Volume 36, No. 5 - September/October 2006 Campus Law ... - IACLEA

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2006 / 25

26 / Campus Law Enforcement Journal

2006-2007 Board of Directors 

President 

Steven J. Healy 

Princeton University 

President Elect 

Raymond H. Thrower, Jr. 

Gustavus Adolphus College 

Treasurer 

Lisa Sprague 

Florida State University 

Immediate Past President 

Priscilla A. Stevens 

College of Southern Maryland 

Directors 

Daniel Hutt 

Canada 

University of Toronto 

Viljoen van der Walt International 

Stellenbosch University 

James E. Schumann Mid-America 

College of Saint Benedict 

Vickie L. Weaver 

Mid-Atlantic 

Rider University 

Laura Wilson 

Mountain Pacific 

Stanford University 

Paul L. Ominsky 

North Atlantic 

Mount Holyoke College 

Jasper Cooke 

Southeast Region 

Augusta State College 

Robert K. Bratten Southwest Region 

University of Texas Health Ctr. 

Phillip A. Johnson 

At-Large 

University of Notre Dame 

Marlon C. Lynch 

At-Large 

Vanderbilt University 

Harry P. Parmer 

At-Large 

Saddleback College 

Chief Staff Officer/Editor in Chief 

Peter J. Berry, CAE 

Managing Editor 

Lynn Sedlak 

Production Director 

Gene Mandish 

Advertising Coordinator 

Lynn Sedlak 

Vol. 36, No. 5 September/October 2006 

Contents 

Addressing the Frustrations of Campus Police Chiefs and Directors........................ 6 

By Bruce L. Benson, Ph.D., Steve Rittereiser, Eui-Gab Hwang, Ph.D. 

Results of a recent study of campus law enforcement 

The Role of Parents/Guardians in Enhancing Security of Their 

Wards (Students) on Campus ................................................................................ 11 

By Rotibi Akinbiyi 

How to keep students safe from an international perspective 

Training on a Shoestring Budget ............................................................................ 15 

By Wesley Harris 

Methods to stretch your training budget 

Accreditation Fee for CALEA-accredited Agencies Approved ............................... 20 

By Jack Leonard 

Learn how your CALEA accreditation can help you become IACLEA accredited 

Campus Counter-terrorism Resources Now Available on IACLEA Web Site .......... 21 

By Christopher G. Blake, CAE 

Latest resource at www.IACLEA.org 

National Campus Safety Awareness Month in Full Swing ...................................... 23 

By Steven Healy 

IACLEA Member Institution Montclair State University Receives 2006 Clery Award 

Departments 

President’s Message ................................................................................................. 2 

Association News ..................................................................................................... 3 

Member News .......................................................................................................... 4 

On the Cover 

Campus public safety leaders face many daily challenges. See the article on page 6 

outlining a recent survey by Dr. Bruce L. Benson. 

Campus Law Enforcement Journal is the official publication of the International Association of Campus 

Law Enforcement Administrators. It is published bimonthly and dedicated to the promotion of professional 

ideals and standards for law enforcement, security and public safety so as to better serve institutions 

of higher education. 

Single copy: $5; subscription: $30 annually in U.S. currency to nonmembers in U.S., Canada, Mexico. All 

other countries: $35. Manuscripts, correspondence, and all contributed materials are welcome; however, 

publication is subject to editing and rewrite if deemed necessary to conform to editorial policy and style. 

Opinions expressed by contributing authors and advertisers are independent of IACLEA Journal policies 

or views. Authors must provide proper credit for information sources and assume responsibility for 

permission to reprint statements or wording regardless of the originating organ. ©2006 International 

Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators. All rights reserved. Business and Publication 

Office: 342 North Main Street, West Hartford, CT 06117-2507; (860) 586-7517; Fax (860) 586-7550. 

Printed in the U.S. by Sundance Press. This publication is available in microform from University 

Microfilms International, 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 USA. 


President’s Message 

The IACLEA Membership Drive – “500 x 50” 

Taking Us from “Good to Great” 

By Steven J. Healy, President 

During our Annual 

Conference this past 

June in Orlando, 

Florida, I announced 

our two-year membership 

drive entitled 

“500 x 50.” Our 

goal with the drive is 

to add 500 new 

members to IACLEA 

by our 50th Anniversary Celebration in 

2008 at the Annual Conference in Hartford, 

Connecticut. I want to use this column 

to further explain the importance of 

this drive, tell you how I envision each of 

us playing a role in the drive and briefly 

outline the incentives we’ve built into the 

drive to encourage your participation. 

As you know, over the past several 

years, IACLEA has increasingly 

played a more important 

role in the public 

debate and in decision 

making about safety and 

security in an increasingly 

unsafe world. You need 

only review our accomplishments 

in this decade 

alone, and you’ll quickly 

see that we have become 

a significant partner with 

federal agencies, professional 

associations and 

member institutions in setting 

the agenda for campus 

public safety in the future. 

Our partnership with 

the U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security, the 

Membership Drive Facts 

Goal: 500 new members by June 2008 

Committee Co-chairs: 

Regina Lawson (4 Year Institutions) lawsonrg@wfu.edu 

Clayton Harris (2 Year Institutions) clayton.harris@tri-c.edu 

Russell Richardson, CPSM (International) rrichardson@college.bm 

Web address for Toolkit: 

Go to the membership page at www.iaclea.org 

Incentives: 

• Recruit a member and received 25 IACLEA Bucks 

• Top recruiter in 2007 and 2008 receives free airline tickets 

• Grand prize drawing in 2008 TBD. Receive one entry for the 

first five new members you recruit and one entry for every 

additional new member. 

IACLEA contact: Lynn Sedlak, lsedlak@iaclea.org 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Departments 

of Justice and Education and 

our presence at international conferences 

are but a few examples of our increasing 

presence both nationally and internationally. 

Today, we are experiencing unprecedented 

influence and recognition among 

our peers, from administrators within our 

institutions, and from decision leaders 

from around the world. Thanks to the 

commitment and vision from members 

of your Board of Directors and the tireless 

dedication from our volunteers, we 

are at a critical point in the future of 

IACLEA. Now is the time to seize upon 

the opportunity that we find before us. 

Today, we are a strong association with 

great benefits for our members. Because 

of our success and our obligation to enhance 

safety on campuses, we must ensure 

that more colleges and universities 

have an opportunity to take advantage 

of our services and resources. There are 

approximately 4,200 higher education 

institutions in the U.S. alone. There are 

countless others located outside the continental 

United States. Currently, we have 

approximately 1,700 members worldwide, 

with 1,000 institutional members. 

We represent a mere fraction of our constituents. 

And therein is our challenge. 

When we proclaim that we are the “voice 

of campus public safety,” we must say it 

with confidence and that means we must 

represent a majority of campuses in the 

U.S and significant numbers internationally. 

As additional members join our ranks, 

we gain credibility. When we testify before 

Congress, meet with 

our partners in the federal 

government or coordinate 

with our peer professional 

associations, they all want 

to know how many institutions 

we represent. 

When our membership 

rolls grow, our voice gets 

louder and our presence 

magnifies. This drive is not 

a “nice to do” initiative. It 

is an imperative if we are 

to move from a good association 

to a great one! 

We intend for the drive 

to be a member-based effort 

to recruit new members 

from all membership 

Continued on page 24 


Association News 

IACLEA Selects DC Representative 

IACLEA has hired Lisa 

Phillips of Harper’s 

Ferry, West Virginia, 

for the newly created 

position of Director of 

Government and External 

Affairs, effective 

September 1. 

The creation of 

this new part-time 

position is a significant 

milestone for 

IACLEA. The position 

will enhance IACLEA’s visibility and 

strengthen its partnerships within 

higher education, public safety and law 

enforcement, federal agencies and 

Congress. 

Phillips has 20 years of experience 

working in public policy areas for 

members of the U.S. Congress. As Senior 

Legislative Director for the House 

Committee on Postsecondary Education 

and later for the Senate Education 

Subcommittee, she participated in the 

reauthorization of the Higher Education 

Act during consideration and adoption 

of the Clery Act. 

She has also served as Director of 

Federal Relations for two higher education 

associations and now serves as 

an advocate before Congress and administrative 

agencies for health and 

local government clients in the Washington, 

D.C. area. 

Phillips serves as 

a non-partisan municipal 

election commissioner 

for her 

home base of 

Harper’s Ferry, West 

Virginia, just outside 

of Washington, D.C. 

She is a volunteer coordinator 

for local 

school board, town 

and county commission 

electoral races. 

She is a member of the Harper’s 

Ferry Historical Association, the Community 

Foundation of the Eastern 

Panhandle and Jefferson County’s 

(WV) Meals on Wheels program. 

A native of New York, Phillips received 

a bachelor of arts degree in 

humanities from Vassar College and 

a master of arts degree in history from 

Georgetown University. 

The selection of Phillips is the culmination 

of many months of hard 

work by a D.C. Representative Task 

Force appointed by the IACLEA Board 

of Directors and chaired by Dolores 

Stafford, a past IACLEA president. 

The hiring of a DC Representative 

fulfills one of IACLEA’s Strategic Plan 

initiatives established in 2003 and further 

supports one of the Association’s 

long-range goals to “be the proactive 

advocate for advancing the role of 

campus public safety.” 

IACLEA Kicks Off 500 x 50 

Membership Recruitment 

Campaign 

Current members are an excellent way to 

market association membership and benefits 

to non-members. IACLEA’s 500 x 50 

Membership Recruitment Campaign 

needs your help to reach its goal. 

The aim is for IACLEA current members 

to recruit 500 new members by the 

start of the 2008 Annual Conference in 

Hartford, Connecticut. These new members 

can be a part of any membership category 

(institution, professional, affiliate or 

supporting). 

To assist IACLEA members in this task, 

an easy to use membership toolkit has 

been posted in the membership section 

of the Web site, www.iaclea.org, and includes 

a new membership brochure, frequently 

asked questions and sample letters 

for you to use. 

What is in it for you? 

• Any IACLEA member who recruits a 

new member will receive twenty-five 

“IACLEA Bucks” for use toward dues, 

conference registration or an education 

program, product or service. 

• An annual prize of a gift certificate for 

airline tickets will be given away at 

the 2007 and 2008 Annual Conference 

to the individual who recruited the 

largest number of members that year. 

• Finally, a grand prize (to be determined) 

will be given away at the 50th 

Annual Conference in Hartford. 

IACLEA members will receive one 

chance for every five new members 

successfully recruited and one additional 

chance for each new member 

successfully recruited above the original 

five. 

