School Shooting "Response " Options, Part II

Responding to School Active Shooter Incidents (ASI's)

In yesterday's blog, several issues with the ALICE approach were identified.  There are hidden financial costs due to Workman's Comp claims that, nation-wide, likely run into the millions.  Some schools that have replaced their emergency plans with ALICE.  The presentation approach used by ALICE is not true, criterion-based training, meaning that no effort is made to determine how well attendees have learned the material.  ALICE proposes that school personnel, and in certain circumstances students, engage in Close-Quarter Combat (CQC), which the Marine Corps defines as "physical confrontation between two or more combatants."

In thousands of assessments across the country, Safe Havens International personnel have found that school staff, some of whom have received ALICE and other 'proactive response' training, are responding improperly when faced with gun situations that are not ASI's.

There are possible serious liability issues with the implementation of ALICE, especially in its current state.  In a recent article of a school board in California advocating this approach, a member of the administrative staff said, "It also means a bad call could put lives at risk, but Lilga said that should not affect staff decisions. She said they are covered by Good Samaritan laws, which prevents people from being liable for civil damages if they act in good faith to help in emergency situations." 

This statement may not likely survive court scrutiny.  If a school trains an employee and the employee then makes a bad decision, even in good faith, then liability may still be conferred upon the school, if not the employee.

Analysis

The question then becomes, if ALICE and other 'proactive response' options are of concern, what are the alternatives?

1.  Use the All Hazards Approach, in which a school conducts regular risk and threat assessments, mitigates and prepares for identified risks/threats, coordinates their activities with local first responders, uses the National Incident Management System and the Incident Command System to respond and recover from any incident.  Under this approach, preparedness for an ASI would be one protocol among many in a school's emergency plan.

2. Use The Window of Life, a process for approaching the first 30 seconds of an incident, the critical time in which a situation can be won or lost by the decisions made.  Safe Havens International has a short, free video on The Window of Life.  A free, downloadable poster can also be found on Safe Haven's website.  The process is easy to remember; Take care of yourself, take care of others, protect your space and contact public safety.

3. Use a concept called "Permission to Live".  A well-trained, empowered employee can see beyond a written emergency protocol, and will know when it is appropriate to act outside of a protocol.  For example, during an ASI the protocol may call for a lockdown, but the employee may see an opportunity to safely evacuate his/her students.  He or she should not necessarily be constrained by the protocol, but guided by them.  The key is empowering the employee and giving them the means to be able to think tactically during high-stress moments.

Under ALICE, staff are given presentations on what to do during an incident, and are essentially instructed to "engage".  Even after being told to do so only as a last resort, what the participant remembers is "engage".  No attempt is made to assess the participant's retention of the material, so once the presentation is over, the schools are left to their own devices. 

What the school should do is to provide a protocol to guide actions, based upon a teacher's own comfort level, knowledge and background.  A teacher who is attempting to evacuate a class under fire when the teacher is ill-prepared to do so, or has not been trained to do so would most likely end up with tragic results, thus that particular teacher would follow the lockdown protocol.

We should be asking if schools should be ordering teachers to engage in CQC, even as a last resort.  There are those who have the personal inclination, background, and even training to engage in CQC.  But what of those school staff who do not have the personal inclination or background, even after they have received training?

It is imperative that schools take the time to consider these points before sending themselves down a path that may lead to tragedy.