School security report

School Safety and Security 1

Running Head: School Safety and Security

Leading Community Risk Reduction

School Safety and Security: Are We Prepared?

David McBride

Whitehall Fire Department

Whitehall, Ohio

January 2007


Certification Statement

I hereby certify that this paper constitutes my own product, that where the language of

others is set forth, quotation marks so indicate, and that appropriate credit is given where

I have used the language, ideas, expressions or writings of another.

Signed: ____________________________________


Abstract

Uncertainty regarding the collaborative role of the Whitehall Fire Department

(WFD) with other public agencies when responding to an incident at a Whitehall City

School has been an ongoing concern. This uncertainty may lead to the improper

deployment of resources during an emergency within the school district.

The purpose of this paper was to identify the roles and responsibilities of the

WFD in the Whitehall City Schools Comprehensive School Safety Plan (WCSCSSP).

Descriptive research was used to answer the following questions: Who are the

stakeholders involved in an emergency response to a Whitehall City School? What lead

roles will the WFD assume during an emergency response to a Whitehall City School?

What are the areas of vulnerability for the WFD in respect to the resources needed to

facilitate the lead and support roles in the WCSCSSP?

The research focused on stakeholder identification, interviews and examination of

the WCSCSSP. Interviews with the Whitehall City Schools Superintendent and WFD

Operations Fire Chief were conducted to identify stakeholders and discuss resources

needed during an emergency response within the school district.

Findings indicated the WFD has a limited ability to self-sustain prolonged fire

operations. Once resource needs are identified, a system for acquisition through mutual

aid agreements with surrounding municipalities is implemented. It was recommended the

WFD develop proactive strategies, including worst case scenarios, with stakeholders to

manage risk for Whitehall City Schools.


Table of Contents

Page

Certification Statement …….......................................................................... 2

Abstract …………………………………………………………………….. 3

Table of Contents …………………………………………………………… 4

Introduction ………………………………………………………………… 5

Background and Significance ……………………………………………… 5

Literature Review …………………………………………………………... 7

Procedures ………………………………………………………………….. 13

Results ……………………………………………………………………… 16

Discussion ………………………………………………………………….. 21

Recommendations ………………………………………………………….. 23

References ………………………………………………………………….. 25

Appendix A. Representatives of Stakeholder Organizations ………………… 28


Introduction

School Safety and Security: Are We Prepared?

An emergency response to a school can evoke fear and loathing in the most

experienced first responder. The reason is simple; errors in protecting the safety of

children or mistakes in caring for their health and welfare can distress the public and

incite the rage of parents, educators, and the media. In the midst of a school crisis, the

central goal of all first responders is to ensure the safety of the students and staff. A

comprehensive school safety plan can assist the first responder in facilitating effective

action during the first critical moments of a school crisis.

Uncertainty regarding the collaborative role of the Whitehall Fire Department

(WFD) with other public agencies when responding to an incident at a Whitehall City

School has been an ongoing concern. This uncertainty may lead to the improper

deployment of resources during an emergency within the school district.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the roles and responsibilities of the WFD

in the Whitehall City Schools Comprehensive School Safety Plan (WCSCSSP).

Descriptive research will be used with the following research questions: Who are the

stakeholders involved in an emergency response to a Whitehall City School? What lead

roles will the WFD assume during an emergency response to a Whitehall City School?

What are the areas of vulnerability for the WFD in respect to the resources needed to

facilitate the lead and support roles in the WCSCSSP?

Background and Significance

On Tuesday, April 20, 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold redefined the national

agenda on gun control measures and school safety when they opened fire on their


classmates at Columbine High School. The pair killed 12 students, one teacher, and

wounded 24 others before committing suicide; perpetrating the second deadliest attack on

a school in United States history (Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia, n.d.). As a direct

result of the Columbine massacre, at least 24 states, as well as the U.S. Senate and House

of Representatives, drafted legislation or revised existing gun control and school safety

bills (Danitz, 1999).

