Category Archives: risk assessment

How Risk-Based Security Can Reduce Violence in Healthcare

reprinted with permission from www.securityinfowatch.com

Using Risk-Based Security to Stem the Tide of Violence
in Hospitals and Healthcare


Created by:   Caroline Ramsey Hamilton

Date: May 22, 2014

Hospital and healthcare security is experiencing a major increase in violence,
instigated by patients, patient families and even healthcare staff.  Just last year,
there was an active shooter incident in Reno, Nev., in which two physicians were
shot, and in Houma, La., 
a hospital administrator was shot to death by a terminated
nurse. As recently as Easter Sunday in California, two nurses were stabbed at the
hospitals, where they worked.  One was stabbed in both the upper and lower torso
and is in critical condition. These two incidents add to the more than 100 
violent
incidents in 2013 and the first half of 2014.

Since 2010, violence in healthcare has skyrocketed. As a result, the Joint Commission has
issued a “Sentinel Event Alert” on the issue and contributed to numerous articles on shootings
in U.S. hospitals. The Department of Homeland Security and a consortium of state and local
hospitals recently released 
a standard for active shooters in healthcare. These all point to the
conclusion that the current law enforcement-based hospital security model is not working.

Changes in Healthcare
The changes in healthcare, including the increase in insured Medicaid patients and increased
traffic to emergency departments, highlights the fact that very well-intentioned people are
working with an outdated security model that hasn’t evolved to address a changing healthcare
environment. The change in billing and reimbursements for healthcare organizations, such as
tracking of readmission rates, has squeezed hospital profits causing reductions in funding in many
security departments at a time when violent events are steadily increasing.

A new risk-based model for hospital security is emerging that is less linear and more cyclical.
It uses technology to a greater extent, employs forecasting and statistical models to predict the
likelihood of future incidents, and is proactive instead of reactive, focusing money and energy on
preventing events instead of simply responding to them. This model also uses risk assessment
formulas to quickly assess the current security profile of a hospital, clinic, hospice, or behavioral
health facility, factoring in heightened threat-risk environment, not only for the facility in question,
but also adding in the wealth of healthcare data that’s now available.

Risk –Based Security Focuses on Continual Assessment
A major focus of this model is the continual assessment and evaluation of preventive security
controls, which are reviewed quarterly, semi-annually, or annually to discover gaps in controls,
and to fix gaps as soon as they are identified. This dovetails nicely into the assessment models
already required by the Joint Commission, OSHA and new CMS standards.

Looking at recent high-profile security events that took in place in hospitals shows that incidents
happen because of exploited gaps in the existing security of the healthcare facility. In the past,
security officers successfully worked hard to reduce response time so that often officers could
arrive in under two minutes, but it’s still too long.  In the Reno shooting, response time was under
two minutes, but that was long enough to kill two doctors.

Focusing on prevention makes sense for healthcare, much in the way the Joint Commission
focuses on patient safety, by continually assessing controls, reducing discovered gaps in controls,
and mitigating gaps by reassessing and tightening security, which creates a cycle of continual
improvement in the healthcare security environment.

Taking Advantage of Technology
The healthcare risk-based security model takes advantage of technology. Instead of waiting
for manual recording of security incidents every day, software programs allow hospital security
officers to enter data at the end of each shift, and that means security directors can map what’s
happening in the hospital or facility on a daily, weekly, monthly and yearly basis.  This can go a long
way to identifying trends early and help facilities make appropriate changes in controls so that
negative trends can be reversed 
quickly and both patient and staff security is increased.

In addition to automating incident collection and analysis, the healthcare security risk assessments
must be automated too.  Risk assessments are too time-consuming and labor intensive to be done
annually.   
By the time the risk assessment is over, the environment has changed again.  By
automating the risk assessments, including environment of care and hazard vulnerability,
it produces data that can be used instantly to analyze and recommend the most cost-effective
controls, and rank them by their return-on-investment (ROI).

The role of security in hospital and healthcare organizations is changing too. Security organizations
should no longer be isolated without intensive interaction with others in the organization, including
the human resources department, the facilities managers, safety managers, and the emergency
management staff.

