Risk and Security LLC

Risk Assessments, Training and More

This content shows Simple View

risk assessment

3 Cleveland Women Freed -The New Front Line of the War on Women

Posted on May 8, 2013 1:54 pm by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

Posted on by

For the past 4 days, media attention has been focused on the three Cleveland girls who were abducted close to their homes and kept as prisoners in an old run-down house with neighbors on all sides.

NOW, neighbors tell how they broke down the door to free the women, the little 6-year old girl who came out with them, presumably the child of their abductor, and stories of screams coming from the house over the LAST TEN YEARS.

Besides the obvious curiosity about how they are, how this happened, how they were subdued for so long, and all the salient details, my question is WHY DID THIS HAPPEN, AND WHAT DO WE NEED TO CHANGE TO MAKE SURE IT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN!

As a security analyst, I have to place some of the blame at the door of the Cleveland police, not that they are different from any other police department in the U.S.  Police are trained to catch criminals – that is their reason for being.   But it seems that, increasingly, in crimes where women go missing, even a 16-year-old, the search for them never really gets underway.  With no speeding car to chase, no easy suspicious person to detain, they stop looking.

Statistics say that about 2300 people go missing every day, over half are men, so that
leaves about 1000 females, and of these, about 70% are young women. so that easy math – about 700 A DAY! or 255,500 EVERY YEAR!

My point is just that the Cleveland Triple Abduction should be a wake up call for parents, citizens AND law enforcement to find a better way to search for these missing girls.

The world has changed – we have cameras, social media, facebook pages, and we need for all of these to be routinely used to find missing girls before we see another case exactly like this one.



Tragedy at the Boston Marathon – What Went Wrong?

Posted on April 16, 2013 11:24 am by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

Looking at the CNN footage of the Boston Marathon finish line yesterday, I was struck by the shock of the bystanders and the chaos that followed the blasts.

Having just giving two seminars on security controls, I pulled out my list to see what could possibly have been done differently to prevent this devastating outcome, and there was the first word on the list ACCESS CONTROL.

After thirty years as a security expert and risk-threat analyst, I am about 85% sure that this was a lone wolf attacker who made his crude bombs to address some personal perceived problem, whether it was fear of gun legislation, spillover from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Neo Con torture initiative, or something else.

Putting the attacker aside for a moment, the tragedy happened because SOMEONE WAS ABLE TO WALK RIGHT UP TO THE FINISH LINE AND PUT AT LEAST 3 BOMBS right near the finish line!   THiS IS NOT RIGHT.

There has to be SCREENING and ACCESS CONTROL PROCEDURES IN PLACE!  You can’t have security if you have open access to a major event like the Boston Marathon.  For year, security experts have cautioned that large crowds make a great target, and so events have paid lip service to this concept, without staying on the task, and making sure that SECURITY CONTROL NUMBER ONE –  ACCESS CONTROL  is ALWAYS in place.

But people don’t like access control, it’s too much trouble, they say.  They don’t like metal detectors, too expensive, too much trouble, too intrusive.  Well, it’s not as intrusive as having a major injury.   There are ways to secure these high profile sites, but the security community has to lead on this.

Yes, it is very sad and depressing that the world has come to this — but it has.  And it will happen again.  As long as security is perceived as too much trouble, too expensive, too tough to do, and too intrusive, there will be more tragic events like this one.

 

 



Wondering Which Security Controls Offer the Highest Protection for Less Money?

Posted on April 8, 2013 12:20 pm by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

Security Controls can be incredibly cost effective or astronomically expensive.  And when you’re faced with a facility or a school campus, or a system that has to be secured, but you also have a budget to keep in mind – what do you do?

The simple answer is ROI – Return on Investment.  This simple calculation compares the Cost of the Proposed Control to the Protection is Provides and that creates the magic ROI Number.

Here’s an example:   A hospital near the New Jersey shore wants to create a new emergency ops center.  They have the space,
but it would cost about $250,000 to build it out.  Here’s what we look at – how often would they use an emergency ops center?