In 1999, the 123rd General Assembly of Ohio enacted Amended Substitute Senate

Bill Number 1, which addressed school safety and security. The Senate Bill required

every school system in the State of Ohio to adopt a comprehensive school safety plan for

each building in their district. As a result, the Whitehall City Schools in conjunction with:

the Whitehall School Resource Officer, The Ohio Resource Network for Safe and Drug

Free Schools, The Whitehall Police Department and the WFD developed the WCSCSSP.

This research is significant for two reasons. First, it will enable the WFD to

identify community stakeholders who have a vested interest in risk reduction initiatives

for the Whitehall City School District. This vital information will enable the WFD to

develop a greater awareness of stakeholder concerns and expectations, building support

and creating positive relationships with these stakeholders to aid in the development of

risk reduction initiatives for the Whitehall City Schools.

Second, this research will provide insight into the vulnerability of the WFD when

responding to a school emergency within the city limits of Whitehall, Ohio. By

identifying the lead and support roles of the WFD in the WCSCSSP, the most serious

risks can be prioritized. In addition, the strengths and weaknesses of the WFD’s overall

ability to respond to an emergency incident in an educational occupancy can be assessed.


This research project relates to the role of the executive fire officer leading and

facilitating risk reduction initiatives within the community; a key element in the

community risk reduction process presented in the Leading Community Risk Reduction

course at the National Fire Academy (NFA). This course portrays the executive fire

officer as a safeguard of citizens, championing risk reduction initiatives within the

community (National Fire Academy [NFA], 2005, p. SM 1-88). This research project

also relates to the United States Fire Administration (USFA) operational objective of the

fire department leading and promoting a comprehensive, multi-hazard risk reduction plan

within the community (NFA, 2003, p. II-2).

Literature Review

The literature review will summarize the findings of other researchers that have

published findings related to maintaining a balance of safety and security in the school

environment in three areas. First, the need for strategic planning and risk management

will be examined. Second, supporting legislation and recommendations of agencies

associated with school safety will be reviewed. Third, the use of stakeholder analysis will

be examined to identify the organizations or people that will require the support of the

WFD within the context of the WCSCSSP.

Strategic Planning and Risk Assessment

In 1958, the death of 92 children and three nuns at the Our Lady of Angels

Catholic Elementary School Fire in Chicago, Illinois, brought national attention to the

issue of fire safety in schools. More recent events, such as the Columbine or Jonesboro

school shootings have brought similar national attention to school place violence. Alex


Szachnowicz (2003) highlights the importance of balancing fire related challenges with

the need to maximize security in the educational occupancy. Szachnowicz explains that

both violent crime and fire-related emergencies have an impact on the safety and security

of students. Risk reduction initiatives that address both the security needs and fire-related

concerns of the students and staff in schools are necessary.

Strategic planning and the performance of a risk assessment for schools is

supported by Scanlon (2000), who cautions school administrators that emergency

planning for schools, while important, can be flawed. School administrators must

consider that a school evacuation is not the proper reaction to all emergencies, and

recognize that it may be appropriate to shelter students at school until the incident is

resolved or further instructions are received from emergency responders.

“Perhaps the main social benefit of systematic risk assessment is that it allows a

greater degree of confidence to be attached to real world uncertainties” (Johnson, 2005, p.

2). In Unknown unknowns: Risk assessment and UK fire services, Eugene Johnson

(2005) breaks down risk assessment into two basic types of systems behavior: open

system and closed system. The fundamental difference between an open and closed

system is that in a closed system, the process to achieve the final outcome is determined

explicitly by the initial conditions. In an open system, the risk assessor can never have

perfect knowledge of all the variables of the event and therefore the same final outcome

can be achieved by a number of different initial conditions and processes. The reason for

this differentiation is the development of a complete systems theory to achieve greater

reduction in risk.


