Vulnerability Assessment- Phyllis Young

The Paper was suppose to be 5 pages not including the reference and title pages, APA format, incite text and references, if possible peer reviewed articles. Like i said im not sure if you wanna do a whole new paper or just make changes and added in. I spoke in general when in fact i was suppose to pick a place or property to analyze like your did in the last paper you did for me.

Teachers Comments

Very confusing paper because I did not see a foundation description of what property/place you are analyzing. Also, too much discussion was spent on describing what a risk analysis is rather than doing the analysis on a specific property/place. See my comments in Track Changes.

Running head: VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT 1

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT 2

Vulnerability Assessment

Leland D. Vaughn

CJMS 630.9041

Turnitin 14%

Introduction

Vulnerability assessment involves a systematic approach that is used to assess a facility’s security system and analyze its effectiveness. It involves assessing the suitability of certain basic aspects in the security system that includes the type of assets to be protected by the facility security program. This paper aims at developing a vulnerability assessment tool to be used to conduct a survey of a home. In order to develop a vulnerability assessment of a home, it is important to examine the physical characteristics of the house, accessibility by the outsiders, geographic location, illumination levels, location of assets within the house as well as the strength of which access measures can be assessed. It is also important to consider the technical measures, which include equipment properties, weakness of networks within the home, susceptibility to other eavesdropping from other electronic surveillances. (Bankoff, 2004) Moreover, it is important to consider the effectiveness of the locks in the house, and the types and number of cameras that have been placed in and outside the house. (Mumtaz, et al, 2011) There are also operational vulnerabilities that govern homes. These include the policies, practices, procedures, behaviors as well as personal actions of those living in the home. These rules must be observed in the development and maintenance of a residence.

Assessing security vulnerability is vital for a home because it enables one to analyze the security weaknesses and opportunities unidentified that can be used to execute adversarial activities. Therefore, a security survey of a home will involve collecting information about that particular home. (Lerche et al., 2006) A security suvey will also make it possible to identify and block the opportunities for any attacks of assets within the home. Therefore, a security survey enables primary decision makers to mitigate threats and reduce risks.

Site Selection and the Rationale for the Site Selected.

A home is usually a place of residence for any individual. Everyone has a home although the size and the type may differ. A home is normally for family to live there as well as store properties that can be used by the family. Sometimes, just placing a perimeter fence is not enough for ensuring an effective security. In major residential places such it is important to consider the security system, as this is a priority to ensure the assets within the house are safe and secure all the time. A home is vulnerable to various threats that range from attacks, the geographical location of the home in consideration with the security level of the area and how vulnerable one considers himself to be. (Bankoff, 2004) Therefore, the location of a home whether in urban or rural areas will determine the security level needed to ensure the occupants and properties are safe. (Lerche et al., 2006) Therefore, the security level is upgraded where there is a need. For example, whether there is high level of vulnerability, it is important to place inside and outside cameras to make sure that one can monitor what is going on outside the house as well as in every room within the building. (Mumtaz, et al, 2011) The home’s additional security measures will be required to increase level of security measures. Moreover, it is also important to consider the changes in policies and procedures governing houses in that particular location. This is because failure to comply with these policies may give room for an attack to occur. (Ball, 2003) For example, when power has been cut, one may be vulnerable to attacks simply because cameras are not working, making it impossible to monitor the activities taking place within the home.

The choice of home is crucial because several attacks have occurred in residential areas simply because they left a gap that was used to carry out the attack. Some people, do not think it’s necessary to improve the security system of a home until an attack occurs, then they realize that there is an acute need to check on the security system for the safety of the family and property. (Mumtaz, et al, 2011) Vulnerability assessment of a home may reveal gap in security and therefore come up with measures to come up with effective measures to block such gaps. Security weaknesses may also be identified through the survey.

Components of the Vulnerability Assessment

The major components of vulnerability assessment include the following: the basic process of a vulnerability assessment, the type of assets that need to be protected by the program, the protection measures that are already in place and lastly the gaps identified in the security system. In short, these components of a vulnerability assessment make it possible to identify the need involved in upgrading the security system of a facility. (Ball, 2003) The assessment makes it possible to identify the weaknesses and come up with solutions to block the gaps identified. It also helps to determine whether there is a need to put in place additional security measures and equipment. (Birkmann, 2006) Depending on the location of the home, vulnerability assessment will come up with an extensive survey of what needs to be done in order to improve the security system.

In fact, the main goal of a security assessment is to ensure that there is life safety and protection of assets as well as promoting the continuity of operations within the home. (Bankoff, 2004) There are various driving forces behind the components of vulnerability assessment which includes the following: new legislations and revised threat assessments which may uncover new or emerging threats. (O’Brien, 2002) Through this assessment, the security decision makers and facility managers are able to come up with future plans and methodologies to deal with the threats. It also makes it possible to budget for the expenditures needed to improve the security system, allocation of personnel as well as other procedural guidelines. Thus, a survey on vulnerability of a facility makes it possible to analyze the potential weaknesses of the security system that can deter the operations and procedures within the building.