Threat data shows that they would need to use it about 3-6

Operations Center (OPS)
Operations Center (OPS)

times a year, including severe storms, thunderstorms and hurricanes.

(After Hurricane Sandy, the hospital was closed for two days because they were not able to resume service right away.  As a result, the hospital lost about $2,000,000 per day because it could not bill for any services, none could be provided.)  

So we take that lost $2,000,000 per day and say that if we could keep the facility open because we had a better operational center, we could easily save 2 days of revenue which is $4,000,000 for the 2 days, and if it cost us only $ 250,000, and saves us $ 4,000,000, that’s a Return on Investment of SIXTEEN to ONE, 16:1.

Say it saved us 3 days of revenue a year – that’s a ROI of TWENTY-FOUR to ONE, 24:1!

You can get more info by writing to me directly at caroline@riskandsecurityllc.com and requesting a webinar invitation,
or a copy of the video.

 



New App does a Workplace Violence Baseline Assessment

Posted on March 13, 2013 10:21 am by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

New Workplace Violence Prevention App helps companies do an OSHA Violence Baseline Assessment

DATELINE:    Boca Raton, Florida,  March 12, 2013

Workplace Violence in US companies is a problem that is getting worse.  Workplace violence is a serious recognized occupational hazard, ranking among the top four causes of death in workplaces during the past 15 years. More than 3,000 people died from workplace homicide between 2006 and 2010, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Additional BLS data indicate that an average of more than 15,000 nonfatal workplace injury cases was reported annually during this time.

The latest figures show that high-risk organizations like hospitals, behavioral health treatment, home health workers and late night retail establishments are at a dramatically increased risk for experiencing a violent incident at work.

OSHA, and over thirty state government regs recommend that companies do an annual Workplace Violence Basement Assessment, but these are time-consuming and difficult to manage.

To solve the problem,  Risk & Security LLC has released a new web-based app, Workplace Violence Risk-Pro©, which makes security directors into Risk Professionals!

OSHA standard 3148 (Guidelines for Preventing Workplace Violence for Health Care &

Social Service Workers)and the new OSHA Inspection Directive, Enforcement Procedures for Investigating or Inspecting Incidents of Workplace Violence, from September, 2011, are both included in the new, easy-to-use application.

The program has been tested on some of the largest organizations in the US, and runs on a laptop, PC or tablet, and even on a smartphone!.  Workplace Violence Risk-Pro©  is built to be affordable and simple to use.

The web 2.0 program, includes newly compiled, updated threat databases, and automated web-surveys  based on the exact OSHA Directives.

The new program gives human services and security professionals a quick and easy way to conduct a workplace violence baseline assessment that will pass an audit!

The Risk-Pro©  model has been used for easy software applications with the Department of Defense and over hundreds of organizations, hospitals, maritime organizatons, and local, state and federal government agencies.

About Risk & Security  LLC

Risk & Security  LLC is a security risk assessment and risk analysis company with over 30 years of combined expertise in security risk.  It specializes in consulting on risk assessment projects and global application development of risk solutions.  Risk & Security partners with security companies around the world to provide state-of-the-art security expertise to analyze risk and recommend cost-effective countermeasures.

The team of risk and security experts is led Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton, who has created more than 40 software programs, and conducted more than 200 specialized security risk assessments in a variety of environments, including companies in the United States and around the world, including in Abu Dhabi, Hong Kong, Japan, South Africa and Qatar.



How Chavez Ruined Venezuela, Up Close and Personal

Posted on March 6, 2013 10:28 am by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

My risk assessment company was contacted in 1995 to come to Caracas and work on a variety of security risk projects for
3 of the major Venezuelan companies — PDVSA (Petroleum de Venezuela, south America), and the two gas utilities, Maravan and Lagovan.

Never had been to south America, and I was worried about security so I remember buying special security devices to take with me and then one Sunday I flew down to Miami and caught the plane for Caracas!

