The First Facility Management Blog

Joseph R. (Bob) Granger, CPP, has advanced to the presidency of ASIS International. Granger is the director of security for United Space Alliance, which is NASA’s space shuttle prime contractor, with primary locations at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, the Johnson Space Center in Texas, and Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama. Granger is responsible for all aspects of USA’s security worldwide, including personnel and industrial security, as well as internal physical security and access, and integrity controls for the space shuttle fleet. Granger has been an ASIS member since 1985.

Granger has more than 39 years in security and law enforcement. After serving in the U.S. Army during Vietnam, he spent eight years as a municipal police officer in Cocoa, FL, and more than 28 years working in various security disciplines at the Kennedy Space Center.

Granger has served on the ASIS Board of Directors for the past five years. He is a Certified Protection Professional (CPP) and a member of the CSO Roundtable. Previously, he served as a council vice president, member, and chairman of the Physical Security Council, faculty advisor and speaker for the Physical Security Professional (PSP) Review program, and member of the ASIS Foundation Board of Directors. He has been a featured speaker and lecturer before international audiences at numerous ASIS professional development programs.

Andrews International, a provider of security and risk mitigation services, recently introduced an analysis service for enterprise customers that comprehensively evaluates security operations in order to reduce costs and improve efficiency and effectiveness. The new service is based on Andrews’ proprietary Security Effectiveness and Efficiency (SEE) methodology, which includes matching security resources to risk profiles, maximizing the integration of uniformed guards and electronic security assets, and projecting return on investments (ROI) through industry-specific financial models.

The SEE Analysis has been used to evaluate enterprise security programs across several key industries including high-tech and manufacturing. According to a Fortune 500 global manufacturer, the SEE Analysis identified actionable improvements that will enable the organization to reduce uniformed guard costs by 20% across its U.S. headquarters and manufacturing sites, while enhancing the strength of its security operations.

For enterprises under pressure to “protect more for less” in security operations, action often include reducing spending on uniformed protection through staff reductions, lowering pay, and overzealous contract cost cutting with outside vendors, which often results in poor service. Some organizations try to compensate by adopting security technology, but this is often attempted without a complete understanding of how uniformed guards and technology assets can integrate to deliver the greatest value in security.

The SEE Analysis is performed by Andrews International’s C&I Division, a group providing clients with a broad range of information and knowledge to mitigate risk and make effective business decisions. It evaluates the effectiveness and efficiencies of enterprise security operations, focusing on deployment and integration of uniformed guards and electronic technology assets such as closed-circuit television, access control, and command center operations. The company has also partnered with a number of software providers to create a “security tool box” that enables proactive monitoring of all aspects of a security program; from supporting targeted screening, testing and qualifying of personnel to integrating facility management with central command center operations. This includes technology from Quantum Secure, a provider of enterprise software for physical identity and access management. The company’s SAFE suite enables corporate security managers to implement best practices, automate key processes, and simplify control of employees, vendors, and other third-parties.

The SEE Analysis covers an enterprise’s complete security operations on a local, regional and global asset utilization level. Areas assessed include: location/site vulnerability, internal and external threats, existing command center operations, electronic technology, security equipment, architectural elements, and uniformed security force policies, procedures, readiness, training and personnel utilization.

With the financial challenges of a recession and rising crime rates, malls and shopping centers this holiday season are, as always, targets for criminal activity and threats impacting consumers, retailers, and their employees. The latest estimate for ORC (Organized Retail Crime) loss alone is $33 billion in the United States. According to experts at Andrews International, Inc., a privately owned provider of security and risk mitigation services, the following tips can help retail operators and employees during the holiday shopping season.