Suggestions and recommendations of security counter-measures to mitigate and reduce the risk of identified vulnerabilities to an acceptable level

Some of the recommendations of security counter measures that can be used to mitigate and reduce risks in a home include the following; firstly, the use of CCTV cameras is a major step that can be used to increase the level of security within any building. CCTV cameras are normally connected with computers where someone can be checking the flow of activities within and outside the building. (Bankoff, 2004) The cameras keep the building secure all the time, just in case any suspicious activity takes place. An alert is always raised and the attack is averted. Secondly, a direct communication with the security force should be developed. After an attack has been identified, the next step involves alerting the security forces that will have the capacity to counter the attack. (Lerche et al., 2006) Thus, an effective communication system should be developed and a surety that security forces can arrive at the scene as quickly as possible. The security system aims at deterring, detecting and delaying the attack before it takes place. Therefore, if an attack is detected and no response is coming through, it is likely to be more damaging.

A working electrified perimeter fence also plays an important role in preventing any attack from occurring. A fence will keep people away with malicious thoughts, as they will find it hard to enter into the building. However, it is important to note the gate should have security guard who is thoroughly checking the visitors in and outside the building. In short, all the security measures put in place should be working and in good condition to enable the condition of activities with the building for security purposes. However, it is important to note that security measures do not only involve physical attacks, but can also range from network weakness, lack of compliance with policies and regulations among others. Thus, it is recommended that those involved should ensure that they comply with all the requirements to guarantee that all are safe and secure.

Reference

Bankoff, G. (2004). Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and People.
London: Earth
scan.

Birkmann, J.(2006). Measuring Vulnerability to Natural Hazards – Towards Disaster
Resilient Societies. UNU Press.

Ball, R. (2003). The Fundamentals of Aircraft Combat Survivability Analysis and Design,
2nd
Edition.AIAA Education Series. pp. 603

Mumtaz, M.; Hansen, Hugh; Pohl, Hana R. (2011).”Chapter 3.Mixtures and Their Risk
Assessment in Toxicology”. In Astrid Sigel, Helmut Sigel, Roland K O Sigel. Metal Ions
in Toxicology.RSC Publishing. pp. 61–80

Lerche, Ian; Glaesser, Walter (2006), Environmental risk assessment : quantitative measures,
anthropogenic influences, human impact., Berlin: Springer, retrieved 27 September 2010

O’Brien, M. (2002), Making better environmental decisions: an alternative to risk assessment,
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press,

Appendix

Birkmann, J. (2006).

Appendix A

.Measuring Vulnerability: Risk Assessment. Resilient Societies.UNU Press.

Appendix A

Assets	Threats	Vulnerabilities	Risk Assessment
Televisions	Intruders	Out dated security System	Cost Benefit Analysis
Jewelry	Flooding	Cracks in foundation
Records	Fires	Smoke Detectors
CleaningService	Supervision

Running head: VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT 1

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT 2

Vulnerability Assessment

Leland D. Vaughn

CJMS 630.9041

Turnitin 14%

Introduction

Vulnerability assessment involves a systematic approach that is used to assess a facility’s security system and analyze its effectiveness. It involves assessing the suitability of certain basic aspects in the security system that includes the type of assets to be protected by the facility security program. This paper aims at developing a vulnerability assessment tool to be used to conduct a survey of a home. In order to develop a vulnerability assessment of a home, it is important to examine the physical characteristics of the house, accessibility by the outsiders, geographic location, illumination levels, location of assets within the house as well as the strength of which access measures can be assessed. It is also important to consider the technical measures, which include equipment properties, weakness of networks within the home, susceptibility to other eavesdropping from other electronic surveillances
. (Bankoff, 2004) Moreover, it is important to consider the effectiveness of the locks in the house, and the types and number of cameras that have been placed in and outside the house. (Mumtaz, et al, 2011) There are also operational vulnerabilities that govern homes. These include the policies, practices, procedures, behaviors as well as personal actions of those living in the home. These rules must be observed in the development and maintenance of a residence.

Site Selection and the Rationale for the Site Selected.