The first thing I noticed was that I was out by the pool, and there were men with machine guns on the roof of the Caracas Intercontinental Hotel!   Later, room service delivered 7 large books, as big as encyclopedias – they were a History of Venezuela, a History of the Venezuelan Oil Industry and a few more.  I guess I was supposed to read them all by Monday.

That was the beginning of a long relationship with the people at PDVSA, many of whom became friends for life.  So I saw the downward spiral up close and personal.  First, the crime started to increase.  Places I had felt safe before, like the public square where the old men played chess at night.  Then one of the women I knew was pistol-whipped at her beach house.

Slowly, Chavez replaced the business people on the corporate Boards, and the staff, of these cash-cow companies with uneducated people with no business experience.   In a real world replay of Ayn Rand’s ATLAS SHRUGGED, these people didn’t care about maintenance, infrastructure, or security, they were the looters who wanted a total redistribution of wealth, without realizing the companies had to actually PRODUCE something to keep that cash flowing.

Within five years, as I continued to go down to Caracas, everyone I knew had left and many moved to other companies.  One married and moved to Spain, several went into other petroleum operations in the US.   An entire industry had been ruined by Chavez and his lack of understanding, or care, of the one income-producing business in Venezuela.

The currency was so devalued that I still have a six inch stack of Bolivars, the paper currency that was worth less than a few pennies apiece.

So it really is possible for one person to totally ruin a country’s economy and main industry, putting his ego and his desire for fame and power to ruin an entire country.

Fate has intervened to give Venezuela another chance – I hope they run with it.

 

 



What Churches Need to Know About Security Risk Assessment!

Posted on February 23, 2013 11:39 am by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

the problems that churches face has changed since the 1950s.  Churches were considered “safe”, but the Sikh temple shootings in Wisconsin, shootings in Colorado Springs Churches, and the burning of black churches, have changed the security posture of churches.

Take a look at violence in churches today.  In 2008, the FBI recorded 23,547 crimes attributed to location code for “Church/ Synagogue/Temple”.  Deaths from church attacks rose 36% in 2012 according to the January 30, 2013 edition of Christianity Today.  Guns were used in nearly 60 percent of all “deadly force incidents” at churches since 1999 according to Carl Chinn who has been tracking these incidents.

Arson incidents are so widespread that the Dept. of Justice has a National Church Arson Task Force, and “Arson at churches has been a problem for a long time,” said Patrick Moreland, an executive with the Wisconsin-based Church Mutual Insurance Co., which insures 63,000 houses of worship.

No church leader, or church member wants their place of worship to become a crime scene, as the country watches it unfold on CNN.  And there’s a pro-active way to analyze a church’s security profile

And determine:

  • How Likely the Church is to have a Violence Incident
  • What Other Churches in the area are experiencing
  • What the Threat Level is in your Geographic Area
  • Exactly What Controls You Need to Add to Stay Safe

A Security Risk Assessment is a quick, easy to use model that can take streams of data and information and use these actual events to produce a simple report that can track the threat levels, and match these to potential and existing controls to see how existing controls can be implemented, what new controls need to be added, and how to do it all in a cost-effective way.

One of the key points of a security risk assessment is that it measures solutions in terms of COST-EFFECTIVENESS.  No one wants to over-spend on something and not have enough money left for a critical security element.

Out in the field, we often find that controls are not effectively implemented, or they are not 100% implemented, and if there’s even a 10% gap, it’s just like the control never existed at all.

And you don’t need to be an expert to perform a security risk assessment on your church, school, temple or summer camp.  There are new automated software applications, like Church Facilities Risk-Pro, similar to the app on your iphone, that will do the assessment for you, showing you the data you need, and even writing and formatting the reports for you.

The Control Reports become a blueprint for improving security and can become part of a 3-year plan that will protect the physical facility, the congregation, and the entire community.



