threat assessment and classification. The threat assessment process can be accomplished by either school administrators or law enforcement. There are no tricks or advanced training required in order to become proficient with assessing threats. However, it is highly recommended that a threat assessment be conducted utilizing a team approach. School administrators working in consultation with law enforcement will yield the best results.
For a threat assessment, first responders and / or administration should conduct an evaluation of the available facts. After a threat is received, school administrators and law enforcement will huddle together and gauge the validity of a threat. Some factors to consider when conducting a threat assessment for an incendiary device are:
• the exact wording of a threat
• the time of day and year
• any information indicating that an attack is imminent( social media, JTTF intelligence)
• student disciplinary action
• gang or bullying activity
• staff disciplinary action( teachers, admin, bus drivers, support staff)
• tests or exams
• similar incidents, either locally or nationally
Another factor to consider when conducting a threat assessment is the motivating factors that drive an individual to carry out a bomb threat. The motivations are very similar to those of a fire setter, including:
• thrill seeking
• disrupting normal operations
• crime concealment / diversion
• revenge
• creating an atmosphere of anxiety / panic
Facts regarding bomb threats should also be taken into consideration when conducting bomb threat assessment for an incendiary device. The facts regarding threats are actually quite simple, particularly in New Jersey. Of the hundreds, if not thousands, of bomb threats in New Jersey over the past several decades, exactly zero have yielded any type of IED or other hazardous device. A review of available statistics from the U. S. Bomb Data Center indicates that that number is consistent throughout the nation. Although there are a number of reasons for this, we will not explore them within this article. The easiest explanation is that if an individual has become homicidal, there is no benefit to announce their intentions prior to carrying out an attack.
Threat classification
Upon completion of a threat assessment, the next step is to classify the threat. This can be accomplished through a number of approaches. For instance, a two-step system uses credible vs. non-credible or viable vs. non-viable. A three-step approach uses low-medium-high or low-moderate-high. A number system uses 1-5 or 1-10. The best approach is the one that is most suitable for the school district and first responders.
The following are examples of bomb threat classifications. Each category includes only some of the indictors which may assist in classifying a threat.
These are some indicators to take into consideration when
Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk
Non-specific Specific Very specific
Implausible Viable / plausible Imminent
Little / no detail
Known and repeat offender
Threat discovered instead of delivered
Time / day indicators
Offender has access to bomb components
Verbal qualifiers“ I really mean it”
Details: Time / date / target
Offender has taken preparatory steps
Actionable intel from law enforcement
classifying a bomb threat. Every threat must be evaluated thoroughly based on the available facts. Finally, the best practice to follow is to classify every threat on the“ low” or“ non-credible” end of the spectrum unit in the absence of information or facts learned that justify elevating it into another category.
Response
Once a threat is assessed and classified, an appropriate response can be accomplished. It is recommended that upon receipt or discovery of a bomb threat, the school transitions to a shelter in place or lockout. This prevents any additional external factors from contributing to the incident. Addi-
CONTINUED ON PAGE 72
www. njcopsmagazine. com ■ JANUARY 2018 71