Emergency Management: Federal Agencies Could Improve Dissemination of Resources to Colleges

Colleges and other postsecondary schools must plan for various potential emergencies, ranging from natural disasters to violence. A number of federal agencies, including DHS, DOJ, and Education, offer resources to support these efforts. GAO was asked to review colleges' awareness of these resources.

This report examines how (1) selected colleges prepare for emergencies, and (2) federal agencies support college emergency preparedness efforts, including the extent to which selected colleges reported awareness of federal resources.

To answer these questions, GAO interviewed officials from a non-generalizable sample of 18 colleges selected for diversity in size, type, and location. GAO also interviewed officials from three states (Colorado, Kansas, and Virginia) in which some of these schools operated. The states were selected to represent varied approaches to supporting colleges' emergency preparedness efforts. GAO also reviewed federal emergency preparedness resources, agency written responses, applicable federal laws, and federal internal control standards, and interviewed federal officials and representatives from several associations recommended by agency officials.

Emergency managers at 18 colleges across the country told GAO that their efforts to prepare for emergencies involved working with the campus community to develop, communicate, and practice plans, as well as working with state and local partners. Campus community members who are involved often include personnel from offices such as public safety, student affairs, or facilities. Officials at all 18 colleges reported developing emergency plans addressing a range of potential events—an approach consistent with federal emergency management principles. To publicize plans, officials often reported using websites, text messages, or presentations to the campus community. Colleges also reported practicing plans through drills. College officials noted that buy-in from the college president and other top campus leaders was critical to their efforts; several officials reported struggling to obtain such support. Most officials also said they coordinate with local or state partners such as police and relied on these partners for advice or to obtain emergency preparedness resources.

The Departments of Homeland Security (DHS), Justice (DOJ), and Education (Education) offer a variety of emergency preparedness resources to colleges (see figure). However, officials GAO interviewed at 18 colleges described mixed awareness of federal resources, especially those specifically tailored to colleges, despite federal efforts to publicize these resources in a variety of ways. Federal officials and other stakeholders acknowledged this mixed awareness and identified potential causes, such as college emergency managers having networks comprised of local officials who are more likely to know about federal resources for local agencies versus those for colleges, or some college officials devoting limited time to researching federal resources for various reasons.

DHS, DOJ, and Education all publicize their resources through electronic mailing lists, websites, or other methods, but GAO identified missed opportunities in their dissemination approaches. For example, the electronic mailing list for one key resource may reach the approximately 1,000 officials from colleges subscribed, but may miss at least 3,000 additional schools. GAO also found two federal agency websites that did not include key resources from other federal agencies. Federal internal control standards state that agencies should consider the most appropriate methods for communicating with their external audiences. By identifying opportunities to improve dissemination, federal agencies may increase their ability to effectively communicate important information to colleges.

GAO recommends that DHS, DOJ, and Education work together to identify opportunities to more effectively publicize emergency preparedness resources to colleges. All three agencies concurred with the recommendations or described actions to implement them.

Colleges and other postsecondary schools must plan for a variety of  potential emergencies. Recent events such as Hurricanes Harvey and  Irma, active shooters, and violent rallies, underscore the importance of  such preparations. Preparedness efforts involve developing plans and  systems to prevent certain manmade events from occurring, protecting  members of the campus community when natural or manmade  emergencies do occur and minimizing the impact of such events, as well  as ensuring the community’s safety and maintaining or restoring  operations in an event’s aftermath. Adequately preparing and responding  to emergencies can be complicated by the diverse needs of campus  facilities that range from classrooms and dormitories to sports venues,  laboratories, and medical buildings.

College emergency preparedness efforts may be influenced by  requirements of and resources from local, state, and federal agencies. At  the federal level, three agencies—the Departments of Homeland Security  (DHS), Justice (DOJ), and Education (Education)—play a key part in  providing emergency preparedness resources to colleges. Education also  oversees compliance with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus  Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act), which  includes requirements related to emergency preparedness and  notification. You asked us to explore colleges’ emergency preparedness  efforts, as well as their awareness of related federal resources.

This report examines how: 1) selected colleges prepare for emergencies,  and 2) federal agencies support colleges’ emergency preparedness  efforts, including the extent to which selected colleges report awareness  of federal resources.