The significance of these open system variables becomes evident for the fire

service when applied to emergency incidents. No risk assessor can ever have a precise

indication of an events outcome; however, by showing the properties of the whole hazard

as opposed to the individual elements or component parts that make-up the hazard,

generic incident types for training and preplanning purposes can be develop in order to

reduce the impact of an event.

Katherine Filippin and Lachlan Dreher (2004) has developed and outlined a risk

assessment methodology for major hazard facilities. Filippin and Dreher maintain that,

for the activities in which they are involved, risk analysis is the responsibility of all

personnel working within a facility. Their approach to risk management seeks to ensure a

full understanding of the risks associated with the major hazards of a facility, and develop

a framework that will minimize the impact of risk to the business, the environment and

the community. The significance of Filippin and Dreher’s risk assessment methodology

for the fire service is apparent in the emergency response assessment component.

Emergency response requirements will be identified through site inspections and code

enforcement, education and training for first responders with facility personnel, as well as

consultation with area experts. Filippin and Dreher state that at least two levels of

response readiness should be developed and maintained: generic response plans and

hazard specific response plans. The development of the former should include probable

threat matrixes and a potential for the escalation of the incident, the facility’s engineered

systems for mitigating the incident, on-site procedures for emergency response and

evacuation of the facility, and facility personnel critical to the command and control of


the incident. The hazard specific response plans should provide information unique to

that specific-type incident.

In summary, the literature reviewed in relation to strategic planning and risk

assessment confirms the need for school administrators and first responders to work

collaboratively in training and improving the WCSCSSP. The literature review highlights

the importance of strategic planning and risk reduction initiatives within the school in

order to balance the safety and security needs of students and staff in educational

occupancies.

School Safety Legislation and Supporting Literature

The review of relevant school safety literature underscores the importance of

school crisis planning. The United States Department of Education offers a general

framework for the development of a comprehensive school safety plan that breaks down

the crisis management cycle into four distinct phases: mitigation and prevention,

preparedness, response and recovery. Mitigation and prevention addresses what school

staff and administrators, in cooperation with police, fire, and other public safety agencies,

can do to reduce or eliminate risk. Preparedness focuses on the process of planning for

and testing evacuation, lockdown and other school safety drills, including worst case

scenarios. Response concentrates on the initial actions taken by school staff during a

crisis, and how the standard operating procedures (SOP’s) of first responders will

integrate with school protocols to mitigate an incident. The objective of the recovery

phase is to restore the learning environment by re-establishing a sense of emotional safety

and security in the school (U.S. Department of Education, 2003).


In 1999, the 123rd General Assembly of Ohio enacted Amended Substitute Senate

Bill Number 1 which addressed school safety and security. The Senate Bill required

every school system in the State of Ohio to adopt a comprehensive school safety plan for

each building in their district. In 2005, the 126th General Assembly of Ohio enacted Ohio

House Bill 422 addressing the need for balancing safety and security in the school

environment. House Bill 422 pertains to all public and non-public school buildings from

pre-school to high school. Unlike the traditional fire drill, which leads to the evacuation

of the building, as required by the Ohio Fire Code, this latest House Bill allows school

administrators to direct students to other areas of safe refuge within the school building

(Ohio General Assembly, 2006). This new legislation represents a significant change to

school safety policies and the mindset of fire department first responders. In states

piloting delayed evacuation programs, critics feel that the short timeline of a fire does not

allow sufficient time for school staff to operate in a multi-phase manner. Instead, they

believe the process of evacuating building occupants to an area of safe refuge while

others investigate the source of the alarm is too time consuming and exposes students and

staff members to unnecessary risk. Dennis Andrist of the Faribault Fire Department states

that in Faribault, Minnesota, the fire fighters strongly disagree with the decision of a

delayed evacuation of a school in the event of a fire alarm. If an alarm signals a true

emergency, the delay in evacuating the building exposes students and staff members to a

higher risk of injury or death. Supporters of the delayed evacuation concept maintain that

through the engineering of fire protection systems, improved building construction, code

enforcement and education in the community, a delayed evacuation policy can be

implemented and conducted safely (Kroll, 2003).


