Volume 35, No. 2 - March/April 2005 Campus Law ... - IACLEA

The New Era of Campus Public Safety
Continued from page 22
pilot are now under consideration by the
police department and other university
policymakers. We anticipate releasing the
instrument with IACLEA by the end of
2005 as a self-administered planning tool.
In April 2004, OSLGCP assigned a senior
staff member to the FBI Office of
Law Enforcement Coordination as a Special
Adviser, in part, to better coordinate
campus public safety initiatives. The Special
Adviser, working with IACLEA and
IACP, convened an August 2004 meeting
at the Washington, D.C. headquarters
of the American Council on Education to
begin developing a Campus Executive
Leadership Workshop on Homeland Security
for delivery regionally and at the
annual conferences of national associations
of higher education. This workshop will
be supported by OSLGCP discretionary
grant funds awarded to West Virginia
University. As with some of the efforts
cited previously, the workshop will be
modeled on an existing initiative — the
Senior Officials Workshop conducted by
TEEX for local elected and appointed officials
such as mayors, city managers and
city and county board members.
To ensure that command level officers
in campus public safety agencies understand
and can operate effectively in a
unified command system environment,
OSLGCP awarded a $1.5 million discretionary
grant to IACLEA in FY 2004. The
grant will support the delivery of training
that is National Incident Management System
(NIMS) compliant and will also provide
seed funding to create a capability
to identify and disseminate best practices
relating to homeland security within the
campus public safety community.
A review of state Homeland Security
strategies clearly indicates that states are
also recognizing the vulnerabilities and
assets presented by colleges and universities.
A significant number of states are
partnering with colleges and universities
to deliver WMD terrorism training to state,
county and municipal emergency responders.
In two states, a university is
designated as the primary provider of this
training, statewide.
Some states explicitly identify campus
public safety officers as authorized recipients
of WMD terrorism training. Other
states note that colleges and universities
may be targets of terrorist attacks, allocate
equipment resources to campus
public safety agencies, involve campus
public safety in WMD exercises, or look
to our campuses as host sites for Community
Emergency Response Teams
(CERTs).
The Future
We believe these efforts have created a
strong foundation upon which we can
continue to build campus preparedness
“Every college and university in the country
now understands that traditional planning
for crisis events is inadequate. The scale of
the problem has changed dramatically, and
while most of the work done in the past to
contend with disasters on campus provided
a solid foundation on which to build, a
very different kind of preparation and
response is now necessary”
(Boston Consortium, November 2002).
capabilities. We also know, however, that
there is a great deal of hard work ahead
of us.
Our challenge to each of you is to fully
appreciate the reality that WMD terrorism,
while a low frequency event, is one
of extremely high consequences if it occurs.
We must devote the necessary resources
to prevent and deter WMD attacks
on our campuses, and should they
occur in spite of our best efforts, we must
be prepared to effectively manage the
incidents in order to achieve the best
possible outcomes for the community.
A good starting point is to conduct a
risk assessment of your campus. Ideally,
this assessment will be carried out in concert
with your federal law enforcement
partners (FBI, ATFE and DHS), and with
an interdisciplinary, multi-jurisdictional
team composed of key stakeholders on
campus and in the surrounding community.
Again, OSLGCP anticipates fielding
a self-administered assessment instrument
with IACLEA in Spring 2005.
Increasingly, local jurisdictions are including
colleges and universities in their
threat and risk assessment process. If you
have already conducted an independent
assessment, this information can be rolled
into the surrounding jurisdiction’s report
to the state and/or be submitted separately.
As mentioned previously, the campus
assessment instrument closely mirrors
the jurisdictional instrument.
Second, share the assessment results
with the executive leadership of your
campus. They must be aware of the risks
to students, faculty, staff and visitors, and
to the continuity of the college or university
as a business.
Third, with the assistance of your assessment
team, and possibly others, develop
a plan. The plan, to be effective
must:
• Identify gaps in facility protection,
equipment, training, and policies and
procedures.
• Prioritize actions based on risks and
costs.
• Assign key roles and responsibilities
for plan execution in a manner that
continues to build interdisciplinary
and multi-jurisdictional partnerships.
• Identify and leverage all available
resources. Make contact with your
State Administrative Agency responsible
for your state’s Homeland Security
Formula Grant.
• Be consistent with operational security
requirements and communicate
the plan to all stakeholders, including
students, parents and alumni.
• Conduct periodic exercises of the
prevention, deterrence and response
portions of your plan. Use the results
of these assessments to make revisions
that address constantly evolving
challenges and realities.
Conclusion
The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Community Oriented Policing Services,
Johns Hopkins University and the Mid-
Atlantic Regional Community Policing Institute
recently conducted the National
Summit on Campus Public Safety: Strategies
for Colleges and Universities in a
Homeland Security Environment. A consensus
theme throughout the Summit was
Continued on page 24
MARCH/APRIL 2005 / 23