EventPRO

Friday, January 11, 2013

It’s sport, not war: Security preparations for Brazil 2014 and what we can learn from Sao Paulo

19 December 2012
It’s sport, not war: Security preparations for Brazil 2014 and what we can learn from Sao Paulo
 
As the biggest football event on the planet, the 2014 Fifa World Cup has led to one of the biggest national investment programmes in major event history. However, the recent postponing of one of the most high-profile matches in South American club football has led to concerns that Brazil is not adequately prepared to host the event.

Sunday, December 9, 2012

The ICSS launches its new Journal



The ICSS launched its Journal, which is a new niche publication that will explore emerging issues and challenges impacting the securing of major international sporting events.

Apart from various interesting and thought provoking articles, the ICSS also examines why so many major sporting events take place without a standard model for security, and presents a model that could form a future baseline.

http://icss-journal.newsdeskmedia.com/approach-to-security-planning/

Tuesday, November 6, 2012


The ICSS unveils its SSI Model as a basis for major sporting event security, safety and integrity management

 2012-10-23, SOCCEREX African Forum, Durban, South Africa

The SOCCEREX African Forum was recently held in Durban. The event seeks to bring together the leading decision makers in African football together with their counterparts and businesses from around the world for two days of unrivalled learning, networking and business opportunities.
The International Centre for Sport Security (ICSS) was a sponsor of the event and also presented a Security, Safety and Integrity (SSI) ModelTM, which may well be the first of its kind to act as an industry standard for planning and managing the SSI aspects of major sporting events.
With every major sporting event – from a FIFA World Cup to a Summer Olympics – each host nation tends to re-invent the wheel to determine their security strategy for their particular sporting event as well as the concept- and operational plans to execute it.

Whether a nation is in the bidding phase or has been awarded a major sporting event, the ICSS constantly hears the questions; “What reference documents are available?” and “Where do we start?”  The ICSS has taken these questions seriously and developed such a model.

The most common ‘reference documents’ that one might find are individual security plans (conceptual, operational or both) from some previous event.  Due to the absence of a “base line” security planning model, it would however not be clear whether all security plans had been obtained, if they are integrated, possess quality content and cover the entire life cycle of the major sporting event.
It is quite clear that security planning for major sporting events can still be flawed in this modern day and age even with all the expertise and technology available to us.  Take the recent 2012 London Olympics as an example.  Although the British have pulled off an amazing feat, they experienced their fair share of challenges, the most exasperating and most publicised one being the poor delivery of private security services for the Games.

There is no ’one size fits all’ to arranging security for major events, but there are however basic principles that must be understood and managed effectively.  These basic principles are as follows:
 One must understand the various dimensions that comprise the life cycle of a major sporting event, and where one is positioned in that life cycle at any given point in time
 One must understand what the requirements are for each dimension of the life cycle
 Consult, track, monitor, report and communicate with key stakeholders
 Timing is everything

In order to improve security planning for major sporting events it seems there is a need for a reliable ‘reference document’.  A ‘reference document’ that exhibits the following characteristics:
 •Provides the industry with a STANDARD to base its security plans on
 •Is FLEXIBLE to accommodate unique dynamics
 •Ensures CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
 •Ensures a DYNAMIC and ROBUST model
 OPTIMISES security plans and operations
•Whilst MINIMISING re-work & security costs
 •Ensuring LEGACY for the Host Nation in general and the respective Sport Sector specifically

In its aspiration to ascribe to the above characteristics the ICSS has developed such a ‘reference document’.  A ‘reference document’ that is based on harvesting the most vital knowledge and lessons learnt from previous major sporting events – both tacit and explicit, extracted by means of research and consultation of major sport event experts.  This has led to the development of the ICSS Security, Safety & Integrity (SSI) ModelTM.
The SSI ModelTM serves as a master guide for the security planning of major sporting events. It consists of an SSI Framework that covers all eight dimensions of an event life cycle and an SSI Concept that addresses the entire suite of security functions that have to be managed during the Preparation- and Operations Phases to ensure a holistic and integrated security plan.

