Empowerment of Crisis Management in Emergencies
Robert Lang, CPP, CEM Chief security officer, Kennesaw State University
Abstract
This chapter uses examples from Kennesaw State University to describe a layered approach to emergency notifications and crisis response. The University has a unique Crisis Coordinator program aimed at empowering people to make safety decisions during emergencies. This chapter describes the components of a four-module training program for crisis coordinators.
Don't panic, but a plane just hit the building, there's smoke, and I need you to call 911 or World Trade Center maintenance and give them my cell phone number. Tell them there are people on the 104th floor, we're all O.K., but we need to know what to do.
Transcript from a World Trade Center caller to his wife during the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.1 (Account by Karen Lee, wife of Richard Lee, victim.)
Introduction
Knowing what to do has always been the main issue during emergencies. Previously, whether to shelter-in-place or evacuate had been the sole responsibility of the police, fire, or other emergency personnel, now known as first responders. However, with the increasing occurrences related to active shooters and adverse weather incidents, along with increased usage of hazardous materials on campuses, the earlier premise of waiting for someone in an official capacity to tell others what to do is now both outdated and dangerous. What we have learned is that many crisis situations are quick to happen with no foreseeable warnings (active shooters) or are evolving situations such as the 9/11 terrorist incidents, where people were attuned to letting the police, fire, or other emergency personnel tell them what to do. Yet, in emergency situations very quick action is needed to survive. You may not have all the facts readily at hand, but many times doing nothing is worse than doing something. This is where awareness and training can come together to allow people to implement all the tools of survival.
Case Study: Kennesaw State University
Kennesaw State University (KSU) deploys a layered approach to both emergency notifications and crisis response in mitigating its responsibilities to keep the students, faculty, staff, and visitors apprised of crisis situations. They do so by utilizing a cadre of 260 volunteer crisis coordinators to act as immediate responders when these crises occur. The concepts, identification of participants, and resultant actions are not just applicable to higher education, but are encouraged and promoted to be functional at any level: pre-K, K-12, and higher ed.
What Prompted This Directional Change?
Prior to 2007, the KSU Campus Public Safety Department was the sole authority to respond to incidents and notify personnel of what to do in an emergency. However, with the shootings at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois University, it became apparent that police response to an incident did not allow time for anything other than the immediate police action and any notification of the incident was usually made after the event was stabilized. The result was that there was no opportunity for anyone to take shelter, evacuate, or glean any information as to what to do. Just about every after-action report on crisis response has identified “the lack of pertinent communications” as a major issue. The active shooter event at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT identified a real weakness in emergency response time, as well as non-effectual security procedures that were deployed with the intent to keep unauthorized persons from gaining access.
KSU’s Crisis Coordinator program is quite unique, not only in its makeup and training but also in its main goal of empowering people to make immediate decisions relative to sheltering-in or evacuation. The empowerment afforded by this program, intended for all levels, is contingent upon school administrators admitting to themselves that a centralized form of action may not always be prudent in a major crisis such as active shooters.
Evolution of the Program
Upon arriving at KSU, I realized that most police departments, including KSU’s Public Safety Department, were unable to provide the entire spectrum of response, mitigation, and recovery by themselves and began to identify individual building representatives to assist in providing that immediate help for the occupants. Thirty-five crisis response individuals were identified (some volunteers, some were “volunteered” as they say) and based in the existing 35 buildings on campus. The number then exploded to over 260, all now real volunteers, based on the complexity of the facilities (many different floors and wings) as well as their experience with real incidents that had occurred over the years. The KSU Crisis Manager, Dr. Randy Hinds, who is also the VP of Operations, realized that the communications aspect of any crisis is critical to ensuring the proper support and response for mitigation. He acquired funding for a state-of-the-art radio communication network, migrating to a digital platform with trunking capabilities, and thus ensuring personnel could talk to each other via radio without “stepping on” one another. Many an incident response has failed due to lack of clear and concise communications.
However, just finding people to fill positions is not the final solution. Initial and continued training is at the heart of the program. Crisis coordinators are required to attend comprehensive training that starts with a four-module program consisting of:
1. Overview of the Crisis Coordinator program
2. Operational interface with the Police Department
3. Terrorism awareness and indicators
4. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)/first aid/automated external defibrillator (AED) certifications/safety overview and material safety data sheet (MSDS) review
Once a crisis coordinator completes each of the four modules, they then need to take the incident command online course, ICS-100b, Introduction to the Incident Command System, not only to ensure that they are aware of the protocols during an incident but also in order to comply with the National Incident Management System (NIMS) requirements for all personnel responding to an emergency to have this training. Volunteers are then “KSU certified” as crisis coordinators and receive a certificate attesting such. These modules can be calibrated to apply to any environment (e.g., pre-K and K-12) with some minor adjustments to the first and second modules.
