Highway Baseline Assessment for Security Enhancements
Highway Baseline Assessment for Security Enhancement (BASE) Program
Highway BASE Instrument.xlsx
Highway BASE Review
OMB: 1652-0062
⚠️ Notice: This form may be outdated. More recent filings and information on OMB 1652-0062 can be found here:
Document [xlsx]
Download: xlsx | pdf
Scoring Guidance
Profile
Checklist
Additional Information
SP Addendum
Overview
SSI CoversheetScoring Guidance
Profile
Checklist
Additional Information
SP Addendum
Sheet 1: SSI Coversheet
|
|||||||||
Sheet 2: Scoring Guidance
| DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY | ||
| Transportation Security Administration | ||
| SCORING GUIDANCE | ||
| A score is assigned to each line item by the field inspector according to the following general convention: The Scoring Criteria Column should be used as a guide, but is not fully inclusive of all scenarios. “0” Security element should be in place but does not exist. (Equates to total non-adherence) “1” Security element exists but does not include all essential recommended components. (Equates to minimal adherence) “2” Security element is in place with all essential components but not fully implemented or practiced. (Equates to partial adherence) “3” Security element is in place and practiced but not monitored or periodically reviewed. (Equates to strong adherence, but not full implementation) “4” Security element is in place, fully implemented and regularly reviewed/verified. (Equates to full implementation) Also assigned to “yes/no” question having a “Yes” response. “N/A” Checked - Security element is not applicable and rational must be given in the justification column to support the N/A rating. |
||
| SECURITY ACTION ITEMS (SAI'S) | REVIEW/VERIFICATION STEPS | Scoring Criteria |
| Management and Accountability: | ||
| SAI #1 – Have a Designated Security Coordinator | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *1. This entity designates a primary Security Coordinator/ Director. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that the entity has a person designated as Security Coordinator/Director that is responsible for overall transportation security. | Someone with this title must be identified (may be shared title). |
| 4 = Fully implemented including this title being documented. | ||
| 3, 2, 1 = Yes, but with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = None | ||
| 2. This entity designates an alternate Security Coordinator/Director. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that the entity has someone designated to fill this role in the primary Security Coordinator's absence. | Someone with this title must be identified (may be shared title). |
| 4 = Fully implemented including this title being documented. | ||
| 3, 2, 1 = Yes, but with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = None | ||
| 3. This entity has policies that specify the transportation related duties of the Security Coordinator. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that specific, transportation security-related duties of the Security Director are documented, not merely captured as "other duties." | 4 = Documented specific transportation security related duties of Security Coordinator. May be found in job description, security plan, or other documents as appropriate. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Polices are in place, but not documented. Security Coordinator duties assigned and followed with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No transportation security related duties specified. | ||
| SAI #2 – Conduct a Thorough Risk Assessment | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| 4. This entity recognizes they may have certain assets of specific interest to terrorists (i.e.: vehicles, IT information, passengers, critical personnel, etc.) and considers this factor when developing transportation security practices. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that the entity has (or does not have) assets that may be of interest to terrorists (passengers, chemicals, vehicles, IT, etc.) and/or may be in physical proximity to other critical assets that could be targeted, and uses these factors in designing their security procedures. | 4 = Yes, entity has identified critical assets and considers this when developing security practices. |
| 3,2,1 = Yes, entity is aware of its potential value to terrorists, and develops security practices with a varying degree of implementation. | ||
| 0 = if no, or "never thought about it." | ||
| *5. This entity has conducted a documented, site specific “Risk Assessment” that addresses current threats, vulnerabilities and consequences. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that the entity has conducted a site-specific security Risk Assessment that includes threat, vulnerability and consequence components, and note any known risks identified. | 4 = Specific written “Risk Assessment” that addresses T, V & C. This assessment is current or reviewed at least annually. |
| 3 = Written “Risk Assessment” that addresses T,V & C, but is outdated or not reviewed at least annually. | ||
| 2 = Written “Risk Assessment” that does not address all elements of T,V & C and/or is outdated. | ||
| 1 = General vulnerability assessment (physical “walk around”) | ||
| 0 = Not conducted | ||
| 6. Management for this entity provides funding and/or approves corrective actions to security vulnerabilities or weaknesses identified. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews if entity has implemented corrective actions and/or provided funding for security enhancements. | 4 = Corrective actions taken or no vulnerabilities or weaknesses were identified. |
| 3,2, 1 = Vulnerabilities or weaknesses were identified and corrective actions taken with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No corrective actions identified | ||
| SAI # 3 - Develop a Security Plan (Security Specific Protocols) | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *7. This entity has written, site specific transportation security procedures (may be in the form of a Security Plan) that address, at a minimum, personnel security, facility security and vehicle security along with actions to be taken in the event of a security incident or security breach. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that the entity/facility has written, site specific security procedures to be followed in the event of a security incident or terrorist event. Note: Keep in mind the “Security Plan” is a general term and an entity may refer to this plan as another title. The TSI should ensure that the plan being reviewed deals specifically with transportation security elements and use this information for their scoring justification. |
4 = Security Plan is either a standalone document or clearly segmented part of another plan that is readily available. This plan addresses transportation security elements including; personnel security, facility security and vehicle security along with actions to be taken in the event of a security incident or security breach. |
| 3 = Documented security procedures are in place, incorporated as part of another document, but are not in a clearly segmented section. | ||
| 2, 1 = Some, but not all security procedures are documented and addressed. | ||
| 0 = No security plan / procedures documented. | ||
| 8. This entity limits access to its security plan or security procedures to employees with a "need-to-know.” | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that confidential security measures used, vulnerabilities identified, and known threat concerns are made known only to employees having a valid "need to know." Note: Generally not all employees may have a “need-to-know.” |
4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| 9. This entity requires that employees with access to security procedures sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that employees having access to security information are required to sign a non-disclosure agreement designed keep confidential information confidential. | 4= Security specific NDA |
| 3 = General corporate NDA | ||
| 0 = No NDA | ||