In summary, while there is a growing body of literature on school crisis

management, an appropriate framework that quantifies the best practices of managing a

school crisis currently does not exist. Prior to the mid-1990’s, safety and security in the

classroom was not a high priority for school administrators. Schools were focused on

education. However, recent concerns over school crime and violence have prompted

many federal, state and local agencies to take various measures to prevent or reduce

violence and breaches of security within schools.

Stakeholder Analysis

By identifying and assessing the expectations of stakeholders prior to a school

crisis, the WFD will be able to recognize the roles and objectives of these different

groups during an emergency response to an educational occupancy. This process of

stakeholder analysis contributes to the overall mission of the WFD by allowing the most

efficient utilization and deployment of resources to support relevant groups in mitigating

hazards in a school facility. This concept of stakeholder analysis is supported by Allen

and Kilvington (2001) who suggest that the stakeholder analysis process is conducted in

three distinct phases: Identification of stakeholders, the determination of the stakeholder

interests, importance and influence, and the establishment of stakeholder priorities for

involvement. Identifying and listing stakeholder groups aids in recognizing important

groups that may otherwise be overlooked, the resources that group will likely commit and

establish their priority of involvement during an incident.

Research conducted by Enserink (2000) underscores the need for recognizing the

value of stakeholders. The knowledge and experience of stakeholders, if used correctly,


helps to refine the problem area and enrich the solutions for the problem-owner’s

dilemma. If neglected, stakeholder values can be the main source of opposition, fostering

a resistance to change and hampering the successful completion of a project.

Stakeholders that are both important and influential must be fully engaged in the

governance and steering of the project if it is to succeed. Murdock (2001) indicates that

the interaction between the fire department and stakeholders can be highly beneficial to

the success of a project. Conversely, he cautions that fire departments not engaged in the

identification of stakeholders and the significance of their power and influence risk the

consequences of the ignored or discounted individuals and groups.

In summary, stakeholder analysis is the essential first step in identifying project

participants and assessing the importance and influence of individuals or groups. The

Whitehall City School District needs the meaningful involvement of administrators, staff

members and other school/community partners, such as the WFD, to avoid operating in a

vacuum. The literature review directly correlates the success of a project to the

understanding and engagement of project stakeholders. It is only when information about

conditions in the school are openly exchanged between stakeholders that protective

measures of the identified risk can be targeted to institute systemic changes in the school

setting.

Procedures

The research for this topic was gathered using the descriptive research method.

The methodology of the research focused on the identification of stakeholders, personal

interviews with stakeholders, and an examination of the current WCSCSSP. Initially, the

researcher conducted an unstructured personal interview with Judith Dobbert-Meloy,


Whitehall City Schools Superintendent. This was used to identify the groups and

individuals that have an interest in the WCSCSSP. Representatives from each group were

identified for later interviews. A copy of the WCSCSSP was obtained for detailed

examination.

Next, a detailed examination of the WCSCSSP was performed by the researcher

and representatives of the Whitehall City Schools Safety Committee. The committee

aided the researcher in clearly identifying the lead agencies responsible for specific

school emergencies as outlined in the WCSCSSP. Once the lead agency for specific

school emergencies was identified, a structured interview with the appropriate agency

representative was conducted. The interviews focused on the lead agency’s responsibility

during a school crisis, and the expectations of that agency in relation to the support role

of the WFD in mitigating the situation.

Finally, an unstructured interview was conducted with the WFD Operations Fire

Chief, Preston Moore. The discussion focused on the resources needed to adequately

facilitate the lead and support roles of the WFD with other public agencies when

responding to an incident at a Whitehall City School. The expectations of the

stakeholders were discussed at length to determine what resources the WFD currently

possess and what resources will be acquired and utilized through mutual aid agreements

with surrounding municipalities.

