UH Faculty Senate Committee Asked to Probe Better Emergency Communications on Campus

The University of Hawaii Faculty Senate’s Committee on Student Affairs is expected to discuss “Campus Security” as a new-business agenda item when it meets this afternoon.

A committee member sent the following email two days ago to the committee chair:

As reflected in (the 10/29 Honolulu Star-Bulletin) editorial titled “Get out the alert by any means,” I think the University community needs to ask the UH administration some hard questions about how (the 10/25) security threat was handled. In particular, I agree that, as stated in the editorial, “…An incident at the University of Hawaii at Manoa displays the need for better plans to alert those on campus….”

CHORE is advised that if the committee agrees to take up the issue, it will be discussed in depth at the body’s next meeting on November 21.

We hope that’s the outcome of today’s meeting, as questions raised within the UH community are much more likely to produce improved emergency communications than anything written here or elsewhere about campus security.

Star-Bulletin Editorial Supports CHORE’s View: UH Should Use More Communications Channels

The Honolulu Star-Bulletin summarizes its lead editorial today – Get out the alert by any means -- as follows:

"An incident at the University of Hawaii-Manoa displays the need for better plans to alert those on campuses."

Exactly right – as we’ve been saying in our posts since 10/26. The editorial concludes: "While it is difficult to gauge levels of danger without considering each event individually, every person on UH's campuses should be aware of procedures to keep safe." Text messaging, which apparently was the only communications channel UH officials used during last week’s incident, obviously is unable to do that.

Unfortunately, we’ve heard and seen nothing from officials to suggest they are revising their procedures. One could even infer from their public statements so far that they were satisfied with their reliance only on text messaging and apparently no other channels last week.

For the sake of everybody’s personal security on campus, we need to see evidence of a broader perspective up in Manoa – one that realizes TM can’t be the end-all in crisis communications just because it’s wireless. And in that regard, continue reading the next post below.

With Coincidental Timing, NPR Report Says ‘College Students Decline Text-Message Alerts’

The University of Hawaii’s enthusiasm over the use of text messaging to notify students and faculty about emergencies -- an approach CHORE believes is flawed -- needs rethinking in light of a National Public Radio story today about students' use of TM.

UH seemingly has embraced TM as a “higher-tech” medium to alert the campus community during emergencies. Yet less than 48 hours after Thursday’s incident, today’s report on NPR’s “Weekend Edition Saturday” should give UH security officials pause.

You can listen to the report at the program’s website, which has this summary:

"College administrators are finding that students are not rushing to sign up for cell phone text-message alerts. After the Virginia Tech shootings last spring, many campuses felt this was the answer to keeping their students alert to danger, but students don't share their concerns."

Improving the Crisis Plan

UH’s apparently used only text messaging on Thursday to send its alert about the bus passenger overheard muttering about shooting 30 UH students. News reports mentioned no other methodology, and neither did UH spokesman Gregg Takayama’s email to CHORE.

NPR’s report tends to support CHORE's view on how to alert students and faculty about future emergencies:

"Any threat to the security of the campus community warranting an alert to students and faculty will be disseminated by all available means – text messaging, emails, loudspeakers in buildings and in the campus’s exterior spaces, and broadcasts over KTUH and the commercial stations."

We’ve alerted both spokesman Takayama and Dr. Francisco Hernandez, UH Vice Chancellor for Students, about NPR’s report and hope they and other University officials take it to heart as they work to improve their emergency alert system.

In Starkest Terms, Yesterday’s “Shooter” Alert Was a Failure; UH Needs a Better Crisis Plan

This will be a long post of an email exchange based on today's first commentary here at CHORE on what we believe was an inadequate emergency alert to the University of Hawaii community. The first email is from UH spokesman Gregg Takayama, who responded to our message calling attention to CHORE's first post. Our response to Gregg follows his email:

Hi Doug:

Thanks for your concern about emergency communications at the UH Manoa campus. Just to let you know that the email alert system used yesterday is not the only method of emergency communications available to us. Based on information provided to UH campus security by Honolulu police, it was decided that it was not necessary to cancel classes or halt any planned activities at UH Manoa.

If it was necessary to evacuate buildings or to order people to stay inside and lock their doors, we would have used building PA systems and loudspeakers on campus security vehicles to make the announcements. Loudspeakers were installed on all campus security vehicles earlier this year (post-Virginia Tech). We would also have asked for assistance from HPD to do so.

