Page 38 - College Planning & Management, June 2017

TRAINING FOR THE UNTHINKABLE
programs that do not provide options for a variety of mass ca- sualty attack methodologies are myopic and leave institutions that rely on them highly vulnerable to easy-to-carry-out and deadly alternative attack methodologies.
While I believe that some current options-based active shooter training programs could be improved to meet the legal standard of care, there are multiple programs that, in my opin- ion, will not be able to meet the standard of care if properly challenged by competent legal counsel during litigation. More effective, reliable and reasonably safe training programs can and should be developed to train campus employees how they can increase survivability of staff and students during active shooter incidents and other types of common and uncommon but catastrophic weapons situations. CPM
During Michael Dorn’s 35-year career, his work has taken him
to 11 countries and he has published 27 books in his field. He is currently co-authoring a 600-page university textbook, Extreme Violence – Preventing and Preparing for Active Shooter, Active Killer, Terrorism and Hate Crimes. Mr. Dorn served on the author- ing team for the IS 360: Preparing for Mass Casualty Incidents: A Guide for Schools, Higher Education and Houses of Worship train- ing program for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. He welcomes reader feedback at www.safehavensinternational.org.
WHEN THE UNTHINKABLE HAPPENS
An important component of an institution’s safety
plan must include what students, faculty, staff and visi- tors on campus should do in the event of an emergency. This plan is applicable to active shooter/attacker situ- ations, but also other situations as well, including the release of chemical, biological or radiological material or severe weather; any situation that poses an immedi- ate hazard or threat.
“Sheltering in place” is a common response plan to emergent hazards. This should not be interpreted as “stay exactly where you currently are,” but instead as a procedure to determine the safest place to position yourself as quickly as possible during a hazardous situation.
As with other campus safety plans and procedures, it’s important to develop (and practice) guidelines
for responding to emergent threats. Communicating your plan to the campus community is vital. Making information available on your institution’s website is one of the best options for sharing guidance for these situations. Although your plans need to be tailored to the geography and existing architecture and infra- structure of your campus, it may be helpful to review what other colleges and universities have in place when reviewing, planning and revising your own.
Here are some examples:
California State UniverSity, fUllerton fUllerton, Ca
“Shelter in Place, or Run/Fight” http://prepare.fullerton.edu/ShelterInPlace.php
indiana UniverSity
Bloomington, in
“Shelter in Place” https://protect.iu.edu/emergency-planning/procedures/ shelter-in-place.html
UniverSity of new HampSHire
dUrHam, nH
“Emergency Guide” www.unh.edu/institutional-research/sites/default/files/ docs/unh-emergency-guide.pdf
weSleyan UniverSity
middletown, Ct
“Shelter in Place” www.wesleyan.edu/publicsafety/Shelter%20in%20 Place.html
38 COLLEGE PLANNING & MANAGEMENT / JUNE 2017
WEBCPM.COM