Limitations and Assumptions

The research was limited to the City of Whitehall, Ohio, public school system. It

was found that the private school system in Whitehall, Ohio, lacked any form of strategic


planning in regards to school safety and security. Because of the lack of strategic

planning, the private school system was excluded from the study. It is assumed that all

stakeholder representatives interviewed are proficient in their area of expertise and the

results of the interviews are accurate and reliable. It is assumed that the stakeholders

interviewed were able to effectively represent the views and concerns of their

organizations.

Definition of Terms

Action Management Model – A basic framework for how the organization functions and

provides on-going service to the customer

Automatic Aid - A plan were communities agree to automatically support one another by

providing assistance in the case of fire or other emergencies, in which the services of

equipment and fire personnel will be used to cooperate and act to mitigate an emergency.

Emergency Action Drill – An emergency action drill is a pre-rehearsed drill that will

confront emergency responders with tactical environments where the first responder is

forced to make critical decisions without being placed in immediate danger.

Mutual Aid – A plan were communities agree to mutually support one another by

providing assistance in the case of fire or other emergencies, in which the services of

equipment and fire personnel will be used to cooperate and act to mitigate an emergency.

Stakeholder – Any person or organization directly involved with ensuring the safety,

security and well-being of the Whitehall City School staff and students.

Standard Operating Procedure – Organizational directives that establish a course of

action stated and described in written form.


Whitehall City Schools Comprehensive School Safety Plan – School safety plan used by

the public school system within the City of Whitehall, Ohio that guides the school staff

and first responders in performing necessary tasks to facilitate effective action in

response to a school crisis.

Results

Question 1. Who are the stakeholders involved in an emergency response to a Whitehall

City School?

The following organizations have been identified as having involvement during a

crisis involving a public school within Whitehall, Ohio.

1. WFD

2. Whitehall Police Department

3. Columbus Fire Department

4. Whitehall City School Administrators & Staff

5. Whitehall City Schools Counseling Team

6. City of Whitehall Office of Resource Coordinator

The representatives contacted and interviewed from each organization are listed in

appendix A.

Question 2. What lead roles will the WFD assume during an emergency response to a

Whitehall City School?

The Whitehall City Schools Safety Committee has designated the WFD as the

lead organization for the following WCSCSSP incidents involving a public school within

Whitehall, Ohio.


1. Hazardous Materials Operation

2. Emergency Medical Issues

3. Incidences of Child Abuse / Neglect

4. Fire / Emergency Evacuation

5. Bomb Threats (Does not include firearms)

6. Utility Emergencies

Question 3. What are the areas of vulnerability for the WFD in respect to the resources

needed to facilitate the lead and support roles in the WCSCSSP?

The WFD, based on the incident type, size, complexity, and resources needed to

mitigate the hazard, has a limited ability to self-sustain a prolonged fire operation. Once

resource needs have been established, based on incident type, a system to acquire those

resources through mutual aid agreements with surrounding municipalities will be

implemented. Based on the unstructured interview with the WFD Operations Fire Chief

Preston Moore, there are six primary areas of concern for resource acquisition and

allocation for the WFD. These areas of concern are: staffing, fire department

communications, fire company operations, emergency medical services (EMS)

operations, special operations and training.

Staffing

The WFD recognizes that proper minimum staffing levels are essential to the

operational effort. Through mutual aid agreements with surrounding municipalities, the

WFD strives to meet the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1710 guidelines.


The WFD fire suppression resources can currently be deployed to provide for the arrival

of a fully staffed initial engine company within a 4-minute response time; however,

because of staffing resource constraints, the WFD must rely heavily on mutual aid to

deploy an initial full or additional alarm assignment. Other types of fire companies

equipped with specialized apparatus and equipment determined by the tactical hazards,

high-hazard occupancies, high incident frequencies, geographical restrictions, or other

impeding factors will also need to be deployed using the mutual aid agreements.

Fire Department Communications

Emergency dispatchers are the initial contact in managing a call for service;

acting as the conduit between the person requesting assistance and those that provide it.