Text-messaging on cell phones is another method of communications that’s being developed, with testing to begin later this year. And in an emergency, we would also enlist help from commercial radio and TV outlets to get word out to our campus community.

I think the underlying theme, Doug, is that we realize no single technology is fool-proof, so our emergency communications range from low-tech loudspeakers (and loud speakers) to the higher-tech. UH Manoa is probably the only campus in the nation to suffer damage from flood, fire, and earthquake in the span of about 3 years. Campus officials with much more experience than me realize that we’re likely to lose power in a disaster, rendering computer email useless; so other means are necessary.

I hope this clarifies a bit what we’re doing at UH Manoa, and what we’re prepared to do, in case of emergencies.

Thanks,
Gregg

Our response:

Gregg, thanks for your email. Here’s the issue as we see it:

Once the University is moved to issue an alert about a possible attack on the campus community, as you were yesterday, UH has an obligation to communicate what it knows as broadly, completely, efficiently and rapidly as possible. From the available evidence, UH didn’t do that.

We already know from published reports and anecdotally that the text message reached only some students and faculty. We don’t know what percentage did not receive it, but it’s not hard to imagine a majority was uninformed of the threat. Therefore, the text message essentially was a failure because too many members of the University community were unaware of the threat.

You allude in your email to other communications channels. UH apparently did not employ them yesterday. Newspaper accounts don’t mention them, and neither does your email. What was the information provided to UH campus security by Honolulu police that led University officials to conclude only a text message was needed but not loudspeakers, not announcements in classes and other buildings, not broadcasts by on-campus KTUH-FM and the commercial stations?

Unlike campus security officials, we don’t have insider information that allows them to nuance menacing threats. Maybe someone who’s overheard muttering to himself on a city bus only warrants a text message and not the other channels available to UH. Frankly, we’re not comfortable with security officials making those nuanced calls. That’s the kind of decision Virginia Tech officials made on their own, with disastrous results.

Here’s our suggestion for your emergency communications SOP:

Any threat to the security of the campus community warranting an alert to students and faculty will be disseminated by all available means – text messaging, emails, loudspeakers in buildings and in the campus’s exterior spaces, and broadcasts over KTUH and the commercial stations.

In other words, the alert level would go from ZERO to HIGH with no intermediate levels. We think this mindset can’t be faulted, whereas the SOP guiding yesterday’s ineffective alert already is under attack. Yesterday’s threat involved potential mass murder, and with the threat-maker’s whereabouts still unknown, UH issued an ineffective alert that may have eluded thousands of individuals on your campus. What possible reason did UH have to downplay the importance of that threat and therefore communicate with half measures to your community?

A final suggestion: Allow students and faculty to make their own decisions about how to react to a threat. If students and faculty members decide to leave or skip class based on a report such as yesterday’s, let them, and don’t penalize them for their absence.

If you’re going to trust personal communications devices such as cell phones with text messaging, take a giant leap and actually trust individual students and faculty members to make good decisions about their personal safety. They deserve that much.

Aloha,

Doug
(A postscript said the email exchange would be posted here at CHORE.)
•••••••••••••••••
We urge University officials to see yesterday's incident as a wake-up call and reason to revise their planning on how to keep the campus community informed about security threats. The current plan is demonstrably inadequate.

UH’s Email Alert Fails the Efficiency Test; Students Themselves Reveal TM’s Weakness

Yesterday’s security alert at the University of Hawaii raises additional questions about the wisdom of relying on text messaging as the primary way to communicate with students and faculty in an emergency.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Mid-Morning Update: CHORE wrote to Dr. Francisco Hernandez, UH Vice Chancellor for Students, and received this reply: "We are all concerned about the safety of our students, staff and faculty. I will bring your email to the attention of the officials on campus who have the responsibility of communicating with our campus during these types of situations."

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

As reported in the Honolulu Advertiser and the Star-Bulletin, a student overheard a bus passenger talking to himself about shooting 30 students. UH officials sent an email to students and faculty urging caution.

Two-Hour Information Gap

Except for the email, there apparently was no system in place to warn the campus community about the would-be shooter. As reported in the Star-Bulletin, some email recipients “were shocked” to learn about the potential threat because they hadn’t checked their email for two hours. Said one student:

"I just got out of class. Oh no! He's planning to shoot 30 students on campus? Oh my goodness. Not too many people actually check their email."

