Hospitals and other medical care facilities present unique challenges to the security professional.

In August 2010, the International Association for Healthcare Security & Safety (IAHSS) published a survey of healthcare security executives which revealed an increase in violent crimes within the reporting hospitals.

The problem is ageless – you want outstanding security to protect your organization’s assets, but where does the money come from? CSOs across the globe have to petition their CFOs and other C-suite executives for appropriate funding to meet compliance requirements, keep software up to date and, generally, keep the right doors closed.

London police lost a set of keys at an Olympic venue last week.

Many institutions have been haunted by the memories of disastrous shootings and tragedies where, among other things, access control went wrong: Columbine, Virginia Tech, the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire.

Using metrics provides a quantifiable way to measure the effectiveness of security programs and processes. As the popularity of metrics has increased over the past few years so has the number and type of metrics that are used to evaluate efficiencies. However, without proper vetting, metrics may not effectively evaluate the process or program that is being measured.

I was searching my email outbox archives the other day and I ran across a column that I’d written a few years ago about the use of video and integrated security systems. I was adamant that a camera be ruled out for an access control solution versus considering it as an optional feature. I still maintain that assertion. I’m not saying that every door should have a camera – every door should be considered for one – as an integrated component of your access control system.

Major sporting events, like the World Series or the Super Bowl, are no longer just athletic contests – they are the new “destination vacations” and, for global events like the Olympics or the World Cup, sources of national prestige and economic drivers.