The WFD currently employs four emergency dispatchers to transmit and manage

communications for all fire and EMS equipment responding to an emergency incident

within the city limits of Whitehall, Ohio. The 24 hour workday is split into two shifts; a

day shift and a night shift. Each shift is staffed by one emergency dispatcher that

performs both call taking and dispatching duties. The emergency dispatchers are

indirectly supervised by the WFD Operations Fire Chief. Due to staffing constraints,

emergency dispatchers have a limited capacity to simultaneously manage multiple

emergency incidents. Because of only one emergency dispatcher on duty per shift, the

WFD does not meet NFPA 1221’s recommendation to assign a dedicated emergency

dispatcher to a major incident.

The emergency communications operation for the City of Whitehall is

fragmented. Each city department maintains their own individual communication system


that is disjointed and does not have the ability to facilitate operational interoperability.

The gaps are so severe that the current emergency communication network does not

allow departments within the city to communicate with one another other via radio.

Fire Company Operations

The WFD fire company operations are organized to ensure a coordinated system

response that will match the needs of an emergency incident. Deployable resources

include, but are not limited to, a shift duty officer, an engine company staffed with four

fire fighters and an advanced life support (ALS) medical unit. Additional fire equipment

can be assigned to an emergency response utilizing the automatic aid and mutual aid

agreements with surrounding municipalities. All personnel assigned to an apparatus are

supervised by a fire officer, who is in turn supervised by the shift duty officer on all

initial full alarm and additional alarm assignments. Because of limited resources and

staffing constraints, the WFD uses the established automatic aid or mutual aid

agreements with surrounding municipalities for all fire responses in Whitehall, Ohio. The

purpose of this is to meet the NFPA 1710 guidelines for the number of personnel initially

required to successfully control and mitigate an incident. An action management model

and SOP’s are used to provide a standard for the delivery of service when responding to

an incident within the Whitehall City limits.

EMS Operations

The WFD EMS operation is organized to ensure the coordinated arrangement of

health and safety resources that provides timely, effective, pre-hospital care to the sick


and injured. The WFD emergency medical capability includes deploying an ALS unit on

all initial full alarm and additional alarm assignments. SOP’s are used to provide for the

delivery of care by EMS personnel when responding within the Whitehall City limits or

surrounding municipalities. Increased calls for EMS services in and around Whitehall,

Ohio, are outstripping fire-based EMS resources. EMS call volume for the WFD has

increased on average 3% per year from 2000 to 2005 (City of Whitehall, 2006). Because

of this, the WFD relies heavily on the automatic aid and mutual aid agreements with

surrounding municipalities.

Special Operations

Technical rescue and hazardous materials operations are extremely complex

disciplines that target low-frequency, high-hazard incidents. The WFD recognizes the

tactical challenge of special operations as more structures and people are exposed to the

risk of a building collapse or the need for some type of specialized rescue; however,

because of limited funding and staffing constraints, the WFD is unable to effectively

respond to an emergency that requires a multi-disciplined approach to a special

operations incident. The WFD cannot self-sustain a special operations incident and will

therefore assume a support role with the Columbus Division of Fire being relied upon to

control and mitigate the event.

Training

Training in all its forms is the single most important function for the WFD to

maintain the operational readiness of its firefighters. Comprehensive training often makes


the difference between success and failure during an emergency incident; when time is of

the essence and decisions must be quick and decisive. In addition to the daily operations

training that reinforces basic firefighting skills used on routine emergencies; the WFD

recognizes a need for more specialized training focusing on low-frequency, high-hazard

emergency incidents. Because of a lack of specialized training and SOP’s when

responding to an incident in an educational occupancy, the WFD is particularly

vulnerable. A lack of SOP’s and the unknown and untested ability to facilitate operational

interoperability with other jurisdictions and city departments when responding to a school

emergency makes the WFD susceptible to mistakes.

