Best Practices in Emergency Communications

Click here to receive your FREE subscription to Campus Technology

Home > Best Practices in Emergency Communications

Focus

Best Practices in Emergency Communications

5/9/2008

By Doug Gale

On April 16, 2007, a little more than a year ago a Virginia Tech student went on a rampage that killed 32 fellow students. And the carnage continued. On February 14, 2008, an Illinois State student gunned down five other students before killing himself.

Shortly after the Virginia Tech shootings I wrote in this column, "Even after this month's horrific events, our campuses are five times safer than the national average. Stated differently, even if an event like the one at Virginia Tech were to happen every year, a student is far more likely to be murdered while home on summer vacation than on campus during the academic year."

But risk assessment doesn't cut much weight in the world of public opinion. In the aftermath of highly publicized violent incidents like those at Virginia Tech and Illinois State, higher education has come under increased scrutiny. In particular, students, their parents, and the general public want to know about the emergency notification procedures that campuses have deployed.

And emergency alerts are more than just good PR and doing the right thing. Under the Clery Act campuses are required to provide "timely warning" of various criminal threats. The emergencies faced by higher education, however, go far beyond those enumerated in the Clery Act and include severe weather, class cancellations owing to infrastructure failures, bomb threats, and hazardous material contamination incidents, as well as threats from deranged individuals.

What Can a Campus Do?
Supported by funding from the United States Department of Homeland Security and the Office of Domestic Preparedness to the State of Florida, the University of Central Florida prepared a report on Emergency Communications Systems that provides a comprehensive discussion of the requirements for emergency communications and available solutions. They identify the three requirements for an alert system as:

1. Alert as many people and as quickly as possible in a normal condition
2. Alert as many people and as quickly as possible without power and phone service
3. Constantly deliver alerts to specific groups of people in different locations

They also discuss why is difficult to design a single alert system that can respond to all hazards and all dynamic behaviors. For example, they note that campuses include a variety of facilities. Some do not have fire alarm intercom systems whereas others have rooms that do not have telephones. Human factors become important. The Florida study found that 50 percent of students and faculty would not immediately pick up a ringing phone and thus limiting the effectiveness of reverse 911 strategies. Similarly, while 95 percent of those surveyed prefer to be notified by mobile phones, cell phone are disruptive in classroom environments, and faculty frequently request that students turn them off.