Certified Emergency Response Team
The second in the series of trainings is called the “Challenge Coin” level, open to all certified crisis coordinators and made up of individual disciplines created from the list of NIMS and ICS courses available from the FEMA site for the Emergency Management Institute. Taking at least three other courses after receiving your original certification qualifies for the Challenge Coin created for KSU.
Next in the series, is the “Lapel Pin” level, in which a lapel pin and a retractable logo badge holder is granted those who attain the Crisis Coordinator Certification and the Challenge coin and then obtain 80 additional hours of training approved by the Office of Strategic Security and Safety. Those 80 hours can be acquired by volunteers for special event support, teaching CPR and first aid (many crisis personnel are certified to train based on attending a “train the trainer” course) or attending and being certified as a Certified Emergency Response Team (CERT) member through the County Emergency Management Agency. The ability to obtain PIN status was greatly enhanced with the inclusion of the CERT opportunity. CERT training has no qualifiers, such as higher ed or K-12, and can be taken to support and bring new crisis response awareness to schools.
The last level is Eagle status. A very nice desktop trophy with a spread eagle top and cherry base is for those who obtain all three previous levels plus 500 additional approved training hours. As of this writing, no one has achieved this status, but many are working toward completion of the additional hours. The attainment of these levels and the certifications/coins/pins is not the main driver; what matters more is the continued training these people get to maintain their competency in what we are trying to do: save lives.
Talking the Talk Is Fine, but Walking the Walk Is Where the Rubber Meets the Road
KSU has had its share of opportunities to deploy their layered communications methods, consisting of an early warning siren/voiceover system for the initial alert (used only for tornado warnings, HazMat spills or events, and active shooters), short message service (SMS) texting/cell voice and e-mail (Blackboard’s ConnectED notification system), a network computer override system for warnings on PCs and Macs, and digital signage to scroll emergency messages in real events. Any school system, regardless of whether higher ed, pre-K, or K-12, can deploy any of the technologies for mass notification, early warnings, or computer override and is only driven by the cost involved and the desire to initiate. Examples of those opportunities include the following scenarios.
In 2009, a prisoner was being transported from Florida to Tennessee when the accompanying police officer stopped at a Waffle House across the street from the campus footprint. While the police officer was inside eating, the prisoner, who came to be known as “little Houdini,” escaped his vehicle and entered the campus. Once it was determined that a prisoner, unknown as to whether he was armed or not, had entered the facility, the KSU protocol to notify everyone to shelter in their locations was issued. As it turns out, the notification system didn't work, as the assistant vice president for strategic security and safety was in Tucson, AZ, giving a presentation at a conference. The system alerted his cell phone in both text message and voice message and the AVP was able to direct many of the responses via cell phone. However, protocols in place allowed for instantaneous response through standard operating procedures.
The second real-time incident occurred when a report was received from a crisis coordinator that some Civil War artifacts (cannonballs) had been identified in a glass cabinet within one of the offices in the social sciences building. After a quick review by the security and police officials, it was determined that upon visual identification, fuses could be seen intact on the cannonballs themselves. Therefore, an evacuation was deemed necessary, utilizing the crisis coordinator radio system in order to alert the 25 crisis personnel in the building within the five existing floors. In order to utilize the elevators, the fire alarms were not activated, thus allowing the ability to evacuate handicapped personnel as quickly as possible. All in all, evacuation of 4,000 people within 12 minutes was a great accomplishment. Many K-12 facilities are structured as multilevel buildings and can utilize the same response in dealing with this type of evacuation.
The third incident occurred when the campus, which occupies approximately 300 acres and 37 buildings, suffered a complete power outage. The only power and communication sources that were still intact were the crisis coordinator radio system and the campus police radio system. Most people thought they could just ride out the power outage and remain in their offices if they had windows. However, it was realized that most of the fire panels that controlled the fire alarm systems had only enough battery backup power for approximately 20 minutes. Once this situation was realized, the response team could not afford for anyone to remain in their offices regardless of whether there was light or the ability to do any kind of work. If there happened to be a fire with no fire panel support, no one would know to evacuate the facility. The crisis coordinators were able to advise everyone within all facilities of the need to evacuate while communicating via radio to the official command center located within the office of strategic security and safety.
As with any emergency protocol or any system that supports crisis management, a layered approach to communications as well as response initiatives is integral to any viable emergency plan. Another integral component is the ability for those involved to be empowered to act and confidently save lives as well as the physical assets of the facility. This program is not intended to be solely for the higher education level and is encouraged to be incorporated into all levels of emergency response protocols, including pre-K and K-12.