need to work with their local law enforcement to provide access and training opportunities that will benefit both groups

Our final discussion on the critical responsibilities of school stakeholders involves the nature of a tactical response. The fire department often comes to schools to show how they look in their turnout gear so that kids aren’t afraid of them during an actual fire. We have virtually no familiarity with the nature of a tactical law enforcement response however. Schools need to work with their local law enforcement to provide access and training opportunities that will benefit both groups.  But familiarity itself is not enough. Staff members need to give consideration to their own actions during a crisis event. The basic question is “How do I not look like the shooter?” In the heat of the moment, someone pointing, yelling, grabbing the officer, or moving suddenly or aggressively is going to compromise the law enforcement response.  Even more important, especially from a student perspective, is what happens to the gun if a shooter is disarmed? The natural reaction to “help” law enforcement is most likely to pick up the gun and show it to them. Imagine how this action looks from a law enforcement perspective and the potential tragedy that might ensue.

For more information, contact us: www.eSchoolSafety.org

So, should we arm teachers?

So, let’s address the inevitable question: should teachers be armed so that they can adequately protect their students? This question is not a gun control discussion, but rather an acknowledgement of the differences in training, attitude, personality, philosophy, and purpose between educators and law enforcement officials.

Once again, FEMA’s document speaks clearly to this issue: “the possibility of an active shooter situation is not justification for the presence of firearms on campus in the hands of any personnel other than law enforcement officers.” (p. 66). Beyond the legal, insurance, and malpractice liabilities, there is the simple fact that there are a myriad of other actions that can be taken to keep students safe that do not involve firearms in the hands of teachers.

For more information, contact us: www.eSchoolSafety.org

Should significant time and attention be focused on teaching staff and students how to “fight a gunman”? Absolutely not.

Now we’ve arrived at the problematic aspect of FEMA’s “run, hide, fight” recommendations.  In the vast majority of cases, rapid evacuation and/or barricading will be the most likely response.  Unfortunately in every active shooter event, there will be people who encounter the violent intruder as the incident begins, and may not be able to evacuate or escape the individual.  FEMA addresses this explicitly: “If neither running nor hiding is a safe option, as a last resort when confronted by the shooter, adults in immediate danger should consider trying to disrupt or incapacitate the shooter using aggressive force and items in their environment…” (p. 65).  Attacking or engaging with a violent individual is obviously not the preferred situation, but it’s critical to acknowledge that when the choice is fight or die, then aggressive action must be taken.  Grab anything available as a possible weapons – books, desks, computers, even fire extinguishers – and use it aggressively against the attacker.

The issue of “countering” or “fighting” an attacker raises a lot of uncomfortable questions, but is clearly a matter of survival. Should significant time and attention be focused on teaching staff and students how to “fight a gunman”? Absolutely not. Why? Because it becomes the center of attention and the more crucial and practical skills of barricading and evacuation are overlooked.  Should we at least acknowledge that in the rarest of cases, you might have to fight to survive the incident? Absolutely. 

Teachers "will have to rely on their own judgment to...best protect lives…”

More discussion regarding the new FEMA guidelines… We’ve talked about the options to “run”, “hide/barricade” or “fight”, but the unspoken question is – do what, when? The natural tendency is to revert to our centralized approach –  the principal will tell me whether to evacuate or barricade.  This couldn’t be further from the truth. An active shooter situation develops and escalates rapidly. There will most likely not be time for wait for someone else to decide what to do. De-centralizing decision making means that you must decide what to do based on the best information you have at the time. FEMA’s recommendation is that "staff members will have to rely on their own judgment to decide which option will best protect lives…” (p. 64).  This underscores the need for adequate training and practice so that you are ready to make these decisions. 

“If running is not a safe option, hide”

The FEMA guidelines address your next best option if evacuation is not possible. “If running is not a safe option, hide in as safe a place as possible…. Barricade the doors with heavy furniture.” (pg. 65).  Barricading is a highly effective (and easily implemented) tool that enhances and improves traditional lockdown.  Creating a barricade of furniture against the locked door gives an additional layer of protection from the intruder and assists you in delaying, deterring, and defending yourself and your students. Once barricaded, FEMA advises to “hide along the wall closest to the exit but out of the view from the hallway (allowing for an ambush of the shooter and for possible escape if the shooter enters the room.)” (pg. 65).

“If running is not a safe option, hide"

The FEMA guidelines address your next best option if evacuation is not possible. “If running is not a safe option, hide in as safe a place as possible…. Barricade the doors with heavy furniture.” (pg. 65).  Barricading is a highly effective (and easily implemented) tool that enhances and improves traditional lockdown.  Creating a barricade of furniture against the locked door gives an additional layer of protection from the intruder and assists you in delaying, deterring, and defending yourself and your students. Once barricaded, FEMA advises to “hide along the wall closest to the exit but out of the view from the hallway (allowing for an ambush of the shooter and for possible escape if the shooter enters the room.)” (pg. 65). 

For more information, contact us

First recommended course of action is to evacuate

According to the new guidelines, your first recommended course of action is to evacuate. FEMA’s new guidelines are very explicit about this: “If it is safe to do so…. The first course of action that should be taken is to run out of the building and far away until you are in a safe location.” (P. 64).  Sounds pretty simple – yet what a change from what we’ve been training school staffs to do.  Rapid evacuation raises a lot of questions that need to be answered: “How will I know when it is safe to do so?” “Where should I go?” “How will I keep track of my students?”.  These questions and many more are answered in lockdown enhancement training.

For more information- contact us!

“There are three basic options: run, hide, or fight."

Remember the previous discussion of critical skills for school staffs? Let’s focus today on the second one – knowing the best steps for survival in an active shooter event. According to FEMA’s 2013 guidelines “there are three basic options: run, hide, or fight. You can run away from the shooter, seek a secure place where you can hide and/or deny the shooter access, or incapacitate the shooter to survive and protect others from harm…” (Guide for Developing High Quality School Emergency Operations Plans pg. 63). Notice that nowhere does it recommend to lock the door, hide in the corner, and wait for law enforcement to arrive. This is a fundamental shift from waiting for someone else to save you to saving yourself and the children in your care. 

We want to help make your school safer: Contact us today

Does your school have the means to adequately screen visitors and/or identify potential intruders?

Let’s continue our discussion of the critical skills for school staffs by starting with the first statement about recognizing and dealing with potentially violent incidents. 

I can recognize the signs of a potentially volatile situation and I have been trained in ways to prevent escalation of the incident. 

There is the tendency to assume that you’d recognize someone acting aggressively or violently. This is true- but the more important question is: can you recognize the signs before the violence occurs? A person may be acting suspiciously or something just may not seem right as a precursor to the act itself. 

Does your school have the means to adequately screen visitors and/or identify potential intruders? Buzzer systems or security cameras are beneficial in this process, but they are only the first line of defense. Every person in the building has the responsibility to engage (not confront) with unknown persons as an additional means of screening. Visitor screening training is vital for those staff members who control access to the school. Threat assessment training gives staff members the skills to rapidly assess and evaluate the level of threat posed by a given individual.

We want to help make your school safer: Contact us today