Note: it should be borne in mind
that the author lives and works in
Often, after another tragedy, in expert discussions addressing the protection
of educational institutions, participants use the term «security level» with
various adjectives such as high, low, satisfactory, unsatisfactory, compliant,
minimal, etc. However, the question arises: what exactly do they mean by this
concept? What can this level be, how is it determined, and what factors
influence it?
After studying publicly available information on these issues, I concluded that
there is currently no unified (or even widely accepted) system for formally
assessing the security level of educational facilities. Most reports containing
such evaluations and conclusions are based on the personal opinions of the
specialists who prepared them, relying on compliance with regulatory documents,
as well as numerous guidelines, recommendations, and informational letters from
the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Federal
Security Service, the National Guard, and other executive and local government
bodies. These documents mostly contain general, and often vague, wording,
making it difficult to judge how accurate and objective the conclusions drawn
from them are.
After reviewing publicly available foreign practices,
I also found nothing concrete; the situation on this issue appears to be
similar there, despite the clear need for such a tool.
I am not a proponent of excessive standardization in security matters, but I
consider this area an exception. Due to the absence of an assessment system
that could, based on formal criteria, objectively calculate the security level
of an educational facility with minimal influence from the «human factor»—and
since I need such a tool in my work—I decided to try creating it myself.
The table presented in this article is intended to
assess the security level of an educational institution against criminal and
terrorist threats. The evaluation is based on 64 criteria, covering:
- Characteristics of the educational facility’s
territory and location,
- Buildings and structures,
- Presence of physical security and its specifics,
- Technical security measures and their capabilities,
- Additional active and passive protective measures.
Each item, if present and—just as importantly—fully
operational, is assigned the number of points indicated in the table. If absent
or non-functional (fully or partially), it receives 0 points, and so on for all
items. The points are then summed to produce a final score. In addition to the
total score, there are factors that negatively affect the final assessment, all
of which are outlined in the «Final Score Calculation Formula» section.
When completed, the table clearly shows the level of protection of the
educational institution against criminal and terrorist threats, its
capabilities, and, most importantly, obvious shortcomings and vulnerabilities
in the security system. Based on the resulting score, measures and costs for
improving the facility’s protection level can be planned.
Furthermore, using annual assessment data for one or multiple facilities,
comparative and trend analysis can easily be conducted, clearly evaluating the
situation in this area for a specific school, city, region, or even country
over a given period—comparing both overall scores and individual indicators or
sections. This is a convenient and, most importantly, objective tool for
monitoring the situation. A decrease in the score, even by 1 point compared to
the previous period, will immediately indicate a worsening situation and the
need for action.
Author’s note: I believe that once completed,
this table should be classified as at least «For Official Use Only» (or
preferably with a higher restriction level), with very limited access granted
to its contents. This information is too critical, and if it falls into the
hands of someone planning a mass killing or terrorist attack, it could become a
«lethal weapon,» significantly increasing the number of potential victims...