A home is usually a place of residence for any individual. Everyone has a home although the size and the type may differ. A home is normally for family to live there as well as store properties that can be used by the family. Sometimes, just placing a perimeter fence is not enough for ensuring an effective security. In major residential places such it is important to consider the security system, as this is a priority to ensure the assets within the house are safe and secure all the time. A home is vulnerable to various threats that range from attacks, the geographical location of the home in consideration with the security level of the area and how vulnerable one considers himself to be. (Bankoff, 2004) Therefore, the location of a home
whether in urban or rural areas will determine the security level needed to ensure the occupants and properties are safe. (Lerche et al., 2006) Therefore, the security level is upgraded where there is a need. For example, whether there is high level of vulnerability, it is important to place inside and outside cameras to make sure that one can monitor what is going on outside the house as well as in every room within the building. (Mumtaz, et al, 2011) The home’s additional security measures will be required to increase level of security measures. Moreover, it is also important to consider the changes in policies and procedures governing houses in that particular location. This is because failure to comply with these policies may give room for an attack to occur. (Ball, 2003) For example, when power has been cut, one may be vulnerable to attacks simply because cameras are not working, making it impossible to monitor the activities taking place within the home.

The choice of home is crucial because several attacks have occurred in residential areas simply because they left a gap that was used to carry out the attack. Some people, do not think it’s
necessary to improve the security system of a home until an attack occurs, then they realize that there is an acute need to check on the security system for the safety of the family and property. (Mumtaz, et al, 2011) Vulnerability assessment of a home may reveal gap in security and therefore come up with measures to come up with effective measures to block such gaps. Security weaknesses may also be identified through the survey.

Components of the Vulnerability Assessment

Suggestions and recommendations of security counter-measures to mitigate and reduce the risk of identified vulnerabilities to an acceptable level

Some of the recommendations of security counter measures that can be used to mitigate and reduce risks in a home include the following; firstly, the use of CCTV cameras is a major step that can be used to increase the level of security within any building. CCTV cameras are normally connected with computers where someone can be checking the flow of activities within and outside the building. (Bankoff, 2004) The cameras keep the building secure all the time
, just in case any suspicious activity takes place. An alert is always raised and the attack is averted. Secondly, a direct communication with the security force should be developed. After an attack has been identified, the next step involves alerting the security forces that will have the capacity to counter the attack. (Lerche et al., 2006) Thus, an effective communication system should be developed and a surety that security forces can arrive at the scene as quickly as possible. The security system aims at deterring, detecting and delaying the attack before it takes place. Therefore, if an attack is detected and no response is coming through, it is likely to be more damaging.

Reference

Bankoff, G. (2004). Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and People.
London: Earth
scan.

Birkmann, J.(2006). Measuring Vulnerability to Natural Hazards – Towards Disaster
Resilient Societies. UNU Press.

Ball, R. (2003). The Fundamentals of Aircraft Combat Survivability Analysis and Design,
2nd
Edition.AIAA Education Series. pp. 603

Lerche, Ian; Glaesser, Walter (2006), Environmental risk assessment : quantitative measures,
anthropogenic influences, human impact., Berlin: Springer, retrieved 27 September 2010

O’Brien, M. (2002), Making better environmental decisions: an alternative to risk assessment,
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press,

Appendix

Birkmann, J. (2006).

Appendix A

.Measuring Vulnerability: Risk Assessment. Resilient Societies.UNU Press.

Appendix A

Assets	Threats	Vulnerabilities	Risk Assessment
Televisions	Intruders	Out dated security System	Cost Benefit Analysis
Jewelry	Flooding	Cracks in foundation
Records	Fires	Smoke Detectors
CleaningService	Supervision

�This is interesting, but is it a real threat to the resident? Is the resident a high value target, and who would electronically surveill?

�Less concerned with how to choose a site for assessment, but that you actually choose a property or location. I don’t see that here.

�Keep your paragraphs short to enhance readability.

�Avoid use of contractions in academic/formal writing.

�I need to see more that you are doing a security assessment and less about what a security assessment is.

�More actual analysis needs to be done, and less theoretical. Why install cameras when the threat and risk are low?

Comments on Paper

Your paper misses the mark in that it explains a great deal about what a
security assessment is, but offers little about an actual assessment. I needed
to see an actual, not theoretical, vulnerability assessment where a site is
selected and an analysis done of existing security measures with
recommendations for improvement. See my comments in Track Changes.

Teacher’s instructions for assignment

To be clear — I need to see a vulnerability assessment of an actual place or property. Conduct a security analysis of the assets, threats and vulnerabilities, and suggest some security countermeasures. When in doubt, refer back to Vellani Chapter 5 and see his sample in Appendix C. This assignment is much like the assignments you have been doing in the Conferences in the early weeks of the course. Which is attached

Running Head: RISK ASSESSMENT

RISK ASSESSMENT

Risk Assessment

Leland D. Vaughn

CJMS 630.9041

March 31, 2013

Turnitin.com 4%

Risk assessment tools

Introduction

A risk assessment is the process of identifying probable risks and scrutinizing what might happen after the risks occur. Different hazards can occur at any time depending on the location, extent and the timing. The procedure of risk management entails taking into consideration the risks and fears, and assessing and putting into place safety measures to compress risks (Hopkin, 2012).

