Mass Notification Lessons Learned from Virginia Tech
U.S. Department of Education report highlights new precedents that campuses must consider.
Case in point: An east coast university police department was recently criticized following a violent, on-campus sexual assault. The chief of police was quoted in a news article that, “xxPD does not have any set guidelines for sending out these (ENS) messages, but evaluates each instance on a case-by-case basis.” This appears to be a policy just begging for trouble.
The problem I have seen in many recent situations that have been criticized are factors that led to confusion and criticism. Poor policy, no clear policy or making up policy on the fly (what I call running by the seat of your pants) is not what I consider a good practice. There are still some campus emergency response officials who have concluded they will assess the situations and make their decisions at and within the moment (by the seat of their pants). They will likely face severe scrutiny as a result of the mistakes they will make.
Higher education offici
als post-Virginia Tech must thoroughly plan, detail and prepare their response strategies long before an actual event occurs. This means clear mass warning policy guidance; clear delegation of authority; a clear and consistent confirmation process; many pre-scripted warnings already laid out for your campus; as well as layered response staff that are well trained and ready to issue a mass warning using redundant and layered systems throughout the campus when they get the call. Finally, the systems must be exercised and tested. There should be no surprises.
That is the new baseline in 2010. What happened back in 2007 was a different period. Three years later, the expectations are much higher. Every time I issue a mass warning we are criticized: “It was not an emergency,” “It took too long,” “It woke me up,” “It upset me,” “It was an overreaction,” “It wasn’t necessary.” I have yet to hear, “Perfect, you folks did a great job!” Someone always knows better; that much I do know.
Much Good Has Come Out of HEOA, Clery Act
The Higher Education and Clery Acts are good laws. They have a purpose. Timeliness in crisis is very subjective. What may be a few minutes to the responders seems to be an eternity for the victims. We know why the law was written, and we understand the intent. It makes our campuses safer. It defines the lines we must adhere to and the mission we have in serving our campus communities.
One of the new precedents in the DOE report also found that it is not a police department’s responsiblity to determine whether an alert is issued. It is the university’s responsibility.
“It was Virginia Tech (administration), not its police department, that was responsible for deciding whether or when to provide information to the campus community.”
A university must have a plan, a strategy and a clear directive to its staff. But at the end of the day, the university leader is accountable. That is why every campus should make safety and preparedness its very first priorities beyond the academic mission.
When was the last time your campus president or chancellor reiterated a message of readiness and preparedness as a priority for every student, faculty and staff on the campus?
Create Your Own Definition of ‘Emergency’
Since the HEOA does not define what constitutes a “significant emergency” or “dangerous situation,” our campuses need to define their emergencies long before it occurs.
Example: Our campus team (EM, law enforcement, vice chancellor and media relations) have discussed at least 45 scenarios where we might be forced to use our mass warning system. We agree and have a consensus on about 15 emergent (life threatening) incidents. The rest (close to 30 scenarios), require some level of field confirmation and additional consideration (time of day – 2 p.m. versus 2 a.m., nature and community impact, and other variables). The most important element is consensus AND communication. This reduces the time to initiate mass warnings to the campus community.
Police Sometimes Don’t Have Time to Issue Alerts
One other factor we all need to consider: Campuses that rely solely on their police departments to issue mass warning notices may risk significant delays. Why?
Police officials are first responders. When the emergency occurs, most if not all of the law enforcement assets on campus may be immediately deployed to the incident scene and field. This means the resources needed to assess, approve and to issue mass warnings may be seriously impeded because of the primary mission of law enforcement is to address life safety. These issues take priority.
If you appreciated this article and want to receive more valuable industry content like this, click here to sign up for our FREE digital newsletters!
Related Content
Leading in Turbulent Times: Effective Campus Public Safety Leadership for the 21st Century
This new webcast will discuss how campus public safety leaders can effectively incorporate Clery Act, Title IX, customer service, “helicopter” parents, emergency notification, town-gown relationships, brand management, Greek Life, student recruitment, faculty, and more into their roles and develop the necessary skills to successfully lead their departments. Register today to attend this free webcast!