Organized Retail Crime: Organized shoplifting gangs have been known to steal upwards of $200,000 in a single mall excursion. They know which retailers are unlikely to prosecute, and those that display merchandise that makes theft easy. Typical tactics include creating a diversion, such as an argument, drawing the attention of employees from others who are stealing merchandise. Retailers and employees should watch all areas of a store when there is a possible diversion. Tip offs for mall security officers are large groups repeatedly leaving and re-entering a mall, depositing merchandise in multiple vehicles usually with out of state license plates, and communicating frequently with handheld devices.

Seasonal Employees-Insider Threats: If possible, background and drug checks should be conducted on all employees, including temporary help. Organized gangs place people within retail stores as employees to facilitate robberies and shoplifting. Seasonal help should never have access to security information such as alarm codes or keys; these should be changed immediately when needed and on a regular basis.

Business Purchases and Checks: A popular scam is for a retailer to be contacted by “an area business” about a large purchase for employee gifts. They then ask if someone can pick up the merchandise and pay by check “on Saturday.” Anytime someone offers to pay with a business check during a time when it cannot be verified by the bank being drawn upon, it is a tip off that something is amiss.

Securing the Store: Criminals often enter a store through back doors left open by employees for ventilation, taking out trash, or sneaking out for a cigarette. Most outlets have back offices, so crimes can be committed without anyone in the store being aware. Doors should be checked regularly and secured at the end of the night, security cameras should be reviewed to ensure they have not been repositioned, and alarms and recording devices should be tested. Additionally, after-hours burglary is common, so there should never be more than $100 left in a cash register draw at the end of the night.

End of Night Cash Drop: Owners or employees leaving a mall alone at night with the day’s cash deposit are a prime target for robbery. If possible, an armored car service should be used for the transaction. If not, use a banking outlet within the confines of the mall. It is ill advised to have a single person carry out this function, particularly if leaving the premises, even if the bank is just across the parking lot.

Targeting of Employees: Parking for employees is often in a designated area, away from the entrance to a facility and more vulnerable. Criminals realize that vehicles in the employee parking area will be there for an entire shift, providing them with a greater window of opportunity to steal a car or merchandise within. In addition to the same precautions consumers should exercise in parking lots, employees should take special care to keep valuables from GPS units to iPods to gifts in their trunk and out of sight.

On November 6, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2868, the Chemical and Water Security Act of 2009, by a vote of 230-193. This bill reauthorizes the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) program to implement and enforce the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS), which are currently set to expire in October 2010, and improves these standards in a number of ways. It also requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish parallel security programs for drinking water and wastewater facilities.

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS), Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security and lead sponsor of the legislation, released the following statement upon passage: “In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, security experts immediately identified the threat of an attack on a chemical facility as one of the greatest security vulnerabilities facing the Nation,” said Thompson. “After four years of hard work, this Congress finally got the opportunity to consider and pass this landmark homeland security bill. Passage of this legislation demonstrates the progress we make with a transparent process that is open to diverse viewpoints,” Thompson stated. “We can now ensure that this vital industry, and the population that lives around these facilities, are secure,” said Thompson.

H.R. 2868:

• Authorizes reasonable, risk-based security standards for chemical security.
• Closes a major security gap identified by both the Bush and Obama Administrations by establishing a security program for drinking water and waster water facilities.
• Requires all tiered facilities to assess “methods to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack.” Plants that voluntarily perform these assessments, which are sometimes called “IST” assessments, often find that good security equals good business.
• Strengthens CFATS by adding enforcement tools, protecting the rights of whistleblowers, and enhancing training security.

From banks to quick serve restaurants, businesses must be vigilant about protecting their patrons from criminal acts committed by third parties, says Jon D. Groussman, President and COO of CAP Index, Inc., a firm that provides crime forecasting models for a variety of facility types. The Exton, PA-based company serves 81 of the top U.S. Fortune 100 companies, as well as retailers, financial institutions, insurance companies, and quick service restaurant companies.

In order to educate companies about the importance of risk management in preventing premises liability lawsuits, CAP Index offers the following tips to corporate security managers. According to Groussman, “One of the most common allegations against companies in premises liability lawsuits is the failure to assess risk and adjust security programs accordingly.”