A New Threat Appears – Meteor Strikes

Posted on February 17, 2013 10:35 am by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

After the meteor showers over Siberia this week, Russia put together a

Financial analysis of the damage from the meteors:

1200 injured by flying glass

             $33,000,000 in damage

4,000 building damaged

50 Acres of windows shattered

In the last twenty-five years, as the rate of climate change has increase, we have occasionally added new threats like Tsunami and ash pollution.

Now meteor showers have actually come to cause damage to companies so they are another factor to be included in risk assessments.

In evaluating threats for a risk assessment, many in the northeast would always tell me, “take out earthquakes”, we don’t have earthquakes in Virginia, Maryland, and Ohio. That changed in 2011 when the Mineral, Virginia earthquake hit during a mid-week business day.

RICHMOND, VA (WWBT) – Aug. 24, 2011. 

There was an earthquake in Central Virginia that measured 5.8 on the Richter scale centered about 5 miles south of Mineral in Louisa, depth 3.7 miles at about 1:51 p.m. The quake was centered at 38°N, 78°W.

The U.S. Geological Survey said the earthquake was centered about 38 miles northwest of Richmond, Va., about 84 miles southwest of Washington, D.C., and was felt as far north as Rhode Island and New York City. See a map of the quake from Chuck Bailey, professor of geology at the College of William and Mary.

Hospitals, government offices, dams and power generating plants,  including nuclear plants, were forced to suddenly reevaluate the long held idea that earthquakes just didn’t happen in the NorthEast.

The threat from meteor damage is the same idea.  It never happened before, but now it has happened again, if you count Tunguska as the first time.

Damage from meteor showers will now add a new category into the Threat index, even though this was the first event in my lifetime, if analyst factor in the previously known instances, such as the Tunguska Meteor Event, which did not occur thousands of years ago, like the meteor event in the Yucatan peninsula that killed off the dinosaurs, but
Tunguska occurred in 1908!   Almost in this century.

Over the next month, we’ll be looking at each different threat every week.  Sign up for my blog or access by following me on twitter at www.twitter.com/riskalert.

 



Data-Driven Security: The Best Way to Improve Security for Anything, Anywhere

Posted on February 5, 2013 3:44 pm by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

How can you improve your security program?  Are we talking about a seaport?  A church?  A manufacturing facility?  A gas pipeline?  An office building?  Corporate Headquarters?   Zoo?  Hospital?  Bank?  Clinic?  City Hall?  Harbor?  Stadium?  Government Agency?

It doesn’t matter what you need to protect — if you decide it is a critical asset, it needs good, continually improving security, and
an on-going assessment program is the fastest, easiest way to get it.

If wonderful, dedicated you, (as the security pro), don’t know what’s working and what’s not, how can you improve the overall program, unless you wait for an “precipitating event”, like a THEFT, like an ASSAULT, like a FLOOD, or a HURRICANE, or a POWER LOSS, and then you immediately start working on that and making sure THAT particular disaster doesn’t happen again!
Meanwhile, everything else is slowly losing energy due to lack of constant attention.

And so let’s say you are the Super Bowl, and the power went out!  Terrible. Inexcusable.  And you’re busy getting a 2nd or 3rd backup generator to make sure THAT POWER LOSS never happens again.

This problem with this model – fixing what’s broken and ‘learning from experience’ is that it’s always a day late.  You’re always chasing after something that already happened.

Instead, you can  set up a program so that you use to continually evaluate the current condition, assess the risk, and then improve the security controls, based on THAT RISK ASSESSMENT.

Tony Robbins used to call it CANI –

  • Constant And Never-ending Improvement.  You can accomplish this by setting up regular assessments and then adjusting or tweeking the security controls to adjust to the new, or more aggressive threats.
    “Regular” assessments can be monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, annually, bi-annually, whatever schedule suits you and the organization.   The idea is that by continually reassessing your last improvement,and changing the threats and risk level,
    you can create a dynamic, data-driven security program that improves the security profile dramatically, without having to
    suffer through another triggering event!
    The concept of CANI – Constant And Never-ending Improvement can breathe life into your security program, you can use it to improve your health, your fitness level, your guitar playing, your _______________________.
    You fill in the rest!