| 10. This entity has written security plans/policies that have been reviewed and approved at the entity's executive level. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that executive level officials have approved all security procedures at this entity/facility and their endorsement is documented. | 4 = Security Procedures have been approved and signed at the entity’s executive level. |
| 3 = Reviewed and signed at lower level without executive endorsement. | ||
| 2, 1 = Verbal plan/policies discussed and approved without signature. | ||
| 0 = No security plan to be reviewed. | ||
| *11. This entity has security procedures to be followed by all personnel (i.e., drivers, office workers, maintenance workers, laborers and others) in the event of a security breach or incident. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that procedures are in place setting forth the expectations, responsibilities, or limitations for all personnel (drivers, office workers, administrators, etc.) in the event of a security incident or breach at this entity. | 4 = Yes, written security procedures for all employees |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with unique variations | ||
| 0 = No procedures in place | ||
| 12. This entity requires that their security policies be reviewed at least annually and updated as needed. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that an annual review of any written security procedures is required, and note the date they were last reviewed or updated to determine how often updates are actually being conducted. | 4 = Documented review within past year |
| 3,2,1 = Documented review occurred but not within past year and/or with unique variations | ||
| 0 = No security policies exist and/or reviewed | ||
| 13. Employees are provided with site-specific, up to date contact information for entity management and/or security personnel to be notified in the event of a security incident and this entity periodically tests their notification or "call-tree" procedures. | Verify through a review of any "contact lists" provided to employees that entity/facility security personnel are included on the list and that the data is current. | 4 = Yes, documented and readily available. Phone-tree exercises in place. |
| 3 = Yes, documented and readily available. No phone-tree exercises in place. 2, 1 = Partially, with unique variations | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 14. This entity has procedures for 24/7 notification of entity security personnel and/or local/state/federal authorities to be notified in the event of a security incident. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that guidelines are provided to employees requiring them to notify, at a minimum, local law enforcement authorities and the entity/facility security coordinator in the event of a security incident or breach. | 4 = Yes, documented and readily available. Note: If 911 is the only notification number, this does not qualify as a 4. |
| 3,2 = Partially, with unique variations | ||
| 1 = 911 is the only notification made | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| SAI # 4 – Plan for Continuity of Operations | Revew Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *15. This entity has procedures designed to ensure restoration of facilities and services following a significant operational disruption. (May be in the form of a Business Recovery Plan, Continuity of Operations Plan or part of the Emergency Response/Safety Plan). | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity/facility has a plan to address the recovery of business operations (Continuity of Operations Plan) in the event of a significant operational disruption. | 4 = Plan is either a standalone document or clearly segmented part of another plan that is readily available. |
| 3 = Documented procedures are in place, incorporated as part of another document, but are not in a clearly segmented section. | ||
| 2, 1 = Some, but not all continuity of operations procedures are documented and addressed. | ||
| 0 = No plan / procedures documented. | ||
| 16. This entity ensures all facilities have an auxiliary power source if needed or the ability to operate effectively from an identified secondary site. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity/facility has an auxiliary power source if needed, and/or the ability to operate effectively from another identified secondary site. (Secondary site must be named and immediate availability must be confirmed). | 4 = Full facility auxiliary power source on site/tested or secondary site named and immediately available. Procedures are tested or practiced occasionally. |
| 3 = Secondary site/ auxiliary power source is identified and in place, but not tested or practiced. 2, 1 = Varying degrees of auxiliary power for certain assets on-site/tested or varying degrees of functionality at secondary site. | ||
| 0 = No auxiliary power available and no secondary site considered. | ||
| SAI # 5 – Develop a Communications Plan | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *17. This entity has methods for communicating with drivers during normal conditions. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that adequate equipment is available for the entity to communicate with drivers during normal conditions. | 4 = Yes, documented methods are in place and practiced/discussed regularly. |
| 3 = Documented methods are in place, but there are no methods of preparation employed (practice, discussion, etc.) 2,1 = Yes, but with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 18. This entity has emergency procedures in place for drivers on the road to follow in the event normal communications are disrupted. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity has alternative emergency procedures for drivers on the road to follow in the event normal communications are disrupted. | 4 = Yes, documented methods in place, and the entity utilizes back-up technology that will function in the even normal communications are disrupted. |
| 3 = The entity has documented, clearly-defined steps for drivers to take in the event normal communications are lost. 2,1 = Yes, but with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| SAI # 6 - Safeguard Business and Security Critical Information | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *19. This entity controls access to business documents (i.e. security plans, critical asset lists, risk/vulnerability assessments, schematics, drawings, manifests, etc.) that may compromise entity security practices. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews if this facility controls and minimizes internal and external access to sensitive business information (Operational Security – OPSEC). | 4= Has written policy to address Operation Security (OPSEC) |
| 3,2,1 = Yes, but with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = Issue not addressed | ||
| 20. This entity controls personnel information (i.e. SSN, address, drivers license, etc.) that may be deemed sensitive in nature. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection if this facility controls and minimizes internal and external access to personnel information (keeps files or office locked). | 4= Has written policy to address personnel information |
| 3,2,1 = Yes, but with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = Issue not addressed | ||
| 21. This entity maintains and safeguards an up-to-date list of all assets that are critical to the continuation of business operations (i.e. vehicles, IT equipment, products, other equipment, etc.), periodically inventories these assets, and has the ability to determine their general location at any given time. | Verify that the facility/entity has an adequate inventory control process that ensures accountability for all at-risk assets (i.e.; products, vehicles, equipment, computers) that may be of specific interest to criminals and/or terrorists. | 4 = A specific, descriptive list of identified "critical assets" along with the knowledge of their general location. These “critical assets” are also periodically inventoried, employees receive some sort of training or briefing on critical asset protection. |
| 3 = A specific list of critical assets without known locations and/or periodic inventory. | ||
| 2, 1 = A general inventory of equipment | ||
| 0 = No inventory control | ||
