Schools and healthcare campuses are seeing a newer spectrum of safety applications that claim to target fast and efficient responses to a situation or a threat. However, these applications have evolved from being simple and easy-to-use to all-encompassing, which encourages decision makers to remove the layered approach that is much more realistic and effective for responding to a situation or a threat.
A layered approach includes having as many solutions as you can to back up anything else that may not be available or accessible. To this day, nothing beats the speed and access that two-way radios have over an application or alarm. A call over the radio can convey the “who, what, when and where” – the vital information first responders need to make quick and accurate decisions during a crisis. With two-way radios, quick follow up questions can be asked or at least some response can be sent back over the radio to convey that help is on the way.
Related Article: Will Your In-Building Communication Systems Work When You Need Them?
Alternatively, a simple press of a body-worn or wall mounted panic button offers excellent speed and even can identify the location of an incident, but it doesn’t give any details or convey what is really going on. Staff members should have some way to follow up a panic button activation to convey the details. However, when that teacher or other type of employee is involved in the incident and cannot talk, if they or the room they are in has a radio, at least someone can immediately call, letting them know that help is on the way.
As a situation is unfolding or is being handled, there may be texts sent out by students and videos posted on social media. Concerned family members may begin calling the campus. If the person who is issuing messages over a mass notification system has also been listening to the two-way radio conversations, they will be able to make much better and more informed choices in what information to push out and to whom.
Unfortunately, there is a risk to combining these approaches into one application that handles voice, panic alerts, and mass notification. All it takes is a key person to not have their phone available for a plan to be disrupted. The same is true with two-way radios as we have unfortunately seen with recent tragedies. While text messages and phone calls may get through in an emergency, accurate information can still be heavily delayed when clear instructions and clear information are not available.
Don’t Fall Into the ‘Tacti-Cool’ Trap
Having as many separate but simple solutions as possible is a good thing to encourage. In this era of technology, all of these different solutions being promoted today can be integrated using common protocols that are widely in use, so there should be no fear of adopting multi-vendor solutions for triggering and organizing a response to an incident.
Proper and effective voice communication is the best tool for managing a critical situation that is currently unfolding. Cameras, sensors, panic buttons, machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) can all be incredibly helpful for triggering a rapid response and providing intel as to what is occurring and where. However, as we’ve seen, the most effective reactions are based on well-executed plans and clear voice communications.
In the law enforcement world, there is a term called “tacti-cool,” which refers to a weapon or a load-out (vest) or vehicle that is too ridiculously over-built to actually be effective or practical. We see a lot of bids and proposals from cities and counties that lean toward “tacti-cool” and are unmanageable and not realistic in a real emergency.
By its very nature, active shooter training is based on one concept: providing a quick response to the attack. A planned attack will always have some degree of success because a campus’ and first responders’ reactions can never be as swift as an attack. You can plan, you can prepare, you can build a defensive strategy, but the two things that we don’t see many campuses considering when building a defensive strategy are the actual effectiveness of the money that’s being spent.
Related Article: Will Your In-Building Communication Systems Work When You Need Them?
Too often, a decision maker gets a budget, and then they just spend that budget. We’ve heard the pitches of new weapons detection technology, and we’ve seen the news articles where counties and cities adopt new comprehensive system integrations. These are great initiatives, but some of us are unfortunate enough to know cases where those measures worked exactly as expected, but they somehow failed to aid in effective and proper communication, especially in cases where over-responding results in a total breakdown of communication.
The amazing advancements in platform integrations, machine learning and AI should absolutely be adopted by schools, colleges and healthcare facilities when and where it makes sense. Technology has a part to play in prevention and response plans, but that part should be to convey appropriate information to people who best understand what they are seeing, and then for those people to communicate that information through the proper chain to the responders over the radio.
For anyone responding to a threat, adherence to training and protocols is key, and that training is largely built on the assumption that nothing else will be available to them but their gun, their radio and the officer next to them. When they are further aided by accurate information coming in, they can do their jobs much easier and faster.
Weigh the Benefits of ‘Hard’ and ‘Soft’ Security Strategies
When asked about new technologies and new trends we see in the market, we first must address the “hard” and “soft” approaches to security that have emerged over the last decade. The first is primarily focused on security hardening such as installing cameras, access control systems, bi-directional amplifier (BDA) systems, hiring school resource officers, etc. The funding for this mostly comes from state and federal grants pushed by industry lobbyists.
The second is less hardware focused where hardening technology is still recommended but is further down the list from additional training, specialized education, and more community involvement. These more proactive programs focus on student well-being, academic standards, intervention and guidance, and increased communication with parents.
Studies conducted in areas such as Loudoun County, Va., that have implemented both types of policies highlight the effectiveness of schools closely working with law enforcement and consultants and have provided us with the understanding that nobody is entirely correct when it comes to what best defines campus safety or prevents a tragedy. While those studies strongly advise that there must be a balance of implementing both hard and soft approaches, that balance is not currently a requirement from the federal government.
Related Article: As Schools Consider Cell Phone Bans, Cellular Connectivity Must Also Be Top of Mind
Of these two ideas, the clear winner for the next several years seems to be security hardening measures. We can clearly see more future funding opportunities from the federal government where the definition of a safe environment will become more developed and standardized. We expect to see market pushes for more hardware, more platform integration, more BDAs (or emergency responder communication enhancement systems — ERECS), more software services, better AI and better machine learning that all result in faster threat detection, reduced reaction times, better RF coverage, and increased support for interoperability.
Two-Way Radios: The Most Basic, Effective Security Tool
Campus and healthcare facility safety will see an increase in focus and funding over the next decade, which is sure to further enhance the coverage and the effectiveness of two-way communications technology.
Even without the sophisticated integration and comprehensive solutions, the two-way radio is still the heart of both hard and soft approaches of implementing school security programs and reducing reaction times. At a bare minimum the two-way radio is the most basic tool needed for campus staff members and administrators to coordinate and respond during a lockdown, while at its most advanced, provides first responders with a critical link to accurate information and supporting agencies.
Jason Brennan is senior product manager for JVCKENWOOD USA’s safety and security sector.
NOTE: The views expressed by guest bloggers and contributors are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, Campus Safety.