To obtain information about how selected colleges plan and prepare for  emergencies, we conducted semi-structured interviews with officials at a  nongeneralizable sample of 18 colleges. Prior to these interviews, we  sent the 18 schools a pre-interview questionnaire to gather details on  their emergency preparedness efforts and their awareness of available  federal resources. In our interviews we asked follow-up questions, as  appropriate, about their responses. In selecting these schools, we  considered diversity in sector (public and private), size, 2-year and 4-year  degree offerings, residential and non-residential campuses, and  population density (i.e., rural versus urban). To obtain additional  information about how colleges prepare for emergencies, we reviewed  documents and interviewed officials from three states (Colorado, Kansas,  and Virginia) in which some of these schools operated. The states were  selected for their varied approaches to supporting college emergency  preparedness. We also interviewed representatives from several college  emergency preparedness associations that support colleges’ emergency  preparedness efforts and which were identified by federal agency  officials. To obtain information about federal resources for college  emergency preparedness, we reviewed federal resources and  interviewed officials from DHS, DOJ, and Education. We also asked  officials from these agencies to provide written descriptions of the  resources they offer to colleges regarding emergency preparedness. We  focused on these three agencies based on their central role in developing  the 2013 Guide for Developing High-Quality Emergency Operations Plans  for Institutions of Higher Education (an interagency effort) and our  subsequent interviews and document review. We also asked officials at  our 18 selected colleges about their awareness of federal resources. We  reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and agency guidance and  compared federal efforts to internal control standards for the federal  government.

We conducted this performance audit from October 2016 to January 2018  in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Colleges are a unique and diverse sector, varying from small, private  schools in rural environments to large public schools in major cities. As of  the 2015-2016 school year (the most recent available data), there were  approximately 4,000 degree-granting colleges in the United States. In  addition to educating students in classrooms, many colleges also manage  a number of related business operations, such as dormitories, scientific  research facilities, hospitals, performing arts centers, athletic venues,  child care facilities, transportation systems, and agricultural facilities.  These various roles and responsibilities increase the complexity of  emergency preparedness efforts.

DHS has developed a national approach to emergency preparedness by  setting a national preparedness goal and outlining activities for achieving  it. This approach is designed to apply across all levels of government and  sectors of the economy—including colleges, as well as local, state, and  federal governments—and to prioritize collaboration among these entities.  The National Preparedness Goal identifies activities to prevent, protect  against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from threats and hazards and  recognizes that preparedness is a shared responsibility of the whole  community. The National Incident Management System (NIMS), which  was developed by DHS’ Federal Emergency Management Agency  (FEMA), operationalizes the goal by providing a guide with advice for  government and nongovernmental entities for managing emergencies,  including identifying a common vocabulary and processes for responding  to emergencies. For example, NIMS establishes a standardized  approach for communicating information during emergencies and outlines  a leadership structure for managing emergencies, called an “Incident  Command System,” so that the various entities responding to an  emergency can operate seamlessly.

DHS, DOJ, and Education all develop and disseminate emergency  preparedness resources in line with their respective missions. Other  agencies, such as the Department of Health and Human Services and the  National Weather Service, also produce information that can help with  colleges’ emergency preparedness efforts.

Selected Colleges Prepare for Emergencies by Involving the Campus Community, Developing and Publicizing Plans, and Partnering with Local and State Agencies

Selected Colleges Varied in Organizational Structures for Emergency Preparedness and Involvement of Campus Community

College offices responsible for emergency preparedness efforts and the  number of staff assigned to such efforts varied among the 18 selected  colleges we interviewed and generally received some input from other  members of the campus community. According to guidance for  emergency planning from DHS’ Federal Emergency Management Agency  (FEMA), emergency preparedness staff are generally responsible for  tasks such as developing emergency plans, communicating and updating  those plans, and taking a lead role during an actual event. College  officials we spoke with said that their schools generally designated a lead  office for emergency preparedness efforts. This lead office ranged from a  dedicated emergency preparedness office at some colleges to offices that  had non-emergency preparedness responsibilities as well, such as offices  of public safety, student affairs, or facilities. About half of the officials  responsible for emergency preparedness efforts at the 18 selected  colleges we interviewed also spent time on other types of responsibilities  that were not specific to emergency preparedness, such as health and  safety issues. State agency officials and representatives from a college  emergency preparedness association we spoke with also noted that  emergency managers at colleges often “wear many hats,” or have limited  time to devote to emergency planning, which makes their jobs more  difficult. College officials often said balancing competing priorities was  challenging. For example, an official at one college told us that if his  school had more staff it could expand outreach efforts to students and  faculty and design specific actions for a wider range of emergencies.

In addition to having a lead office, most of the 18 colleges reported  convening advisory committees or teams from the campus community to  help develop or revise emergency preparedness plans. For example, one  official at a large public university with over 36,000 students told us  emergency plans are reviewed by an emergency response committee  comprised of representatives from the business office, student housing,  faculty, and the provost, among others. An official from another college  reported that, while some campus community members played a less  active part in developing the emergency plan, they were still responsible  for understanding their roles and responsibilities in the event of an  emergency. According to FEMA’s guidance for emergency plans, there  are benefits to using a team approach. For example, the campus  community is more likely to follow a plan if members have been involved  in developing it because of a sense of shared ownership (see text box.)