• IACLEA members will be required to 

inform headquarters staff of who they 

have recruited in order to receive 

credit. Also, all membership applications 

have been updated to include a 

space for the sponsor name. 

If you have any questions, please do 

not hesitate to contact Lynn Sedlak, Director 

of Membership and Administration, 

at (860) 586-7517, ext. 547 or via email 

at lsedlak@iaclea.org. Good luck! 


Member News 

New Members – July/August 

Institutional Membership 

Ave Maria University 

Thomas R. Minick 

California State University – 

Channel Islands 

John M. Reid 

County College of Morris 

Harvey A.J. Jackson 

Germanna Community College 

Steven Ross 

Hollins University 

David J. Carlson 

James Madison University 

Lee Shifflett 

Millsaps College 

John A. Conway 

Oklahoma State University at Tulsa 

Melvin Murdock 

Peking University 

An Guojiang 

Queensborough Community College – 

CUNY 

Edward J. Locke 

Quinsigamond Community College 

Kevin Ritacco 

Shelton Board of Education 

Nicholas A. Zerella, Jr. 

Southern Oregon University 

Eric J. Rodriguez 

Tacoma Community College 

Eddie Aubrey 

Teachers College at Columbia 

University 

John DeAngelis 

The King’s College & Seminary 

Jody D. Smith 

University of Portsmouth 

Christopher Brian Beaman 

Professional Membership 

Bethany Lutheran College 

Brian Bartelt 

Brown University 

Donald J. Gobin 

Camden County College 

Steve Hetherington 

Central Arizona College 

Luis Martinez 

County College of Morris 

David Smith 

Delaware State University 

Belinda R. Baker 

Massachusetts College of Art 

Dwayne Farley 

North Harris Montgomery Community 

College 

Robert T. Lovelace 

Northwest Arkansas Community 

College 

Larry Hughes 

Southern Oregon University 

Stephen P. Ross 

The George Washington University 

Darrell Johnson 

University of Illinois Police Dept. 

Roy A. Acree 

University of Kentucky 

Joe Monroe 

University of Miami 

John Pepper 

Southern New Hampshire Names 

New Public Safety Chief 

Southern New Hampshire University recently 

named James J. Winn as its director 

of public safety. 

A 22-year veteran of the Manchester 

Police Department, Winn most recently 

held the position of captain. Winn replaces 

George Miville, who served as 

the university’s public safety director for 

two decades. 

“The university is extremely fortunate 

and excited to have someone like 

Jim, who possesses outstanding skills and 

knowledge of law enforcement, safety, 

and security,” said Scott Kalicki, vice 

University of Texas 

Don E. Verett 

University of Washington – Bothell 

Terry R. Rauch 

Wake Forest University Police 

E. Preston Oldham 

Affiliate Membership 

Arlington Texas Police Department 

Michael A. Ikner 

Connecticut State Police 

Thomas Snyder 

Security Risk Management Consultants, 

Inc. 

Elliot A. Boxerbaum, CPP 

Supporting Membership 

Chandler Associates 

John M. Madonna, Jr., Ed.D. 

Pelco 

Steve Nibbelink 

STOP Security Tracking of Office 

Property 

Paul Briganti 

Team AVS 

Marc Lepage 

president for student affairs. “Having 

someone with a rich history of the city 

and a strong working relationship with 

many of our community partners is a 

tremendous asset.” 

Winn began his career with the 

Manchester Police Department in 1984 

as a patrol officer. He was promoted to 

detective, sergeant, lieutenant, and, finally, 

to captain in 2003. He earned his 

bachelor’s degree in 1991 from Notre 

Dame College and a master’s degree 

in public administration from the University 

of New Hampshire in 2003. 


Member News 

Rinaldi promoted to lead 

NVCC Public Safety Department 

Lt. Toni Rinaldi has been 

named director of public 

safety at NVCC, 

overseeing a staff of 11 

people and all police 

activities on campus. 

An eight-year veteran of the Public Safety Department 

at Naugatuck Valley Community College in 

Waterbury, Connecticut, has been promoted to lead 

the department. 

Toni Rinaldi, who held the position of acting 

director of public safety for several months and 

had been a sergeant, has been promoted to lieutenant 

and hired into the director’s position permanently. 

The former director, Edward Connole, 

retired in January after 12 years as director of public 

safety. 

“I’m honored to have been chosen for this position 

and feel privileged to lead a team of such 

high-caliber professionals,” Rinaldi said. 

As director of public safety, Rinaldi oversees a 

staff of 11 people and supervises all police activities 

on the 110-acre NVCC campus. In Connecticut, 

campus police officers receive the same testing, training and certification 

as municipal police officers. 

Rinaldi is former president of the Connecticut Association of Women 

Police (CAWP) and is currently vice president of the Connecticut Association 

of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators. She was selected as Officer 

of the Year twice — by CAWP in 2003 and by the International Association 

of Women Police in 2004. 

“The college is extremely fortunate to have someone with Lt. Rinaldi’s 

extensive law enforcement background head up the Public Safety Department,” 

said James Troup, NVCC’s dean of administration. “She has already 

exhibited superior leadership skills, as well as an understanding of how law 

enforcement should function in a higher education setting.” 

Rinaldi joined the NVCC Public Safety Department in 1998. She began 

her career in law enforcement as a part-time officer in Woodbury, before 

becoming an airport police officer at Bradley International Airport for six 

years, assigned to Connecticut State Police Troop W. 

She is one of 32 incident command system instructors nationally for the 

International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators. Rinaldi 

also is certified in critical incident management, and hate and bias crime 

training, providing training to municipal and agency officers in those areas. 

She was valedictorian in her class at the Connecticut Police Academy in 

1992, and received a master’s degree in health education from Southern 

Connecticut State University and a bachelor’s degree in physical education 

from the University of Bridgeport. 

UAB Names Purcell 

Chief of Police 

Anthony B. Purcell has been named 

assistant vice president and chief of 

police at the University of Alabama at 

Birmingham, Richard Margison, vice 

president for financial affairs and administration 

at UAB, announced recently. 

Purcell is currently the deputy chief 

of police and security at Georgia Tech. 

He will assume his duties at UAB on 

October 9. 

“Anthony brings a wealth of experience 

in a variety of settings that make 

him a perfect fit for UAB,” Margison 

said. “He has served as a chief of police 

at other universities, including the 

University of North Carolina at Charlotte, 

so he understands the issues that 

UAB faces being a campus in a bustling, 

large city.” 

In addition to serving at Georgia 

Tech and UNC-Charlotte, Purcell was 

the chief of police and director of 

public safety at North Carolina Central 

University in Durham. Prior to joining 

NCCU, Purcell served nine years 

with the Durham County Sheriff’s 

Department. At Georgia Tech, Purcell 

was responsible for the patrol, special 

operations, criminal investigations 

and administrative services divisions. 

During his tenure, the university has 

seen a more than 50 percent decrease 

in campus crime. 

Purcell earned his bachelor of arts 

degree in criminal justice and his 

master’s degree in criminal justice from 

North Carolina Central University. He 

has served as an adjunct instructor in 

criminal justice at UNCC and NCCU. 

He has also presented seminars nationally 

on such topics as “When Diversity 

and National Security Collide,” 

“Campus Policing Issues: Policing in 

an Age of Litigation” and “Community- 

Oriented Policing and Problem Solving 

for Campus Law Enforcement 

Agencies.” 


Addressing the Frustrations of Campus Police 

Chiefs and Directors 

By Bruce L. Benson, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Criminal Justice and Police Chief Emeritus, Michigan State University; 

Steve Rittereiser, Police Chief and Assistant Vice President, Central Washington University; and Eui-Gab Hwang, Ph.D., Assistant 

Professor, Department of Criminology, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Former Police Captain, S. Korean Police Department 

As a campus police chief I’ve experienced 

many job stresses and frustrations, and 

have worked with other chiefs who are 

similarly affected. One police chief friend 

would sometimes phone and tell me he 

was having an especially bad day, had 

his riot helmet on and was hiding under 

his desk. He once sent an e-mail message 

that began, “Good morning! Having 

just finished my usual morning cocktail 

of Prozac and Mylanta, I am now ready to 

face another day.” 1 

The job of campus police chief/director 

not only has its challenges and rewards, 

but can also be demanding, frustrating and 

stress-provoking. A respected priest and 

counselor describes the police chief/director 

job as having “the burden of final 

decisions.” 2 At times it can be very “lonely 

at the top” of the organization, and job 

pressures can be difficult to deal with, both 

professionally and personally. To examine 

this issue further, a national on-line 

study of campus police chiefs and directors 

of public safety/security was conducted 

through IACLEA 3 by Dr. Benson 

and Dr. Hwang. From more than 900 campus 

public safety leaders, 400 responses 

were received and analyzed in early 2006. 

Responses were examined in terms of 

percentage categories, and significant relationships 

between some variables were 

determined using the chi-square test of 

significance, noted at the .05 level or better. 

Summary results were disseminated 

to IACLEA members at the recent Annual 

Conference in Orlando by Dr. Benson and 

Police Chief and Assistant Vice President 

Steve Rittereiser, who was involved in the 

As a campus police chief I’ve experienced 

many job stresses and frustrations, and have 

worked with other chiefs who are similarly 

affected. 

study since its inception. The research 

results are outlined in the following paragraphs. 

Where the category percentage 

responses total more than 100%, more 

than one question response was allowed 

per respondent. The research results provide 

some interesting insights, and are of 

concern to the health and wellness of our 

campus police chiefs and directors nationwide. 

General Information 

Of the 400 respondents, 61% work as a 

sworn police chief/director of public 

safety, while 39% work as a non-sworn 

director of security/safety. Thirty-one 

percent have held a previous chief/director 

job, while 69% have not. Average 

length of service as a chief/director was 

about eight years, with 50%, the largest 

category, having served one to five years. 

Regarding education, 3% of the chiefs/ 

directors have a doctoral or law degree; 

46% have a master’s degree; 40% have a 

The job of campus police chief/director 

not only has its challenges and rewards, 

but can also be demanding, frustrating 

and stress-provoking. 

bachelor’s degree; 5% have a two-year 

associate degree and 6% have high school/ 

some college. 

The respondents are 87% married and 

13% single/divorced. 

The size of college represented was 

measured in terms of full-time equivalent 

students, reflected as follows: 

43% Under 5,000 

41% 5,000 to 19,999 

16% 20,000 and over 

The larger colleges are associated (to 

a statistically significant degree) with having 

a sworn chief vs. a non-sworn director. 

