Safety Zone

From personal security alarms attached to PENNcards From personal security alarms attached to PENNcardsImagine this scenario -- you are a University student walking alone late at night somewhere near the intersection of 42nd and Osage streets. You have never been as scared in your life as you are now and there is no one else in sight. You reach for your PENNCard, which is clipped to the breast pocket of your jacket, depress the small button on the upper left-hand corner and say, "I need help -- someone is following me." Seconds later, in the University Police control room, a computer receives your call for help and recognizes your personal identification number. A control room dispatcher hits a key on the computer keyboard and a your picture, along with a brief biography, appears on the screen. The dispatcher presses another key -- and a map with a red dot pin-pointing your location within 100 feet pops up on the screen. This whole process has taken 2 seconds. In under a minute, the officer arrives on the scene and safely escorts you back to your room, before any irreparable damage is done. While this technology is not currently available, the capability to transmit a voice message and alert police from an ID card may be an integral part of campus policing within the next 10 years. In a recent campus poll, conducted by Secure Systems, a company which sells personal security systems, nearly 73 percent of University students said they would carry a transmitter, which when pressed would notify University Police. This transmitter, called a pad, can be worn as a pin on jackets or can be attached to key chains. Having a pad is only half the process, though, said Michael Beals, chief executive officer of Secure Systems, Inc. Beals said Secure Systems would place signal receivers around campus, at a maximum interval of 300 feet, so students would always be within 150 feet of a signal receiver. When the pad is depressed a signal transmits to the receiver and then, ultimately, to a base receiver located at University Police headquarters. Beals said signal receivers would be installed both outside and inside every building and dormitory on campus, if negotiations between the University and Secure Systems are finalized. While the estimated installation cost of $2 million would not be billed to the University itself, students would have to pay $150 per year to use the technology. Despite the cost, Beals said, his system has many advantages over conventional campus safety measures. "It's a proactive response [system] for the students and the police," he said. For instance, if a student were in an uncomfortable situation in someone else's room, where it would be virtually impossible to use the phone to call for help, that student could press the button on his or her pad and expect an officer to come knocking on the door. "It's like putting a blue light phone in your hand," University Police Commissioner John Kuprevich said. The system is intended to prevent and respond to crime so that police work would not only be after-the-fact, as it often is, Beals said. "Victim support is terrific except for one thing, it's after the fact," he added. "This is before the fact." While Beals' system offers an alternative to conventional policing, major changes may be required at the University Police department to accommodate for the shift. Kuprevich said more officers would have to be ready to respond instantly to alarms, adding that this would mean an entirely new strategy for stationing patrols. But, there are extremely beneficial side effects to installing a system such as this one, Kuprevich said. It would be possible to put a transmitter in any piece of valuable equipment in a registered student's dorm room, so that if the equipment was removed, University Police would instantly be alerted. They would then be able to track the signal and find the object, Beals said. The changeover to digitized imagery would also allow the University to store a photograph of each student in its database. Consequently, security guards could see students' pictures on a screen in front of them to verify identification, and professors could even receive illustrated class rosters. The same would be true in the library. When a student attempted to check a book out, his or her picture would automatically appear on the screen. And if a student were reported missing, University Police could quickly print 'missing' posters, Kuprevich added. Another new technology the University is considering is a key control system developed primarily for the college environment, said Mike Bogie, president of a company which resells the product. This system, called Intellikey, is basically a combination of the University's card access system and its conventional key access system. Although the technology accomplishes the same end as the card and key access systems, there is a glaring discrepancy in cost. The Intellikey system is battery operated, whereas card access requires that doors be hard-wired. Installing Intellikey would cost the University about $350 per door, but to install a card access system the University could pay anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000, Bogie said. He added that Intellikey also has an advantage over a conventional key system. In a conventional key system, if someone loses a master or sub-master key, the entire building or set of buildings must be rekeyed. That may involve pulling out the cores of all the locks. Normally, this would cost about $30,000, and could take several days, Bogie said, but with Intellikey this can be accomplished in a couple of hours for about $50, because the locks and keys only need to be reprogrammed. The Intellikey itself is slightly larger than a regular key and has a plastic coating on the base, which communicates with the lock through infrared light. A small computer in the base of each key is programmed with time and access restrictions. For instance, a student's key would be programmed to have access to all outer doors, his dorm room and any other doors he might need to open. And the keys could either be programmed before students arrive on campus or when students arrive at their residences. The keys are fully programmed in under five minutes, although Intellikey is already in the process of reducing this time, Bogie said. If a key is lost or stolen all the student has to do is get a new key. The lock automatically recognizes the new key and cancels the old one, Kuprevich said. But this system would require a financial commitment out of the University. The University would be paying to replace dormitory door locks which are currently operational. Bogie said the most important aspect of this system, though, is its accountability. The locks, for instance, record the last fifty entries and attempted entries into a room or building, and this information can later be used if any wrongdoing has to be traced. The key, too, can be read to tell which doors it has either opened or attempted to open. Executive Director of Physical Plant James Wargo said the University is currently testing the Intellikey system in his department on a smaller scale. Although the University may never fully changeover to card access, as it is extremely expensive, PennCard will probably still expand its capabilities within the next few years. The University and the University Student Federal Credit Union are currently undergoing negotiations to turn the PennCard into a debit card, Vice President of Planning Francisco Bayron said. The Credit Union wants to provide this service to students free of charge, in hopes of offering PennCard service at all stores on campus. Bayron said the card would not work like a credit card, but rather like a MAC card. "When [students] swipe the card at the terminal, money will be debited from their bank account [with the Credit Union]," he said. He added that if the debit card becomes a reality it could have a significant impact on campus crime. "If people realize Penn Students don't have any cash, there will probably be fewer crimes," he said. These technologies have the potential to increase both safety and quality of life for students. They are not, however, a solution to crime, but rather ways of reducing risk. When these or other new safety technologies are implemented they are only as good as the people who use them, Kuprevich said. Common sense and a sense of community will be just as important as they ever were, he added. "People often look at security technology as an annoyance, rather than something that's a benefit to them," he said. "We have to teach people to appreciate that combining security technology with their own awareness and the way they function on a daily basis is really the key to being safe," he added.