Two College Emergency Managers’ Descriptions of Emergency  Preparedness Efforts   On the day a campus police officer was shot and killed, several of the  members of the campus leadership, including myself (the emergency  manager) and chief of police, were off campus. Fortunately, many  people on campus have been trained to manage a significant event  because college leadership had placed a strong emphasis on  emergency preparedness, including succession planning. When  something occurs it is important to have a team that has practiced  together and can provide leadership even if some key individuals are  not on campus at the time.

Hurricane Irma was 340 miles across, wider than the states of Florida  and Georgia in some places. We were on the “dirty side” of the  hurricane, just to the east of the eye. We were relieved that the  damage on our campuses was not worse. Because of our actions  before the storm—such as removing loose items like traffic cones and  signage and tying down large equipment— we minimized the damage.

Selected Colleges Reported Preparing for a Range of Emergencies and Varied in How They Communicated and Practiced their Plans

College officials we interviewed described preparations for a range of  emergencies and used a variety of tools to communicate and practice  their plans (see text box). Officials we interviewed at all 18 colleges said  their school developed “all hazards” emergency plans, which means the  plans are designed to address a range of emergencies while prioritizing  those that are most likely to affect their campus. This “all hazards”  approach is supported by federal emergency preparedness principles as  outlined in NIMS. Most college officials we spoke with said they prioritize   at least one type of natural disaster that could occur in their geographical  area, as well as manmade threats like active shooters. Most of the  college officials reported talking with state or local partners or using some  type of risk assessment tool or similar analysis to prioritize specific types  of emergencies. College officials sometimes described this process as  prioritizing emergencies that either occur more frequently, or are likely to  have a significant effect on the college if they were to occur. For example,  several officials at selected colleges said their schools prioritized active  shooter events—even though they occur relatively rarely—because of  incidents at other colleges or the potential effects on the community if  such an event were to occur. A college’s specific characteristics can also  inform its emergency plan. For example, officials from two colleges said  their schools serve as research institutions and may need to take extra  steps to secure scientific infrastructure in an emergency. Two officials  described emergency preparedness efforts related to the physical  location of their campus, such as bordering a body of water or being  adjacent to an airport.

Two College Emergency Managers’ Descriptions of Responding  to Emergencies   We knew that the hurricane was likely to hit other parts of our state  badly, but we were not overly concerned that the hurricane would hit  us directly. I came to work that morning and there were 20 buses on  campus by our football field. We are an evacuation center but  someone had forgotten to tell us that they were sending us 1,100  evacuees. Where were we going to put 1,100 people? These are the  types of events that you plan for and hopefully you never have to  implement those plans, but that day we had to do it. It took us about 4  or 5 hours between the time the buses showed up to when we had  prepared the gymnasium with cots that were provided by the American  Red Cross and food for the evacuees. The evacuees were here for 3  days. Our administrative staff slept on cots in our offices so that we  were on campus the whole time the evacuees were here.

Prior to the rally, we set up cameras in the area and arranged for  additional security through mutual aid agreements with other police  departments. We also convened in a nearby meeting room to monitor  the situation. The situation turned violent very suddenly. At first, a  couple hundred students and other individuals were in the area  peacefully. Then a more rowdy group convened and within 15 minutes  of their arrival, bottles were flying through the air and windows were  being broken. I looked down for just a moment, then looked up again  and a generator was on fire. We tried very hard to continue with the  event because we believe in free speech, but safety became a  concern and we had to cancel. It was very stressful and hard to watch.  We were worried about the safety of our students.

College officials we interviewed also outlined a variety of methods to  communicate with the community in the event of an emergency and to  conduct emergency drills.

Officials we interviewed at the 18 selected colleges most commonly  described using college websites, text messages, or mass email alerts to  communicate emergency preparedness information to the campus  community (see text box). Officials at several colleges also said they  developed more detailed applications that students and faculty could  download to their electronic devices for up-to-date emergency  preparedness information.

Two College Emergency Managers’ Descriptions of Emergency  Communications   Within minutes of the shooting, an alert was sent utilizing multiple  channels including texts, email, message boards, web, desktop and  voice messages. This serves two functions; it provides redundancy of  delivery and also considers the different information receiving  preferences of the community. Emergency messages, at a minimum,  provide what happened, where it happened, and what action needs to  be taken. Updates are sent when there is new information. It is  recommended that during an emergency you communicate at least  every 30 minutes. It is also important to ensure that correct up to date  information is available, since inaccurate rumors can spread quickly  through social media.

Twitter helped us amplify our messages. We wrote these messages  quickly, while doing many other things, so that the community could  have information as soon as possible including about areas to avoid  for safety reasons. After the fact, the messages also provided a time- stamped record of the events and the campus response to those  events.