Discussion

A considerable amount of evidence supports the need for strategic planning on the

issue of an emergency response to a public school in Whitehall, Ohio. The operational

goals and strategies considered should be assessed based on the issues and target hazards

identified during a review of the WCSCSSP. The idea of strategic planning used to

identify exposures to risk and allow the WFD to develop a comprehensive framework of

SOP’s to ensure an effective emergency response is supported by Filippin & Dreher

(2004). Johnson (2005) also supports this theory, stating that every emergency incident a

fire department responds to is, to a lesser extent, an open system where the risk assessor

will never have complete knowledge of all the variables that will effect the containment

and mitigation of the incident. To aid in bringing the situation under control, specific

target hazard and generic response SOP’s for training and pre-planning of the facility

should be developed. In addition, training can provide a feedback loop that will offer

continual improvements in emergency response SOP’s by testing their actual


effectiveness. The WFD must spend time focusing on the public issues that drive the

strategic planning of the organization. In addition the WFD administrators must

remember that a fire department exists to serve the public, and therefore maintains a

responsibility to focus on the primary issues concerning the community in an effort to

fulfill the overall mission of the fire department and create future excellence by

continuously improving customer service (Wallace, 2006).

The outcome of this applied research project is compelling and confirms the need

for the WFD to work collaboratively with the identified stakeholders to balance the safety

and security needs of the staff and students in educational occupancies. The Whitehall

Public School System must offer students a safe and secure environment conducive to

learning, and teachers an atmosphere where they can carry out the fundamental mission

of teaching. However, the responsibility of creating this setting lies not only with school

administrators, but all stakeholders involved with school safety and security (Scanlon,

2000). It is imperative for the WFD to embrace the diversity and range of stakeholders

involved with the delivery of services to the school system and that the interaction of

stakeholder groups are vitally important to improving the safety and security of the

Whitehall City Schools (Murdock, 2001). By understanding stakeholders, the WFD can

collaboratively work with other agencies to properly deploy resources to support the

containment and mitigation of the crisis. The neglect of the stakeholder can lead to

opposition and resistance among agencies, which may result in a fragmented or improper

response; ultimately leading to failure (Enserink, 2000).

Solutions start with the recognition of a problem. In the case of this applied

research project, it is the recognition that both security and fire-related emergencies will


directly impact the safety and security of students attending a Whitehall City School. By

working collaboratively, the WFD and identified stakeholders can develop a strategic

approach to the management of risk in an educational occupancy and address credible

threats faced by students and staff of the Whitehall City Schools.

Recommendations

Based on this applied research, the WFD should develop a strategy to be proactive

with the Whitehall City Schools. The focal point of this strategy should be on the

WCSCSSP, with a key element being the formation of a coalition of stakeholders who

have a vested interest in risk reduction initiatives for the Whitehall City School System. It

is recommended that the WFD develop and implement both generic SOP’s and target

specific SOP’s for emergency responses to an educational occupancy.

It is also recommended that the WFD develop and continually reevaluate, in

conjunction with the identified stakeholders, emergency action drills for educational

occupancies. The use of emergency action drills for training in response to an incident at

an educational occupancy will confront emergency responders with an unexpected

tactical environment where it is necessary to react to a crisis without being placed in

direct danger. Emergency action drills will allow the WFD and identified stakeholders to

preplan incidents in an effort to minimize risk by attempting to work through any

possible contingencies, including worst case scenarios. The emergency action drills

should also be used to provide a feedback loop to improve SOP’s and examine the actual

effectiveness of emergency responders.

While beyond the extent of this applied research project, the WFD, in conjunction

with the identified stakeholders, should assess the operational interoperability of its


emergency communications network. An interoperable emergency communications

network should have the ability to integrate the radios of local law enforcement, fire and

EMS agencies, along with other local, state and federal public safety organizations.