This study was done with the main aim of identifying a risk assessment tool that can be used in the workshop
to avoid suffering from probable hazards. A risk assessment tool is an indicator of the probable hazards that can befall any business, home or even projects. For risk assessment to be effective there must be a thorough search for hazards and situations that can be harmful.

In modern age, there are different steps in which a business can use to set a risk assessment tool. When setting up a risk assessment tool you have to focus on those hazards that can occur and potentially bring damage in your workshop (Hopkin, 2012). In the workshop, it is impossible to eliminate all risks but ensuring the risks are minimized is far much important. This research was conducted on a company. The main aim of setting the assessment tool in the workshop was to identify whether the management and the employees work hand-in-hand to assess, evaluate and reduce the risks.

Literature review

Where there is co-operation between the employees and the management in an organisation, assessing the risks is very simple. In the AMEC Tech workshop, the risks are well known
and applying the risk management measures is not complicated. For a small organization, risk assessment does not involve hiring safety and health experts. You can do the risk assessment at your own pace considering the views of the employees since they also know where the floor is slippery, where many people fall and where accidents occur at the workshop. In a large organization, the advice of a safety and health expert is required. The staff should also be included in the process since they might have useful information to disclose when assessing the risks.

Steps To Follow When Assessing the Risks

Categorize the hazards

A hazard can be defined as anything that can cause harm. These things can be chemicals, open drawers and electricity. You have to think how the employees can be harmed. It is easier to overlook some hazards when you are at the same workshop. You have to stroll about in the place of work and explore what can lead to harm. When strolling, inquiring for information from the employees is highly regarded since they might have been aware of things that you might not see.

Researching from the Internet about how and where hazards happen is also advisable. In the Internet, you will find information on how to control these hazards and information on the effects of the hazards. There are also regulatory guidelines on how to set the workshop from trade associations (Dalton, 1998). When using chemicals, it is advisable to make sure that the instructions printed on the labels are followed. On these instructions, the dangers and hazards are clearly stipulated. You have to make sure that when mixing or using the chemicals, a specialist is available. If an accident had happened previously, it is important to remember its cause and identify the reasons for its occurrence.

Identify those that can be harmed

You must identify those likely to be harmed by these hazards depending on the departments where they work. Those who work near chemicals are more likely to be harmed by these chemicals and those who work in the stores may suffer from backaches for lifting heavy boxes. When it comes to identifying where the employees are to be deployed, you must consider the disabled, expectant and new or young workers
. Changes in the workshop should also be notified to all the employees. When machines are moved from one place to another, tiles mounted and various fittings changed, it is advisable to allow only those who have knowledge of the changes to those areas.

Sharing the workshop entails a lot of responsibility and it should be extremely emphasized. Irresponsible workers will most likely cause great risk to the rest. Some workers spill water and chemicals on the floor and leave it wet and slippery. The next thing that happens is a colleague falling and breaking the backbone. Who is to blame? The management should be on record to note all reckless employees and issue them with notices, warnings and subsequent dismissal to minimize such hazards.

Evaluate risks and take precautions

After realizing the hazards, you have to come up with an idea of tackling them.
There are regulations by the law that an employer should do everything possible to protect the employees from any harm (Hopkin, 2012). Neglect of the obvious hazards that can harm the employees is punishable by law. You should check at what you are doing first and if you feel confused, you can compare it with the set guidelines. It is easier to manage your own workshop through your own controls that those set by the government.

When evaluating and taking precautions for minimizing hazards, it is very important to use a less dangerous alternative. Use the less harmful chemicals and always control access of the chemicals. To avoid on employees stumbling on each other at the workshop, barriers should be put in place to avoid collision between the working and the moving. The workers should be provided with protective clothing in terms of gloves, goggles, helmets, footwear, etc. to protect them from the hazards. Arranging mirrors at blind corners will cost less but will play a great role at preventing accidents at the workshop (Spiers, 2003).

Document and apply finding

After assessing and evaluating the risks, you have to put the findings of the assessment into exercise. Documenting the results and involving the employees formulates a great difference in the workshop. Make the notes simple to allow easy interpretation. A risk assessment is not always perfect but it is appropriate and satisfactory. The risk assessment tool should be reassessed and modernized where necessary. Many workshops experience changes in machinery and in workforce. It is advisable to review the assessment tool where changes occur (Spiers, 2003). You should consider setting up review dates to avoid hazards happening due to being forgetful.

Rationale of selecting the workshop

The reason behind basing this research to a workshop is that there are many hazards in the work place than in the home and institutions. In the workshop, there are different people, departments, hazards and risks.
Most of these accidents are caused by neglect and identifying the hazards and setting up rules minimizes the dangers (Dalton, 1998). Many businesses and companies are closed down due to the ignorance of assessing the risks.

