Related articles about Best Practices in Anti-Terrorism Security (BPATS):
It’s one thing to implement best anti-terror practices at sports stadiums, but those practices mean little if they don’t measure up.
That’s why the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has published a guide to measure the effectiveness of best practices in anti-terrorism security adopted by sports stadiums and other large entertainment venues.
That guide, Metrics & Measures of Effectiveness Resource Guide (aka BPATS II), is available on the DHS website. It was researched and written by CCICADA, a data-analytics research group based at Rutgers University in Piscataway, NJ.
The guide is essentially a sequel to CCICADA’s Best Practices in Anti-Terrorism Security Resource Guide (aka BPATS I) for Sporting and Entertainment Venues. Published in 2013, the Resource Guide explains how to plan and implement effective anti-terrorism security measures at stadiums and other large venues.
“The BPATS I guide presents important components of a stadium anti-terrorism security plan. This knowledge product has been well received and used by security professionals across the United States,” Bruce Davidson, director of the DHS Office of SAFETY Act Implementation (OSAI), said in announcing the availability of the BPATS II metrics guide.
The metrics guide (BPATS II), published in November 2016, provides venue operators and owners with a detailed approach to measuring the effectiveness of anti-terror security measures.
“A well-developed, layered security program should have a means to perform regular assessments of capability and effectiveness,” Davidson said.
He added that BPATS II was the result of wide ranging, in-depth research into current best practices in evaluating the effectiveness of venue security programs: “The research project reviewed relevant literature on the evaluation of venue inspection and credentialing processes, of practices used by government agencies and the private sector, and consulted with venue and sports league security directors to assess the utility and feasibility of proposed measures.”
The DHS funded the research and development of both guides because mass gathering places are highly vulnerable to terrorist attacks, and because legal liability risks after 9/11 discouraged private-sector venue owners from investing in new security technologies that might fail during a terrorist attack.
In response to the legal liability concerns, Congress passed the SAFETY Act. Stadiums and similar venues that receive SAFETY Act certification or designation obtain legal liability protections when making costly investments in anti-terror security systems. In addition, they can purchase related security insurance.