Current annual salaries are as follows: 

15% $25,001 to $50,000 

41% $50,001 to $75,000 

29% $75,001 to $100,000 

11% $100,001 to $125,000 

Higher salaries are associated with 

sworn chiefs vs. non-sworn directors. 

Only 34% of the respondents are provided 

with full or limited use of an automobile. 

The main reasons for choosing this line 

of work are as follows: 

54% Challenging, interesting job 

in a changing environment. 

52% Chance to help people and 

make a difference for 

others. 

50% Job security and benefits. 



Addressing the Frustrations of Campus Police Chiefs and Directors 

Continued from page 6 

The main reasons given for choosing 

a campus chief/director job are: 

45% I like the campus 

atmosphere. 

18% I wanted to get away 

from municipal, county or 

state law enforcement. 

12% Better pay or other job 

compensations vs. 

municipal. 

Positive Issues 

When asked, “Overall, do you feel that 

your campus law enforcement/safety career 

has proved to be a good choice for 

you,” 92% responded that it has been, 

and they would do it again. 

Another primary question was “How 

really satisfied are you in your current 

job?” The chiefs/directors responded: 

40% Very satisfied. 

49% Somewhat satisfied. 

4% Neutral. 

5% Somewhat dissatisfied. 

2% Very dissatisfied. 

Higher job satisfaction is associated 

with sworn chiefs vs. non-sworn directors, 

and with higher salary. 

Selected as “the most positive, satisfying, 

enjoyable aspects of the job” are the 

following: 

80% Making improvements and 

impacting the department 

and officers/employees in a 

positive way. 

76% Helping people, solving 

problems and making a 

difference in the 

community. 

46% Working and interacting 

with students. 

The “making improvements” choice 

is associated with larger colleges, sworn 

chiefs vs. non-sworn and sworn departments 

vs. non-sworn. 

The “helping people” choice is associated 

with sworn chiefs vs. non-sworn. 

The most significant positive impact 

of the job on one’s personal life is shown 

as follows: 

59% A sense of accomplishment 

and personal satisfaction, 

knowing that I have made 

a difference or done 

something worthwhile. 

20% The challenge of the job; it 

keeps me vibrant, involved 

and satisfied. 

16% Interacting with citizens, 

students, community 

leaders and many 

interesting people in 

general. 

The “challenge of the job” selection is 

associated with higher education. 

Negative Issues 

Selected as “the most negative, discouraging, 

dissatisfying aspects of the job” are 

the following: 

44% Dealing with negative, 

resistant, problem employees 

who display a lack of 

professional commitment. 

44% Dealing with the budget 

and fiscal issues. 

40% Frustrations of the political 

environment of the job, in 

dealing with administrators 

and elected/appointed 

officials. 

The chiefs/directors were asked, “What 

other agencies/departments give you the 

most grief and criticism, and are the most 

difficult for you to deal with,” and they 

responded: 

28% Other university departments 

(other departments 

in general, with no single 

agency distinguished from 

others). 

23% University Physical Plant. 

19% University top 

administration. 

18% University Student Affairs. 

Our campus police chiefs and directors 

are a competent, exceptional group of 

dedicated professionals. 

The “other university departments” 

choice is associated with smaller colleges, 

lower salaries, non-sworn chiefs vs. sworn 

and fewer sworn officers. 

“Physical Plant” is associated with 

smaller colleges. 

“University top administration is associated 

with lower job satisfaction and 

fewer sworn officers. 

“Student Affairs” is associated with 

lower job satisfaction and smaller colleges. 

A related question was “What individuals 

or categories of people seem to cause 

you the most difficulty and frustration in 

your job?” Answers are: 

47% Problem employees. 

30% Faculty groups or members. 

25% Other campus administrators/department 

heads. 

The “problem employees” selection 

is associated with sworn chiefs vs. nonsworn. 

“Faculty” is associated with non-sworn 

chiefs vs. sworn, and lower salary. 

Selected as the “most significant negative 

aspect of your job on your personal 

life” was: 

37% The all-consuming stress 

and constant responsibility 

of the job. 

28% The excessive time 

demands of the job. 

20% Physical impact: gaining 

weight, lower fitness level, 

smoking or drinking more. 

The “all-consuming stress” choice is 

associated with lower education. 

Helpful Information 

The following questions and responses 

highlight some information that could be 

helpful: 

“Who do you talk with most for advice, 

support, mentoring or venting frustrations 

and problems?” 

31% Other chiefs/directors, including 

previous and retired. 

22% Another campus department 

administrator. 

20% Spouse, family member or 

significant other. 





“Other chiefs/directors” is associated 

with sworn chiefs vs. non-sworn, more 

sworn officers and higher salary. 

“What are the most helpful training/ 

education programs you’ve attended?” 

63% Educational degree 

programs. 

40% State or regional higher ed 

or campus public safety 

conference. 

35% IACLEA annual conference. 

The “IACLEA annual conference” 

choice is associated with higher education, 

and more years as chief/director 

(newer chiefs/directors attend less). 

“The main things your boss could do 

to assist you more in your job”: 

55% Not much; great boss, gives 

me freedom and support. 

45% Could provide more budget 

resources. 

25% Could give higher priority 

to crime and safety 

concerns over other campus 

operational issues. 

“The main things your law enforcement 

employees could do to assist you 

more in your job”: 

62% Appreciate the “big picture” 

in the importance of 

serving the campus with 

respect and courtesy, and 

of working with students 

and employees to solve 

problems. 

40% Communicate more positively; 

give constructive 

feedback, stop rumors and 

speak up openly and 

honestly on issues. 

39% Do their jobs professionally 

and take responsibility for 

their actions. 

As chiefs and directors, they enjoy 

improving their departments, having a 

positive impact on employees, helping 

people with problems and interacting with 

students, citizens and community leaders. 

“What do you do for yourself to deal 

with stress and pressure?” 

59% Spend quality time with 

spouse, family, significant 

other. 

45% Individual exercise 

(walking, jogging, weights, 

swimming). 

42% Enjoy time alone, slow 

down, enjoy quiet time, 

reflect, unwind. 

32% Travel, vacation, enjoy a 

change of scenery. 

31% Relaxing, enjoyable 

activities (non-active): 

reading, TV, movies, music, 

computer games. 

23% Rely on spiritual faith, pray, 

go to church, bring my 

concerns to God. 

19% Seek out comedy, a sense 

of humor, ways to laugh. 

“Ways you problem-solve on major 

‘crisis’ issues”: 

73% Brainstorm and consult with 

top command staff/team 

and those trusted employees 

closest to the problem. 

57% Personally examine the 

problem and its history, 

gather information, consider 

all options and make the 

best decision. 

55% Always start by asking 

myself, ‘What’s the right 

(vs. expedient) thing to do?’ 

“Right thing to do” choice is associated 

with sworn chiefs vs. non-sworn. 

“Ways you develop support and expertise 

in your top managers”: 

71% Communicate regularly and 

openly with them. 

66% Lead by example, provide 

an open and honest administration, 

treat others with 

respect. 

61% Clearly delegate authority, 

empower and involve them. 

“If you were to leave your present job 

for any reason, what kind of job would 

you most likely take?” 

31% Another chief/director 

position. 

21% Teaching, at the college, 

community college or K-12 

level. 

16% Consulting, training or other 

job in the law enforcement 

field. 

“Another chief/director position” is associated 

with sworn c 

hiefs vs. non-sworn, higher education, 

fewer years as chief/director. 

“What do you look forward to most 

about your eventual retirement?” 

26% Spending more time and 

attention with spouse, 

family, significant other. 

22% Getting away from the 

constant stress of personnel 

management and top 

responsibility. 

21% Enjoying relaxing leisure 

activities, including golf, 

reading, fishing, horseback 

riding. 

“What changes would you make in your 

job, if given the authority, to make your 

chief/director job more satisfying and productive? 

53% Better pay and other job 

compensation. 

28% More opportunities to do 

other things within the 

university, such as teaching. 

25% More freedom and authority 

to run the department 

without unwarranted 

interference. 

The “better pay” selection is associated 

with lower education, lower salary, 

smaller colleges and fewer sworn officers. 

Advice to a New Police Chief/ 

Director 

The top ten suggestions for advice to a 

new chief/director, starting with the most 

frequently mentioned, are as follows: 





1. Use caution, preparation and patience. 

2. Take good care of yourself, your 

physical and emotional well-being and 

your professional growth. 

3. Lead others by your example. 

4. Listen to others and keep an open 

mind. 

5. Maintain your ethics and integrity. 

6. Build positive, trusting relationships 

within the campus community. 

7. Learn to work with the unique environment 

of the college campus. 

8. Develop a strong management team 

and work force. 

9. Develop trust and communication 

with your boss. 

10. Focus on the vision. 

Conclusions and Recommendations 

The culmination of this research is represented 

in the following ten conclusions 

and recommendations, which provide a 

basis for reflection and related future actions: 

1. Our campus police chiefs and directors 

are a competent, exceptional 

group of dedicated professionals. 

They are well seasoned in administrative, 

and safety and law enforcement, 

experience. 

49% have graduate degrees. 

89% have a bachelor’s degree or 

higher. 

They chose this profession to meet 

interesting challenges, and to help 

people and make a difference for others. 

2. Our campus chiefs/directors enjoy 

their jobs. 

92% feel that their campus law 

enforcement/safety career has 

been a good choice, and they’d do 

it again. 

As chiefs and directors, they enjoy 

improving their departments, having 

a positive impact on employees, 

helping people with problems and interacting 

with students, citizens and 

community leaders. 

Our campus chiefs/directors have health 

and wellness issues in need of further 

analysis and response. 

3. Our campus police chiefs/directors 

work high visibility, high risk jobs with 

very little job security. 

They are at the forefront of campus 

issues involving life safety, social conflicts 

and political tensions, with major 

responsibilities for success or failure. 

They are expected to implement 

needed change, protect life and property 

and ensure the rights and sensitivities 

of all those on campus. 

Yet 72% are either “at will” chiefs or 

have only a one-year contract for job 

security. 

4. Our campus chiefs/directors are cautious, 

patient, slow and deliberate in 

making decisions and implementing 

changes. 

The question arises as to whether this 

is a good method of leadership and 

management, or whether it is merely 

necessary for survival in a political 

campus environment. 

This caution and deliberation may be 

exacerbated by the lack of job security 

provided to their positions. 

One questions whether these issues 

of poor job security and very political 

campus environments might serve to 

stifle innovation, dynamic actions, risk 

taking, and daring and dramatic leadership 

for change. 