Many companies are also accused of violating generally accepted security practices and/or even their own corporate standards. To avoid this, CAP Index recommends the following guidelines for designing and implementing a corporate security strategy:

• What are we attempting to protect? First evaluate what the primary assets of your business are (i.e., products, services, technology).
• What role do various departments play in the process and execution? Determine exactly how various departments, such as loss prevention, asset protection, and even the C-Suite, will interact in the development and deployment of the company’s overall security strategy.
• What is our corporate risk tolerance? Every company has a different tolerance for risk. Establish what yours is and keep it top of mind in developing an overall security strategy.
• Can we justify the costs/what is our return on investment (ROI)? Make sure to factor in all the costs associated with designing and implementing a security system. Try to estimate an ROI that can be shared with various corporate stakeholders.
• Can we articulate our decision making process? According to Groussman, the most important aspect of any company’s security strategy is being able to articulate it—and the decision making process behind it. In the event that you are questioned during the litigation process, you will be well prepared.

Additionally, one of the largest components in defining a corporate security strategy involves evaluating various risk assessment considerations. According to Groussman, these may include:

• The nature of the business (e.g., cash on hand, operating hours, inherent risks)
• Event history at the location and in the immediate vicinity
• The nature, frequency, and severity of prior events
• External crime risk, or the level of “social disorganization” in and around the immediate vicinity

Finally, in the event that a company is involved in a third-party crime, Groussman recommends an immediate post-incident response, as well as consequence containment process—ideally, one that has been planned well in advance. This includes having a designated team ready to respond to the event; the careful documentation of facts and circumstances as soon as possible; the determination if safety changes are necessary (as well as a possible re-evaluation of risks); and a rationale for any “go forward” modifications.  And if the incident advances to the litigation process, the identification, selection, and preparation of both legal and company representatives becomes a critically important next step.

The odor in a room is enough to elicit a stronger impulse towards fairness, claim researchers from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. They believe their research proves there is a correlation between hygiene and decency and that by improving our environment we can improve our behavior. The research found an increase in ethical behavior when the scent of a fruit scented cleaner fills a room.

Professor Adam Galinsky, the psychologist who conducted the study, said it shows “morality and cleanliness” are inextricably linked. “Researchers have known for years that scents play an active role in reviving positive or negative experiences. Now, our research can offer more insight into the links between people’s charitable actions and their surroundings.”

Katie Liljenquist, assistant professor of organizational leadership at Brigham Young University Marriott School of Management said: “This is a very simple, unobtrusive way to promote ethical behavior. The data tells us a compelling story about how much we rely upon cleanliness cues to make a wide range of judgments about others.”

The researchers see implications for workplaces, retail stores, and other organizations that have relied on traditional surveillance and security measures to enforce rules.

“Companies often employ heavy handed interventions to regulate conduct, but they can be costly or oppressive,” said Liljenquist. “This is a very simple, unobtrusive way to promote ethical behavior.”

Cleaning The Way To Virtuous Occupants

The study, titled “The Smell of Virtue,” made subjects carry out several tasks, with some asked to work in unscented rooms, while others worked in rooms freshly sprayed with lemon scented cleaner.

The first experiment evaluated fairness. Participants were given $12 and were asked to decide how much of it to keep and how much to return to their partners who had trusted them to divide it fairly. Subjects in clean scented rooms were less likely to exploit the trust of their partners, returning a significantly higher share of the cash.

The average amount of cash given back by the people in the “normal” room was $2.81. But the people in the clean scented room gave back an average of $5.33.

The second experiment evaluated whether clean scents would encourage charitable behavior. Subjects indicated their interest in volunteering and their interest in donating funds to a charitable cause.
Participants surveyed in the clean-smelling room were significantly more interested in volunteering (4.2 on a 7 point scale) than those in a normal room (3.3).  Meanwhile, 22% of participants in the clean-smelling room said they’d like to donate money, compared to only 6% of those in a normal room.

