Protective Actions for Life Safety

There are many goals for a preparedness program—property protection, business resiliency, environmental protection, and protection of an organization’s brand, image and reputation. The first goal of a preparedness program should be the protection of life safety.

There are many hazards that could jeopardize life safety. Fires, severe weather, a spill or release of hazardous chemicals, an act of terrorism, or an act of violence in the workplace are just a few examples. Development of the preparedness program should include a risk assessment to identify possible hazards, their probabilities of occurrence, and the vulnerability of people, property, the environment, and the entity itself (NFPA 1600: 5.4).

The emergency operations/response plan should include actions to protect life safety from credible hazards identified during the risk assessment. Protective actions for life safety include:

• Evacuation
• Shelter-In-Place
• Lockdown

In this eNewsletter, we will explore the basics for each of these protective actions.

Download the eNewsletter in Adobe PDF format …

Read other Preparedness, LLC eNewsletters ...

Protecting the Education Infrastructure

As reported in the Emergency Management and Response Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EMR-ISAC) INFOGRAM 37-08, September 25, 2008: "Much effort has been expended to protect the nation’s critical infrastructures, including those of the Emergency Services Sector (ESS). However, Department of Education officials concede that educational institutions are not specifically identified as among America’s critical infrastructure sectors or key resources, which potentially makes soft targets of schools, colleges, and universities. Experts say learning facilities are vulnerable to terrorism, because of the high consequence of an attack against children. The Emergency Management and Response—Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EMR-ISAC) gleaned from various case studies that the threat to schools may not be detected or prevented by physical security measures alone. Therefore, the EMR-ISAC suggests that ESS leaders can offer encouragement and assistance to educational centers as they conduct emergency planning and develop crisis action plans. For example, it is important that a school’s emergency plans are effectively integrated with the emergency response plans of the community in which the teaching establishment resides. Case studies further indicate that municipal authorities and their ESS leaders consider the following activities to improve the overall security of the local education infrastructure:

• Deliver “all-hazards” awareness training for school administrators, staff, and students.
• Train school administrators and staff regarding emergency actions.
• Review and validate all school emergency response, crisis management, and communications plans.
• Conduct drills and exercises to test and refine emergency response and crisis management plans.
• Provide primary and secondary interoperable communications systems for each school.
• Implement and test plans to maintain reliable contact with schools and school buses.
• Arrange for a “closed-campus” environment with a single point of access for all personnel.
• Increase police presence on school grounds by ensuring frequent visits as part of patrol routes.

There are national standards, including NFPA 1600, that address the essential elements of emergency management program. In addition, a new school preparedness standard is being developed in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Education. I am principal author of that new standard, and I will provide updated information on the standard when it can be released to the public.

If you are interesting in learning more about school emergency preparedness, check out the resource links at http://www.preparednessllc.com/resources/resources.html.