Federal Protective System - Assignment Example

 Federal Protective System 1. Evaluate the security measures taken by the FPS and determine if the measures are comprehensive enough, given any potential threats not mentioned in the report. The report titled Federal Protective Service: Actions Needed to Resolve Delays and Inadequate Oversight Issues with FPS’s Risk Assessment and Management Program gives a critical glimpse on some of the security measures undertaken by FPS. A key security measure undertaken by Federal Protective Service was adoption of Risk Assessment and Management Program (RAMP), which is web-enabled risk assessment and guard management system. Essentially, RAMP was meant to enhance risk assessment capabilities of FPS on facilities owned by the federal government. This risk assessment was to be conducted on the basis of threat, vulnerabilities as well as counter actions to palliate those risks. The other role to be played be RAMP was to boost the ability of the agency to inspect and ascertain that all of its federal guards are adequately trained and meet all prerequisites before being assigned to federal facilities (United States Government Accountability Office, 2011). The findings of the report are quite damning especially on account of the high budget needed to finance the RAMP project. Secondly, the RAMP project has failed to meet most of its objectives as it is still difficult for FPS to determine that all of its contracted guards meet the required qualifications. Therefore, acts of terror being the gravest risk to federal buildings since 9/11, its illogical to assume that federal workers and buildings are safe from terror attacks. While most of the guards are trained on the use of magnetometers and x-rays, FPS has certainly failed to carry out adequate follow ups to guarantee that their guards are implementing the post orders to the latter. This is quite dangerous as terrorists also act on intelligence and would, definitely, seek to exploit that moment of security lapse to carry out their activities. 2. Compare the security measures provided by the FPS to those of a commercial building with which you are familiar. Citigroup Center is one of the tallest buildings located in California and which has invested heavily on security to safeguard the people within the premises. In addition to security personnel deployed around the building, security of this building has been further enhanced by design. For instance, it is noticeable that the number of accesses such as entry or exit points have been limited. Other measures include proper landscaping, installation of security lights and surveillance cameras at strategic positions among many other architectural designs to deter potential criminals (Krisandra, 2007). However, similar to other federal buildings, this commercial center has installed detection devices and electronic security. At the entrance points to this building are the walkthrough metal detectors that detect presence of metallic object on a person’s. Also, security guards at the entrance are highly specialized and trained as most of them are hired from private contractors. They equally make use of magnetometers and x-rays while carrying out inspection. Notably, the human traffic at this commercial building is so high hence, unlike in federal buildings, hardly have officers who frisk or use hand held metal detectors. Nonetheless, the security measures in this building and that provided by FPS are more or less similar. The only difference could arise from the measures adopted in risk assessment and, perhaps, follow up to ensure that post orders are adhered to the latter. 3. Describe the weaknesses that still exist within the protocols defined by the FPS. There are quite a number of weaknesses that still exist in Federal Protective System. In a damning report released by GAO, it was noted that FPS has not fully complied with the requirement that all of its contract security guards must possess the relevant training and certification before being deployed in a federal facility. According to FPS protocol, all prospective guards must have undergone 128 hours of training including 8 hours that specifically focus on x-ray and magnetometer. Unfortunately, this has not been the case. In one region, for instance, it is reported that FPS has failed to offer x-ray or magnetometer training to approximately 1,500 guards ever since 2004. In spite of this, these guards have been deployed at federal facilities to provide protection. A perfect example of a case that is attributed to such weaknesses in protocol is when an infant in a career was sent through an x-ray machine. This incidence was blamed on the guard’s negligence (United States Government Accountability Office, 2009). Another weakness in FPS protocol is inconsistencies when it comes to inspection of its guards. FPS lacks a proper national guidelines on when and how to conduct routing inspections. When regional comparison is done, there is a glaring inconsistency on the frequency and quality of inspection carried out across the regions. Furthermore, GAO noted that FPS mostly conduct inspection during the normal working hours, hence, seldom do they visit their contracted guards at night. This means that there is hardly an assurance that all of its guards are fully putting post orders in practice. Cases have happened where guards were found asleep at night while others, because of negligence, failed to notice a box having handguns. 4. Describe the security measures that you see at your nearest federal building as well as the security measures that you believe may not be obvious to other observers. Federal buildings around my locality are guarded by FPS personnel who spend much of their time inspecting people entering the buildings. For instance, a notable security measure is the use of x-rays and magnetometer to detect metallic objects in bags and other packages carried by persons visiting the facilities. Walkthrough metal detectors are fitted at the entrance of most of these buildings to reinforce and simplify the work of these security guards. The frisking activities are also common with male and female guards inspecting whether a male visitor or female visitor respectively could be having a dangerous object within their personality. Also, while in these buildings, surveillance cameras that are under close supervision are visible. Another security measure, though not easily noticeable by other observers, is the proactive patrol carried out by FPS inspectors some of whom are in casual or not easily identifiable outfits. In the case of the FPS officers patrolling in identifiable outfits, they do this to serve as a deterrent to any persons who might be contemplating carrying out criminal activities. On the other hand, “secretly” attired officers mostly engage in risk assessments within federal buildings. It is a common scenario to see FPS vehicles strategically positioned at some of the areas with high concentration of Federal buildings. References United States Government Accountability Office (2011). Federal Protective Service: Actions Needed to Resolve Delays and Inadequate Oversight Issues with FPS’s Risk Assessment and Management Program. Retrieved from: www.gao.gov/new.items/d11705r.pdf United States Government Accountability Office (Jul 8, 2009). Homeland Security: Preliminary Results Show Federal Protective Service's Ability to Protect Federal Facilities Is Hampered By Weaknesses in Its Contract Security Guard Program. Retrieved from: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-859T Krisandra, G. (2007). Antiterrorism security measures for commercial buildings. Washington, DC: Appraisal Institute. Read More