When risks are identified on time in the workshop, you enjoy maximum productivity since the barriers that may arise in the course of duty are eliminated. You also have to provide the employees with the proper clothing and working implements to enjoy this. When employees feel that their safety in the workshop is guaranteed, the feel motivated and minimized hazards will see less employees skipping duty due to illness. When hazards are reduced in the workshop, fewer costs are experienced in paying the hospital bills and compensating the workers. Negligence has seen many companies close down since they have no funds to compensate the workers in times of accidents (Dalton, 1998).

Qualitative assessment

When dealing with qualitative assessment, you have to determine whether the assets you want to protect are of much value. The outcome of the qualitative assessment relies on the expertise of those involved in carrying out the research. The risk stages can be concluded to be high, low or medium. You prioritize the possible hazards by use of a rating scale (Hopkin, 2012).

Quantitative Assessment

Numerical values to both possibility and value are assigned to the risk stages in quantitative assessment. It rates the probable outcomes and gauges the aim of attaining the objectives. In quantitative assessment, you create an attainable and a sensible cost. You require high-quality information and a list of prioritized hazards when carrying out quantitative assessment (Hopkin, 2012). According to this research, it is evident that a risk assessment tool requires maximised consideration when it comes to identifying the hazards. When you stay out of negative publicity, your business will flourish since workers have the oomph to produce more.

References

Dalton, A. J. P. (1998). Safety Health & Environmental Hazards. Farmington Hills, MI: Cengage Learning

Hopkin, P. (2012). Fundamentals of Risk Management: Understanding, Evaluating and Implementing Effective Risk Management. London, UK: Kogan Page Publishers

Spiers, C. (2003). Tolley’s Managing Stress in the Workshop. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis

�Vague description of the property/place. I don’t know what this is.

�If so, then describe them. I need to see more discussion about specific threats and vulnerabilities rather than description of what goes into a risk assessment.

�Very confusing because you did not set out a clear description of what this workshop is.

�Avoid stating the obvious or truisms.

�Need you analyzing how to offset the hazards rather than describing what they could be.

�Confused.

Workplace Violence i

other

eton

arish

Isk

ssessment

Risk Assessment: Mother Seton Parish

Germantown, MD

Ian Swayze

CJMS

Professor Wilson

University of Maryland – University College

March 31,

013

Turnitin.com Match Score:

% similar

Introduction

As institutions focused on the practice of faith and the associated charitable contributions to their surrounding communicates, a reasonable person may assume that churches and other houses of worship are largely insulated from the threats that envelop the environment around them. Unfortunately, much like hospitals, churches and other religious institutions face a seemingly increasing degree of threat from both property crime and related violent crimes against persons. In a concise and well-developed study in the security challenges to churches,

arrell (2010) paints a frightening picture of both numerous and egregious attacks and criminal incidents involving faith based institutions (FBOs). To that effect, he notes the proclivity of these such events, to the degree of

homicides and 38 other violent crimes against Christian churches alone within the US during CY 2009. Aside from the human victimization, crimes against property are no less worrisome in this venue, with more than $2

million in property loss incurred during that same period. To that effect, sadly, Purpura (2010) notes that arson is the leading cause for fires in churches and facilities used by FBOs. Clearly the spectrum of threats facing these institutions has become vast.

Despite the nature of their mission to be a source of hope and assistance to their communities, FBOs face such serious threats as theft, vandalism, arson and, increasingly, cases of assault and homicide against their staffs and membership. Accordingly, in addition to advancing their noble cause for service, clergy and FBO community leaders must continually, and diligently evaluate means by which to examine and counter potential risks facing their institutions.

Site Selection & Rationale

With that respect, this paper serves to provide a cursory risk assessment for a church of which I am a parishioner, Mother Seton Parish in Germantown, MD. In evaluating potential options to consider for this assignment, having had the opportunity to view this institution and its practices through the lens of a stakeholder has helped to hone a more effective view on the potential challenges associated with the security environment therein. As both a security professional and as a member of the church community, I have a vested interest in the assurance of safety, security, and relative peace of this component of my life. The scope of this assessment is the entire parish site, to include all facilities, physical property, and persons with a presence at the site.
Importantly, as this was not a church-requested assessment, the discussion provided henceforth is based on the best information available through public data, personal dialogue with clergy and parishioners, and individual observation. As such, this assessment would not be appropriate for, nor should it be utilized in, and sort of insurance determination, risk acceptance, or capital budgeting activities.

