ELECTRONIC ACCESSAND ELECTRONIC ECURITY …cfo.ufl.edu/.../ElectronicSecurityPresentation130219.pdf · central enterprise-wide electronic access control and electronic access security

ELECTRONIC ACCESS AND ELECTRONIC SECURITY

BUDGET PRESENTATION

University of Florida

Physical Plant Division

February 19th, 2013

AGENDA

� Overview

� Strategic Value

� Complexity of Management

� Governance & Staffing Plan

� Funding

� Initiatives for Future Consideration

� Conclusion

OVERVIEW

OVERVIEW

� Lenel OnGuard system established in 2004 as the University’s central enterprise-wide electronic access control and electronic access security standard.

� Electronic Access Control� Card access

� Biometrics

� Keypad

� Access logging

� Electronic Security� Video surveillance

� Intrusion detection

� Panic alarms

� Alarm monitoring

REASONS FOR STANDARDIZATION

� Lack of standards

� Implementations not in good order

� Lack of consistent administration

� Need for compliance with federal security regulations

� Improve system redundancy and dependability

� No defined roles, responsibility, and accountability

� No formal procedures and training

� Decentralized or no monitoring

� Improve cost

STRATEGIC VALUE

STRATEGIC VALUE

Before After

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

� Standards

� Design and construction standards

� Hardware standards

� Vendor qualifications

� High-security installation protocols

� ADA door integrations

� On-campus vendor registration

� Access Data

� UFID Gator 1 card and Shands ID cards differentiated

� Master access to UFPD officers

� Real-time cardholder integration

� Departmentally specified access control logic, badge activation/deactivation

� Semester bulk access level updates to local administrators

ACCOMPLISHMENTS (CONT.)

� Hardware

� Remote desktop server access to local administrators

� High availability server with internal redundancy

� System controllers located in secure rooms

� Controllers on PPD automation VLAN

� ACL-level network security system wide

� Platform independent video recording devices

� Monitor and Notification

� Alarms and video available to UFPD

� Electronic hardware malfunctions

� Power supply failure

ACCOMPLISHMENTS (CONT.)

� Administration

� Registration and training for local administrators

� End user contracts

� Alarm monitoring agreements

� Multiple occupancy agreements

� Purchasing review

RISKS

� Personal safety

� Loss of research capability

� Fines for non compliance

� Potential liability lawsuits

� Loss of assets

� Inability to restrict sensitive information and space

� Lack of accountability

� Unfocused expense

REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

� Designation of a security officer

� Establish a security subject matter expert team

� Develop and implement a written security plan

� Requirements for a robust IT and security management system

� Intrusion detection system unless physically occupied

� Redundant systems / security maintained in power failure

� Minimum of 3 security barriers

� One barrier monitored for circumvention of established control measures at all times in all conditions

� Security force response in 15 minutes or barriers sufficient to delay until response

REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS (CONT.)

COMPLEXITY OF MANAGEMENT

BUILDING STATISTICS

COVERAGE BY TYPE OF SPACE

COMPLEXITY OF MANAGEMENT

� Currently the Lenel system has connectivity to:

� 91 Buildings in Alachua, Marion and Orange counties

� 1,253 internal and external doors

� 17 vehicular or pedestrian gates

� 36 elevators

� Covers 30,548 access control cardholders

� 97 User Segments (control panels)

� 15 intrusion detection devices

� 509 video surveillance cameras in or around 26 buildings

� 73 panic devices monitored by UFPD

� 10 thick client stations for security guards and UFPD Dispatch

� 4 Motor Pool gas pumps

� We support card readers, key pads, hand geometry and iris scanner

technology along with 8 different types of cards

SERVICES

� New and existing building installation construction design

� New and existing building construction management

� Transitioning of existing systems

� Policy and standards – Design, Maintenance, Compliance Monitoring

� Design and development

� Purchasing review and quote development

� Customer maintenance

� Customer support

� End user training

� Database administration

� Vendor qualification and management

� Process improvement

� New technology evaluation

INTERFACES

CHALLENGES

� Responding to requests rather than executing a Master Plan (exception new and renovated space)