5. Our campus chiefs/directors experience 

significant barriers and frustrations 

in their jobs. 

These include excessive time demands; 

all-consuming stress and con- 

Our campus Chiefs/Directors 

experience significant barriers and 

frustrations in their jobs. 

stant responsibility; budgetary problems; 

negative, resistant employees; 

and the political campus environment, 

especially involving other university 

departments, problem employees 

and faculty. 

6. Our campus chiefs/directors have 

health and wellness issues in need of 

further analysis and response. 

They describe good methods of dealing 

with stress, such as quality time 

with family, exercise, and spending 

quiet time to reflect. 

Yet 20% report the negative job impact 

of “physical impact—gaining 

weight, lower fitness level, smoking 

or drinking more.” 

They report their job affecting their 

personal lives negatively with constant 

stress, excessive time demands and 

negative physical consequences. 


Plan Now 

for Future 

IACLEA 

Conferences 

2007 

June 26-29 

Las Vegas, Nevada 

2008 

June 28-July 1 

Hartford, Connecticut 

2009 

June 29-July 2 

Quebec City, Canada 




7. Some special needs and concerns of 

non-sworn campus chiefs and directors 

need to be further explored and 

addressed. 

These include lower levels of job satisfaction; 

lower levels of compensation; 

and the issue of respect and appreciation 

from college units and local 

law enforcement. 

8. Specific administrative training (beyond 

the usual management topics) 

should be offered to campus chiefs/ 

directors, addressing such issues as: 

orienting a personal world view, career, 

family and life plan; reducing job 

stress; meeting specific health and 

wellness needs; succeeding in the campus 

political environment; budget 

management and innovations; comfortable 

delegation and time management; 

and motivating a positive work 

force while dealing with negative or 

problem employees. 

9. This research information is being 

shared with IACLEA members in this 

journal article; and it should be further 

shared by IACLEA members with 

any campus chiefs/directors who are 

not current members. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10. This research information on campus 

chiefs/directors should also be marketed 

and shared with other campus 

stakeholders in written form, conference 

presentations and discussions. 

These campus stakeholders include 

college presidents and vice presidents, 

campus leaders, campus administrators, 

student leaders, faculty 

groups, etc. As a start, campus chiefs/ 

directors should provide a copy of this 

journal article to their boss, the college 

administrator to whom they report. 

Albert Schweitzer once addressed a 

group with this statement: “I do not know 

what your future holds. Some of you will, 

perhaps, occupy some remarkable positions. 

But I do know this: the only ones 

among you who will be really happy are 

those of you who have sought, and found, 

how to serve.” 

Campus chiefs and directors have 

made this commendable life choice of 

serving others. As they continue in these 

difficult jobs, they deserve the utmost 

support and respect. 

Notes 

1. Account of Dr. Benson. 

2. Father Jake Foglio, East Lansing, Michigan. 

3. Christopher G. Blake, CAE, IACLEA Associate 

Director, provided valuable assistance 

in this research project. 

For questions or further information regarding 

this study, contact Dr. Bruce Benson, 

bensonb@msu.edu, (941) 795-2530. 

Copyright 2006 Bruce L. Benson 

Highlights of 

Recommendations 

Some special needs and concerns of 

non-sworn campus Chiefs and Directors 

need to be further explored and 

addressed. These include lower levels 

of job satisfaction; lower levels of 

compensation; and the issue of respect 

and appreciation from college 

units and local law enforcement. 

Specific administrative training (beyond 

the usual management topics) 

should be offered to campus Chiefs/ 

Directors, addressing such issues as: 

orienting a personal world view, career, 

family and life plan; reducing job 

stress; meeting specific health and 

wellness needs; succeeding in the 

campus political environment; budget 

management and innovations; comfortable 

delegation and time management; 

and motivating a positive work 

force while dealing with negative or 

problem employees. 

This research information is being 

shared with IACLEA members in this 

journal article; and it should be further 

shared by IACLEA members with 

any campus Chiefs/Directors who are 

not current members. 

This research information on campus 

Chiefs/Directors should also be 

marketed and shared with other campus 

stakeholders in written form, conference 

presentations and discussions. 

These campus stakeholders include 

college presidents and vice presidents, 

campus leaders, campus administrators, 

student leaders, faculty 

groups, etc. As a start, campus Chiefs/ 

Directors should provide a copy or this 

journal article to their boss, the college 

administrator to whom they report. 


The Role of Parents/Guardians in Enhancing Security 

of Their Wards (Students) on Campus 

By Rotibi Akinbiyi, Security Unit, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, Nigeria 

Editor’s Note: This article presents a perspective 

from an international institution 

on an issue that all campus public 

safety departments deal with from time 

to time: the role of parents in enhancing 

the security of their children on campus. 

The author is a representative of the security 

unit at Olabisi Onabanjo University 

in Nigeria. 

Security is a collective responsibility. Parents 

should therefore not regard the prevailing 

security problems on our campus 

as those for the government and university 

authorities to confront on their own. 

The unhealthy security situation and campus 

violence should be of concern and a 

challenge to the parents too. 

Violent acts that have been occurring 

too often within or adjacent to campus 

communities that compromise students 

and employee health and safety include 

campus shootings, murder-suicides, examination 

misconduct, hate crimes based 

on religion or ethnicity or sexual orientation, 

suicides, assaults, hazing or cultism 

and arson. 

Campuses continue to face headlines 

on alcohol-fueled rioting, sexual assault, 

hazing or cultism and other violent behavior. 

When violence occurs in a campus 

setting, reaction is necessarily complicated. 

Campus departments can find 

themselves interacting with parents, police, 

advocacy groups, government agencies, 

lawyers and media in an ever-changing 

mix of circumstances. 

Cultism or hazing refers to any activity 

expected of someone joining a group (or 

Security is a collective responsibility. Parents 

should therefore not regard the prevailing 

security problems on our campus as those 

for the government and university 

authorities to confront on their own. 

to maintain full status in a group) that 

humiliates, degrades or risks emotional 

and/or physical harm regardless of the 

person’s willingness to participate. It is a 

complex social problem that is shaped 

by the power dynamics operating in a 

group or organization. It is usually against 

the rules of the institution. 

Violent secret cult activities or hazing 

constitute the most worrisome security 

threat on any university’s campus. Various 

measures have already been taken 

by different campus administrators to 

curb the menace of cultism or hazing on 

their campuses. At Olabisi Onabanjo University 

Nigeria, countermeasures taken 

include the following: 

a. Security documentation, screening 

background checks and counseling of 

all new students to sharpen their security 

awareness; 

b. The inauguration of an anti-cult surveillance 

committee; 

c. Affirmation by oath of non-membership 

in secret cults by principal officers 

and other staff of the university; 

d. Rustication and expulsion of identified 

and confirmed student cult members; 

e. Zero tolerance policies for campus 

violence; 

f. Offer students alcohol- and smokefree 

campus/hall of residence; 

g. Enforce Code of Conduct; 

h. Violence prevention through environment 

management—the essence of 

this approach is for administrators and 

staff working with the local community 

to change those campus and 

community policies, practices, infrastructure 

and culture that promote violence 

and tolerance for it. 

The University/parent forum in 

progress is part of these measures. 

Campus administrators are, however, 

unhappy with the trend of events; 

whereby students inflict horror on fellow 

students and staff, leading to death and 

permanent scars on victims. Neither are 

they happy that large numbers of students 

on whom considerable resources 

and energy have been expended were 

withdrawn from the university almost at 

the end of their courses on account of 

the danger they constitute to the academic 

community. 

A proactive policy is needed. This approach 

will aim to prevent and preempt 

conditions leading to the commission of 

crimes or breach of security. The parents 

have an active role to play in the process. 

For instance, parents have to contribute 

their share toward discouraging and 

preventing students from joining the secret 

fraternities, posing a threat to the 



The Role of Parents/Guardians in Enhancing Security of Their Wards (Students) on Campus 


university system, their colleagues and 

staff, including their own career. 

Parent’s role becomes more important 

in view of first-year students who are 

vulnerable to victimization, since they now 

have new freedoms, lack parental control 

for the first time, may be inexperienced 

in self-protection and boundaries 

and are thrust into halls of residence where 

living density is high and social experimentation 

is common. In addition, more 

students are entering university with severe 

mental health disorders and conduct 

disorders with violent components. 

Parents should therefore pay attention 

to the security needs of their wards (students) 

in such areas as: 

a. Continuous monitoring of the 

progress of their wards (students) 

upon admission to the campuses 

Parents should participate in securing 

good and safe accommodations for 

students. This will enable them to familiarize 

themselves with the landlords, 

neighbors and hallmates. It will 

serve as a source of independent information 

on the activities of students. 

This could enable parents to detect 

any attitudinal change, which might 

indicate bad company and influence, 

and therefore allow timely correction. 

b. Regular visits 

This will allow their wards (students) 

to brief them on their experiences and 

problems. In the process, students 

might report approaches being made 

by secret cult groups to enlist them. 

Parents might therefore take preemptive 

measures to safeguard students 

from joining cults. 

During such visits, parent should conduct 

searches of the student’s residence, 

baggage and other belongings 

to detect cult regalias and other items, 

which might be indicative of their true 

standing. 

Unscheduled visits might reveal that 

the student is already enmeshed in 

cultism; thereby, quick remedial measure 

could be taken. 

For instance, cult members usually go 

to meetings or operations on other 

campuses. Unscheduled visits could 

reveal long absence of wards (students) 

from the campus, an indication 

that the ward (student) is into 

something sinister. 

c. Parent liaison with head of departments 

and dean of faculties 

This will enable parents to confirm 

that their wards (students) are doing 

fine and are still genuine students. 

Many students withdraw from the 

university without their parents knowing. 

Such students usually constitute 

a ready army for the secret cults. 

Some have lost their lives while partaking 

in cult operations. So it is nec- 



The Role of Parents/Guardians in Enhancing Security of Their Wards (Students) on Campus 


essary that parents know the true 

position of their wards (students). 

d. Showing keen interest in the way 

their wards (students) live on 

campus 

Fraternities watch for affluence in their 

recruitment drives. They aim for student 

recruits with a lot of cash and 

with influential parents who can be 

relied upon in time of trouble. So students 

with flashy cars and living in 

luxury are often pestered for membership 

in the fraternities. 

e. Warnings 

Parents should continue to warn their 

wards (students) against joining cults. 

They should also advise them to report 

approaches made to them by cult 

groups during membership drives. If 

a problem occurs, they can handle it 

better, in conjunction with the university 

authorities. 