| SAI # 7 - Be Aware of Industry Security Best Practices. | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *22. Personnel at this entity meet with industry peers, partners or associations that share security related information or best practices. (May include individual or corporate membership with an industry trade association). | Determine through interview or documentation if security or administrative personnel at this entity/facility belong to one or more industry groups that provide or share resources or security related guidance. (ATA, NTTC, ACC, NASDPTS, NAPT, OOIDA, others) | 4 = Is a member of and actively participates with a trade group(s). |
| 3 = Meets with industry peers and partners, but not a member of an association. | ||
| 2,1 = Informal interaction on occasion with industry peers. | ||
| 0 = No peer involvement. | ||
| 23. Personnel at this entity have sought and/or obtained transportation related security information or "best practices" guidance from external sources. | Determine through interview or documentation if this entity has used or provided security related information (best practices) to or from industry peers or partners. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| Personnel Security: | ||
| SAI # 8 – Conduct Licensing & Background Checks for Drivers / Employees / Contractors | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *24. This entity requires verification and documentation that persons operating entity vehicles have a valid driver’s license for the type of vehicle driven, along with any applicable endorsement(s) needed. | Review through interview or documentation that this entity verifies and documents that persons operating entity vehicles have a valid driver’s license for the type of vehicle driven, along with any applicable endorsement(s) needed. | 4 = DMV inquiry required upon hire and periodically (multiple times per year) thereafter or is enrolled to receive automatic updates. |
| 3 = DMV inquiry required upon hire and reviewed annually. | ||
| 2, 1 = DMV inquiry required upon initial hire and not periodically reviewed. | ||
| 0 = No DMV record required | ||
| *25. This entity requires a criminal history check, verification of Social Security number and verification of immigration status for personnel operating entity vehicles. | Review through interview or documentation that this entity requires a criminal and/or TSA recognized background check for personnel operating entity vehicles. Note: E-Verify gives verification of immigration status, not criminal background history. |
4 = A fingerprint based FBI background check, CDL-HME or TWIC |
| 3 = Background check thru reputable private entity w/o fingerprints | ||
| 2 = State or federal "Name Only" background check | ||
| 1 = Local PD name check only | ||
| 0 = No check | ||
| 26. This entity requires a criminal history check, verification of Social Security number and verification of immigration status for non-driver employees with access to security related information or restricted areas. | Review documentation confirming that this entity/facility requires some type of criminal and/or TSA recognized background check on non-driver employees with access to security related information or restricted areas. | 4 = A fingerprint based FBI background check, CDL-HME or TWIC |
| 3 = Background check thru reputable private entity w/o fingerprints | ||
| 2 = State or federal "Name Only" background check | ||
| 1 = Local PD name check only | ||
| 0 = No check | ||
| 27. This entity asks perspective employees if they have been denied employment elsewhere specifically as the result of a security background check. | Verify through interview or a review of documents that this entity asks applicants if they have been denied employment elsewhere specifically as the result of a security background check. | 4 = Yes, in application process |
| 0 = No, not part of application process | ||
| 28. This entity has security-related criteria that would disqualify current or prospective personnel from employment. | Verify through interview or a review of documents that this entity/facility has security criteria that would disqualify current or prospective personnel from employment. | 4 = Yes, written policies |
| 3, 2, 1 = Yes, but with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 29. This entity has policies to address criminal allegations that may arise or come to light involving current employees. | Verify through interview or a review of documents that this entity reviews and evaluates any new criminal activity information for current employees that may come to light. | 4 = Has written policy to address issue |
| 3,2,1 = Informal process in place with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = Not been addressed | ||
| 30. The entity requires that contractors having access to security related information or restricted areas be held to comparable licensing and background checks as those required of regular company employees (contracted employees may include contractual drivers, unescorted cleaning crews, etc.). | Verify through interview or a review of documents that this entity/facility has comparable licensing and background check requirements for both entity employees and contracted employees. | 4 = Yes, contractor and entity standards are identical |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| SAI # 9 – Develop and Follow Security Training Plan(s) | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *31. This entity provides general security awareness training to employees (separate from or in addition to regular safety training). | Verify through interview or a review of documents that this entity provides general security awareness training for all employees. | 4 = Provides security training for all employees |
| 3 = Provided to employees with security related duties and front line employees (i.e. drivers, ticket agents, station managers, etc.) | ||
| 2, 1 = Minimal training provided during safety meetings | ||
| 0 = No security training provided | ||
| 32. This entity provides additional security training to employees having security responsibilities. | Determine if this entity conducts more in-depth security training to familiarize employees with their specific responsibilities as outlined in the entity security plan. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| 33. This entity provides periodic security re-training. | Review through interview or a review of documents to determine if this entity provides periodic security re-training (recurrent training) no less than every three years. | 4 = Yes, at least every 3 years for all employees. |
| 3 = Provided every 3 years to employees with security related duties and front line employees (i.e. drivers, ticket agents, station managers, etc.) | ||
| 2, 1 = Minimal informal security re-training provided occasionally. | ||
| 0 = No security re-training. | ||
| 34. The security training/re-training offered by this entity is specific to and appropriate for the type of transportation operation being conducted (trucking, school bus, motor coach or infrastructure mode). | Verify through interview or a review of documents that the security training/re-training being offered by this entity/facility is specific to the type of transportation operation being conducted (trucking, school bus, motor coach or infrastructure). | 4 = Yes, security specific and specific to appropriate mode. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with unique variations. May be some type of general transportation security training. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 35. This entity has comparable security training requirements for both internal employees and contracted employees with security responsibilities or access to security-related information. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that his facility requires identical training requirements for both entity employees and contracted employees. | 4 = Yes, contractor and entity standards are identical |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 36. This entity requires documentation and retention of records relating to security training received by employees. | Verify through interview and/or a review of documents that this entity/facility documents and retains records relating to security training received by employees. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 =No | ||