New DHS Guidelines for Active Shooters in Healthcare
With DHS issuing new guidelines for active shooters in healthcare, hospital emergency managers
are now required to prepare for active shooter incidents, as well as storms, hurricanes, tornadoes,
power interruptions and other events related to natural or man-made disasters.  This creates a
natural partnership between the emergency management staff and the security program,
because the skills of both functions are needed to properly prepare an organization for any disaster.

Instead of existing in a vacuum, healthcare security directors and managers should cheer at
this development because it expands the importance of security inside the hospital or healthcare
facility, and underscores its value in protecting the organizational assets –  the physical facility,
patients, visitors and staff –  to proprietary information, including the HIPAA mandated PHI
(Protected Health Information), vehicles, security systems, high-value healthcare equipment
and the healthcare provider’s reputation.

Security budgets have always suffered because security costs are seen as operating
expenses, not an income source, but by tying the security expenses more closely to loss
prevention and protection of the organization, it creates a cost justification for hospital and
healthcare security.

Risk-Based Security Links to Hospital Compliance Standards
A risk-based security model also links security to myriad compliance standards that affect healthcare
and this also supports and justifies the costs related to security. For example, hospitals are required
to have a variety of security controls in place related to tagging of newborns, posting of no-weapons
signs, and environment of care issues. Any healthcare organization accepting funds from Medicare
or Medicaid must comply with the new mandate for annual security risk assessments. 

OSHA 3148 also requires hospitals and healthcare organizations to do annual workplace violence
assessments, and more than 33 states also require enhanced protection of hospital and healthcare staff.

As security incidents continue to increase and violence in healthcare escalates, making the
switch to a risk-based security program will provide better protection for hospitals and healthcare
organizations, making more effective use of existing security personnel, as well as justifying and
expanding healthcare security budgets.

 

For more information:  contactCaroline Ramsey-Hamilton at caroline@riskandsecurityllc.com

 

Why We Need to Switch to a Risk-Based Security Model – School Stabbing at Franklin Regional, Active Shooter Incidents at Fort Hood (twice), LAX, and The Washington Navy Yard.

When I turned on the news today, I was in the middle of writing an article on the 2nd Shooting
at Ft. Hood from last week, and then saw that there had been a violent knife attack at a
Pennsylvania high school, with 20 casualties and at least eight injured critically, the next day,
there was a hate crime shooting at the Jewish community center in Overland Park, Kansas.

Once again, we see violence on a mass scale, the FBI has been brought in, and next will come
information on the victims.   With two major events, in two weeks, what can we deduce about the
security in place at both Franklin Regional High School, Pennsylvania, and Fort Hood, Texas.

        NEWS FLASH:   THE CURRENT SECURITY MODEL IS NOT WORKING!

CURRENT SECURITY MODELS

Disaster preparedness is improving,  Emergency Management is working, but security is
still not where it needs to be.  It is a systemic problem based on the fact that security around
the U.S. is still locked in a REACTIVE mode, not a PROACTIVE mode.

The main reason for this reactive mode in security organizations, is because most security
officers come from a law enforcement background, with a model which is based on crimes
and arrests, and it is totally REACTIVE.  A crime happens and police officers go into action
and arrest the perpetrator(s).

CRIME HAPPENS    =    PERP IS IDENTIFIED    =   PERP IS ARRESTED

Unfortunately, this reactive model does not work for preventing security incidents and mass violence
because it is INCIDENT DRIVEN, not Risk-Driven.  It focuses on individuals, not on a more holistic,
generalized view of Threats, and it totally leaves Solutions (Controls) out of the equation.

After studying pages of after action reviews, post-incident analyses and media sources, the one
recommendation that makes sense is that organizations need to switch to a RISK-BASED,
PROACTIVE mode for security to work
.

This was highlighted in a remark made by a Pentagon official, commenting on the 2nd Fort Hood
Shooting on April 2, and the fact that new DOD recommendations for security, had just been released.

“After the Navy Yard shooting in September 2013, another round of recommendations were made
to improve security at all DOD installations, however, a  Pentagon official said that the new
recommendations had not yet been put into effect at Fort Hood.
 At Fort Hood, very little 
had
changed from 2009
regarding security procedures for soldiers at the entrance gates.”