PU for MITI 

pu last issue page 15 

In some cases, parents see their children 

as miniature adults as soon as they 

gain admission into higher institutions. This 

concept tends to affect the way in which 

such youths are handled. The adults who 

hold this opinion seem to forget that 

these youths in tertiary institutions are still 

adolescents who cannot just be abandoned 

to their own devices. They should 

not remain unchecked most of the time. 

Children who suffer this form of abandonment 

are those from the upper class 

families. Their parents often shower enormous 

wealth on them, believing that such 

comfort provided is enough to compensate 

for the abandonment. Such parents 

see the pursuit of wealth as their primary 

focus in life, while caring and training of 

their children take the back seat. They 

are the group whose children are found 

wearing expensive apparel, driving posh 

cars, etc. that some of their lecturers cannot 

even afford. The children have too 

much money to throw around and plenty 

of time to play with. 

The way out of this problem is for parents 

to stop the unguided freedom and 

apparent neglect of these adolescents and 

vigorously embark on direct training, caring 

and counseling, which is not possible 

without regular visits and impromptu checks 

on such children in schools. 

The way out of this problem is for 

parents to stop the unguided freedom and 

apparent neglect of these adolescents and 

vigorously embark on direct training, caring 

and counseling, which is not possible 

without regular visits and impromptu 

checks on such children in schools. Failure 

to do this will naturally throw the children 

in the warm and waiting arms of cultic 

peer groups. 

The child’s parents and siblings play 

vital roles in the proper development of 

a child from the early stages of life. The 

parents, as agents of socialization, have 

the task of presenting a “single world of 

meaning” to the child as the only possible 

way to organize perceptions by giving 

information through direct training and 

counseling for social roles. The quality and 

content of parents’ training roles tend to 

vary within and across cultures in terms 

of structure, family size, interpersonal relationships, 

family values, parents’ income, 

educational background, occupation, 

ethnicity, race and religion. All these 

factors may interfere with the capacity of 

parents acting as factories, which produce 

stable and reliable human personalities 

strong enough to resist cultic peer group 

overtures. For instance, parents of a large 

family, or a disorganized family due to 

either separation or divorce, and poor 

socioeconomic standing may end up raising 

youths with personality structures that 

are characterized by troublesome emotions 

like loneliness, inferiority complex, 

etc. Cultic peer groups often use these 

inherent emotional problems in such 

youths to lure them into cultism by pretending 

to have answers to their troublesome 

emotions. The solution to this problem 

is that every family unit should live 

in harmony and be organized in such a 



The Role of Parents/Guardians in 

Enhancing Security of Their Wards on 

Campus 


way that it will really be a “factory” for 

producing enduring and reliable personality 

structures based on positive values. 

IACLEA Virtual Exhibition Center 

Is Open for Business 

In summary, parents must monitor the 

activities of their sons and daughters 

through regular visits to them. 

24 Hours a Day • 7 Days a Week 

www.iaclea.org 

In summary, parents must monitor the 

activities of their sons and daughters 

through regular visits to them. The students 

are predominantly adolescents who 

need parental guidance and counseling 

from time to time. Second, enough provisions 

and allowances should be made 

available to students to avoid the temptation 

of being ensnared by cultist groups 

that usually tempt students with money. 

Third, parents should not pamper students 

by overproviding for their material and 

physiological needs. Some cult members 

are known to operate fat accounts as well 

as ride state-of-the-art cars on our campuses. 

Finally, parents must show good 

examples at home by shunning secret societies 

and clandestine meetings. 

About the Author 

Rotibi Akinbiyi holds a B.Sc. degree in 

Geography, Master of Public Administration 

degree and a postgraduate diploma 

in Transport Studies. He has 25 years’ 

experience in the field of security of which 

eight years were with the Nigeria Police. 

He is currently the Assistant Chief Security 

Officer at Olabisi Onabanjo University, 

Ago-Iwoye, Nigeria. He also holds 

CPO certification and membership in 

ASIS International and has conducted a 

series of workshops and seminars. 

IACLEA STORE 

NOW OPEN FOR BUSINESS 

IACLEA Logo Apparel 

and Accessories 

Now available to IACLEA members 

online, http://www.iaclea.org, in the 

Members Only area. 

Historical Law Enforcement 

Items Wanted 

By Fred Behr, Chair of the Media and Conference Displays 50th Anniversary 

Committee 

In 2008, IACLEA will be celebrating our 

50th Anniversary at the Annual Conference 

in Hartford, Connecticut. The Media 

and Conference Displays Committee 

is planning to provide a historical 

look at the progress of IACLEA and a 

mini-museum containing a historical 

look at campus law enforcement in 

general. 

We will assemble the history of 

IACLEA including a year by year look 

at the Association, conference site information, 

significant events impacting 

campus law enforcement, the evolution 

of membership services offered as well 

as items produced by IACLEA for its 

members. 

The mini-museum will contain “tools 

of the trade” used in campus law enforcement 

such as old uniforms, time 

clocks, leather gear, hats, badges, flashlights, 

watchman’s ring of keys, old 

photos of patrol cars, motorcycle units, 

saps, billie clubs, handcuffs, etc. (sorry, 

no firearms) — virtually any item that 

depicts the origins of campus law enforcement 

from 1958 (or earlier) up to 

the technology we use today. If you 

have items that you feel fit the spirit of 

this venture and are willing to loan the 

items to the museum, please contact 

one of the committee members listed 

below. We would like the items by January 

1, 2008 to begin setting up the 

museum. They will be returned 

promptly after the conference in Hartford. 

Fred Behr behr@stolaf.edu (507) 646-3636 

Ben Gollotti bernard.gollotti@drexel.edu (215) 895-1550 

John Pack pack@augsburg.edu (612) 330-1644 

David Reagan dlr2870@dcccd.edu (972) 860-4191 

The success of the museum depends on membership support. 

I hope we can count on you! 


Training on a Shoestring Budget 

By Wesley Harris 

Employee training is absolutely essential 

but the funds to accomplish that training 

are not always available. While some 

courses cost hundreds or even thousands 

of dollars per officer, training does not 

have to be expensive. With a little planning 

and hard work, quality training can 

be accomplished even on a tight budget. 

After struggling for over 20 years to 

sustain training programs with miniscule 

budgets, I have discovered a few methods 

to stretch those precious dollars as 

far as possible. The following ideas are 

not intended to replace an adequate training 

budget but to provide tips on using 

available resources as effectively as possible. 

Budgetary constraints generally have 

not been considered by the courts as a 

valid defense in cases of failure to provide 

proper training. 

• Determine your needs. Before 

you spend money, first determine your 

training needs. You will spend your funds 

more effectively by following a plan 

based on the training needs of your officers. 

As a foundation, consider the critical 

areas in which all law enforcement officers 

require training. Foundation training 

must occur to reduce liability and provide 

your officers with basic abilities. 

Teaching officers to shoot and drive and 

write reports may not bring your crime 

rate down, but it has to be done. Emergency 

driving, search and seizure law, and 

use of force have to be taught in all law 

enforcement agencies, regardless of their 

size or the nature of their crime problems. 

Skill enhancement training serves to 

improve your effectiveness. In conducting a 

needs assessment, study the issues unique 

to your campus and the skills and abilities of 

your officers. 

Skill enhancement training serves to 

improve your effectiveness. In conducting 

a needs assessment, study the issues 

unique to your campus and the skills and 

abilities of your officers. Needs change as 

employees come and go or move to new 

areas of responsibility. For example, your 

investigators may be great at questioning 

suspects. But just a few personnel changes 

may make interrogation training a priority. 

A developing crime problem might 

need to be addressed with new training 

initiatives. Computer fraud and financial 

crimes require training that may have 

been unnecessary a few years ago. 

Crime volume should not be your only 

consideration. You may not have many 

homicides or arsons, but it is a good idea 

to have someone trained to handle them. 

Study training opportunities and see 

how they fit into your plan. If that course 

to teach countersnipers to rappel off dormitories 

simply does not fit your needs, 

don’t waste your money. 

Seek training that serves a realistic 

purpose. 

• Survey all the possibilities. It’s 

difficult to spend your money wisely if 

you don’t know what’s available. Get your 

name on every mailing list possible. If 

flying to such prestigious training facilities 

as the Northwestern University in Illinois 

or the Institute of Police Technology 

and Management in Florida is too expensive 

for you, consider their budget-friendly 

regional on-site courses. But you may not 

know about them if you aren’t on their 

mailing lists. 

Alert your dispatchers to watch for 

teletype messages or faxes regarding 

training courses. Often these notices are 

simply thrown away and you may miss 

some outstanding training within driving 

distance of your department. 

Read all the ads in the Law and Order, 

POLICE, Law Officer and other publications. 

These magazines typically list more 

than 20 training courses each month. 

• Uti1ize interagency sharing. 

Some types of training are prohibitive simply 

because of equipment costs or lack 

of facilities. Every department can not afford 

its own pistol range or computerized 

judgmental shooting system. Your 

organization’s basic training regimen is 

probably much like the local city police, 

sheriff’s department or the university 

across town. Why not pool resources, instructors 

and facilities to save everyone 

time and money? Sharing facilities, expensive 

equipment or specialized instructors 

may be a financially feasible means of 

providing quality training to several agencies 

that individually could not afford it. 

Sharing training expenses with other 

agencies may be as simple as splitting 

gasoline costs for travel. When one of my 

investigators traveled to an advanced fin- 





gerprint course at the FBI Academy, she 

caught a ride with a crime scene technician 

from another nearby department. 

• Arrange for officers who attend 

outside training courses to share 

their new knowledge with others. 

Sending an officer to outside training 

should benefit your entire department. It 

just doesn’t make sense for officers to 

return from training and keep everything 

they learned to themselves. Have officers 

make presentations at roll call sessions 

or conduct mini-classes. Useful handouts 

or notes could be shared with other officers. 

Administrators and training personnel 

should be briefed on any new case 

law or other critical information that the 

agency needs to consider in developing 

and revising policies and operating procedures. 

• Send officers to instructor 

schools or train-the-trainer seminars. 

Training employees as instructors 

may be more cost effective than continually 

sending officers away for certain types 

of training. Usually there is little cost difference 

between an instructor course and 

a regular course. 

It is not necessary for the “training officer” 

to conduct all the courses within a 

department. Using a number of officers 

It is not necessary for the “training officer” 

to conduct all the courses within a 

department. Using a number of officers to 

teach a variety of subjects provides several 

benefits. 

to teach a variety of subjects provides 

several benefits. It allows instructors to 

develop their own areas of expertise. 