| SAI # 10 –Participate in Security Exercises & Drills | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *37. This entity meets with outside agencies (i.e.; law enforcement/first responders) regarding security support and or issues. | Verify through interview or a review of documents that this entity meets with outside agencies (i.e.; law enforcement/first responders) regarding security issues or security exercises/ drills. | 4 = Meets regularly |
| 3, 2, 1 = Score based on frequency and/or degree of interaction | ||
| 0 = Does not meet with outside agencies | ||
| 38. Personnel at this entity have actually conducted or participated in some type of exercises/drills that involve security related activities. | Verify through interviews or a review of documents that this entity has conducted or participated in some type of security exercises/drills. Examples would include active participation in exercises/drills such as: Tabletops, ISTEP, Situational Drills (bomb threats, hijacking, lock downs, etc.). Note: These drills must involve transportation security. | 4 = Yes, within last 12 months |
| 3, 2, 1 = Score based on frequency and/or degree of interaction | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 39. This entity has administrative and/or security personnel trained in the National Incident Management System (NIMS) or Incident Command System (ICS). | Verify through interview or a review of documents that this entity has security personnel trained in the National Incident Management System (NIMS) or Incident Command System (ICS). | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| Facility Security: | ||
| SAI # 11 - Maintain Facility Access Control | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *40. This entity has controlled points of entry/exit for employees and restricts non-employee access to buildings, terminals and/or work areas. | Verify through interview, a review of documents, or physical inspection that this entity/facility restricts non-employee access to the buildings, terminals or work areas. Note: If this is a BASE conducted on the corporate office, scores should be rated as it applies to all of their facilities (not just the corporate office/facility of visit). | 4= Yes, employee entrances and exits are controlled and entry to all buildings, terminals and/or work areas is restricted for non-employees at all facilities. |
| 3 = Entry is restricted to most areas, but not all. | ||
| 2, 1 = Access is partially restricted, with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = Access is not restricted. | ||
| *41. This entity has secured all doors, windows, skylights, roof openings and other access points to all buildings, terminals and/or work areas. | Verify through interview, a review of documents, or physical inspection that this entity/facility has secured all doors, windows, skylights, roof openings, and other access points to all buildings, terminals, and/or work areas. | 4= Yes, all doors, windows, etc. are inoperable or secured with adequate locking mechanisms, and entry to all buildings, terminals and/or work areas is secure at all facilities. |
| 3= Access points are secure in most areas, but not all. | ||
| 2, 1 = Access is partially restricted, with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = Access is not restricted. | ||
| 42. This entity restricts employee access into certain secure areas (i.e.; computer room, administrative areas, dispatch, etc.). | Verify through interview, a review of documents, or physical inspection that this entity/facility restricts employee access to certain secure areas. | 4= Secure areas are clearly identified and access to these secure areas is restricted to certain employees based on job function. |
| 3 = Access to these secure areas is restricted to certain employees based on job function. | ||
| Note: If this is a BASE conducted on the corporate office, scores should be rated as it applies to all of their facilities (not just the corporate office/facility of visit). | 2 = Secure areas are clearly identified, but access is not restricted. | |
| 1 = Restricted access is implied but not adhered to. | ||
| 0 = Secure areas are needed, but not identified by entity. | ||
| *43. This entity issues photo-identification cards/badges or uses other effective identification methods to identify employees. | Verify through interview, a review of documents or physical inspection that this entity/facility issues identification cards/badges or other effective identification methods to identify all employees. | 4 = Entity issued photo ID badges issued to all employees. |
| 3 = Other effective ID badges are issued to all employees. | ||
| 2 = Photo ID badges issued to some employees, but not all. | ||
| 1 = Non-photo ID badges issued to some employees | ||
| 0 = Badges are needed, but not issued. | ||
| 44. This entity requires employees to carry and/or display their identification card/badge or other form of positive employee ID while on duty. | Verify through interview, a review of documents, or physical inspection that this entity/facility requires employees to carry and/or display an identification badge while on duty | 4 = This entity requires that all employees display and/or carry their entity ID card/badge while on duty, and methods of verification are in place. |
| 3 = Requirements are in place, but no measures of verification take place. | ||
| 2,1 = Some employees are required to display/carry ID cards/badges, but not all (i.e. drivers, warehouse workers, office workers, etc.) | ||
| 0 = No ID cards/badges issued or there is no requirement in place. | ||
| 45. This entity has a challenge procedure that requires employees to safely report unknown persons or persons not having proper identification. | Verify through interview, a review of documents, or physical inspection that this entity/facility requires employees to report unknown persons or persons not having proper identification. | 4 = This entity has a written policy in place requiring employees to safely report unknown persons or those not having proper identification. |
| 3 = This entity has a verbal policy requiring employees to report unknown persons or those not having proper identification. | ||
| 2,1 = Varying degrees of implementation. No specific policy, but a general understanding is in place. | ||
| 0 = No policy in place. | ||
| 46. This entity utilizes advanced physical control locking measures (i.e.; biometric input, key card, PIN, combination locks) for access to buildings, sites or secure areas. | Verify through interview, a review of documents or physical inspection that this entity/facility requires biometric input, key card, PIN, combination locks, for access to buildings, sites or secure areas. | 4 = This entity utilizes personal identifying access control (i.e. biometric, key card and/or PIN). Access is deactivated upon employee separation. |
| 3 = This entity utilizes combination type locks and combinations are changed periodically and upon employee separation. | ||
| 2,1 = Personal identifying access control or combination locks are in use, but not deactivated or periodically changed. | ||
| 0 = No advanced physical control locking measures are used. | ||
| 47. Where appropriate, entrance and/or exit data to facilities and/or to secure areas can be reviewed as needed (may be written logs, PIN or biometric data, or recorded camera surveillance). | Verify through interview, a review of documents or physical inspection that this entity/facility records entrance/exit data for persons accessing restricted areas, and the data can be reviewed, if needed, either manually or electronically. | 4 = This entity captures personal identifiers (PIN, key card, biometric ID, photograph, computer log-in, or other electronic means of identifying who enters the facility or certain restricted areas) and the data can be examined if needed. |
| 3 = The entity requires the use of an entry/exit written log, time card or signature of personnel entering that is retained for review as needed. | ||
| 2,1 = Entry/Exit requirements are sporadically used or other unique variations in place. | ||
| 0 = The entity captures no info on persons entering or exiting. | ||