About half of the colleges also told us that they offer training to  communicate emergency preparedness information to specific groups  such as students, faculty, and administrators. For example, an official at  one college told us the college has targeted outreach to faculty by  developing specific trainings that cover specific issues, such as what to  do when classes are disrupted or a building is no longer accessible, for  example, as the result of a weather event. Officials from several colleges  also said they communicate emergency preparedness information during  new student orientation. Several college officials acknowledged that  engaging students can be challenging, and some officials said they  address this challenge by making presentations or printed and online  materials as engaging as possible.

Emergency Preparedness Drills and Exercises  College officials we interviewed also said their colleges practice and test  emergency preparedness plans by conducting drills and exercises at  least once a year. Most officials from the 18 selected colleges said they  conducted evacuation drills, such as fire drills; a few officials said they  conducted more time-intensive activities such as “tabletop exercises” (i.e.,  sessions in which officials meet to discuss their roles during a specific  type of emergency). For example, a large public college conducted a  tabletop exercise to simulate a hypothetical weather event that damaged  a dormitory. One official at a large university also described how the  college uses emergency preparedness principles to manage non- emergency events such as sports events in order to practice their plans.

College emergency managers said that buy-in from a college’s top  leadership was very important for promoting emergency preparedness  efforts and increasing campus involvement. For example, one official  described top leadership buy-in as the “guiding light” for the campus  community. Another official said the president of his college made it  mandatory for all executive staff to attend emergency preparedness  trainings, which demonstrated his commitment to emergency planning  and preparedness. When such support is lacking, officials said it is often  difficult to engage students and faculty. For example, one college official  told us that his college’s previous president viewed emergency  preparedness as bothersome and a burden. The lack of support limited  the type of drills that could be conducted on campus, the official said.  Another official at a private 4-year school explained that his college could  not participate in the “The Great ShakeOut” program because the drill fell  outside of the allowable hours when drills were permitted to occur to  avoid any conflicts with classroom instruction time.

Selected Colleges Often Coordinated with Local Partners or State Agencies

Officials at most of the 18 selected colleges stated that they relied on  either their local or state partners, or both, for advice, questions, or to  obtain resources for emergency preparedness. These partners were also  the first responders for colleges experiencing emergencies and may  include local and state police and fire departments, hospitals, and  emergency management offices. Coordinating with partners is a key  component of the federal emergency preparedness principles, as outlined  in the National Preparedness Goal and NIMS.

Most of the officials we spoke with at our selected colleges said they work  with partners in their local community, such as police, fire, and  emergency management departments or local public health agencies, in  preparing for emergencies. For example, one official at a large public  university described a mutual aid agreement with its local emergency  management department, which allows his school access to the county’s  radio communication system in the event of an emergency. The specific  nature of local partnerships often varied based on factors such as the size  of the college and the surrounding community. For example, we heard  from some state, college, and association representatives that some  smaller colleges did not have very extensive police or security  departments, and therefore, relied heavily on local police departments  when emergencies occurred. While coordination often involved planning  for how a community could help a college in the event of an emergency,  college and emergency preparedness association officials also described  instances in which large universities in small towns had more emergency  preparedness resources than the town and were therefore the ones  offering help. For example, one large university in a part of the country  prone to tornadoes offers shelter to town residents and employs  emergency response coordinators to help individuals quickly find shelter.

Officials also said interpersonal relationships play a big part in deciding to  whom they reach out. Most of the college officials with whom we spoke  highlighted the importance of their interpersonal relationships with local  and/or state law enforcement or emergency management officials and in  some cases, attributed these relationships to having previously worked in  local or state law enforcement or emergency management. For example,  one college official told us that his former role as a local police chief has  made it easy to identify and maintain contacts with local police, fire, and  emergency medical services and to include them in all campus drills and  exercises.

College officials also described partnering with state agencies to develop  their emergency plan and identify roles in the event of an emergency,  adhere to state requirements, or obtain resources (see text box). Officials  at about half of the 18 selected colleges described working with state law  enforcement entities to, for example, obtain information about emerging  threats, or involve state officials in drills and exercises to practice their  colleges’ emergency plans. About half of the college officials also  described cases in which they were required by state law or regulation to  complete certain college-specific emergency preparedness activities,  such as developing an emergency operations plan, although officials from  a college emergency preparedness association noted that state  requirements related to college emergency preparedness vary widely. In  addition to describing requirements from state emergency management  agencies, officials from several public colleges described emergency  preparedness requirements from the head office of their state’s college  system. Other officials said that their state did not have any requirements  specific to emergency preparedness at colleges.