Appointing in-house instructors also gives 

officers a sense of worth through performing 

an important task for the agency. An 

instructor gives you an internal resource 

that can provide benefits for years to 

come. 

• Utilize local resources. Look for 

people on your campus or in your community 

who can provide no-cost training. 

We tend to be cliquish in our police and 

security training, believing no one outside 

the profession could possibly teach 

us anything. Health professionals can provide 

training on stress, AIDS awareness, 

or how to deal with emotionally disturbed 

persons. English professors can help improve 

your officers’ writing skills. A local 

prosecutor could teach courtroom testimony 

or search and seizure law. I used a 

physician once to teach nutrition classes 

specially designed for police officers. 

While departmental instructors could have 

provided similar information, the doctor 

saved us time and money by researching 

local meal alternatives for officers, preparing 

her own lesson plan, printing handout 

materials, and donating her time free 

of charge. 

• Call the feds. Federal law enforcement 

agencies place high priority on training. 

Much of this training is available to 

state and local officers. Each FBI field office 

has a special agent assigned to training. 

This agent handles applications for 


Information 

You Can Use! 

INVISIBLE INK PROPERTY SECURITY MARKER 

» Helps deter theft » Promotes recovery » Proves ownership 

Please contact us for details and more information. 

www.campussafetysolutions.com | 614.256.8107 

All IACLEA members now 

have access to a searchable 

resource database 

that includes publications, 

previously published 

Campus Law Enforcement 

Journal articles and 

links to other helpful Web 

sites. Check it out in the 

Members Only area of the 

IACLEA Web site. 

www.iaclea.org 




the FBI National Academy, the shorter 

Law Enforcement Executive Development 

Seminar and local requests for instructors. 

Other federal agencies also assign 

staff to handle requests for training 

assistance. 

Several free courses are offered through the 

National Center for State and Local Law 

Enforcement Training, a division of the 

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in 

Glynco, Georgia. 

Since September 11, more agencies 

are seeking training on terrorism and 

weapons of mass destruction. The Federal 

Emergency Management Administration 

(FEMA) has excellent courses available 

on terrorism, disaster response, and 

similar topics. FEMA’s Internet courses are 

free and a completion certificate is provided. 

Several free courses are offered 

through the National Center for State and 

Local Law Enforcement Training, a division 

of the Federal Law Enforcement 

Training Center in Glynco, Georgia. The 

Small Town and Rural Training Program 

presents free training programs at selected 

sites throughout the U.S. on community 

policing, domestic violence, drug enforcement 

and other topics. 

• Check affiliated organizations 

for training opportunities. Most departments 

belong to a variety of organizations 

for chiefs, instructors or investigators. 

These organizations often provide 

training for their members for little or no 

cost. Many will come to your campus if 

you provide the facility and recruit the 

students. 

Thousands of U.S. agencies belong to 

a Regional Information Sharing System 

(RISS) project. The RISS program consists 

of six regional organizations that share 

intelligence and coordinate investigative 

efforts across jurisdictional lines. For example, 

the Regional Organized Crime 

Information Center (ROCIC) serves fourteen 

southern states. The Western States 

Information Network covers the West 

Coast, Alaska and Hawaii. The RISS programs 

provide free training and contribute 

to sponsoring local training. Video 

tapes and other materials are often available 

on loan or for free. While few colleges 

belong to RISS, it is likely your local 

police or sheriff’s department is a member. 

Joint sponsorship of a local training 

course may qualify for RISS financial assistance 

with little or no out-of-pocket 

expense for the local agencies. 

For example, last December I coordinated 

a five-day crime scene investigation 

course for local officers. We scheduled 

it during a semester break so more 

officers from the local universities could 

attend. The FBI provided a highly qualified 

special agent to teach the course, 

and the RISS program (ROCIC, in our 

case) paid his travel expenses. The training 

was held at a well-equipped fire department 

training center. Forty officers 

multiplied by 40 hours of instruction 

equals 1,600 hours of cost-free training. 

The National White Collar Crime Center 

offers training on financial and computer 

crimes, usually at little or no charge 

for its member agencies. Membership in 

the NW3C is free and the training it provides 

is outstanding. Over 75 courses are 

offered each year by NW3C on basic computer 

data recovery, financial investigation 

skills, fraud and financial records 

analysis. These courses cost hundreds of 

dollars for non-members but the training 

is free to NW3C member agencies. 

Regional Community Policing Institutes 

were established across the country 

with COPS funding to support community-oriented 

policing endeavors. The Institutes 

are mandated to provide training 

to local agencies on COP issues. These 

courses are usually free and can often be 

conducted on-site to ease the financial 

burden on the department. Some RCPIs 

also provide ready-made lesson plans. 

Our own IACLEA offers a free Incident 

Command System (ICS) course and an 

awareness class on weapons of mass destruction. 

In both cases, the training is 

among the best available. Information on 

both can be found at the IACLEA Web 

site at www.iaclea.org. 

The state chiefs’ or sheriffs’ association 

might assist in providing training if 

you express a need and a willingness to 

assist in publicity, recruiting students, and 

providing meeting facilities. 

• Check out your state training facility 

loan library. Many states maintain 

a resource center or library of books 

and videos, usually within a training academy 

or state agency. For example, Michigan 

has a resource center at the State 

Police Academy. Georgia’s state loan library 

is located at the Georgia Public Safety 

Training Center. In Illinois, the resource 

center is part of the state training and standards 

board. The Texas Municipal League 

maintains a video library for the state’s 

municipalities. These libraries usually 

keep a catalog of available materials that 

can be checked out free of charge by 

agencies within the state. 

• When considering equipment 

purchases, determine what training 

the dealer provides. Whether it is computer 

software or impact weapons, training 

your employees to use new equipment 

is essential. Consider writing on-site 

training into specifications for bids on large 

expenditures. Training may not be the 

primary factor in your purchasing decision, 

but a manufacturer who provides 

customized low-cost or free instruction 

can help you make up your mind. On 

the other hand, dealer-provided training 

may be cost prohibitive. My agency is 

converting to new records management 

software but the cost quoted by the vendor 

for training far exceeds our budget. 

Instead, we will use qualified trainers from 

a neighboring law enforcement agency 

to teach the system to our personnel at 

no cost. 

We also identified a need for radar 

operation certification among many of our 

officers. The price quoted by a product 

supplier to certify one officer exceeded 

the cost of sending one to the state police 

academy for instructor training. That 

officer can now certify all our personnel 

at no additional cost. 

• Go surfing. Access to the Web is 

essential for the contemporary trainer. 

News articles, photographs and other 

training aids are available by the 

thousands. A 65-page lesson plan for 

community policing can be found 

at www.communitypolicing.org. The 






National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration’s Web site 

www.nhsta.dot.gov contains a huge online 

catalog of training materials. A little 

browsing can produce a wealth of training 

materials and resources. 

• Enlist the military. The armed 

forces can provide training in a variety of 

areas, but especially in counterdrug operations. 

The National Interagency 

Counterdrug Institute is a Defense Department-funded 

program operated by 

the National Guard. It provides training 

for a nominal fee on planning and coordinating 

joint or interagency counterdrug 

operations and programs. Its drug prevention 

course teaches officers how to 

develop and sustain community anti-drug 

programs. 

Other free training programs operated 

by the military for civilian law enforcement 

include the Multi-jurisdictional Task 

Force Training Program (MJTFT) at St. 

Petersburg College in Florida and the 

Regional Counterdrug Training Academy 

(RCTA) at Naval Air Station, Meridian, MS. 

Courses at the RCTA also include meals 

and lodging at no cost. The RCTA not 

only provides drug-related courses, but 

offers its eleven-building Urban Training 

Complex for agencies who want to do 

their own training but lack a location for 

practical exercises. 

Each state has a National Guard 

counterdrug coordinator to assist in identifying 

local military resources such as K- 

9 or surveillance training. Even if your 

campus does not have a significant drug 

problem, the training the military provides 

is applicable to civilian law enforcement 

in areas such in patrol tactics, interviews 

and interrogations, and critical incident 

management. 

• Think creatively. Practical exercises 

that simulate real-life events are 

among the most effective of all training 

techniques. But such training requires creativity 

and improvisation. A vacant dorm 

or office building is a great location to 

privately conduct some realistic exercises. 

University theater students love an opportunity 

to role-play and use their skills 

in a meaningful way. I have successfully 

used theater students to role-play vehicle 

stops, disturbance calls and suicide threats. 

When funds are lacking, improvise. 

One training director created a fairly realistic 

firearms training program, spending 

less than $20. Using community volunteers, 

he photographed a variety of 

“shoot” and “don’t shoot” scenarios. Officers 

built a shelter at the pistol range 

(owned by another agency) using scrap 

lumber and tarps obtained free through 

the Department of Defense excess property 

program. The slides were projected 

on the inside of the shelter, while firearms 

instructors added a level of stress 

by orally role-playing the scenarios out 

of sight of the student. Using live ammunition, 

the incident provided inexpensive 

and realistic training. 

Access to the Web is essential for the 

contemporary trainer. News articles, 

photographs and other training aids are 

available by the thousands. 

One of the most expensive aspects of 

training is overtime pay to ensure adequate 

staffing while employees attend 

class. My agency often handles this problem 

by pulling office personnel from their 

regular duties to cover patrol assignments 

while the street officers attend training. 

Recently, our regional community policing 

institute (see above) sponsored a free 

stress seminar in our city. The institute 

agreed to conduct the one-day course 

twice to allow local departments to send 

more officers. On each day, we were able 

to send the entire on-duty patrol team to 

the training while various captains, commanders, 

investigators and administrators 

worked the street. While we can not use 

this alternative for every training opportunity 

that comes along, it is an option 

that eliminates any need for overtime. 

Besides, all those “desk jockeys” need 

some time on the street occasionally. And 

nothing garners the respect of line employees 

more than seeing the command 

staff willing to get out there and get their 

hands dirty to make training possible. 

My agency also has a written policy 

authorizing changes to work schedules to 

permit officers to attend training while 

minimizing overtime. We work with the 

employees to ensure this policy creates 

no personal hardships while still allowing 

us to achieve our training objectives. 

Improvise, adapt, overcome. Training 

is a “pay me now or pay me later” 

proposition. It can not be an incidental 

function of management. A lack of funding 

is no excuse not to train. While sufficient 

funds are important, planning and 

ingenuity can help us get the most bang 

for the buck. With the right attitude, you 

can make it happen! 