This brings us to the other question one hears so often; “Where do we start?”
The SSI ModelTM Framework covers all eight dimensions of a major sporting event life cycle, whether one is planning to bid for a major sporting event or has already been awarded the hosting rights.  The eight dimensions are briefly as follows:




1.        Due Diligence
Action: This is where it all ‘starts’.  It basically entails researching of all relevant contracts, sport regulations, legislation and event history, vetting of staff and service providers, as well as an in-depth risk analysis based on National-, Regional- and International risks , integrated between the bid / organizing committee and the government. 
Outcome: Discovery and awareness of the opportunities and threats

2.      Strategy
Action: This entails the development of an SSI strategy for the event, an SSI concept indicating WHAT SSI services will be provided, any legislation that may be required to be developed pro-actively in support of the event and specifically to indicate any security service exclusions.
Outcome: A clear Direction for providing SSI services. 

 3.        Planning
Action: This entails the structuring of the organizing committee’s security department and specifically the Joint Security Coordinating Committee with all relevant stakeholders, development of support services plans, concept plans (WHAT will be provided) for each of the SSI services required, as well as the eventual operational plans (HOW the SSI services will be provided), development of the organizing committee’s own internal SSI policies, procedures and services, development of an SSI Communications Strategy, as well as the SSI budget.  It is also vital at this early stage to ensure an accurate SSI needs analysis to base tenders and contracts on as well as to compile a Testing Plan and a Legacy Plan.
Outcome: A robust Design for quality SSI services.

 4.      Implementation
Action: The core aspects to be managed successfully in this dimension are Staffing, Procurement and Contracting, Construction (permanent physical facilities and temporary overlay), Signage, Running Orders and Training.
Outcome: A smooth Deployment.

 5.      Testing
Action: This is a critical dimension that requires the organising committee to test its readiness to host the event.  The core aspects of this dimension include the early development of a Testing Plan, early finalization of all Agreements with test venues, Communication of the Testing Plan, Budgeting, Preparation of the Team, Testing Logistics, Deployment Plan, Debriefing and Revision of plans, policies, procedures & training in preparation of the main event.
Outcome: Valuable Diagnostics.

6.     Execution
Action: This is the moment of truth. The core aspects to be covered in this dimension are the Hand-Over of Facilities, Deployment of Personnel and Equipment, SSI Operations Management and the Main Operations Centre (MOC).
Outcome: Successful Delivery.

7.      Close Out
Action: After every event the organising committee attempts to close down its operations as soon as possible. 
Outcome: A smooth Departure.

8.      Legacy
Action: Each event offers government security forces, the sport code involved and the sport facilities involved in hosting the event the opportunity to equip themselves with the most recent technology, equipment, training and experience to plough into the SSI services of future events or general public security and safety.  This is why it is imperative to pro-actively approve a Legacy Plan that ensures this can happen in a sustainable manner. 
Outcome: Future Development. 

In order to ensure that the SSI ModelTM conforms to the requirements of being dynamic, flexible and robust, the major sporting event life cycle has to be professionally project managed.   The application of research and expert knowledge by the ICSS on a continuous basis ensures that the model is continuously improved and remains relevant.
As far as the SSI ModelTM Concept is concerned, it covers all the SSI Operations required for any major sporting event.  The key SSI Operations are as follows:

Inter-agency Security 
Venue Security and Safety (including Fan Zones)
Security Technology 

Cyber Security 

Close Protection 

Logistics Security 

Hotel Security 

Transit Security 

Sport Integrity 

Ticketing Security 

Accreditation 

Government Security and Safety

The core knowledge required to inform the above aspects, ensure that they are addressed comprehensively and integrated effectively resides in the expertise of the right people, as well as recording cumulative knowledge in an accessible knowledge portal.  This is one of the core strengths of the ICSS.
In an attempt to minimise the risk of unnecessary mistakes, wasted time and fruitless expenditure the ICSS is able to offer the SSI ModelTM as a baseline from which bidding- and host nations, sporting bodies and sport venues alike can start to track, monitor and compare their sport security, safety and integrity planning.
The SSI ModelTM is ultimately a common sense model that can help major sporting event security experts ensure that SSI plans are developed and managed effectively, and the ICSS hopes that this model will assist in making common sense a common practice for all major sporting events in the future!

Thursday, October 18, 2012

FootExpo Marrakech: Malcolm Tarbitt, Director of Security and Risk Advisory for the ICSS, presents 'The Mechanics of a Major Sporting Event Security Plan'

2012-10-11
FootExpo Marrakech held its second edition of the successful conference and expo showcasing the best of African football.
 
Morocco is the first African country to have been awarded the FIFA Club World Cups which will be held in 2013 and 2014. Morocco will also be host to the 2015 African Cup of Nations.
 
Malcolm Tarbitt of the ICSS delivered an interesting presentation on the mechanics of a major sporting event secuity plan.  The ICSS have developed a Security, Safety and Integrity (SSI) Model that serves as a master guide for the security planning of major sporting events.
 
It consists of a Framework that covers all dimensions of an event life cycle and a Security Concept that addresses the entire suite of security functions that have to be a managed during the Preparation- and Operations Phases to ensure a holistic and integrated plan.
 
This is not only invaluable to any country seeking to bid for a major sporting event, but also for host countries that have already been awarded such events.  It is also specifically of  value to Morocco as it is currently challenged by a lack of compliance by most of its sport venues to ensure minimum security and safety standards.
 
 

Saturday, September 22, 2012

Involvement of private security companies in major events: To be or not to be? That seems to be the question.


The G4S debacle had placed the involvement of private security companies in major events in the spotlight.

Although this is a topical issue, it is not a new one. Recently Poland and Ukraine handed the event security functions over to private security companies with success, whilst Brazil is in the process of planning to do the same. In both countries, the government security forces have traditionally performed this task.


See my article in the link below to form your own opinion on whether the UK government response to the G4S issue is a knee jerk reaction or whether it is justified.


http://www.insidethegames.biz/blogs/1010965

Tuesday, July 31, 2012

The ICSS participates in panel discussion at the IACP Symposium, Sao Paulo on the protection of Fan Zones and public places used for major events




Malcolm Tarbitt, Director of Security and Risk Advisory at the International Centre for Sport Security, attended the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) in Sao Paulo recently, where he participated in a panel discussion on the protection of Fan Zones and public places used for major events.

Brazil is currently the host to the 2014 FIFA World Cup and the 2016 Rio Summer Olympics.  Traditionally, the military police in Brazil perform the task of inner perimeter security at sport venues, and are finding it challenging to relinquish control of this vital function to private security companies.  This is especially so in light of the security fiasco experienced by the 2012 London Olympics.

In answering a question on how safe it is to allow private security companies to perform the task of stewarding and inner perimeter security at sport events, Malcolm informed them that if certain simple basics are addressed there is no need for concern.  These include the standard phases of the event and understanding what the requirements are for each one (Bidding- and Technical Inspection phases before being awarded the event, and then the Planning-, Implementation-, Testing-, Execution-, Close-out- and Legacy Phases after being awarded the event), a compact yet complete Security Committee (including the Local Organising Committee and relevant government law enforcement-, intelligence- and military stakeholders) to jointly manage all security aspects of the event, as well as a quality tender and contracting (procurement) programme based upon sound security requirements, followed by continuous contracts-, project- and operations management throughout the respective phases.  If this is done, it would be impossible to suddenly establish a year before the event that one’s private security force has to be increased by 100% or that one’s security service provider cannot deliver the required quantity and quality of security personnel only weeks before the event starts!

Although it is clear from media reports that the security service provider did not deliver according to contract, the Local Organising Committee and the Government (Home Office) should have project managed the contract which would have indicated well in advance whether the security service provider was meeting delivery milestones or not. 

Another crucial aspect is the planning and execution of a Testing Programme for an event.  Unlike the FIFA World Cup which has an official test event a year in advance of the World Cup (the FIFA Confederations Cup), the Olympics do not.  It is therefore imperative to plan well in advance to host one’s own test events in order to ensure that policies, procedures, training and operations are optimal for the main event.  If the private security service provider was managed effectively, then the private security would have been a key aspect of the Testing Programme.

Malcolm then emphasised that the point he was making, is that Brazil should not be concerned about the poor delivery of private security companies for an event such as the 2012 London Olympics, as the Security Committee remains in control of all planning and execution.  Any failure of private security companies to deliver for an event can only be attributed to the Security Committee (bearing the basics in mind), and NOT to private security companies.

If one sticks to the basics, then common sense will become common practice.  Unfortunately the 2012 London Olympics have not managed to do this, which has turned what should have been ‘spectacular security’ into a ‘security spectacle’.  Sadly, this has made security the spectacle, instead of the sport.

Monday, July 30, 2012

2012 London Olympics Security Challenges Continue 

Sun News Network interviews Malcolm Tarbitt, Director of Security and Risk Advisory at the International Centre for Sport Security on the security of the 2012 London Olympics.
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featured/news/868018287001/olympic-security-fails-india/1759923469001