“Not too many people actually check their email.” What more need be said about relying on text messaging to spread emergency alerts?

Low-Tech Solutions Needed

Does UH have a campus loudspeaker capability? We know it has a radio station. Was the alert broadcast over KTUH? What about the mass telephony capability that’s been touted? There’s no mention in the newspaper stories of the alert using any of these media.

Society’s love affair with personal technology is as hot as ever, yet each new emergency raises questions about relying on text messaging as the primary emergency communications channel. Even UH’s spokesman cited its current limitations:

"It's not clear that (cell phone carriers) have the ability to send out 10,000 or 15,000 text messages at the same instance."

Students and faculty can’t tolerate a two-hour delay in being informed about their potential peril. “Not too many people actually check their email.” That’s by a 22-year-old from the heart of the text-messaging generation!

Yesterday’s events revealed UH’s seriously flawed capability to inform the campus about emergencies. Rather than obsessively gather everyone's cell phone number, University planners need to perfect additional channels -- including low-tech loudspeakers and radio -- to alert their community.

PS: We have it on good authority (our wife, a UH student) that ALL of her instructors announce cell phones must be turned off during class. If students are observed text messaging, they're told to turn off the phone. Case closed.

Advertiser Story Captures a Contrite Attitude Among Key Players in Communications Chain

Having been interviewed by the Honolulu Advertiser for its series on emergency preparedness, we waited for the paper’s delivery wondering how it would play the story. Would it focus on comments from the state’s high-gloss press conference on Saturday or dig deeper? The very first paragraph set our mind at ease:

“Persistent questions remain unanswered about the state’s plan to communicate with residents in the event of another devastating natural disaster such as the Oct. 15 quakes, say critics who complained bitterly about what seemed like an information vacuum during the 24-hour outage following the quakes.”

Paragraph 2 highlighted residents’ upset over State Civil Defense’s delay in allying fears about a possible tsunami. Paragraph 4 mentioned HECO’s two-hour delay in explaining why the power was out throughout Oahu, and the following paragraph questioned how information will be given to residents quickly.

Seeing It the Same Way

It’s clear others share at least some of CHORE’s perspective on the 10/15/06 communications failures. It’s also interesting that after their prolonged argumentative defensiveness in the face of criticism of their performance, some of the key players in the communications chain now seem contrite.

The general manager of all Clear Channel stations said the Clear Channel staff has been given new training. “We assessed what we did. We always try to improve. We’re going to work hard to do a better job,” he said.

That refreshing attitude is also a noticeable shift from his earlier somewhat self-satisfied descriptions of how flagship station KSSK performed during the emergency. One would hope it’s evidence of a new emergency mindset among all station personnel, including on-air personalities who seemed to be stuck in entertainment mode during the blackout. (Maybe this is the last time that we’ll recall KSSK’s decision to air the pre-recorded John Tesh show while half the island was still without power.)

HECO says it is assessing ways to prioritize restoring power to media outlets so information can flow quicker, and it has installed a direct communications link to emergency station KSSK. The utility, along with other emergency responders, now has a list of unpublished radio station telephone numbers so its personnel can get through during a crisis. (As noted here several times, that’s a lesson we learned at HECO during Hurricane Iwa 25 years ago!)

Even the State Adjutant General says in this story, “We’re going to get on the air right away,” a concession that State Civil Defense personnel were slow in providing information to the public.

Ah, Yes – the Public

The Advertiser story concludes with our continuing concern that the public has been shut out of the dialogue over how we’re to be served with emergency communications. “This (Comprehensive Communications Review) committee was a committee of insiders. The process still has a weak link until the public has a chance to ask questions.”

CHORE urges fellow citizens with similar concerns to call the Governor’s office to register your support for a public meeting on the emergency response plan.

What Exactly Has Been Updated in EAS Plan?

The first “key recommendation” in the CCRC report says the State’s Emergency Alert System Plan has been updated. One year after the 10/15/06 earthquakes and Oahu’s massive island-wide power outage, these words do not appear in the plan update that's available online: “power,” “outage,” “electricity” and “blackout.”

Just what was updated in this plan? That’s another question to be asked at a future public hearing on the CCRC’s report (see below).