Notes 

National Center for State and Local Law Enforcement 

Training, Federal Law Enforcement 

Training Center, Glynco, GA 31524 

(800-74FLETC), s&l@fletc.treas.gov, 

www.treas.gov/fletc. 

Regional Information Sharing System (RISS), See 

http://www.iir.com/riss/ for contact information 

for your state. 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

www.nhtsa.dot.gov/. 

Federal Emergency Management Administration 

www.fema.gov/. 

Illinois Law Enforcement Media Resource Center 

www.wiu.edu/users/milemc/, (800) 

843-2690. 

Indiana Law Enforcement Academy Video Library 

www.state.in.us/ilea/video/ 

index.html, (317) 839-5191. 

Michigan State Police Academy Resource Center 

http://www.voyager.net/msp/division/ 

academy/enforcem.html. 

Regional Counterdrug Training Academy (877) 

575-1435, www.RCTA.org. 

National White Collar Crime Center (800) 221- 

4424 www.nw3c.org/. 

Regional Community Policing Institutes 

www.communitypolicing.org/links.html 

About the Author 

Wesley Harris has spent nearly thirty 

years in law enforcement agencies in 

Louisiana, Georgia and Texas as a patrol 

officer, trainer, administrator and 

police chief. He is a member of the IACP 

and an affiliate member of IACLEA. The 

author of several books and many articles, 

Harris now works for the Lincoln 

Parish, Louisianna Sheriff’s Department 

and serves on the Criminal Justice faculty 

of the University of Phoenix. He can 

be reached at roughedge57@yahoo.com. 


Accreditation Fee for CALEA-accredited 

Agencies Approved 

By Jack Leonard, Accreditation Coordinator 

IACLEA’s Accreditation Commission has 

approved a process for institutions that 

wish to seek IACLEA accreditation and are 

already accredited by the Commission on 

Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, 

Inc. (CALEA). To support this initiative, 

the IACLEA Finance Committee has 

approved a new fee structure. It is expected 

that this plan will encourage eligible 

campus law enforcement agencies 

to seek and retain CALEA accreditation, 

while also achieving the “Gold Standard” 

of IACLEA Accreditation. 

During the development of the accreditation 

program, it was IACLEA’s intention 

to join the Alliance Program, offered 

by CALEA. By doing so, sworn campus 

law enforcement departments could 

simultaneously attain IACLEA accreditation 

and CALEA recognition, a preliminary 

achievement toward full CALEA accreditation. 

However, while we were planning 

our program, CALEA instituted several 

restrictions governing its Alliance partners’ 

activities. Chief among these new regulations 

was the prohibition against adopting 

anything other than their “core” standards, 

or those standards that address life, 

heath and safety issues. 

While the application of the core standards 

would have been sufficient for our 

sworn members to achieve recognition 

status with CALEA, the IACLEA Accreditation 

Commission felt that the IACLEA program 

needed to be broader and more 

comprehensive, particularly for those 

non-sworn departments that could not 

advance to full CALEA accreditation. 

IACLEA is intent on providing an accreditation 

program that is universally applicable. 

The CALEA standards selected for 

the IACLEA program were deemed essential 

to the effective and professional 

administration of a campus public safety 

agency, irrespective of its size and/or 

sworn status. In making those selections, 

the IACLEA Accreditation Commission did 

not want to make any distinction between 

a sworn and non-sworn department when 

assessing their conformance to “best practice” 

principles of organization and management. 

Consequently, efforts were undertaken 

to negotiate a modified Alliance 

agreement that would provide IACLEA 

with an exemption from the restriction 

of using only the “core” standards. 

Unfortunately, we were informed that 

the CALEA Commission, at their July meeting 

in Lexington, Kentucky, rejected our 

proposal to modify their Alliance Program. 

The failure to achieve an Alliance agreement 

with CALEA means that our sworn 

members will be unable to simultaneously 

achieve IACLEA accreditation and 

CALEA recognition through the same process. 

However, because the CALEA standards 

form the foundation of the IACLEA 

program, sworn agencies may move relatively 

seamlessly between the complementary 

programs. For example, the 

IACLEA Accreditation Commission has 

recently approved a process by which 

CALEA-accredited agencies may acquire 

IACLEA accreditation through “comparative 

compliance.” 

These departments would have to 

prove their CALEA-accredited status by 

submitting their most recent CALEA onsite 

report and a copy of the letter notifying 

them of their CALEA accreditation or 

re-accreditation. They would also have to 

demonstrate compliance with the IACLEAspecific 

standards. Since the unique IACLEA 

standards all address campus crime reporting, 

the Accreditation Commission has decided 

that the candidate agencies will 

forego an on-site assessment. Instead, the 

Accreditation Commission will rely on a 

review of the standard files by having the 

departments mail them to IACLEA. Once 

IACLEA confirms a department’s compliance 

with its standards, the agency would 

receive IACLEA accreditation that would 

run concurrently with their CALEA accreditation. 

On the anniversary of its CALEA 

accreditation, the department would have 

to resubmit its compliance documentation 

and undergo another review. 

IACLEA’s Finance Committee has reviewed 

the process and approved a fee 

for those campus public safety agencies 

that seek IACLEA accreditation and are 

already accredited by the CALEA. The fee 

for CALEA-accredited departments that 

wish to pursue IACLEA accreditation will 

be $450. Initially, the fee will be prorated, 

based on the number of years left on the 

agency’s CALEA accreditation (examples: 

one year = $150, two years = $300, three 

years = $450). 

The candidate agency will complete 

an application/contract, submit the required 

compliance documentation and 

remit a check in the amount of $150 for 

every year (or portion thereof) left on 

their CALEA accreditation. The IACLEA 



Campus Counter-terrorism Resources Now Available 

on IACLEA Web Site 

By Christopher G. Blake, CAE, WMD Project Director 

A comprehensive set of resources that 

can be used to provide guidance to campus 

public safety departments to develop 

an all-hazards campus emergency operations 

plan (EOP), including a terrorism 

incident annex (TIA), is now available at 

www.iaclea.org. 

The Campus Emergency Operations 

Planning Guide features a sample emergency 

operations plan, emergency support 

functions and appendices that contain 

plans for dealing with specific types 

of incidents, such as civil disturbances, 

natural disasters, and terrorism-related 

events. The resources available on the 

Web site also include a resource document 

that features documents and Web 

sites with general counter-terrorism research 

materials, communications-related 

materials, best practices/lessons learned 

in counter-terrorism, sample EOPs and 

terrorism incident annexes, and incident 

action plan research materials. 

The research and development of this 

resource was supported by a grant from 

the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 

Office of Grants and Training. 

The model EOP and related documents 

are the major product of the IACLEA Domestic 

Preparedness Committee’s Subcommittee 

on Best Practices in Campus Counterterrorism. 

This subcommittee was responsible 

for producing a best practices guide 

for campuses on how to develop their own 

terrorism incident annex to their EOP. 

The subcommittee was co-chaired by 

Noel March, director of public safety at 

the University of Maine in Orono, Maine, 

and Keith Gehrand, patrol division commander 

at Illinois State University in Normal, 

Illinois. The subcommittee oversaw 

more than 18 months of research conducted 

by Anthony Vitale, WMD staff research 

analyst, who drafted the model 

EOP guidelines and related materials. 

“We urge all campus public safety 

departments to utilize the guidelines as a 

starting point in either developing or updating 

their Emergency Operations Plan,” 

March said. 

The Planning Guide on the Web site 

is divided into several sections: 

Basic Plan and Accessory Documents: 

The basic plan is the primary administrative 

component of an EOP. The basic plan 

on the Web site consists of the best features 

of existing campus plans that were 

reviewed, with additional materials intended 

to make these guidelines compliant with 

federal mandates, including the National 

Incident Management System (NIMS) and 

the Incident Command System (ICS). 

Full EOP Plan: This document is intended 

to be used as a single source reference 

document with every part of an EOP 

presented in logical order. Many of the parts 

included in the full EOP can be edited out 

of an actual EOP, but this document includes 

all materials assembled by IACLEA 

to illustrate the components that could 

be included within a campus plan. 

Emergency Support Function (ESF) 

Annexes: These documents essentially 

mirror the ESFs in the federal National 

Response Plan (NRP). The ESF documents 

are intended to describe the support duties 

of various campus departments and 

functions. Sixteen ESFs are presented, but 

the actual number of ESFs necessary for 

a particular institution may vary. 

Appendices: These are geared to providing 

information about specific types 

of incidents and may be directed toward 

one or more audiences, including faculty, 

staff, students and others who may be 

present on campus during an emergency. 

Appendices include information to be 

used for personal protection and for the 

protection of others before, during or after 

an incident. 

Inclusion/Source Documents: These 

documents were selected based on their 

perceived importance and the need for 

campus public safety departments to be 

aware of them. Some are the original 

documents and some have been edited 

for brevity. Campus public safety leaders 

are encouraged to read the original documents 

as posted on the Internet or as may 

be derived from any original source. 

“The subcommittee took an all-hazards 

approach in developing these resources 

to assist campuses in drafting their own 

Terrorism Incident Annex,” Gehrand said. 

“A comprehensive EOP with a terrorism 

annex will serve a campus well, not only 

in responding to terrorism events, but also 

in protecting lives and property in the 

event of a natural disaster or other catastrophic 

event,” Gehrand said. 

To access these resources: 

Go to www.iaclea.org 

Click on WMD/Campus Preparedness 

Tools on the left side of the home page. 

Click on WMD/Campus Preparedness 

Resource Center 



Accreditation Fee for CALEA 

Accredited Agencies Approved 


Accreditation Commission will then review 

the material and, if satisfied, award IACLEA 

accreditation for the period of the 

department’s CALEA accreditation. The 

agency will not be obligated to pay either 

the application fee of $350 or an onsite 

assessment fee. However, as IACLEA 

adds standards to the program, an on-site 

evaluation may be required. At that time, 

the cost of the assessment would be borne 

by the agency. 

Currently 35 college or university public 

safety departments are accredited by 

CALEA. Another 26 departments have 

signed contracts with CALEA and are engaged 

in the self-assessment process. A 

number of these agencies have expressed 

interest in obtaining IACLEA accreditation. 

For more information about IACLEA 

accreditation, please contact IACLEA Accreditation 

Coordinator Jack Leonard at 

(860) 586-7517, ext. 558, or at 

jleonard@iaclea.org. 