States sometimes also provided resources for colleges’ preparedness  efforts. Officials at most of the 18 colleges we contacted said that they  received some state written guidance, training, or technical assistance  that was either specifically tailored to colleges, or was designed for  various entities including colleges. For example, Colorado has an online  school safety center that disseminates emergency preparedness  resources and offers technical assistance. An official from the Kansas  Board of Regents told us the Board’s staff helps to facilitate a new  emergency preparedness community of practice led by colleges, and an  official from the state’s Division of Emergency Management said they  hold general emergency preparedness trainings in which colleges may  participate.

In addition to supports from local and state government, officials at most  of the selected colleges reported that they received support or assistance  from college emergency preparedness associations. For example, these  associations host conferences and conduct studies on emergency  preparedness.

Three College Emergency Managers’ Descriptions of Working  with Community Partners  Informal networks were essential. People who know each other will  help each other. I have a friend in the state police department and  requested his assistance with security for the evacuation center. The  state police provided approximately 10 troopers to assist the campus  police officers. Some evacuees brought their pets with them, so the  county office of emergency management activated its animal shelter  resources and positioned an animal shelter on campus. Someone  brought a 4-foot iguana. What do you do with an iguana?

The group that was being destructive moved back and forth between  campus and the city, so we communicated and coordinated a lot with  community partners. We work together on a daily basis, so the  communication that night was seamless. We also had a member of the  local police department in our emergency management headquarters  during the event, which was very helpful.

In the days leading up to Hurricane Irma, statewide briefings were held  twice a day with a variety of emergency personnel in the room,  including local police and fire chiefs, mayors, power companies,  communications personnel, and the state emergency management  department. Everyone had already discussed how we would work  together in the event of an emergency, so the conversation focused on  coordinating specific actions. For example, we are a state system of  technical colleges with many tractor-trailer drivers on campus. We  were asked to deploy those drivers to deliver supplies to various state  and FEMA locations around the state.

In addition to managing emergencies for the college, I am also the  mayor of one of the local towns and those responsibilities dovetail  nicely. Responding to emergencies never becomes second nature, but  it’s nice to know that when something natural or manmade strikes,  there are systems, people, and assets in place. One of the reasons  that the system works so well now is because frameworks like NIMS  were put in place after Hurricane Katrina.

Several Federal Agencies Offer Emergency Preparedness Resources Although Selected Colleges Reported Mixed Awareness

Federal Agencies Provide Guidance, Training, Technical Assistance, and Other Resources to Help Colleges Prepare for Emergencies

Various sub-agencies within DHS, DOJ, and Education are involved in  developing and providing emergency preparedness resources for  colleges (see fig. 1).

These three agencies use a variety of methods to provide resources,  such as written guidance, webinars, and individual technical assistance  (see fig. 2). The content of these resources ranges from general  emergency management information to guidance specifically tailored to  schools (see text box). Agency officials we interviewed said federal  agencies have specific areas of expertise as it relates to college  emergency preparedness. For example, DHS’ FEMA provides broad  emergency preparedness information and tools and DOJ approaches  emergency preparedness through a law enforcement and public safety  perspective. Education’s role includes the work of its Federal Student Aid  office, which approaches emergency preparedness by issuing relevant  guidance, providing technical assistance, and enforcing compliance with  the Clery Act.

Federal officials noted that colleges can have differing needs when it  comes to emergency preparedness, based on their size, funding, and  current threats. As a result, agency officials said they strive to provide  tailored resources when possible. For example, DHS officials said that the  Campus Resilience Program is building a website portal that will include a  menu of FEMA resources tailored to colleges’ needs, including a  downloadable self-assessment of risk and vulnerability. This new program  is meant to expand on a similar pilot program that operated from 2013 to  2016; officials expect it to be accessible to schools midway through fiscal  year 2018. Education and DOJ officials said that college officials have  recently been requesting information and assistance with demonstrations  and large events on campus. Specifically, the DOJ-funded National  Center for Campus Public Safety (NCCPS) publicized a “For Official Use  Only” report on maintaining safety and order on campuses during protests  and demonstrations, which was produced by DHS and DOJ. According to  NCCPS tracking records, 325 colleges and other parties requested this  guidance from January through August 2017. Additionally, agencies have  developed resources based on current events, including webinars in  response to a series of severe hurricanes in fall 2017.

Examples of Federal Resources for Colleges’ Emergency  Preparedness Efforts

National Incident Management System: The Department of  Homeland Security’s (DHS) Federal Emergency Management Agency  (FEMA) provides general emergency management resources through  its National Incident Management System (NIMS) and Incident  Command System (ICS). FEMA officials have also helped produce  some college-specific resources within NIMS and ICS, such as a  guide for NIMS implementation for colleges, and courses tailored to  college officials, including a course titled “Multi-Hazard Emergency  Management for Higher Education.”