Finally, further examination of the vulnerability of the Whitehall City Schools is

warranted. This also is an important area outside the scope of this applied research

project, but needs to be examined to identify the most serious hazards and the causal

factors contributing to the severity of those hazards. By identifying the most serious

hazards and their causal factors, the WFD and identified stakeholders can establish risk

reduction priorities based on the potential impact to the Whitehall City Schools and

identify desired outcomes from the risk reduction initiatives.


References

Allen, W., & Kilvington, M. (2001, November). Stakeholder analysis. Manaaki Whenua

Landcare Research. Retrieved August 18, 2006, from http://www.landcareresea

rch.co.nz/research/social/stakeholder.asp

City of Whitehall. (2006, August). A summary of emergency medical services call

volume from 2000 to 2005 (Report No. 082005-001). Whitehall, OH: Author.

Danitz, T. (1999, May 26). School violence spurs new policy debates. Stateline.org.

Retrieved August 10, 2006, from http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?

siteNodeId=136&languageId=1&contentId=13695

Enserink, B. (2000, March). A quick scan for infrastructure planning: Screening

alternatives through interactive stakeholder analysis. Impact Assessment and

Project Appraisal, 18(1), 15 – 22.

Filippin, K., & Dreher, L. (2004, December). Major hazard risk assessment for existing

and new facilities. Process Safety Progress, 23(4), 237 – 243.

Johnson, E. S. (2005). Unknown unknowns: Risk assessment and UK fire services. Fire

Safety, Technology and Management, 9(1), 1-6.

Kroll, K. (2003, September/October). Stay or go? NFPA Journal, 97(5), 42 – 47.

Murdock, A. (2001, Summer). Knowing and mapping your stakeholders – can a

stakeholder approach offer something for the fire service? Fire Command and

Management, 7 – 15.

National Fire Academy. (2005, November). Leading community risk reduction student

manual (1st ed.). Emmitsburg, MD: Author.


National Fire Academy. (November, 2003). Executive fire officer program operational

policies and procedures applied research guidelines. Emmittsburg, MD: Author.

National Fire Protection Association. (2002). Standard for the installation, maintenance,

and use of emergency services communications systems (NFPA 1221). Quincy,

MA: Author.

National Fire Protection Association. (2004). Standard for the organization and

deployment of fire suppression operations, emergency medical operations, and

special operations to the public by career fire departments (NFPA 1710). Quincy,

MA: Author.

Ohio General Assembly. (1999). Amended substitute senate bill number 1. Retrieved

August 9, 2006, from http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=123_SB_1.

Ohio General Assembly. (2006). House bill number 422. Retrieved August 31, 2006,

from http://web2.ohcapcon.com/126_btx4/BTX/126AHBXX0422-FH0000-BTX-

ROT.PDF.

Scanlon, J. (2000, April/June). Strategic planning for schools: Beyond the fire drill.

Canadian Journal of Emergency Management, 23 – 26.

Szachnowicz, A. (2003, Fall). Balancing safety and security in the school environment.

Fire Protection Engineering, 20, 17-24.

U.S. Department of Education. (2003, May). Practical information on crisis planning: A

guide for schools and communities. Washington, DC: Government Printing

Office.

Wallace, M. (2006). Fire department strategic planning: Creating future excellence.

Tulsa, OK: Pennwell.


Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia. (n.d.). Columbine high school massacre. Retrieved

August 9, 2006, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_

massacre.


Appendix A

Representatives of Stakeholder Organizations

Organization Representative

Columbus Fire Department Battalion Chief Vingle

Whitehall City Schools Judith Dobbert-Meloy

Holy Spirit Elementary Linda Saelzler

Whitehall City Schools Safety Committee Brian Hamler

Sub-committee Chair Mark Trace

Whitehall Police Department Ralph E. Rickles

Whitehall Fire Department Preston Moore

Whitehall City Schools Counseling Team Jenifer Peters

Whitehall City Resource Coordinator Linda Luft

Whitehall School Resource Officer Spencer Salyers

School security report

More Related Content

Similar to School security report (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

School security report