Follow up questions revealed that participants did not notice the aroma in the room and that their mood at the time of the experiment did not affect the outcomes.

Commenting on the study’s findings, Steve Wright, Chairman of the British Cleaning Council, said: “We all know that cleanliness is key to encouraging a sense of pride in local areas, but this is the first time a link has been proved between people’s behavior and their surroundings. I hope this encourages more people to get involved with efforts to make to make their area cleaner and greener, and the cleaning industry welcomes the opportunity to work with local councils and government as we strive to create a cleaner environment.”

The recent death of Yale graduate student Annie Le and the subsequent arrest of lab technician Raymond J. Clark III — who is alleged to have murdered her — has thrust the topic of workplace violence back into the national headlines.

While workplace violence prevention has typically focused on the role of the human resources department, there are several aspects of the problem that can be alleviated by having the proper safety plans and security procedures in place, and by the facility itself.

To that end, facility professionals interested in reviewing their workplace violence prevention policies may want to check out the IFMA Foundation’s recent report entitled “Violence in the Workplace: The Role of the Facility Manager.”

Written by Wayne D. Veneklasen, Ph.D., CFM, and Donald W. Barnes Jr., CPP, the report looks at the history of violence in the workplace, examines the scope of the problem, describes the statutes surrounding it and concludes with a focus on planning, response and recovery. It takes the perspective of the building owner and facility manager while outlining the steps they can take to help mitigate this problem.

The report was made possible through contributions donated in memory of W. David Beverly, the late husband of Linda Beverly, CAE, IFMA’s vice president of administration. A long-time engineer at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, David Beverly was killed on April 20, 2007, at Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, by a contract engineer who shot him and held another coworker hostage before committing suicide. This senseless act impacted the lives of countless people and underscored the very real threat posed by violence in the workplace.

To obtain a free copy of the report, visit www.ifmafoundation.org.

The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, the third largest tribe in the U.S., recently expanded its use of network video cameras from Axis Communications to include more than 1,000 cameras at six of its casinos.

Prior to 2006, the Choctaw casinos used analog solutions, comprised of analog cameras and monitors, co-axial cabling, multiplexers, time-lapse VCRs, and video tape. The tribe decided to move to IP video because its video recordings were not of high enough quality and some video recordings were not good enough to be used as evidence for the prosecution of certain events. In addition, they could not determine insurance coverage for slips and falls and other safety concerns.

The Choctaw Nation's Pocola, OK casino

A committee determined the new surveillance system should be an open platform design that would be secure, scalable, and able to expand without major expense. Another requirement was that the selected cameras meet Tribal Internal Control Standards that included recording at least 20 frames per second in money areas. Later the committee elected to implement a higher rate of 30 frames per second. Based upon its requirements and an in-depth evaluation, the Choctaw Nation selected Axis pan/tilt/zoom (PTZ) and fixed network cameras as well as Genetec’s fully integrated IP video management and access control solutions, Omnicast and Synergis.

“We are focused on protecting our assets and ensuring the safety of our staff and customers,” said Paula Penz, gaming commissioner for Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. “And we found that Axis network cameras best met our needs.”

Axis network cameras now monitor cash intensive areas and outside the buildings.

“Axis network cameras met our needs for running 30 frames in MJPEG and MPEG4 and are easy to maintain,” said Jason Pritchard, integrations manager, onsite solutions for Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. “That made our selection straightforward.”

The future will bring an expansion of Axis capabilities since the Choctaw Nation is planning to build four new casinos by next year, including McAlester, Grant, Stringtown, and a new expansion at Durant. That may result in the eventual installation of 3,000 network cameras or more at all of its properties.