Mother Seton Parish is a Roman Catholic Church located on Father Hurley Blvd (intersecting with Middlebrook Rd) in Germantown (Montgomery County), Maryland. Though the parish has been in existence since 19

4, the current facilities were not completed until 2004. The church campus is comprised of three main facilities: the church itself, a parish center (for religious education and community activity), and the parish rectory which houses the three priests assigned to the parish. From a property standpoint, the site is tightly nestled into a

.2-acre lot bound to the north by Middlebrook Road, and to the west by Father Hurley Blvd (which, coincidentally is named after Msgr. Leonard Hurley, the parish’s first pastor). On-site parking at the church is normally plentiful for normal Sunday mass, but often woefully inadequate for holiday services such as Easter and Christmas. Forming the site’s western line of demarcation is a significant-sized shopping center (to include a large grocery store, larger stores, smaller inline stores and restaurants). In this way, the church is at the edge of a zone of convergence between a high-density residential area (mostly rental apartments and some smaller townhomes) and a major retail / commercial area, principally anchored around Germantown Rd (Maryland Rt. 118). The closest major highway is I-

0, which can be accessed by vehicle in less than 5 minutes’ drive time during normal traffic conditions.

Law enforcement responsibility for this area is under the jurisdiction of the Montgomery County Police Department (MCPD), with the church located within the county’s 5th District (Germantown) and an estimated nominal response time of NLT 5 minutes (5th District station is 1.5 miles from the site). Crime metrics from MCPD’s most recent quarterly statistics document (Q1 – 2012) suggest a moderate year-to-year rise in crimes reported to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting System within this police district. The most recent full-year reporting (2011) indicates that larceny and burglary are by far the most prevalent types of crime reported (1398 and 352 incidences, respectively).
On a positive note, these statistics were the lowest of the six districts within MCPD. With respect to previous criminal history at the church itself, it should be noted that in 2001, Monsignor Thomas Wells, the parish pastor was murdered in the rectory by a local man who reportedly suffered from emotional and psycho-social disorders. The assailant approached the rectory during hours of darkness, under the auspices of seeking assistance, though purportedly with the actual intent of robbery. The anecdotal value of this event alone suggest a potential for risk associated with unknown persons’ relatively easy and largely unrestricted access to church assets, empowered by the central location of the site in a densely-populated area. In discussion with the parish’s current priests and staff, recent criminal concern has been largely along the lines of property focused (i.e. larceny attempts or damage to vehicles).

Approach and Methodology

By definition, the classical approaches to risk assessment activities factor in threat considerations and vulnerability evaluations as precursors. For as Vellani (2006) reminds us, risk is essentially a function of threat and vulnerability relative to an asset or group of assets. Accordingly, the risk assessment tool and approach presented in Appendix A works in a logical, sequential and integrative approach. With respect to Mother Seton Parish as the evaluated entity, the tool first identifies assets while at the same time matching those to the most likely threat vectors. Next, the process utilizes the US Army’s MSHARPP matrix as a methodology to quantify a vulnerability rating for identified assets based on what are largely quantitative elements of evaluation. This method has the beneficial effect of presenting a numerical picture of what would otherwise be difficult to measure in terms of pure-data driven metrics for vulnerability assessment. As a standalone tool, MSHARP measures vulnerability using criticality & probability considerations as embedded determinants. For this application, however, final risk rankings included additional calculus.

Within Appendix A, Table

represents a quasi-qualitative rubric to analyzing and prioritizing risks for this asset-based risk assessment. The MSHARPP index is employed as the starting point, at this represents the quantification of an overall vulnerability rating for the given asset or target. This value is then multiplied by a qualitatively-determined scale for the probability of any measurable threat affecting the asset. Although the MSHARPP tool already considers postulated threat potential (implied through the aggregation of several of the matrix categories), this general threat variable expand upon that by considering the likelihood of ALL reasonable threats affecting the asset. As such, this calculus provides a greater utility for risk analysis, such that amplifies the value of threats that may not have yet been specifically considered. An additional value is also then considered, which is the loss event criticality. Similarly, although criticality is already implicitly embedded within the MSHARP index value, this variable in this case seeks to accentuate the relative criticality of the asset versus the others listed. In this way, the resultant scaling factors when multiplying the composite of columns A x B with column C help to drive the final risk ranking score so as to allow concentration of mitigation efforts based on a ranked prioritization.

Assessment Analysis Results

Overall, the security picture at Mother Seton Parish is reasonable, with risk levels that appear commensurate with the baseline for religious institutions in the area. On a positive note, the church has instituted a stricter adherence to a policy of not opening the door of the rectory after-hours to uninvited visitors following the tragedy with Msgr. Wells. Similarly, the priests with whom I had the opportunity to discuss the criminal threats facing the church seemed well versed on the ongoing concerns and have made concerted efforts to tackle the lower handing fruit
(ex: exterior lighting was in far worse shape prior to the arrival of the current pastor).

