EVOLVING RISKS FOR CAMPUS EVENTS: CRITICAL CONCEPTS IN COMMUNICATIONS
About the Author Steven M. Crimando is a subject matter expert and trainer specialized in human factors/behavioral sciences in homeland and corporate security, violence prevention and intervention, emergency and disaster management. Steve is a Board Certified Expert in Traumatic Stress (BCETS) and Certified Trauma Specialist (CTS). He holds Diplomat status with the American Academy of Experts in Traumatic Stress and the National Center for Crisis Management. He has been awarded Level V Certification in Homeland Security. He is recognized as an expert in the behavioral response to CBRN emergencies, crowd behavior, and mass violence. Steve is the principal of Behavioral Science Applications and serves as a consultant and trainer for the federal, state and local law enforcement and emergency management agencies, as well as multinational corporations and NGO s worldwide.
Evolving Risks for Campus Events: Critical Concepts in Communications In skating over thin ice our safety is in our speed - Ralph Waldo Emerson Special events on campus bring crowds. Sporting events, concerts, lectures by highprofile public figures, all can bring throngs of people to the college or university campus. In most instances, these large events are exciting and memorable for students, faculty and visitors who may come from great distances to attend. The risks associated with large special events have evolved over the past decade requiring all those concerned with campus safety to re-visit their special event emergency plans with increased attention to emergency communications and mass notification. Regardless of the nature of the event, simply having a large crowd in attendance creates its own inherent risks. There are two critical concepts keep in mind: Disasters can create crowds, and crowds can create disasters. In the former statement, any sudden and shocking incident can result in a fight or flight response by a large number of people that can increase risk. A shot fired in a crowd, even the rumor of a violence, can result in a surge of people competing for escape. A surge of people competing for escape can create a deadly crowd crush that can result in a mass casualty incident. The single greatest risk in a panic-fueled stampede is compressional asphyxiation. Most people who die in large crowds die on standing up from this Disasters can create crowds, and crowds can create disasters. hazard, and not by being trampled by others. At large campus events there are countless potential crisis scenarios ranging from a fast moving storm to an active shooter situation. Increasingly there is the frightening prospect of a terrorist attack directed at the target rich environment created by special events. In an unprecedented move in the wake of the horrific mass shooting incident in Orlando, Al Qaeda published the four-page, Inspire Guide to the Orlando Operation. The guide praises the Orlando shooter and calls upon others to follow in his footsteps. But more concerning than this call for action, there are two significant shifts in strategy for ISIS and Al Qaeda promoted in this publication that pertain to safety and security at special events.
The first strategic shift is the new designation of public combatant. Specifically, this directive to those inspired by ISIS and Al Qaeda states, We call upon and continue to call for the likes of these operations that target the general populations in America (Combatant Public), this means that we no longer view them as civilians in America. Compounding this risk is the call to target general gatherings. The message to the would-be violent extremist is now target civilians in mass gatherings using any available weapon; if you don t have access to a gun, then a rock, a knife or a car will suffice. The tragic attack on Bastille Day revelers in Nice, France by a lone radical attacker sadly demonstrates just how easily an act of terrorism can be carried out at a large public gathering. AN EVERBRIDGE SOLUTION Given the additional layer of concern posed by the specter of terrorism or mass violence directed at a large campus event, it becomes even more critical for everyone involved in campus safety, security and emergency management to be at their optimal level of readiness. The ability to quickly and effectively communicate the nature and location of a threat, as well as the appropriate response needed for safety and survival, has never been more important. It is also important for campus safety professionals to know that the 2016 edition of The Handbook for Campus Safety and Security Reporting was released in June, replacing the 2011 version, and provided update information on the Clery Act and new regulations added by the Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA). The handbook provides practical information on how to meet the requirements of the Clery Act, including an entire section dedicated to emergency notification and timely warning in emergency situations. All college and universities participating in federal financial aid programs must agree to follow these guidelines, including the requirement to disclose information to emergency procedures and notification capabilities. The Clery Act requires institutions of higher education to provide a statement of policy regarding their emergency response and evacuation procedures in their annual security report, and also requires the immediately notification of the campus community upon confirmation of a significant emergency or dangerous situation occurring on the campus. The new Handbooks give provides important actionable information about how to best meet the requirements of the various federal regulations, such as the Higher Education Act (HEA) and the Clery Act, but more importantly, have to ensure the safety and survivability of students, staff, faculty and others in the campus community during a crisis. The new handbook is a critical resource for anyone concerned with campus safety and security. Chapter 6, Emergency Notification and Timely Warning: Alerting Your Campus Community introduces the key concepts and requirement for communications. As we consider the various requirements, it may be helpful to apply well-worn Three T s