| 48. This entity utilizes visitor control protocols for non-employees accessing non-public areas. | Verify through interview, a review of documents or physical inspection that this entity/facility requires documented visitor control protocols for visitors/guests. | 4 = Yes, visitor positively identified, logged-in, is issued visitor badge and escorted while on premises. |
| 3 = Visitors are positively identified, but not escorted –OR– Visitors are escorted, but not positively identified. | ||
| 2, 1 = Unique variations of above. | ||
| 0 = No protocols in place. | ||
| SAI # 12 - Implement Strong Physical Security at all Locations | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *49. This entity utilizes perimeter physical security barriers (fences/gates/ planters /bollards, etc.) that restrict both unauthorized vehicle and pedestrian access. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that perimeter physical security barriers to restrict unauthorized vehicles and pedestrians are utilized. | 4 = This entity utilizes physical barriers that restrict both unauthorized vehicle and pedestrian access at all locations. |
| 3 = Entity utilized physical barriers that somewhat restrict either vehicles or pedestrians at all/most entry points. | ||
| Note: If this is a BASE conducted at the corporate office, scores should be rated as it applies to all of their facilities (not just the corporate office/facility of visit). | 2, 1 = This entity utilizes physical barriers to a varying degrees of effectiveness. | |
| 0 = No physical barriers are utilized. | ||
| *50. All perimeter physical security barriers on site are functional, used as designed, and adequately maintained to effectively restrict vehicle and/or pedestrian access. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that the physical barriers used by this entity/facility are functional, used as designed, and adequately maintained to effectively restrict vehicle and/or pedestrian access at this and/or all locations | 4 = Yes |
| 3, 2, 1 = Varying degrees of functionality. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| (if scored 0 / none in #49 - score as N/A) | ||
| 51. This entity utilizes a tamper resistent intrusion detection system(s) (burglary/robbery alarm). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity has an intrusion detection system (burglary/robbery alarm) at this and/or all locations. | 4 = Windows/doors/interior at all locations are covered and a tamper resistent system is monitored 24/7 when armed. |
| 3 = Some, but not all facilities are covered and system is monitored 24/7 when armed. | ||
| 2 = Entity only has audible alarm at all locations, not monitored. | ||
| 1 = Entity only has audible alarm at some locations, not monitored. | ||
| 0 = No intrusion detection system. | ||
| 52. This entity utilizes closed circuit television cameras (CCTV). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity/facility has closed circuit television cameras (CCTV). | 4 = Yes, at all locations |
| 2 = Yes, at some locations | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 53. The CCTV cameras present are functional and adequately monitored and/or recorded. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that the CCTV cameras used by this entity/facility are functional, used as designed, and adequately monitored. | 4 = A CCTV system is utilized at all locations and is actively monitored 24/7 and/or recorded. |
| Note: To warrant a 4 the CCTV system must cover all applicable areas. | ||
| 3 = Some, but not all locations are covered by CCTV systems and system is monitored 24/7 and/or recorded. | ||
| 2 = CCTV systems are only passively monitored. | ||
| 1 = Utilizing non functional cameras as a general deterrent. | ||
| 0 = No intrusion detection system. | ||
| 54. This entity has adequate security lighting. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity/facility has adequate security lighting at this and/or all locations. | 4 = Yes, lighting is clearly adequate. |
| 3,2,1 = Level of lighting varies. | ||
| 0 = Not adequate or none. | ||
| 55. This entity utilizes key control procedures for buildings, terminals and gates. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this facility has a key control program for buildings, terminals and gates. | 4 = Yes, an active key control program is in place and all keys are accounted. |
| 2 = An active key control program is in place, but not strictly enforced. Some keys may be unaccounted for. | ||
| 0 = No key control program is in place. | ||
| 56. This entity employs on-site security personnel. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity on-site security guards. | 4 = This entity has dedicated security personnel who are effectively deployed and equipped with firearms. |
| 3 = This entity has dedicated security personnel who are effectively deployed and not equipped with firearms. | ||
| Note: “On-site security personnel” should be someone who performs physical security functions (i.e. perimeter checks, gate guards, ID badge checks, etc.) This is in addition to the Security Coordinator/Alternate. | 2 = This entity has security personnel who are used on a part-time basis only (e.g. may visit the site randomly at unannounced intervals, may share security responsibilities with other companies in the area, may be deployed only during heightened levels of concern or for special events/occasions, has personnel who perform security duties as function secondary to their main responsibilities, or other part-time deployment pattern.) | |
| 1 = Procedures have been established with local law enforcement personnel or security contractors to quickly deploy security assets if needed. | ||
| 0 = No on-site security personnel are utilized. | ||
| 57. This entity provides a secure location for employee parking separate from visitor parking. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this facility provides a secure location for employee parking. | 4 = Yes |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 58. Clearly visible and easily understood signs are present that identify restricted or off-limit areas. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that, that clearly visible and easily understood signs are used that identify restricted or off-limit areas at this entity/facility/facility. | 4 = Yes |
| 3,2 or 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 59. Vehicle parking, stopping or standing is controlled, to the extent possible, along perimeter fencing or near restricted areas. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that vehicle parking, stopping or standing is adequately restricted, to the extent possible, in areas within or adjacent to all facilities. | 4 = Yes |
| 3,2,1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = Not restricted. | ||
| 60. This entity controls the growth of vegetation so that sight lines to vehicles, pedestrians, perimeter fences or restricted areas are unobstructed. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity adequately controls growth of vegetation so that sight lines to vehicles, pedestrians or restricted areas remain unobstructed. | 4 = Yes |
| 3,2,1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 61. This entity conducts random security checks on personnel/vehicles and/or other physical security countermeasures (i.e. random perimeter checks, breach/trespass tests, bomb threat drills, etc.). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity uses unique or random security measures that introduce unpredictability into the entity’s practices for an enhanced deterrent effect. May be spot inspections, “red alerts,” or other random/imaginative security initiatives. | 4 = Random security checks are regularly conducted by entity or outside agencies. |
| 3 = Random security checks are occasionally conducted by entity or outside agencies. | ||
| 2, 1 = Random security checks are occasionally conducted, but only on certain security countermeasures. | ||
| 0 = None are conducted. | ||
| SAI # 13 - Enhance Internal and External Cyber Security | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *62. This entity requires an employee logon and password that grants access to limited data consistent with job function. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity requires an employee logon and password that grants access to limited entity data consistent with job function. | 4 = Yes, logon required giving limited access based on job function and must be reset periodically. |