 

 



What do Benghazi and Newtown have in common? Flawed Security!

Posted on December 27, 2012 12:06 pm by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

After the attack on the Benghazi mission and the tragic mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, its apparent that what these two terrible incidents have in common is that security was not adequate.

In Benghazi, after the hearings and the pundits and speculation, the bottom line is that there was insufficient security.  In-place security controls were not sufficient to deter an attack, and the emergency controls were also not sufficient to recover and deal with the emergency attack.

In Newtown, at Sandy Hook Elementary, security was inadequate.  Security people often say that security is just as good as the weakest link, and despite adding new security controls, it was defeated because of the glass entry.  The shooter wasn’t allowed in so he simply broke the glass.  That slowed him up by 2 minutes, maybe. Also backup security controls were non-existent.  The shooter was observed and still there was no effective response.

There are three elements to security – DETER, DENY and RESPOND:

DETER – means to make the facility look too difficult to attack, and so the attacker thinks it’s too hard and goes away.

DENY – means that it is impossible for the attacker to get into the facility to launch an attack.

RESPOND/PROTECT means that after the attack is launched, the facility can defend itself, or to protect the individuals and/or property inside the facility.
Both Benghazi and Newtown did not deter, didn’t deny access, and didn’t have an adequate security response.

The Newtown shooting showed that this school, like many others across the country, had a false sense of security, because while some security elements were in place, the shooter easily entered the school, making the other elements irrelevant and  him to inflict mass casualties.

In both cases, the response was not adequate, it was ‘too little too late’.  And ‘too late’ means the attack can’t be stopped or contained.

The WHY is easy, because the security budget was inadequate.  These facilities did not have adequate risk assessments that could have demonstrated the critical assets contained within them.  What is more critical than classrooms of 6 year old children?  What is more critical than a State department facility with a U.S. ambassador inside?  Yet both didn’t have the protective security controls they deserved because their wasn’t enough budget for enough security.

Another element these incidents have in common is that they are both government facilities.  Yes, one was the Federal government and one was a local school district – but they both had the same problem of being short on budgets.  And when organizations are short on budgets, security is one of the first things to get their funding cut, or reduced.

Every facility needs a SECURITY risk assessment up front, how else can you allocate the funding and make sure that there is ENOUGH security in place to protect our most critical assets, our children?



Why the State Department Needs Better Threat-Risk Assessments

Posted on September 14, 2012 4:02 pm by Caroline Ramsey-Hamilton Comment

Obviously, the tragedy in Libya this week focused the world’s attention, not just on the bodies of our countrymen returning home, but made me wonder about the risk assessments and threat assessments that are routinely done in these extremely sensitive locations.

Unfortunately, the threat assessments tend to be more political forecasting and less about the reality of the situation on the ground.  One problem with these simple manual threat/risk assessments is that they take too long to complete.  Maybe they spend a few days looking at the physical controls, and then a week writing up a report, and much of it may rely on anecdotal incidents or reports of questionable value.

That’s why I am a believer in automating these threat/risk assessments, and in a potentially dangerous area like the whole country of Libya, they should be at least weekly, or bi-weekly, or even daily when tensions are running high.  It allows you to get a quick assessment in less than 30 minutes, and allows for quick updating, which is critical in situations like this week.

And no, I don’t believe a threat/risk assessment would necessarily PREVENT a terrible tragedy like the death of an American Ambassador, but I do think that having these updated assessments allows for safeguards to be continuously checked, measured and improved, and also may expose weaknesses that can be exploited by a terrorist group when the opportunity presents itself.

The practice of running continual assessments is not used very often, but when it is, it’s very effective because when the situation goes south, you already the blueprint of what to do right in front of you, and it allows better decision support under such stressful conditions.

The information-sharing done by different groups can be wrapped up in the risk assessment and combined, so that maybe a higher threat condition can be identified, in time to relocate, leave the country, or whatever else it takes to protect the lives of our diplomatic staff.

 




top