The asset specific outcomes of the vulnerability and risk assessment process are noted in Appendix A. Generally, the items with highest assessed vulnerabilities fell in line with the final determinations for assets with the highest overall risk. It is interesting to note though that the assets with the two highest vulnerability index scores (MSHARPP rating) exhibited a reasonably wide margin between their final respective risk scores. Although these assets were ranked next to each other in terms of overall mitigation prioritization (#1 and #2), this risk score gap highlights the significance of the score weighting enacted by the event probability (Column B) and loss criticality (Column C) multiplier factors.

Site Security Recommendations

Recommendations for improving asset protection are enumerated in detail in the corresponding sections of the security survey portion of Appendix A.

Appendix A: Risk Assessment Tool

Consolidated

Asset

Identification & Postulated Threat Assessment:

The below table represents the identification of assets affiliated with Mother Seton Parish, and also presents the corresponding postulated threat or basis for asset loss, damage or harm. Postulated threats are projected based on a synthesis of area crime data and rational evaluation of the relationship to the asset considered.

Table 1 – Asset Identification & Threat Matrix

Street level criminals / petty theft; or assault seeking personal effects or valuables

	Target	Postulated Threat Vector/ Motive
Parishioners				Street level criminals / petty theft; or assault seeking personal effects or valuables
		Clergy	Street level criminals / petty theft; or assault seeking personal effects or valuables –OR— Discontented persons with political or social opposition to aspects of the Catholic Church
		Donations / Cash Collection Box
		Audio / Music Equipment
		Personal Vehicles
		Religious relics / items	Discontented persons with political or social opposition to aspects of the Catholic Church
		Clergy personal property
		Site Facilities (Church, Parish Center, Rectory)	Discontented persons with political or social opposition to aspects of the Catholic Church – Vandalism, Non-Theft Property Destruction, Arson

Vulnerability Assessment:

A quasi-quantitative asset-focused vulnerability analysis was conducted using DoD MSHARPP matrix. The targets noted in the table below are core components and elements associated Mother Seton Parish’s facilities and the reach of its ministry. Here, the numerical total / index corresponds to a categorized level of vulnerability ranging from

Very Low

to Very

High

Per US Army Field Manual 3-19.5:

One of these assessment tools used to determine the criticality and vulnerability of U.S. interests examines seven variables: mission, symbolism, history, accessibility, recognizability, population, and proximity (MSHARPP). MSHARPP is a targeting tool geared toward assessing personnel vulnerabilities but can also be used for facilities, units, or other assets. The assessed items are listed in the left-hand column; the MSHARPP variables are listed across the top. Each asset is assigned a number (ranging from 1 through 5) that corresponds to the applicable MSHARPP variable. The number 5 represents the greatest vulnerability or likelihood of attack; the number 1 represents the lowest vulnerability. The respective numerical values are totaled to provide a relative value as a target or the overall level of vulnerability.”

In this application, the following situation-specific interpretations of each variable are assumed:

· Mission – the degree to which harm to the noted target would disrupt the ability of the church to continue to function as a place of worship and/or as a center of support to the community

·
Symbolism – the attractiveness of the target based on the potential notoriety that would be achieved by inflicting harm

· History – significance and ease of attack on the target in the eyes of attacker based on previous incident success

· Accessibility – the degree to which the assets are shielded or compartmentalized from the public, street-level environment

· Recognizability – likelihood that attacker would be able to easily located a pre-determined target set on the church site at time of attack

· Population – reaction from and impact to the local population if identified asset is harmed or damaged

· Proximity – the degree of movement required to reach the asset, i.e. difficulty before reaching first barrier

Table 2 – Vulnerability Assessment (DoD MSHARPP matrix)

Target

Clergy

Donations / Cash Collection Box

Audio / Music Equipment

Personal Vehicles

Religious relics / items

Clergy personal property

Site Facilities (Church, Parish Center, Rectory)

Index

High

Parishioners

Medium

-Low

Medium-Low

Very Low

27
High

Medium

12
Very Low

29
High

Security Survey:

In line with prior security surveys (Swayze, 2013), the below checklist / survey was developed and implemented to understand the protective measures in place and assess their effectiveness in protecting the assets noted above. The results of this survey are used in concert with the stand-alone and integrated threat, vulnerability and risk considerations to help in prioritizing use of resources to mitigate identified security concerns. Format was adapted from a critical infrastructure survey template designed by the Utah Department of Public Safety Division of Homeland Security (2006).