| 3= Yes, logon required giving limited access based on job function, but no password resets are required. | ||
| 2 = Yes, but logon gives unrestricted access to all employees. | ||
| 0 = No logon/password is required. | ||
| 63. This entity utilizes an Information Technology (IT) "firewall" that prevents improper IT system access to entity information from both internal and external threats. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity/ facility utilizes an IT "firewall" that prevents improper IT system access to entity information from both internal and external threats. | 4 = Yes |
| Note: Most Windows and Mac based operating systems come preloaded with a standard “firewall.” | 0 = No | |
| 64. This entity has IT security guidelines. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity has IT security guidelines. | 4 = Yes, IT security guidelines are written and fully implemented. |
| 3, 2, 1 = With varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 65. This entity identifies an IT security officer or coordinator. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity identifies an IT security officer or coordinator. | Someone with this title must be identified (may be shared title). |
| 4 = Fully implemented including this title being documented. | ||
| 3, 2, 1 = Yes, but with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = None | ||
| 66. This entity tests their IT system for vulnerabilities. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews that this entity tests its IT system for vulnerabilities. | 4 = Yes, tests are conducted regularly. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 67. This entity has off-site backup capability for data generated. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity provides off-site backup for data for this and/or all locations. | 4 = Yes |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| Vehicle Security | ||
| SAI # 14 - Develop a Robust Vehicle Security Program | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *68. The vehicles used by this entity are equipped with appropriate door/window locks and their use is required (if not prohibited by State law). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity equips vehicles with adequate door/window locks and requires their use (if not prohibited by State law). | 4 = Yes |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with unique variations | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| N/A = if prohibited by State law. | ||
| 69. This entity provides some type of supplemental equipment for securing vehicles, which may include steering wheel locks, theft alarms, "kill switches," or other devices. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity provides some type of supplemental equipment for securing vehicles (i.e.; steering wheel locks, theft alarms, "kill switches," other devices). | 4 = Yes, all vehicles have some type of supplemental securing equipment. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 70. This entity utilizes a key control program for their vehicles. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that, based on the level of risk and the assets present, this entity/facility has an adequate key control program for their vehicles. | 4 = Yes, an active key control program is in place and all keys are accounted for. |
| 2 = An active key control program is in place, but not strictly enforced. Some keys may be unaccounted for. | ||
| 0 = No key control program is in place. | ||
| 71. This entity employees technology that requires the use of key card, PIN or biometric input to enter or start vehicles. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity uses key card, PIN or biometric input to enter or start vehicles. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles have some type of key card, PIN or biometric reader to enter or start. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 72. This entity uses vehicles with panic button capability. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity equips vehicles with any type of panic button capability. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles have panic button capability. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| Motor Coach Version | Motor Coach Version | Motor Coach Version |
| 73MC. This entity uses vehicles equipped with on-board video camera(s). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity equips vehicles with any type of on-board video camera. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles have on-board video camera(s). 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. 0 = No |
| School Bus Version | School Bus Version | School Bus Version |
| 73SBThis entity uses vehicles equipped with on-board video camera(s). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity equips vehicles with any type of on-board video camera. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles have on-board video camera(s). 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. 0 = No |
| Trucking Version | Trucking Version | Trucking Version |
| 73TR. This entity uses vehicles equipped with on-board video camera(s). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity equips vehicles with any type of on-board video camera. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles have on-board video camera(s). 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. 0 = No |
| *74. This entity uses vehicles equipped with GPS or land based tracking system. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity equips vehicles with some type of GPS or land based tracking system. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles are equipped with GPS or land based tracking system. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 75. This entity prohibits unauthorized passengers in entity vehicles. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity prohibits unauthorized passengers in entity vehicles. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| 76. This entity restricts or has policies regarding overnight parking of entity vehicles at off-site locations (i.e.; residences, shopping centers, parking lots, etc.). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity prohibits the overnight, unsecured parking of entity vehicles at off-site locations (i.e.; residences, shopping centers, parking lots, etc.). | 4 = Yes |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with unique variations | ||
| 0 = No policies exist | ||
| SAI # 15 - Develop a Solid Cargo/Passenger Security Program. | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| Motor Coach Version | Motor Coach Version | Motor Coach Version |
| *77MC. This entity requires the use of adequate locks on vehicle cargo/ storage areas. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity requires the use of locks on cargo or storage doors or other openings. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 78MC. This entity equips vehicles with a safety/security barrier between the driver and passengers. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this motor coach entity equips vehicles with a safety/security barrier between the driver and passengers. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 79MC. This entity utilizes some type of cargo, baggage or passenger screening system. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity uses some type of supplemental passenger screening system on motor coaches. | 4 = Yes, the entity regularly utilizes some type of cargo, baggage or passenger screening system. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 80MC. This entity has previously participated in a DHS/TSA sponsored security assessment (CSR, BASE, etc.). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity/ facility currently participates in a DHS sponsored security inspection or certification program or receives DHS grant funds. | 4 = Yes, within least every 3 years |
| 3,2,1 = Varying degrees of implementation – state/local sponsored security assessment. | ||
