Lessons from the 10/5/2015 Emergency Incident The bomb threat - - PDF document

1

Prepared by Curtis Sommerfeld, 10/9/2015

Lessons from the 10/5/2015 Emergency Incident The bomb threat incident of October 5 was truly a cruel hoax, placing both the college community and emergency responders in harm’s way, causing much distress, and loss of valuable learning and work time. However, it also provided a real-life scenario for the implementation of the College’s emergency response procedures. As typical in such situations, some things went very well, and some things did not. In all cases valuable lessons were learned so we might improve the procedures should they ever be again needed. The following are issues the college’s Emergency Response Team has identified as needing to be addressed:  The automated phone call sent to all students, staff and faculty showed on cell phone displays as an out-of-state phone number, leading some people to disregard the call.

• Response: The phone response company has purchased a local phone number

to be used. RCC will publicize this local number to those receiving alerts so that the specific number will be recognized.  Intercom system via campus telephone is not heard on all phones.

• Considerations: Many users turn down the volume on their RCC phones,

resulting in inaudible alerts. Not all areas have phones (e.g. RWC/Z Bldg., elevators, etc.). Some phones are inherently inaudible due to environmental conditions (e.g. Welding). Students in some classes are required to turn off cell phones.

• Response: All RCC phones will be tested and corrected as necessary. Inaudible

zones should be identified and solutions developed. Regular checking of phone volume settings will be done by custodial staff. Other methods of initial alert (strobe lights, reader boards, alert displays on individual computer screens, etc.) will be investigated.  Intercom messages sent only once.

• Considerations: Once law enforcement takes control of the scene College staff

have limited or no access to online electronic resources. Alert messages and use

• f other resources need to be done from homes or other alternate locations.

Can our phone response company activate intercom messaging?

• Response: Message to be repeated every minute for five minutes, if possible.

We will investigate our ability to automate message and repetition.  Intercom messages can only be sent from campus designated to receive the alert.

• Response: Alternatives under investigation with phone vendor.

 Alert messages were not received by all.

• Response: Staff are currently reminded twice per year to enroll in alert system.

Students registering online will be asked to update emergency contact information once per term.  Alerts messages and intercom messages need to include non-RCC recipients, such as SOU, ECE, other partner agencies, etc.

2

• Considerations: Should community members, such as parents, be allowed to

sign up for alerts?

• Response: Process needs to be determined for non-RCC campus residents to

receive intercom messages. Procedure for non-RCC users to be enrolled in alert system will be published. Our alert system has an app for those with mobile

• devices. Additionally, any may sign up for RogueConnect, Facebook, and local

emergency agency notification systems.  Lack of student awareness of intercom system and alert messages.

• Response: Suggest basic emergency procedure information be included in class

syllabi and New Student Orientation. Drills should be run at least annually at each campus.  RCC was not officially notified of the threat.

• Considerations: Local agencies may have priorities different from RCC, thus

choose if/when to notify.

• Response: Regularly send local emergency response agencies updated lists of

RCC contacts. 24-hour emergency contact will be the primary RCC contact for

• agencies. Campus and building maps will be sent to agencies and hardcopies

available with contracted security. On site walk through will be scheduled.  Evacuation resulted in significant traffic jams leaving RWC.

• Response: This is largely not in RCC’s control. RCC to try planning with law

enforcement to more effectively control not only traffic on College grounds, but encourage law enforcement to quickly and effectively control traffic on public roadways.  Evacuation resulted in many students on foot leaving RWC, with no place to assemble.

• Response: The parking area around the Demaray Market and Smerdon

Automotive south of the college seems to be the best location to identify as an

• ff-campus meeting place. Responsible parties at the businesses will be

contacted asking for their permission.  Armed contracted security

• Response: No recommendation at this time.

 Campus-based versus institutional-based emergency response

• Considerations: Should RCC have a consistent emergency response across all

campuses, regardless of where a threat seems aimed? Alerts are broadcast institutionally, so all staff and students are aware of threat, and already on edge. What if a targeted threat (single campus) is a diversion? What if alert is sent with mistaken location? What if SOU closes HEC?

• Response: Emergency response (evacuation, lockdown, etc.) will be normally

implemented at all campuses. Meetings will be held with SOU to determine how best to coordinate closures/openings in emergency situations.  Expectations of managers

• Response: Executive team will develop a plan.

 Pre-programmed 9-1-1 buttons at TRC display RVC address at dispatch center.

3

• Considerations: Handsets are individually programmed. If a handset is moved to

a different campus the address will be incorrect. The telephone technician must be informed of each move so programming can be updated.

• Response: Each handset will be checked and corrected as needed.

 Second alert message was unclear

• Considerations: The message to close RVC and TRC was essentially the same

message already sent/received about closure of RWC.

• Response: This becomes moot with decision to implement response at all

campuses.  Website “All Clear” update was delayed

• Considerations: Update was delayed to allow for unified messaging with

Josephine County Emergency Management. Ultimately, no response was received, and website was updated after a 3 hour delay.

• Response: Provide best available information in a timely fashion.

 Updates during event

• Considerations: Once emergency response agencies take control of scene RCC is

limited in responsibility and access.

• Response: Upon completion of evacuation situation updates from RCC are a

lesser priority. It is expected that incident command will provide updates, although RCC will make available a liaison.

4

Many staff and students offered feedback following the incident, in addition to what the RCC Emergency Response Team identified as issues to be addressed. A summary follows, in no particular order:  Have staff use police scanners so the College can more quickly initiate emergency response procedures. In this particular situation many students and staff were aware of the threat several minutes prior to the College.  Contracted security guards should appear physically capable of dealing with threats.  It was difficult to receive information if one did not have a cell phone and was not in their office  Assembly areas make staff and students feel particularly vulnerable and should be avoided  Staff and students should be encouraged to gather in assembly areas  Designate RVC/G alley doors as egress only  More trainings  Put blinds on all windows, including door windows  Put peep holes on doors without windows  Replace sidelight glass in HEC interior doors with bulletproof glass  Put sirens on campus  Put alert indicators (flashing lights, etc.) at college entrances  Alerts need to be very specific about what to do  Staff and students need to be alert to hints of a violent actor (Facebook posts, etc.).  Place gun in locked box in each building  Allow staff and students to carry weapons  Use various means (metal detectors, pat downs, etc.) to make sure staff and students are not carrying weapons  Obtain a grant to pay for sworn armed officers on campuses, similar to SRO’s  Train all for situational awareness  Encourage staff and students during evacuation to offer rides to those without transportation  Managers should wear ID’s so others can have confidence/proof of authority  Alert needs to be specific about the threat, allowing appropriate response  Alert needs to be less-specific about threat, encouraging urgency in response  Use Demaray exit only, and both lanes, for evacuation  People did not go far enough away during RVC evacuation / still in danger zone  Encourage staff and students to sign up for alerts