Table 3 – Security Survey

YES

YES*

Facility & Physical Security Survey
Question	Answer	Comment	Action Needed / Enhancement Recommended
CPTED – Is there a defined perimeter, physiological controls to entry?				NO	Other than shrubbery, the site has no obvious physical perimeter, and property transitions without any barriers into adjacent property. This allows for nearly unrestricted access to persons moving on food.	Consider installation of a fence line to encourage enforcement and delineation of property boundaries and limit east of approach from offsite property
CPTED – Vandalism / Facility Upkeep: Is the site free from graffiti, litter and other signs of disrepair?		YES	The site is well maintained with not signs up disrepair or allowance of property degradation	N/A
CPTED: Observation & Concealment: Are avenues approach to the site observable from within?		YES*	Vehicular and pedestrian traffic approaching the main entry doors of the three structures are easily viewable at a distance from within the level parking lot. Access to the site from northerner and the sides cannot be as easily observed from a distance.	Consider placement of thorny shrubbery on N&S sides to discourage access to the property from other than actual entrance points
Signage: Is signage posted to dissuade trespassing, or advise on hours of availability for facilities	Such signage was unobserved	Post signage at main entry driveway and at regular intervals to advertise boundaries on when services / assistance should not be expected as available
Facility Access: Are doors secured consistently according to a schedule	Main church doors are secured at 10PM nightly. Parish center doors locked when activities not scheduled. Rectory doors secured 24 x 7	Consider earlier securing timeframe for church when no activities are ongoing. Install bell or intercom to connect to on-call priest or parish attendant telephonically during hours after dark when doors are secured.
Lighting: Is exterior lighting sufficient	Lighting design is adequate, however, a number of parking lot light poles were out	Replace bulbs and consider outward facing lights to illuminate wooded boundaries, especially the area adjacent to shopping center parking lot
Emergency Alert: Is there an instant notification / “panic button” capability inside buildings to quickly summon law enforcement?	No panic button inside church building, and telephones not easily accessible from most areas other than co-located parish office. Conditions in parish center & rectory unobserved.	Install alarm-monitoring service connected panic devices, or add additional telephone handsets in entry area and hallways of church building
CCTV: Is this capability present and is it recorded	No camera systems are present	Consider cameras with DVR to at least monitor door entry points and parking lot along with signage announcing the capability.

Risk Analysis / Prioritization:

Table 3 – Risk Analysis & Prioritization

Clergy

29
High

Parishioners

20
Medium-Low

Donations / Cash Collection Box

17
Medium-Low

Audio / Music Equipment

14
Very Low

Personal Vehicles

27
High

Religious relics / items

23
Medium

Clergy personal property

12
Very Low

Site Facilities (Church, Parish Center, Rectory)

29
High

Asset	MSHARPP Index (Vulnerability) (A)	General Threat Probability (1-5) (B)	Loss Event Criticality (1-5) (C)	Risk Categorization (Quasi –Quantitative) =A x B x C	Risk Priority
232
120
51	8
56	7
216
69	6
72
290	1

References

Harrell, B.M. (2010). Security challenges for houses of worship. Journal of Physical Security 4(2). Retrieved from:

http://jps.anl.gov/Volume4_iss2/Paper1-BMHarrell

Milton, K. (2001). Lucas receives 42 years for Monsignor Wells’ murder. Gazette.net: Maryland community newspapers online. Retrieved from:

http://ww2.gazette.net/gazette_archive/2001/200133/montgomery/news/67261-1.html

Montgomery County Police Website (2013). Montgomery county police crime statistics. Retrieved from:

http://www6.montgomerycountymd.gov/poltmpl.asp?url=/content/pol/media/crimestats.asp

Mother Seton Parish Website (2013). Retrieved from:

http://www.mothersetonparish.org/

Purpura, P.P. (1999). Securing houses of worship: A community services manual for ASIS

chapters. Alexandria, VA; ASIS International Press. Retrieved from:

http://www.scnus.org/local_includes/downloads/13619

Swayze, I.R. (2013). Vulnerability Assessment: George Washington University Hospital L&D Department. Adelphi, MD; University of Maryland – University College.

United States Army (2010). Police Intelligence Operations, ATTP 3-39.20 (FM 3-19.50). Retrieved from:

http://armypubs.army.mil/doctrine/DR_pubs/dr_a/pdf/attp3_39x20

Utah Department of Public Safety Division of Homeland Security (2006). Security Vulnerability Self-Assessment Guide for Critical Infrastructure Protection. Retrieved from:

www.des.utah.gov

Vellani, K.H. (2007). Strategic security management. Burlington, MA: Elsevier

�Excellent research and opening to your paper that gets the reader’s attention.

�Good roadmap of content to follow.

�Outstanding research and application to the threat environment.

�Excellent explanation of a complex tool.

�Avoid idioms/colloquialisms in formal academic writing.

�Outstanding work.

�Wonderful use of tables to convey a lot of information in a short amount of space.

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Vulnerability Assessment- Phyllis Young ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Still stressed with your coursework?

Get quality coursework help from an expert!

Order now