National Center for Campus Public Safety (NCCPS): Funded by  the Department of Justice (DOJ), NCCPS maintains a website with a  library of resources and training for colleges, and distributes a weekly  electronic newsletter to officials who request to be on the distribution  list. NCCPS also staffs research associates who answer email  requests from college officials.

Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools (REMS)

Technical Assistance Center: Administered by the Department of  Education (Education), the center includes a community of practice,  and links to federal resources and training. The REMS Center  addresses emergency preparedness for both K-12 schools and  colleges; according to officials, the center devotes approximately 20  percent of its resources to emergency preparedness for colleges.

2013 Guide for Developing High-Quality Emergency Operations  Plans for Institutions of Higher Education: Developed by  Education, DOJ, DHS, and other agencies, this is an overall guide for  colleges as they develop their emergency plans.

Assistance related to Clery Act components on emergency  preparedness: Offices within Education provide guidance (such as  the Handbook for Campus Safety and Security Reporting) and  assistance with calls to the Campus Safety and Security Help Desk.

Campus Resilience Program: As part of this program, the Office of  Academic Engagement, within DHS, leads the National Seminar and  Tabletop Exercise Series for Institutions of Higher Education, a  series of campus-based events where college officials discuss their  roles during a simulated emergency situation. DHS officials  collaborate with officials from DOJ and other agencies to conduct  these events. In 2016, the tabletop exercise focused on responding  to campus violence.

Campus Liaison Program: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

Campus Liaison Agents, comprised of both Special Agents and Task  Force Officers on the Joint Terrorism Task Forces in FBI field  offices, provide information, training, exercises, and response  capabilities to campus public safety officials.

Research and reports on manmade threats: Agencies have  published reports on manmade threats applicable to higher  education settings, such as the 2010 report “Campus Attacks:  Targeted Violence Affecting Institutions of Higher Education,” which  was a collaborative among the FBI, Education, and Secret Service.

Most of the federal agency officials we interviewed said they were  generally aware of resources produced by other federal agencies and  reported that collaboration is based on relationships formed through prior  collaborative efforts, such as the White House-initiated effort to produce  emergency preparedness guidance for colleges in 2013. For example,  Education officials described being contacted by their colleagues at other  agencies with questions or requests, and DHS and DOJ officials said they  frequently cross-promote each other’s resources. Further, various  agencies have advisory boards and committees to inform their agency- specific initiatives, such as the DHS Homeland Security Academic  Advisory Council, which includes officials from other agencies. However,  some agency officials shared potential issues with information sharing.  For example, one official said he continues to encounter federal offices  that have emergency preparedness resources of which he was unaware,  indicating there are continued opportunities for increased collaboration.

There is currently no systemic way for federal agencies to share  information about resources for college emergency preparedness.  Federal officials have established an interagency working group, “Federal  Partners in School Emergency Management and Preparedness” that  currently focuses on resources for K-12 schools, and Education officials  said it plans to expand its focus to include colleges, perhaps by fall  2018. Most federal agency officials we spoke with said having an  interagency working group focused on colleges would be useful, for  example, to ensure that officials are aware of all available resources  across the federal government.

Selected Colleges and Stakeholders Cited Schools’ Mixed Awareness of Federal Resources Despite Agency Efforts to Publicize Them

Officials from the selected 18 colleges cited mixed levels of awareness  regarding federal resources on emergency preparedness developed  specifically for them. For example, officials at all 18 colleges said they  were aware of FEMA resources focused on general emergency  preparedness, such as NIMS. However, we found that college emergency  managers were less frequently aware of college-specific resources  produced or funded by Education, DOJ, and others. Specifically, college  emergency managers at almost half of the selected schools said that they  were unaware of each of the following key resources: the 2013 Guide for  Developing High-Quality Emergency Operations Plans, the NCCPS  website, or Education’s Readiness and Emergency Management for  Schools (REMS) Technical Assistance Center website. In addition, the  college officials with whom we spoke sometimes requested the federal  government develop specific resources without realizing these resources  already exist. For example, one college official described wanting  resources on how to manage active shooter and weather-related  emergencies, although several agencies currently fund or provide such  resources. Additionally, another college official who generally accessed  federal resources through DHS suggested that the agency develop  tailored guidance for colleges beyond NIMS, without realizing that a NIMS  guide for colleges exists on Education’s REMS website.

Federal officials and representatives from college emergency  preparedness associations have also observed gaps in awareness of  federal resources among college officials and have acknowledged it as a  challenge. For example, one agency official said that every time she goes  to a conference, she finds more college officials who have not heard of  key federal resources, signaling a continued need for more outreach. A  needs assessment funded by DOJ also found that awareness of federal  resources may be an issue. Further, NCCPS staff conducted a survey  among colleges to assess the level of engagement these schools have  with entities such as FBI Campus Liaison Agents, and told us they found  about half of colleges—especially private colleges—are unaware of the  federal entities included in the survey.