“We have enjoyed a strong relationship with the Choctaw Nation and look forward to assisting it maintain secure operations as it continues to expand,” said Fredrik Nilsson, general manager of Axis Communications Inc.

Recently, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) revealed that it soon plans to audit more than 600 employers nationwide for compliance with hiring laws. In addition, a number of state and local jurisdictions are implementing requirements for employers to verify the status of workers and performing inspections targeting illegal workers who use false documents. Companies need to examine their hiring practices to avoid the disruption and negative publicity that can accompany a federal or local enforcement action.

Some companies have already experienced the new style of immigration law enforcement. In early May, Overhill Farms, a large frozen food company in the Los Angeles suburbs, was the subject of what has been called a “desktop raid.” An audit uncovered that one-fourth of its 1,000 employees had discrepancies in their Social Security records that turned out to be unresolvable, exposing their status as illegal immigrants. The company had little choice but to let the workers go in one fell swoop. Overhill quickly found replacement workers, but the episode was traumatic for management and workers alike, as it came with little warning.

Immigration investigations in progress are shifting focus rapidly. In February of this year, a Bellingham, WA engine manufacturing company was raided when agents became aware that criminal gang members had been on the payroll. Twenty-eight of 100 workers were initially arrested, and early reports indicated that the employers were cooperating with ICE. Within weeks the case took a turn, as temporary visas were issued to the illegal workers in exchange for their cooperation in the investigation that is now focused on the employer.

Electronic screening systems such as E-Verify and SSNVS are helpful, but are no substitute for human attention. Human resources personnel today need to be aware of all the possible vulnerabilities in their hiring process and how to minimize them. They also need to make sure that any problems are resolved fairly and appropriately.

Consequently, Omega Secure Solutions (OSS), a homeland security services firm comprised of former immigration officers, recently announced a new program to assist employers in complying with immigration laws. Says company President Bob McGraw, “Even eight years after 9/11, many in the business community still have only minimal baseline knowledge of immigration law.”

Maintaining a legal workforce is important for some obvious reasons—to protect a company from enforcement action and to avoid the negative publicity and business disruption that accompanies it. But the best reason, as those who have devoted time and resources to this goal know, is that it results in a stable workforce that helps companies flourish. As governments at all levels flirt with ever more punitive laws and regulations, corporate leaders should take control of their hiring process on their own schedule and in accordance with the company’s best interest.

Google, the world’s most popular search engine, is often revered (and reviled) for its Street View images, which offer anyone with an Internet connection direct access to detailed photos of homes and buildings around the world.

But do these images pose a security threat?

A recent FM World poll found that the vast majority of facility professionals think they do not. The poll asked 100 facility practitioners if they “see Google Street View as a potential security threat in any way” to their organization.

Their answer was largely no. Seventy-one percent of respondents said they did not see the search engine’s images as threatening, with the remaining 29 percent saying they did.

One respondent said, “There’s nothing to stop a thief driving past with their phone video on to get the same, even more up-to-date, footage.” While another asked, “Who is really interested in this footage except for burglars? Isn’t our privacy invaded enough already?”

The second respondent has a point. While Google Street View might not pose any more of a security threat than other, more accessible forms of technology can produce, what real purpose does it serve? What is to be gained from looking at the front of the neighbor’s house, or the hospital or school up the road, beyond a voyeuristic thrill, or possibly, something worse? Nothing.

Even more of an invasion of privacy is Google’s Satellite View, which offers viewers plenty of top-down satellite imagery of homes and buildings everywhere, extending into their private property. Former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney famously had his own vice presidential home pixelated and obscured in these Google images, a move U.S. Vice President Joe Biden has since reversed.

But perhaps Cheney had a point. Views such as those offered by Google can, when used improperly, result in not only an invasion of privacy, but also a security threat. As both private citizens and people with an interest in facilities, we have a duty to fight things that encroach on our freedoms and jeopardize our safety. And maybe Google crosses the line.

What do you think?