� No established criteria for valuing request for installations

� No dedicated security counterpart in Central IT organizations

� Providing a full array of services but not

meeting our own or customer’s expectations

� Delays in response to customers

� No capability for immediate telephone support

� Areas wanting to transition have long waits

� No robust plan for 365/7/24 service

� Current staff dedicate a very large amount of personal time to meet the needs of the University but not enough hours in the day to keep up with increasing need

GOVERNANCE & STAFFING PLAN

GOVERNANCE & STAFFING PLAN

FUNDING

BUDGET

Lenel Budget Flat 2014

Optimal

2014 2015 2016 2017

PPD Salary 164,957 516,197 516,197 660,130 660,130

PPD Expenses 21,752 176,026 207,931 118,358 110,786

PPD Total 186,709 692,223 724,128 778,488 770,916

UF Salary 285,340 285,340 285,340 285,340

UF Expense Not Defined Not Defined Not Defined Not Defined

Total w/UF

Salary 186,709 977,563 1,009,468 1,063,828 1,056,256

BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS

� Staffing Levels to bring current operations up to standards and growth consistent with historical rate.

� Does not include other UF units’ baseline budget or projections for security.

� Operation budget for replacement parts for panels, readers, keypads, Lenel intrusion devices, ADA and electrified door hardware, and gate hardware. Growth consistent with historical rate.

� Video, biometric devices, panic alarms and other specialized equipment not included in central budget.

� Capacity upgrade in 2015 to NEC redundant servers and NEC cluster software.

� No new installation cost included.

� No cost for future master plan initiatives.

INITIATIVES FOR FUTURE

CONSIDERATION

INITIATIVES FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION

� Add video surveillance on campus emergency blue light phones and in high-crime areas or “high-priority” areas

� Provide UFPD with a hardened facility and improve UFPD Dispatch Center

� Implement campus-wide video analytics system and monitoring service

� Implement access control on building envelopes of all classroom buildings, dining halls, admin buildings and other areas open/closed on a daily basis

INITIATIVES FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION (CONT.)

� Encourage campus-wide standardization of intrusion

detection systems

� Install video surveillance and panic buttons in high-level

administrative offices

� Change Gator 1 Cards from magnetic stripe to smart

cards

CONCLUSION

RESEARCH SOURCES

� National Association of College and University Business Officers’ (NACUBO) National Campus Safety and Security Project Survey

� Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

� University of Pennsylvania

� University of California at Berkeley

� Cleveland State University

� University of North Texas

� University of Maryland at College Park

� University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

� University of Glasgow

� Lenel

� Designed Security Inc.

� The Chronicle of Higher Education

� Campus Safety Magazine

� CSO Online Security and Risk Magazine

� American Association for the Advancement of Science News

� Education Portal.com

LENEL EXPERTSPATRICIA ZABRISKIE – ITS MANAGER

JAMIE SERRATO – SYSTEM ENGINEER

QUESTIONS?

PPD LENEL MANAGER

� Directs and advises the University in electronic access

control and security system matters

� Develops, recommends and implements policies and

construction standards

� Responsible over all activities related to PPD Lenel IT

Unit

� Project management for new construction, existing

security system transitions and major security IT system

improvements and upgrades

� Maintain proper service capacity meeting customer

needs and following industry best practices

� Serve as a member of the Security Council

PPD SYSTEM ENGINEERS

� Responsible for system configuration, performance, data structure and integrity

� Develop plans and strategies to provide the most secure, functional and accessible electronic security system to end users

� Demonstrate technical leadership, embrace collaborative solutions, recommend prudent software and hardware upgrades to provide the required level of services

� Interact technically with network support staff, application vendors, security hardware technicians and local administrators

� Responsible for the implementation of new and transitioned electronic security systems and troubleshooting system issues.

PPD LENEL DATABASE ADMINISTRATOR

� Responsible for the system maintenance of the

application and underlying database platform

� Interacts with the primary campus end users

� Until there is a need for two database administrators or

more there needs to be a primary and a designated back

up

PPD ELECTRONIC TECHNICIANS

� Responsible for the repair, maintenance and

troubleshooting for:

� Campus Lenel electronic access control components

� Wiring

� Power supplies

� Automatic door operators

� Electrified door hardware

PPD APPLICATION SUPPORT

� System administration

� Maintains end user information

� Provides end user support

� Maintains internal PPD documentation

� Purchasing and inventory control