This limited awareness among some schools is occurring despite federal  agencies’ efforts to disseminate resources and engage with the higher  education community. Agencies publicize resources through electronic  mailing lists (i.e., listservs), social media, conferences, websites, direct  outreach, and college emergency preparedness associations. For  example, Education’s Office of Safe and Healthy Students, which  publishes its resources on its REMS website, publicizes these resources  through social media. DHS publicizes its Campus Resilience Program at  conferences. Other agency officials we spoke with said they also use  conferences as opportunities to increase school officials’ awareness of  federal resources, and they partner with college emergency preparedness  associations to publicize their resources. NCCPS includes information on  various resources in its weekly e-newsletter. Additionally, following up on  the results of the NCCPS survey on colleges’ engagement with FBI  Campus Liaison Agents discussed above, NCCPS staff have discussed  the results with the FBI Program Manager of the Campus Liaison  Program so the FBI can improve engagement with colleges.

Officials from colleges, college emergency preparedness associations,  and federal agencies we interviewed identified several factors, such as  colleges’ staffing resources dedicated to emergency preparedness and  the nature of the professional networks used by their emergency  managers, that may lead officials to be less familiar with college-specific  federal resources on emergency preparedness:

Without full-time emergency preparedness staff, colleges, particularly  small colleges, must prioritize the most urgent tasks, and thus,  officials reported not having enough time to research available federal  resources. Representatives from college emergency preparedness  associations also said that, in their experience, larger schools were  more likely to be aware of federal resources than private and smaller  colleges.

College emergency managers we spoke with often have backgrounds  in local or state emergency preparedness or law enforcement or have  networks comprised of local or state officials. These managers often  said they learned about federal resources through their more general  local and state emergency preparedness networks. As a result, they  were more frequently aware of general FEMA resources applicable to  these localities versus resources specifically designed for colleges. In  particular, college officials we contacted were more likely to report  seeking information from DHS than from Education or DOJ.

Some college officials may be uninterested in learning about  additional resources provided by the federal government, especially if  they receive resources from states, localities, or college emergency  preparedness associations or potentially in cases where campus  leadership does not prioritize emergency preparedness.

While agency officials and representatives from college emergency  preparedness associations said that federal agencies have made strides  in publicizing their resources to a population of college officials that can  be challenging to reach, and expressed desire to increase awareness, we  identified potential gaps or missed opportunities in their dissemination  approaches, including:

Agencies commonly publicize new resources through their existing  listservs and social media accounts. While these dissemination  strategies are effective for alerting colleges already connected to  federal agencies, they are less likely to reach additional colleges not  already subscribed to these distribution lists. For example, a REMS  official reported that the REMS listserv includes approximately 1,000  officials from colleges and related associations. Given that  approximately 4,000 colleges were operating in the 2015-2016 school  year, according to Education data, most colleges do not receive these  electronic communications. In addition, DHS officials told us that  one of their college emergency preparedness distribution lists  includes representatives from college emergency preparedness  associations and state college and university systems, but is not  designed to include individual colleges unless they request to be  included.

Agencies also often publicize their efforts at conferences, but these  conferences may miss some colleges, especially some smaller  colleges with fewer resources with which to send college officials,  according to several agency and college emergency preparedness  association officials. As a result, colleges that can afford to send  officials to these conferences may already be more informed than  colleges not in attendance.

In reviewing various federal websites, we found some lists of  resources that did not include key federal resources, or included web  links that directed visitors to other agencies’ resources that were out  of date. For example, one federal website included a list of resources  related to emergency planning for colleges, but did not list the NCCPS  website among these resources, even though it is a key resource  focused on the topic. Another federal website for college emergency  preparedness did not include a link to Education’s REMS website,  which was specifically developed for school emergency  preparedness. Further, this same resource included a link to another  Education webpage that was empty of content and had not been  updated since 2015. When federal emergency preparedness websites  are out of date or incomplete, federal agencies miss opportunities to  provide accurate, up-to-date information about their resources and  initiatives and those of their partner agencies, and may contribute to  colleges’ gaps in awareness about these resources.

We heard from several college officials that they would like direct  outreach from the federal government. Agencies do not generally  distribute information directly to all colleges, especially those not  previously signed up for listservs or other distribution services.  However, Education has email contact information for the official at  every college who reports campus crime statistics to the agency,  which may be a natural entry point for federal agencies to disseminate  information on emergency preparedness to all colleges.

As discussed above, agency officials do not have a systematic  method for notifying each other about their resources for colleges.  This could limit officials’ ability to cross-publicize each other’s  resources; an important activity given that some colleges we  contacted only seek information from one agency or website and were  unaware of resources from others.