| 0 = No participation | ||
| School Bus Version | School Bus Version | |
| *77SB. This entity requires the use of adequate locks on vehicle cargo/ storage areas. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity requires the use of locks on cargo or storage doors or other openings. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 78SB. N/A - This Question Intentionally left blank. | N/A - This Question Intentionally left blank | N/A - This Question Intentionally left blank. |
| 79SB. This entity or the appropriate school board requires the presence of a school official (other than driver) onboard during all extracurricular transports. | This school system requires a school official (other than driver) during all extracurricular transports (i.e. field trips, off campus sporting events, etc.) Note: A school official may be a designated employee (i.e. teacher, coach, etc.) of the school or a chaperone (i.e. parent, guardian, etc.) approved by the school. |
4 = Yes, all extracurricular transports require the presence of a school official (other than driver). |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 80SB. This entity has previously participated in a DHS/TSA sponsored security assessment (CSR, BASE, etc.). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity/ facility currently participates in a DHS sponsored security inspection or certification program or receives DHS grant funds. | 4 = Yes, within least every 3 years |
| 3,2,1 = Varying degrees of implementation – state/local sponsored security assessment. | ||
| 0 = No participation | ||
| Trucking Version | Trucking Version | |
| *77TR. This entity provides appropriate locks for vehicle cargo doors, valves, and/or hatch openings, and requires their use. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity requires the use of locks on cargo or storage doors or other openings. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 78TR. This entity provides an adequate supply of seals for vehicle cargo doors, valves, and/or hatch openings, and requires their use. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this trucking entity provides an adequate supply of appropriate seals for cargo doors. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. Or other unique variations. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 79TR. This entity provides or requires some type of supplemental trailer security measures (i.e.; kingpin locks, glad-hand locks, high-grade door locks, any type of cargo alarm system, etc.). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that supplemental trailer security measures are used for trucks. | 4 = Yes, all vehicles |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, provided for use on some vehicles, but not all. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 80TR. This entity has previously participated in a DHS/TSA sponsored security assessment or certification program (i.e. CSR, BASE, C-TPAT, CFATS, IAC/CCSF, etc.). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity/ facility currently participates in a DHS sponsored security inspection or certification program or receives DHS grant funds. | 4 = Yes, within least every 3 years |
| 3,2,1 = Varying degrees of implementation – state/local sponsored security assessment. | ||
| 0 = No participation | ||
| SAI # 16 - Plan for High Alert Level Contingencies | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *81. This entity has additional security procedures that take effect in the event of a heightened security alert status from the DHS National Terrorist Alert System (NTAS) or other government source. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity has enhanced procedures that take effect in the event of an elevated security alert status from the DHS National Terrorist Alert System (NTAS) or other government source. | 4 = Yes, written within Security Plan or security procedures. |
| 3 = Has procedures, but they are not documented. | ||
| 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 82. This entity monitors news or other media sources for the most current security threat information. | Determine through a review of documents, interviews or physical inspection if this facility monitors TV news, newspapers, homeland security website, or other media sources every day for security threat information. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| *83. This entity distributes relevant or evolving threat information to affected entity personnel as needed. | Determine if and how this entity distributes relevant or evolving threat information to affected entity personnel. | 4 = Yes |
| 3, 2, 1 = Yes, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 84. Administrative or security personnel at this entity have been granted access to the unclassified intelligence based internet site HSIN (Homeland Security Information Network), and they regularly review current intelligence information relating to their industry. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity has personnel who have been granted access to HSIN. | 4 = Yes, they have access and regularly review |
| 3, 2, 1 = Yes, some employees have access, but intelligence information is not regularly reviewed. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 85. Administrative or security personnel at this entity/facility regularly check the status of the DHS sponsored National Terrorism Alert System (NTAS) or have enrolled to receive automatic electronic NTAS alert updates at www.dhs.gov/alerts. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity has personnel who regularly access the DHS NTSA site. | 4 = Yes, They have access and regularly reviewed 3, 2, 1 = Yes, some, but not all employees have access and may not be regularly checked. |
| 0 = No | ||
| SAI # 17 - Conduct Regular Security Inspections | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *86. In addition to any pre-trip safety inspection conducted, this entity requires a pre-trip vehicle security inspection. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity, in addition to any pre-trip safety inspection conducted, requires a pre-trip vehicle security inspection. | 4 = Yes, procedures are written, fully implemented, and security inspections are documented (i.e. security inspection checklists). |
| 3 = Procedures are written and fully implemented, but no documentation is completed upon inspection. | ||
| Note: This is in addition to DOT safety requirements. | 2 = Unwritten procedures are in place. | |
| 1 = Inspections are occasionally conducted. | ||
| 0 = No pre-trip security inspections are conducted | ||
| 87. This entity requires a post-trip vehicle security inspection. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity requires a post-trip vehicle security inspection. | 4 = Yes, procedures are written, fully implemented, and security inspections are documented (i.e. security inspection checklists). |
| 3 = Procedures are written and fully implemented, but no documentation is completed upon inspection. | ||
| Note: This is in addition to DOT safety requirements. | 2 = Unwritten procedures are in place. | |
| 1 = Inspections are occasionally conducted. | ||
| 0 = No pre-trip security inspections are conducted | ||
| 88. This entity requires additional vehicle security inspections at any other times (vehicle left unattended, driver change, etc.). | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this entity requires additional vehicle security inspections at any other times (vehicle left unattended, driver change, etc.). | 4 = Yes, every time the vehicle is left unattended, driver change, etc. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| Motor Coach Version | Motor Coach Version | Motor Coach Version |
| 89MC. This entity requires a "passenger count" or ticket re-verification be taken any time passengers are allowed to exit and re-enter the bus. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this Motor Coach entity requires a "passenger count" or ticket re-verification be taken any time passengers are allowed to exit and re-enter the bus. | 4 = Yes, written policy in place and fully implemented |
| 0 = No | ||
| School Bus Version | School Bus Version | School Bus Version |