The question for the Department of Defense is “how could this happen again at the same military
base?  
I took extra time to study the 89-page document called An Independent Review “Protecting
the Force
”, one of 3 reports created after the initial Fort Hood Shooting, whene 13 were killed, and
43 injured.

If you look at the recommendations, they are very bureaucratic and procedural.  They could have
been written by an efficiency expert, not by anyone with a background in security, and covered things
like policy changes, and having screening for clergy and psychologists, and improved mental health
programs.   These are all important, but they do not provide a secure environment.

The LAX after action analysis’ Number One recommendation was to change
the security focus to a Risk-Based approach
.

 


RISK-BASED SECURITY

The problem with a reactive approach is that you can’t screen and lock down everyone. At Fort
Hood, for example, there are 80,000 individuals living on the base, and probably hundreds of
visitors who go in and out every day.  It’s impossible to assess the mental health, and the
‘intentions’ of all of them.

FortHoodAmbulances-Medium

That’s why a Risk-Based Approach works – because it focuses on the potential threats and then evaluates the existing controls to see whether they offer the required amount of protection based on the likelihood of the threat occurring.

You stop violent events by controlling access and by controlling weapons.  No matter how unpopular they are, you use metal detectors at certain points, you use security officers at key entrances, you control entrances and exits.

Once the event starts, you can improve security by having faster notification (panic alarms), ability
to block, or disable weapons and attackers, adequate transport, better emergency response, but to
avoid the violence, you need to have strong access control.

The Risk-Based approach makes use of annual risk assessments that are holistic in nature. They
are not done in stovepipes, they include the entire organizations, they include input from staff
members, visitors, students, vendors, soldiers, patients on how they see security from their point
of view, which is always dramatically different from management or administration.

A risk-based approach requires an organization to:

  • Define potential security risks.
  • Develop standardized risk assessment processes, for gathering and
    analyzing information, and use of analytical technology
  • Risk-Based Security focuses on PREVENTION OF NEW INCIDENTS
    whether they are active shooter, general violence, etc.
  • Enhances security’s ability to rapidly respond  to changes in the threat environment.

MORE BANG FOR THE BUCK

According the LAX (LAWA) after action report, “Simply adding more security does not
necessarily provide better security.
  Determining priorities and where to achieve great
value for the dollars invested requires regular, systematic assessment of the likelihood
and consequences (risks) associated with a range of threat scenarios that morph and
change more quickly now than ever before. 

Collaborative engagement in a security risk assessment process across the community builds
the buy-in needed to develop and sustain a holistic security program over time. Leaders must
be open to challenging established practices and demonstrate a willingness to change direction”
.

Making the switch to a Risk-Based security program is the best recommendation for those who
want to protect their staff, students, patients, vendors, clients, soldiers, and visitors from a mass
casualty event, or for all the organizations who don’t want to have a terrible incident happen in
the first place!

 Caroline Hamilton, friend of Patty Garitty (Soup Kitchen voluteer)

Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton

President, Risk and Security LLC

Caroline@riskandsecurityllc.com

 

www.securityinfowatch.com/blogs

www.riskandsecurityllc.com

What Went Wrong at Fort Hood? Another Active Shooter?

RISK Alert  Alert  #530 –  Fort Hood Active Shooter-April 2, 2014

 Dateline:  April 5, 2014

Shock and grief were the reactions when the news said, for a second time, a shooter
inside Ft. Hood near Killeen, Texas had killed 4 and injured 13 in another Active Shooting
Incident. Everyone remembered  the first major shooting attack in November 2013, when
a major killed 13 and injured 43 because he did not want to be deployed to Afghanistan.

A total of 73 injured and/or killed in the two incidents!

How could this have happened?  The Department of Defense had implemented many of
the recommendations of its internal, and independent review panels, and the changes had not

been enough to prevent another active Shooter incident.

The 34-year old shooter had apparently been denied a leave form, and asked to come
back the next day and he came back, with a .45-caliber Smith & Wesson semiautomatic
handgun, recently purchased at Guns Galore, and started shooting.  He eventually turned
the gun on himself, after firing 35 rounds in two buildings over a 2 block area.  He had a
history of mental issues, and had recently been transferred to Fort Hood.


What We Learned:    The After Action Review “Protecting the Force” had detailed 89
recommendations, but by Sept. .2013,  only 52 had been
implemented and none included an Active Shooter Risk Assessment.


A comprehensive Active Shooter Risk Assessment has to be the first recommendation
after any Active Shooter event.  Recommendations from the previous shooting were concentrated
on new policies and procedures, mental health screening, education and training programs but
those controls did not directly influence PREVENTION of incidents.

A Review of the Most Important Active Shooter controls would have been more
likely to prevent a future shooter event, like:

  •           Tightened Access Controls for Facilities
    • Panic Alarms
    • Tracking of Potential Troubled Individuals
    • Metal Screening for Weapons
    • Policy on Personal Weapons on Base

      After the Navy Yard shooting in September 2013, another round of recommendations
      were made to improve security at all DOD installations, however, a  Pentagon official
      said on Thursday, April 4th, that the new recommendations had not yet been put into
      effect at Fort Hood.
       Unfortunately, at Fort Hood, very little had changed from 2009
      regarding security procedures for soldiers at the entrance gates.

      Stay Alert and make sure that any Security Incidents are reported IMMEDIATELY!
                                                                      
                                     

After Action report on LAX Shooting Recommends Risk Assessments

The Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) released the long-anticipated After
Action Analysis on the LAX Active Shooter Incident in 2013.

The 83-page report was written by an independent consultant who analyzed
all aspects of the Shooting incident and includes a list of “Major Observations
and Recommendations.”   The recommendations are “to provide focus for
LAWA’s efforts toward continuous improvement in it’s security and emergency
preparedness programs.  

These areas were highlighted in the report as “7 priority observations that merit
special consideration.

Recommendation 1.1:  Evolve the LAX Security Program to reflect a more
integrated assessment of security risk and provide for the ongoing development
and management of mitigation measures.

Recommendation 1.2:  Based on the RISK ASSESSMENT and updated security
plan, consider the focus and structure of security functions to determine whether
realignment and integration are needed.

Recommendation 1.3:  With the benefit of recent vulnerability and risk assessments,
take a risk-based approach to evaluating current security programs and explore
intelligent use of technology.”

Once again, doing frequent Security Risk Assessments and managing the security
program and enhancements to follow the recommendations of the Risk Assess-
ment are the first recommendations in the After Action Analysis of an Active
Shooter Incident.

In my experience, in most organizations, Facility Security Risk Assessments are
not conducted correctly, are not reported to senior management, and not used as a
tool to ADJUST AND FOCUS the security program based on RISK.

Why aren’t security risk assessments done more often?  

1.  People don’t have the right expertise to do a full risk assessment.

2.  Security managers view Security Risk Assessments are too difficult
     to undertake.

3.  Law enforcement personnel still do not understand the concept of risk 
     assessments and instead, tend to rely on checklists of controls or
     security elements, rather than integrating all the information to
     create a true Risk-Based model for security.

The solution to this problem is to use affordable, easy to use software tools, like
the Risk-Pro Application for Facilties Security Assessment  and their Risk-Pro
Application for Active Shooter Incident to simplify the process of doing more
frequent risk assessments and using them as a management tool to focus
security so it will be able to recommend the security enhancements that are
needed, and not only how MUCH to spend, but actually dictate the order
of necessary controls.

Far from being a boring, intellectual exercise, well done security risk 
assessments can dramatically reduce the possibility of an active shooter
event, and also mitigate the many negative consequences that come
from such disruptive incidents.

 

 

 

Putin Analyzes his Risk on Invading Crimea

The invasion of Ukraine’s Crimea region by Putin’s “un-labeled” troops
illustrated two major principles of a Risk Assessment.   

    #1 – Secure your Critical Assets First

It’s not about the citizens of Crimea, not about the Ukraine wheat fields, or
even it’s use as a pipeline pass-through area.  It’s all about the Black Sea
Ports.  These ports 
are absolutely critical to Russia (and also to PUTIN
– the EGO), because they 
are a critical place to ship gas and oil from,
and they also give Russia their 
only access to the Mediterranean,
in case Putin urgently needs a gelato!

The second principle of a risk assessment is

    #2 – Analyze all the Potential Threats

I read a great article over the weekend about how Putin had sized up the
EU and the European bankers, and calculated that the threat of any interruption
of the Russian-European banking relationship was zilch – zero.  Bankers are
not going to reduce their profits by refusing to do business with Putin.

The next potential threat is U.S. retaliation or sanctions.   Putin correctly
calculates that the US didn’t get out of Iraq and almost out of Afghanistan
to immediately send any boots on the ground to Crimea or eastern Ukraine.
We can threaten to curtail his trips to Vegas and Disneyland, but the U.S.
is not going to start a war over this.

Putin did his risk calculation and decided that his chance of getting in any
serious trouble was VERY SMALL and his potential gain was VERY HIGH:

1.  He gets to look like a tough guy again.

2.  He gets lot of media attention from the whole world (doesn’t care what
media writes about him, as long as they spell P*U*T*I*N  correctly and
gets him back on the world stage again.

3.  And, the clincher is that he can pull the troops out anytime he wants,
send them 
back home, and no real harm done.

But I did pay attention in my history class, and I am hoping out loud that
we are not on the precipice of another war!

3 Killed, 4 Others Injured at Columbia, MD Mall Shooting

Saturday morning at the Columbia Mall, in this neat, planned community was cold and many people decided
to go to the mall!  Columbia, Maryland is a large mall, situated between Washington DC and Baltimore
in the Maryland suburbs. I’ve been there frequently – in fact, last month.

Unfortunately, at 11:15 in the morning, a young man entered the mall and started shooting.  Some witnesses
said he was shooting down into the Food Court from the 2nd Level.  The shots were centered in a surf, skateboard
and snowboarder store called Zumiez.

Two young people were killed, store employees, Brianna Benlolo, 21, of College Park, MD; and Tyler Johnson
25, of Ellicott City, MD, and a man police identified as the shooter.  He had killed himself, but was wearing more
ammo and had more ammo around him.

A bystander was shot in the foot, and others were injured in the chaos that started when the 8-10 shots
were fired and someone yelled, “There’s a man shooting”.   But these injuries were judged to be minor.

ONE MORE ACTIVE SHOOTER.  ONE MORE YOUNG MAN WITH NO MOTIVE.  Seven families devastated
and looking for answers.

Again, we look at access control, and due to the NRA effect, making it ridiculously easy to carry a gun, even
a concealed gun almost anywhere, we have to start with what kind of access we should allow to public places,
like schools, malls and airports.

In a risk and reward calculation, it’s basically, does the right of an individual to take a loaded gun anywhere
they want, supersede my right to safely shop at the local mall on a Saturday morning?  I think it does.

Now the burden is on the mall owners about how many of these shootings it’s going to take before we start
seeing armed guards at malls, and access control devices like metal detectors, at entrances to the larger malls.
Because think of what the mall owners lost – they lost their reputation as a “SAFE” place to go.  They lost
almost a whole day of sales, and maybe they will lose another day.

The local police and county Executive were on TV saying police arrived within 2 minutes of the shootings.

ColumbiaMallshoot_011390675393

and the SWAT team entered the Mall and did a store by
store search, while the media trucks assembled in the parking lot.

If people want to take loaded guns everywhere and society
thinks that’s great – then store owners are going to have to
increase security and be able to have tools to exclude these
people.

Guns are for hunting, not for shopping!

 

Terrible day for Columbia Mall and it’s customers, I guess it’s a wonderful day for the security industry that will sell
lots more metal detectors, cameras, monitoring, panic alarms and more.  Because that’s what we need to keep
the public safe.

 

Get Management’s Attention for Security – Shooter Kills the Hospital Administrator

Every Security Officer I’ve ever met has mentioned how difficult it can be to get funding for additional security!  It is a never-ending mission, to get the budget for a security program that will truly protect an organization.

Hospitals are no exception.  They have suffered their own financial problems and because security is not seen as a ‘clinical’ or ‘patient care’ issue, it is easy to take money from security and put it somewhere else.

But there’s one sure way to get management’s attention for Security — having a security incident.  And if you don’t have one at your organization, high profile security incidents at other facilities will all grab management’s attention.

In my Risk-Pro Security Incident Report today, a shooter killed four, wounded three, and then killed himself.   What was unusual about this incident was that the shooter went to the Hospital Administrator’s house and shot the administrator dead, and then shot his wife who was taken to an area hospital.

AdministratorHome-Louisiana

 

 

 

Most executives and administrators think about security as sort of an abstract concept, that doesn’t directly affect them.  But it might, and by sending your management a copy of our Risk-Pro Incident Report, you’ll get their attention this time!

(Subscribe to the Risk-Pro Incident Report program by sending an email with the word SUBSCRIBE on it to info@riskandsecurityllc.com)

New Active Shooter App Announced on October 20, 2013

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

New Active Shooter app released to reduce likelihood of an Active Shooter Incident.

Active Shooter incidents have increased both in the number of incidents, as well as the number of people killed and injured in the last five years.  As an aspect of  workplace violence, the active shooter has become is a serious recognized occupational hazard, ranking among the top four causes of death in workplaces during the past 15 years. More than 3,000 people died from workplace homicide between 2006 and 2010, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Additional BLS data indicate that an average of more than 15,000 injuries were annually during this time.

The latest figures show that high-risk organizations like hospitals, schools, malls, universities, military installations and even hair salons have experienced an active shooter incident and are likely to have a dramatically increased risk for experiencing an active shooter incident in the future.

Risk & Security LLC has released a new web-based app, Active Shooter Risk-Pro©, which offers an easy to use risk assessment program that assesses your organizational risk of an active shooter incident, as well as recommending solutions to prevent an incident from occuring in the future.

In additional to using the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Guidelines on Active Shooter Response, the OSHA standard 3148 (Guidelines for Preventing Workplace Violence for Health Care, the FBI and Secret Service Guidelines on Active Shooter Incidents, and the new OSHA Inspection Directive, Enforcement Procedures for Investigating or Inspecting Incidents of Workplace Violence, from September, 2011, are both included in the new, easy-to-use application.

The program has been tested on some of the largest organizations in the US, and runs on a laptop, PC or tablet, and even on a smartphone!.  Active Shooter Risk-Pro©  is built to be affordable and simple to use.

The web 2.0 program, includes newly compiled, updated threat databases, new active shooter incident analysis metrics, and automated web-surveys based on the DHS Guidelines..

The new program gives human services and security professionals a quick and easy way to conduct a active shooter, or general workplace violence that will recommend that will pass an audit!

The Risk-Pro©  model has been used for easy software applications by the Department of Defense and over hundreds of organizations, hospitals, and local, state and federal government agencies.

About Risk & Security  LLC

Risk & Security  LLC is a security risk assessment and risk analysis company with over 30 years of combined expertise in security risk assessment. It develops specialized programs and applications which are easy to use, affordable and which help organizations assess their risk, the likelihood of becoing a target, and which recommend cost-effective solutions.

Risk & Security offers full service consulting on critical risk assessments including HIPAA Risk Analysis, Facilities Security Assessments, Hospital Security Assessments, Workplace Violence, Active Shooter Incident Assessment, Environment of Care and more.  Risk & Security partners with security companies around the world to provide state-of-the-art security expertise to analyze risk and recommend cost-effective security controls justified by return on investment metrics.

The team of risk and security experts is led Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton, who has created more than 40 software programs, and conducted more than 200 specialized security risk assessments in a variety of environments, including companies in the United States and around the world, including in Abu Dhabi, Hong Kong, Japan, South Africa and Qatar.

Contact Information:

Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton, CHS III

Email:  caroline@riskandsecurityllc.com

Phone:  301-346-9055

Twitter:  www.twitter.com/riskalert

 

DOD-OIG Report on Security Weaknesses at the Navy Yard

The recently released 56-page report by the Department of Defense, Office of the Inspector General found that the Navy Access Control System did not adequately control the risks to the Washington DC Navy Yard and other sites under their control.

NCACS did not effectively mitigate access control risks associated with contractor installation access. This occurred because Commander,
Navy Installations Command (CNJC) officials attempted to reduce access control costs.

