Page 8 - Campus Security & Life Safety, November/December 2018

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
A 21st CENTURY APPROACH TO CAMPUS SAFETY AND SECURITY
By Carolyn Parent
Safety and security must be front of mind for university and college administrators. Protecting the wellbeing of stu- dents, staff, faculty, and guests is not only simply the right thing to do, but it also reduces risk and exposure for the institution itself. While this has always been true, colleges and universities are now dealing with a greater variety of incidents while also being subjected to a much higher level of public scrutiny. At the same time, increases in legal fees and the other costs associated with incidents have driven the costs of responding to issues to extreme- ly high levels. These costs are now so high that the only sustainable, viable model for mitigating incidents is preventing them before they can ever occur—and that requires new efforts and approaches.
MOST EFFECTIVE FORM OF MITIGATION
IS SEAMLESS COMMUNICATION
Put simply, as virtually any safety or security official will attest, preven- tion is the most effective form of mitigation. Stopping a crisis before it can develop is always better, for all parties involved, than responding after the fact. The most effective way to prevent incidents of all kinds, from thefts to harassment, assaults and much more, is for safety and security officials to receive advanced intelligence of a potential problem, and act before the situation can escalate. Receiving this intelligence
requires open, seamless, and anonymous lines of communication between security officials and the populations they are protecting.
Higher education institutions have long used a variety of methods to connect their students, staff, and faculty members with security. These include anonymous tip lines, email communications, blue lights call boxes, and more. The problem is that for a variety of reasons (human behavior, a perceived lack of anonymity, cumbersome com- munications/phone calls, etc.), none of these have been terribly effec- tive. Consequently, vital, actionable intelligence too often does not get conveyed to the authorities who are in position to act and prevent an incident before it can develop. Far too often, after the fact, it is discov- ered that multiple people were aware of issues surrounding what became a crisis, but they didn’t speak up at the time.
The most notable example is the 2007 Virginia Tech mass shoot- ing, which killed 32 and injured dozens more. The final report of the Virginia Tech Review Panel documented at least 18 pre-attack indi- cators spanning several years that should have led to greater scrutiny of the shooter’s behaviors and mental stability leading up to the attack. Dozens of students, teachers and staff observed these indica- tors. Had there been a way to report and act upon these risk indica- tors there is a good chance authorities could have prevented this tragedy from ever happening.
8 WWW.CAMPUSLIFESECURITY.COM | NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2018
cdrin/Shutterstock.com
CAMPUS SECURITY & LIFE SAFETY