framework. The Three T s of emergency notification are Target, Timing and Type, and those three elements should be addressed in that exact sequence. 3 T s of Emergency Notification The Target is the who; the intended recipient of an emergency notification. In meeting the requirements emergency managers must determine the appropriate segment or segments of the campus community to receive a notification. For example, using a flexible mass notification tool in the instance of a gas leak, it may be necessary to only notify occupants of the affected building(s) of the situation, but in the instance of a disease outbreak, it might be important to notify the entire campus. It may be necessary to segment the campus community and share different instructions to different areas during the same incident. In the case of an active shooter, individuals in one wing of a building may be given direction to evacuate, while those in another part are told to shelter or lock-down. Flexibility and nimbleness in mass notification becomes critical then for safety and to meet the requirements of defining and quickly communicating with potentially multiple audiences. Target Timing - Type Timing refers to the when in mass notification. The language of the Clery Act requires immediate notification of the campus community upon confirmation of a significant emergency or dangerous situation. The new handbook provides examples of the types of events that would represent immediate danger, including, but not limited to: A bomb threat An armed intruder or active shooter incident Civil unrest or rioting An outbreak of a serious illness An imminent weather emergency Beyond defining when as at different types of crises, it is also important consider when in terms of the immediacy of the communication. We know too well that active shooter incidents evolve very quickly, typically in minutes and many are over before the first police can arrive on scene. Therefore, confirmation of someone actively engaged in violence would necessitate an immediate notification. You begin to see how the Target (i.e., those potentially in vicinity of the active shooter situation, informs the timing of the notification, which in turn informs the Type of communication.
Type of communication can be understood at two parts: the message and the messenger. Let s begin with the latter. The messenger is the delivery mechanism. Schools are required to provide a description of the procedures their institution will use to communicate in a significant emergency or a dangerous situation. The regulations don t require institutions to use a particular mode of communication, but rather encourage overlapping means of communication. In the context of mass notification this may mean the combined use of voice, email, text and other electronic messages, but should also envision the use of more analog forms of communication such as public address systems, signboards, emergency phone lines, phone trees, and bulletins posted on building entrances and exits. The former element, the message, refers to content, and here again the new handbook provides clear guidance. To meet the requirements institutions must also describe the content of the actual emergency message. Applying the Three T s model, Target (who we are communicating with) determines the timing (when are we communicating), and together, those two factors influences the Type of message (the What ). Depending on what segments of the campus community your notification targets, the content may differ, as may the timing of the release of information. Evolving Communications Plans For Mass Communication, a multimodal approach is recommended to reach as many people as possible. The challenges in emergency notification and communication continue to change. With the ubiquity of cellular communication and social media, people inside a crisis situation are likely send and receiving information at a dizzying pace. Good information, bad information, misinformation and rumors can all move at light speed. Using templates and other tools, it is essential to reduce lag time and push timely and accurate information to a crowd as quickly as possible. The risks associated with panic within a crowd, or violence directed at a crowd, create an urgency that must be anticipated and met with your best efforts and your best tools. Our times demand that are full attention be directed to the first moments of a crisis, and when crowds are involved, the risks associated with a crisis grow exponentially. Just as the risks continue to evolve, so must our plans and our tools. In our current environment, large gatherings of civilians at any event put us all on thin ice.
About Nixle Community Engagement, by Everbridge Engaged and active communities are built on a commitment to transparency and safety. Our Community Engagement application helps campus and emergency management agencies to easily create a student, faculty and visitor opt-in database, while providing you with control over authoring and publishing your message directly to your audience. Community Engagement enables: Easy Text Opt-in: Easily increase opt-in s at an exponential rate. Maintain a robust database of student, faculty and visitor contact information to foster a community dialogue or provide effective emergency notifications. A Force Multiplier: Publish and distribute information at scale, with the push of one button, via social media, websites, email, text, mobile app, and Google Alerts. Leverage campus populations to act as force multiplier to assist in preventing and solving crime. Ideal when internal resources are limited. Control Public Information Dissemination: Maintain complete power and control to author messages and disseminate information to the public at will. Focus on Safety: The most trusted public safety product on the market, as used by over 8,000 public safety agencies. Completely focused on helping agencies, school and organizations keep people safe and informed.