As a result, 52 convicted felons received routine, unauthorized installation access, placing military personnel, dependents, civilians, and
installations at an increased security risk.

Additionally, the CNIC N3 Antiterrorism office (N3AT) misrepresented NCACS costs. This occurred because CNIC N3AT did not perform
a comprehensive business case analysis and issued policy that prevented transparent cost accounting of NCACS. As a result, the Navy
cannot account for actual NCACS costs, and DoD Components located on Navy installations may be inadvertently absorbing NCACS costs
.
Furthermore, CNIC N3AT officials and the Naval District Washington Chief Information Officer circumvented competitive contracting
requirements to implement NCACS. This occurred because CNIC N3AT did not have contracting authority. As a result, CNIC N3AT
spent over $1.1 million in disallowable costs and lacked oversight of, and diminished legal recourse against, the NCACS service provider.

You can read the entire report at:  http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/documents/DODIG-2013-134.pdf

 

Courtesy Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton at Risk and Security LLC

caroline@riskandsecurityllc.com

 

 

 

 

What’s Your Active Shooter Risk? How to Assess the Threat!

Just the idea of an Active Shooter in your organization, whether you’re a military base, like Fort Hood, and the Washington Navy Yard, or a school like Sandy Hook, a beauty shop, a cracker factory in Philadelphia, a retail mall, a movie theatre, a grocery store parking lot, or a hundred other places, is a terrifying thought.

I lived about 3 miles from one of the shooting sites, a gas station, used by the Beltway Snipers back in October, 2002.  They killed ten people, totally at random, and critically injured three others.   Both of the snipers were sentenced, and John Muhammad was killed by lethal injection in 2009.

If you lived in the DC area, do you remember how scary it was just to pump gas into your car,  people were huddled against the side of their cars in the gas stations, and hidden by their shopping carts at the local Home Depots.

The fear of the Active Shooter comes from the seeming randomness of the action, which means there’s no way to prevent it, unless you give up, stay home, and hide under the bed all day.

But there are things you can do.  Instead of thinking of an Active Shooter incident as a totally unique situation, it’s really a form a Workplace Violence, Gas Station Violence, Parking Lot Violence and other related forms of random violence.   In fact, the Department of Homeland Security has identified quite a few steps you can take to keep yourself safer if you are in the vicinity of an active shooter (http://www.dhs.gov/active-shooter-preparedness).

Most of the shooters are mentally ill.  Normal individuals do not enjoy planning and killing strangers, and it is usually a last ditch effort, with the suicide of the shooter as the grand finale.   Their actions can sometimes be identified early, and the police can be alerted, or the Human Resources group at work, or even the local Sheriff can intervene before it gets to the actual shooting.

Signs that someone is having trouble negotiating their life, especially if that someone is a gun fanatic, with their living room full of AK-47 assault weapons and hollow point bullets, is not hard to spot, because these individuals often leave lots of warning signs, like:

  • Irrational Posts on Facebook or inappropriate tweets.
  • Threats made against friends and family.
  • A dropoff in personal hygiene, as the person gets more obsessed.
  • Problems negotiating their personal life.
  • Demonstrating signs of isolation and groundless paranoia

Organizations can protect themselves from an potential active shooter through a combination of specific controls that include elements like access control, continuous monitoring of cameras, employee awareness and training programs, clear cut evaluation routes, regular active shooter drills, and hardening of facilities, to name a few.

One of the best preventive measures is to conduct an Active Shooter Risk Assessment, which is similar to other security analyses, except that it is focused on a particular set of threats related to an Active Shooter Incident.   As part of my annual Threat Trend Reports, I’ll be releasing a new set of threat data about the Active Shooter, to help organizations calculate their risk of
having such an incident.   For example, did you know that the number of active shooter incidents has jumped from 1 in 2002
to 21 incidents in 2010?

ActiveShooterIncidentsbyYear

 

 

 

 

 

 
Locations have changed, too, and we found that

About 25% of active shooter incidents occur in schools,
About 25% in retail locations, and
About 37% in workplaces.

In future blogs, we’ll be looking at each element of the active shooter incident, and providing more information to keep
your organization safe.