| 89SB. This entity requires a "passenger count" be taken any time passengers are allowed to exit and re-enter the bus. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this School Bus entity requires a "passenger count" or ticket re-verification be taken any time passengers are allowed to exit and re-enter the bus. | 4 = Yes, written policy in place and fully implemented |
| 0 = No | ||
| Trucking Version | Trucking Version | Trucking Version |
| 89TR. This entity requires drivers to verify (to the extent possible) that the materials being shipped match the trip manifest/shipping papers. | Verify through a review of documents, interviews, or physical inspection that this trucking entity requires drivers to verify (to the extent possible) that the materials being shipped match the trip manifest/shipping papers. | 4 = Yes, written policy in place and fully implemented |
| 0 = No | ||
| SAI # 18 - Have Procedures for Reporting Suspicious Activities | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *90. This entity has participated in or received some type of domain awareness/counterterrorism training (First Observer™ or equivalent). | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity has participated in or received some type of domain awareness/counterterrorism training (First Observer™ or equivalent). | 4 = Yes, all employees receive domain awareness training and employees receive some type of re-training at least every three years. |
| 3, 2, 1 = Yes, but with varying degrees of implementation | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| *91. This entity has policies requiring employees to report security related “suspicious activities” to management and/or law enforcement. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity has policies requiring employees to report suspicious activities to management and/or law enforcement. | 4 = Yes, written policies are in place and fully implemented. |
| 3 = Policies are in place, but are unwritten. | ||
| 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 92. This entity has notification procedures (who to call, when to call, etc.) for all personnel upon observing suspicious activity. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity has written notification procedures (who to call, when to call, etc.) for all personnel upon observing suspicious activity. | 4 = Yes, written policies are in place and fully implemented. |
| 3 = Policies are in place, but are unwritten. | ||
| 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 1 = No | ||
| 93. This entity has policies requiring a written report be filed for suspicious activities observed. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity requires a report be filed for suspicious activities observed. | 4 = Yes, written policies are in place and fully implemented. |
| 3 = Policies are in place, but are unwritten. | ||
| 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| SAI # 19 - Ensure Chain of Custody & Shipment/ Service Verification | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| Motor Coach Version | Motor Coach Version | Motor Coach Version |
| *94MC. This entity requires confirmation of arrival upon reaching final destination. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity requires confirmation upon arrival at final destination. | 4 = Yes, affirmative telephone/radio response, beyond location information from GPS |
| 0 = No | ||
| 95MC. This entity prohibits the use of alternate drivers without specific entity authorization. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this motor coach entity requires confirmation shipment or arrival of passengers at final destination. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| 96MC. This question is intentionally left blank. N/A | This question is intentionally left blank. N/A | This question is intentionally left blank. N/A |
| School Bus Version | School Bus Version | School Bus Version |
| *94SB. This entity requires confirmation upon arrival at final non-school destinations (final drop-offs, field trips, extracurricular activities, etc.) | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity requires confirmation upon arrival at final non-school destination. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| 95SB. This entity prohibits the use of alternate drivers without specific entity authorization. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this school bus entity requires confirmation shipment or arrival of passengers at final destination. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| 96SB. This question is intentionally left blank. N/A | This question is intentionally left blank. N/A | This question is intentionally left blank. N/A |
| Trucking Version | Trucking Version | Trucking Version |
| *94TR. This entity requires confirmation of shipment delivery upon arrival. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity requires confirmation upon arrival at final destination. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| 95TR. This entity requires that shipments not be subcontracted or turned over to another driver without specific entity authorization. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this trucking entity does not allow shipments to be subcontracted or turned over to another driver without specific entity authorization. | 4 = Yes |
| 0 = No | ||
| 96TR. This entity requires advance notice to the consignee or point of destination regarding anticipated delivery information. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity requires confirmation upon arrival at final destination. | 4 = Yes, written policies are in place and fully implemented. 3 = Policies are in place, but are unwritten. |
| 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. | ||
| 0 = No | ||
| 97. This entity requires specific security protocols be followed in the event a trip must be delayed, discontinued, requires multiple days to complete or exceeds hours-of-service regulations. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity requires specific security protocols be followed in the event a trip must be delayed, discontinued, requires multiple days to complete or exceeds hours-of-service regulations. Note: These are separate from safety procedures. Example – Where and how do they secure vehicles when they have to be parked overnight. | 4 = Yes, written policies are in place and fully implemented. 3 = Policies are in place, but are unwritten. 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. 0 = No |
| SAI # 20 - Pre-plan Emergency Travel Routes. | Review Steps | Scoring Criteria |
| *98. This entity prohibits drivers from diverting from authorized routes, making unauthorized pickups or stopping at unauthorized locations without justification. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity/ facility prohibits drivers from diverting from the scheduled route and stopping at unauthorized locations. | 4 = Yes, written policies are in place and fully implemented. 3 = Policies are in place, but are unwritten. 2, 1 = Partially, with varying degrees of implementation. 0 = No |
| 99. This entity has identified alternate routes in the event primary routes cannot be used under certain security related emergencies. | Verify through a review of documents or interviews that this entity has identified alternate routes drivers can use in the event of a security related emergency. | 4 = Alternate routes are established and in writing or dispatch can readily provide alternate routes to drivers. |
| 0 = No | ||
Sheet 3: Profile
Sheet 4: Checklist
Sheet 5: Additional Information
Sheet 6: SP Addendum
| 0 | |||||
| Date: | 12/30/1899 | ||||
| Smart Security Practice Addendums (SP) | |||||
| Instructions: For each item identified as a possible "Smart Practice", copy the cells in columns A thru E from the referenced line item in the Checklist into the "Reference" line below, then provide a description of the program or practice. | |||||
| Item | Description | N/A | Score | SP | |
| Smart Security Practice Description: | |||||
| Item | Description | N/A | Score | SP | |
| Smart Security Practice Description: | |||||
| File Type | application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet |
| File Modified | 0000-00-00 |
| File Created | 0000-00-00 |
© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy