District to Hire Firm to Conduct Security Audit of Fort Lee Schools

Among the resolutions passed by the Fort Lee Board of Education Monday was one approving a proposal from a Pennsylvania-based company specializing in school security to provide a security and emergency management audit of all six Fort Lee public schools.

SERAPH, Inc. has conducted over 26,000 audits in schools in the U.S. and abroad, according to Assistant Superintendent Steven Engravalle, who said he’s worked with the company before. Since 1989, SERAPH has trained over 78,000 teachers, 23,000 administrators and 12,000 paraprofessionals, he said, adding that the term “security audit” may be somewhat misleading.

“This is more of a culture and climate audit, as well as a management audit of how we’re managing the security within our schools,” Engravalle said. “Security is comprised of many things. As our population is now changing, as are our procedures, we want to make sure that we are meeting the needs of our population. This is more than just, ‘where do we place cameras?’ or ‘we need more door locks.’ These are really going to be things that if we need to do things differently with our own policies and procedures, they’re going to point it out to us.”

Business administrator and board secretary Cheryl Balletto said the district received three proposals, and that at $28,750, SERAPH’s was not only the cheapest, but also “the most comprehensive for that amount of money and also the place that had the most experience with schools.”

Engravalle pointed out that in fact two of the members of SERAPH’s proposed “team” for the audit are long-time educators.

“So you’re getting not only the police perspective—and they will be working with the Fort Lee police to gather intelligence from them, as well as our fire departments and other emergency personnel,” he said. “But they’re also going to look at it from an educational perspective. Because the way a police officer looks at a situation is different from the way a teacher looks at a situation, and vice-versa.”

The company’s audit process includes three phases, according to the proposal it submitted to the school district. Phase A includes research and a preliminary assessment of social issues, crime issues and current district policies in response to them. Phase B includes on-site, physical assessments and interviews with principals, assistant principals, school nurses and counselor/social workers and Chemistry teachers at the high school and middle school and with principals, nurses and head custodians at the elementary schools. Phase C is a final audit report, including individual school assessments and a presentation to the board.

Questions from members of the public relating to the audit abounded at Monday’s meeting: Why do we need a school security audit now? Is the $28,750 cost of the audit worth it at a time when the district is laying off teachers? How will this affect additional security at the high school the board recently approved? And what about a previous “security audit” conducted several years ago?

“The security audit is not really speaking to the current security or past security people or companies, but rather, what we’re asking to do here is to have a thorough examination of our facilities and our practices and policies related to the safety and security of students and facilities,” Fort Lee Superintendent of Schools Raymond Bandlow said. “Out of that, we may very well get some recommendations that have to do with the deployment of security personnel, of cameras and other types of equipment. But perhaps the most important part of it is examination of policies and practices … much of what we’ll be doing is looking at [those] to make sure that we’re doing everything we can to ensure the safety of children.”

Bandlow added that there was not a single event or series of events at Fort Lee High School—or indeed at any of Fort Lee’s schools—that precipitated the need for an audit.

“Our high school’s extremely safe,” he said. “But I think we all have to recognize that we live right on the doorstep of the busiest bridge in the world. And the traffic that comes through this area—through Fort Lee—not all of the traffic is of the positive, constructive type. We operate as a school district—given our location—with very, very little in the way of security personnel.”

Board president Arthur Levine called a prior audit conducted in 2004/2005 “an incomplete report principally about camera coverage.”

“And it was done by people who do not specialize in security for schools,” Levine said.

Engravalle said that audit “was not a true audit,” but rather the result of a Federal  “Secure Our Schools” grant that mainly provided materials such as video cameras.

Of the $28,750 price tag for SERAPH’s services, Levine said it’s well worth it if it means protecting Fort Lee students, teachers and other staff members and even “if we can prevent one event from happening.”

“This new firm is going to cover a wide discipline,” Levine said. “And you talk about $28,000, but I don’t equate that to a lot of money when we’re talking about the safety of our children … We’re very mindful of spending any amount of money, but for the safety of our children, and again, covering all six schools, it’s money well spent.”

Board member Joe Surace raised a counterpoint, however, saying that having read through the 2004/2005 report, “part of the recommendations that were in that report, I don’t believe were ever implemented” because the board didn’t have the money to pay for them.

“I agree with all of you as far as security of our buildings, not only for our students, but for our employees,” Surace said. “My question would be if this firm comes up with good recommendations, then what this board’s got to think about is the financing in order to implement [them].”

Levine however anticipated that many of the recommendations wouldn’t cost anything to implement.

“It could be about procedure, which is also critical,” he said. “But anything that they recommend vis-à-vis making a capital expenditure will be scrutinized tremendously.”

SERAPH, Inc.'s complete proposal approved by the board Monday can be found on pages 68-75 of the June 13 agenda, which is available for download here.