Campus Counter-terrorism Resources 

Now Available on IACLEA Web Site 


Scroll down the page to the heading, 

Emergency Management & Terrorism 

Related Resources 

Click on Campus Emergency Operations 

Planning Guide 

From this page, users can access the 

ESF Functions, Appendices, Basic Plan and 

Accessory Documents, Full EOP Plan, and 

Inclusion/Source Documents. 

IACLEA thanks the members of the 

best practices subcommittee and the 

Domestic Preparedness Committee, 

chaired by Ken Goodwin of Portland (Oregon) 

Community College, for their outstanding 

efforts in producing these resources. 

IACLEA also thanks the Board of 

Directors for its support of this project. 

IACLEA welcomes any comments or 

suggestions to enhance this resource. 

Please direct your comments to WMD 

Project Director Christopher G. Blake at 

cblake@iaclea.org. 

American 

Whistle defense 

pu last page 34 

Palma auto boot pu last page 34 


National Campus Safety Awareness Month in Full Swing 

IACLEA Member Institution Montclair State University Receives 2006 Clery Award 

By Steven Healy, IACLEA President 

IACLEA has joined with Security on Campus, 

Inc. (SOC) to mark the second National 

Campus Safety Awareness Month 

(NCSAM) in September. SOC established 

NCSAM to heighten awareness of one of 

the most potentially dangerous times for 

young adults in higher education — September. 

Throughout September, SOC 

partnered with colleges and universities 

across the U.S. to help keep students safe 

by educating them about sexual assault, 

binge drinking, hazing, fire safety and 

other potential threats. 

In June, at the IACLEA Annual Conference 

in Orlando, Florida, SOC Senior Vice 

President S. Daniel Carter announced 

plans for the National Campus Safety 

Awareness Month, including the campus 

safety toolkits that are now available 

(http://www.campussafetymonth.org/). 

SOC, with support from Rave Wireless, 

has also provided fifty schools with special 

programming kits that include educational 

DVDs, study guides, educational 

brochures and other materials. 

At the University of Pennsylvania, officials 

joined with SOC representatives on 

August 30 to kick off the month of activities. 

SOC co-founder Connie Clery spoke 

about the challenges facing college students. 

Penn President Amy Gutmann and 

Vice President of Public Safety Maureen 

Rush, a long-time IACLEA member, talked 

about the new initiatives at Penn to educate 

students about safety. 

The University of Tennessee Police 

Department kicked off the 2006 academic 

year with several National Campus Safety 

Awareness Month activities. The UT Police 

Department is one of 50 colleges and 

universities selected nationally to receive 

programming kits and material for the 

NCSAM. The UT police disseminated specific 

educational and programming information 

regarding sexual assault awareness, 

Rape Aggression Defense ® , alcohol 

awareness, substance abuse, theft 

prevention, and other critical topics. 

IACLEA member August Washington, the 

Chief of Police at the University of Tennessee, 

says that September is the perfect time 

during the academic year to get the community 

focused on safety and security on 

campus. Washington further stated that he 

was pleased that IACLEA was also encouraging 

its members to actively support National 

Campus Safety Awareness Month 

activities. “The ability to establish and 

maintain a close relationship between 

SOC and IACLEA affords campuses 

throughout the country resources and 

training which are critical to the overall 

safety of our campus communities.” The 

NCSAM exemplifies this commitment. 

In related news, Montclair State University 

was awarded the 2006 Jeanne Clery 

Campus Safety Award during a ceremony 

at the university on September 5, 2006. 

During the ceremony, SOC co-founder 

Connie Clery stated, “Montclair State is the 

first educational institution in the country 

to pilot an exciting new mobile phone 

technology that turns students’ cell phones 

into a personal alarm device connecting 

them to a caring, sworn police force.” 

Clery also cited the university for “funding 

a full-time coordinator of the Center 

of Non-Violence and Prevention Programs, 

which is modeled after New Jersey 

State standards and provides services 

to victims of sexual assaults.” The Sexual 

Assault Response Team (SART), which 

was the first university-based program of 

its kind in New Jersey and one of a handful 

on campuses in the nation, is a team 

composed of trained sexual assault nurse 

examiners, university police officers and 

trained rape care advocates organized to 

assist the victims of sexual assault. 

During the ceremony, IACLEA Mid-Atlantic 

Regional Director Vickie Weaver, 

Director of Public Safety at Rider University 

in Lawrenceville, New Jersey, congratulated 

Montclair State University and, 

specifically, the University Police Department. 

“Chief Cell and his department truly 

embody campus law enforcement’s ongoing 

commitment to student safety and 

awareness. Chief Cell’s commitment to 

working closely with his campus partners 

to create a safe environment for sexual 

assault survivors represents the very best 

of collaboration and teamwork.” 

Weaver also highlighted the new era 

of collaboration between IACLEA and 

SOC. Today, IACLEA and Security on Campus 

are collaborating on a number of initiatives. 

We are joining with SOC to mark 

the second National Campus Public Safety 

Awareness Month. And early next year, 

several IACLEA members will join SOC to 

present the first-ever comprehensive, 

multi-disciplinary Clery Act training seminars. 

IACLEA is committed to working 

together with SOC for many years in the 

future to further our goals of protecting 

the next generation of leaders, Weaver said. 

For further information on NCSAM, 

please visit www.securityoncampus.org. 


President’s Message 


We will also award a round-trip 

airline ticket to the person who recruits 

the most new members during each 

year of the drive. 

categories. While the primary focus is on 

institutional and professional members, 

we will obviously benefit from all new 

members. The focus on institutional members 

is obvious — we need more colleges 

and universities in our association. The 

drive for additional professional members 

may not be as obvious. As campus public 

safety professionals, we have an inherent 

responsibility to provide opportunities 

for our people to grow so they are 

ready to lead our organizations in the future. 

One way to achieve this goal is to 

ensure that we all avail our staff members 

the opportunity to participate in 

IACLEA in meaningful ways, including 

serving on committees and task forces, 

but also by attending regional and annual 

conferences. As our team members engage 

in IACLEA activities, they develop a 

greater understanding of and appreciation 

for our role in protecting our campuses 

and the future leaders of the world. 

I submit that each of us should have at 

least one, if not many more, professional 

members from our respective organizations. 

Likewise, our supporting and affiliate 

members play vital roles in our association. 

This past year, we significantly 

ramped up our efforts to build closer relationships 

with our corporate partners. I 

ask that each of you use your existing 

relationships with local, national and international 

vendors to encourage their 

participation in IACLEA through membership 

in the Association. Attracting new 

affiliate members, i.e., local, state and 

other law enforcement/public safety 

agencies, also supports our goal of increasing 

interagency cooperation, coordination 

and understanding of our unique 

role in global security. 

To support our efforts in this ambitious 

goal to recruit 500 new members by 2008, 

the Membership Committee, co-chaired 

by Regina Lawson, Wake Forest University; 

Clayton Harris, Cuyahoga Community 

College; and Dino Richardson, Bermuda 

College, assisted by Lynn Sedlak at 

IACLEA headquarters, has developed a 

number of tools to assist. First and foremost, 

we have created a Membership Recruitment 

Toolkit that is available on the 

IACLEA Web site. The toolkit contains a 

list of talking points outlining benefits of 

IACLEA membership, a brochure of recent 

accomplishments, the strategic planning 

brochure listing our goals and objectives 

for the current year, and sample letters 

you will find useful for recruitment. 

The toolkit will also contain a list of nonmember 

institutions to help guide your 

outreach. We will provide additional resources 

based on your suggestions and 

recommendations. The primary purpose 

of the kit is to provide you with the information 

you need to be successful in your 

recruitment efforts, so please feel free to 

give feedback on its usefulness. Our goal 

is to make recruiting new members so 

easy that each institutional member is able 

to sponsor at least one new member over 

the next two years. If we are able to meet 

that goal, we will exceed our goal of 500 

new members by 100%. That would be a 

great accomplishment to celebrate at our 

50th Anniversary Conference! 

I am also very excited to announce 

that we have established a number of incentives 

to further motivate members in 

their efforts. First, each time you recruit a 

new member, you will earn twenty-five 

“IACLEA Bucks.” You can use your 

“IACLEA Bucks” for any IACLEA product 

or service, including membership renewal 

fees, conference registration, or LEMAP 

or Accreditation fees. What a great way 

to help IACLEA meet its membership 

goals and receive discounts on valueadded 

services and products. 

We will also award a round-trip airline 

ticket to the person who recruits the most 

new members during each year of the 

drive. The tickets will be awarded at the 

Annual Conference in Las Vegas and again 

at the 50th Anniversary Conference in 

Hartford, Connecticut. 

We are also establishing a grand prize 

drawing for those members who sponsor 

at least five new members during the twoyear 

drive. For each additional member 

recruited, the sponsor receives another 

entry. For example, a member who recruits 

ten new members during the drive 

is entered six times for the grand prize 

drawing, which will be held at the 50th 

Anniversary Conference. We will release 

further information about the grand prize 

at a later date. 

As you can see, we have established a 

full plate of incentives to generate energy 

and excitement about the Membership 

Drive. We are relying on you, our 

current members, to help us reach our 

goal. No one knows the value of IACLEA 

membership like you. And only you know 

how important this membership drive is 

to the future of IACLEA. 

I encourage each of you to commit to 

recruit at least one new member over the 

next two years. You can use the Membership 

Recruitment Toolkit, call a member 

of the Board of Directors or call me 

directly if you need assistance in your 

efforts. I hope I can rely on you to help 

us reach our goal of moving from “Good 

to Great.” I appreciate your continued 

commitment to campus public safety and 

your service to IACLEA. 

GOT NEWS? 

Have you received an award, been 

interviewed by the media, moved 

into new office space, retired, 

accepted a new job, received a 

promotion, received accreditation 

for your department, or anything 

else that might interest other 

IACLEA members? 

We want to hear about 

it and tell your 

colleagues about it. 

Mail the information (and photos) 

to: Lynn Sedlak, Managing Editor, 

Campus Law Enforcement Journal, 

IACLEA, 342 North Main Street, 

West Hartford, CT 06117-2507 or 

email to lsedlak@iaclea.org 


SECURE IT— 

REPEAT 

IBC 


NONPROFIT ORG. 

U.S. POSTAGE 

PAID 

TUCSON, AZ 

PERMIT NO. 541 

International Association 

of Campus Law 

Enforcement Administrators 

342 North Main Street 

W. Hartford, CT 06117-2507 

WELDON, WILLIAMS & 

LICK 

REPEAT AD FROM 

LAST 

OBC WITH

Volume 36, No. 5 - September/October 2006 Campus Law ... - IACLEA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?