According to federal standards for internal control, in communicating  information to achieve their objectives, agencies should consider  appropriate methods of communication with their external audience (in  this case, college emergency managers). Relatedly, these standards  also state that agencies should communicate with each other on  necessary information for achieving their objectives. Limited awareness  of federal resources may result in colleges unnecessarily focusing their  limited time and resources on developing strategies or information that  federal agencies have already addressed, or advancing preparedness  efforts that are not fully informed by federal agencies’ expertise.

Emergency preparedness is a vital and challenging task for the higher  education community. Various sub-agencies within three key federal  agencies—DHS, DOJ, and Education—provide a number of resources for  colleges, but over the course of our review, we found that colleges were  sometimes unaware of key federal resources that could assist them in  meeting their important emergency preparedness needs. The breadth of  many colleges’ responsibilities beyond education—such as housing  students, running research facilities, and operating hospitals—increases  their exposure to risks. Being underprepared in the face of an emergency  could dramatically increase both human and economic consequences,  not only for the colleges themselves, but also for the larger communities  to which they are connected.

Emergency preparedness is a shared responsibility and colleges bear  some responsibility for learning about federal resources that can assist  them in protecting their students and staff. However, striking an  appropriate balance between meeting colleges’ main mission—educating  students—and other equally important responsibilities, such as  emergency preparedness, can be difficult, especially given resource  constraints. While federal agencies also face resource constraints,  supporting the safety of college community members is an important part  of the missions of DHS, DOJ, and Education. These agencies have  developed a variety of resources intended to support colleges in their  emergency preparedness efforts, but colleges are not always aware of  these resources. This problem is exacerbated by federal agencies’ choice  of dissemination methods, which could miss a large portion of college  emergency managers, and because federal agencies have missed  opportunities to cross-promote each other’s resources. Unless federal  agencies address these issues, they will continue to miss opportunities to  more effectively communicate important information to colleges,  particularly those that may be harder to reach, such as smaller schools.  The planned interagency working group on emergency preparedness for  colleges may offer an opportunity to systematically explore areas in which  communication and connection between colleges and federal agencies  can be improved, while leveraging and improving existing agency  relationships.

We are making a total of three recommendations—one to each of the  three agencies in our review—to improve awareness of federal resources  for emergency preparedness among colleges. Specifically:  The Secretary of Education, in collaboration with other agencies through  the planned interagency working group or another mechanism, should  identify further opportunities to more effectively publicize resources to  reach additional colleges. (Recommendation 1)

The Secretary of Homeland Security, in collaboration with other agencies,  through the planned interagency working group or another mechanism,  should identify further opportunities to more effectively publicize  resources to reach additional colleges. (Recommendation 2)

The Attorney General, in collaboration with other agencies through the  planned interagency working group or another mechanism, should  identify further opportunities to more effectively publicize resources to  reach additional colleges. (Recommendation 3)

We provided a draft of this report to Education, DHS, and DOJ for each  agency’s review and comment. All three agencies agreed with our  recommendations or described steps they would take to implement them.  Education’s written comments are reproduced in appendix I and DHS’  written comments are reproduced in appendix II. DOJ did not provide  written comments. DHS and DOJ provided technical comments. We  incorporated changes based on their comments into the report, as  appropriate.

Education stated that the agency is always interested in increasing  utilization by colleges of the emergency management resources that the  Department and other federal agencies develop. It also stated that the  planned interagency working group would be a very appropriate and  effective vehicle for increasing utilization of these resources, and that it  will consider that group or other mechanisms to identify further  opportunities to publicize resources to colleges.

DHS concurred with our recommendation to the agency and said that it  would continue to collaborate with its partners to further publicize  resources available to colleges. It also highlighted several of the  Department’s current and planned resources for its related Campus  Resilience Program.

DOJ did not provide written comments, but stated that it agreed with our  recommendation to the agency. Officials stated that they would outline  steps for addressing the recommendation in future communications.

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the  report date. At that time, we will send copies to the appropriate  congressional committees, the Attorney General of the United States, the  Secretary of Education, and the Secretary of Homeland Security. In  addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO website at  http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (617) 788-0580 or nowickij@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices  of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last  page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report  are listed in Appendix III.

Appendix I: Comments from the Department of Education

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security

In addition to the individual named above, Janet Mascia (Assistant  Director), Barbara Steel-Lowney (Analyst-in-Charge), Shilpa Grover, and  Vernette Shaw made key contributions to this report. Also contributing to  this report were: Susan Aschoff, Rachael Chamberlin, Jessica  Moscovitch, Jessica Orr, Mimi Nguyen, Deborah Bland, Benjamin Sinoff,  Sheila McCoy, Jean McSween, Lori Rectanus, and Sarah Veale.