Security Survey Results Summary Parent Council - R.Tait McKenzie Public School 2010-2011 School Year In an effort to get a sense of what parents currently think about security at the school, 400 surveys were distributed to R.Tait families and almost 20% of you responded. The questionnaire asked your opinion about the school s current practices (arrival, dismissal, entrances, grounds and attendance) and gave you a chance to make comments and suggestions. The information from this survey will be used to help guide the Parent Council, working co-operatively with the Principal and Vice Principal, to improve safety at the school. Generally, in each category, families were satisfied with the current practices. Parents were most satisfied with the current arrival, dismissal and attendance practices, and were least satisfied with the main entrance. The following is a summary of your responses, opinions and comments. Some surveys included questions which have been addressed at the end of this summary. ARRIVAL Currently, yard duty supervision begins at 8:45am. Parents drop students off in the drop-off loop at the North end of the school, or students arrive by bus and proceed to the back of the school to ensure supervision. 75% of families who responded indicated that they were very satisfied or satisfied with the current arrival practices at the school. 13% felt dissatisfied and 10% had no opinion. There were 20 comments made about the arrival process, these focused on the following general areas: Traffic The Traffic Circle drop off loop is too congested. Supervision Yard supervision should start earlier (8:30am) and there should be more supervision generally and specifically around the drop-off area, the gate to the JK/SK yard and/or in the yard. Safety A few parents expressed concern with the safety of students at the North end of the school because it is a very busy area in the mornings (kids filing by from buses and parents dropping off at the Traffic Circle). There is no fence or separation between the cars dropping off kids and the bussed kids walking by. 2010-2011 Security Survey Summary Page 1
ATTENDANCE Currently, every child is accounted for through twice daily attendance. 79% of families who responded were very satisfied or satisfied with the current attendance practices. 13% were dissatisfied and 9% were neutral. There were several written comments praising the front office staff regarding attendance, for example it was appreciated that Mrs. Lotan calls when a child is absent without notification from parents. But a few people commented that they had not been called. One suggestion was to have Kindergarten kids accounted for each time they move to a new location. MAIN ENTRANCE Currently, doors are unlocked throughout the day and ALL visitors must report to the office as per School Board policy. There is an easel in the Main Foyer and signs on the front door directing visitors to report to the main office to sign in and get a Visitor Badge to proceed further into the school. People in the school without these badges are required to return to the office to sign in and get one. The Main Entrance doors are not visible from the office but the Main Foyer is. 52% of those who responded were very satisfied or satisfied with the current security at the Main Entrance and 35% were dissatisfied. 13% were neutral. This was the question with the lowest percentage of satisfied parents and highest percentage of dissatisfied parents. Correspondingly to this level of satisfaction/dissatisfaction, there were 37 comments, often detailed and offering suggestions. They can be categorized as follows: Visibility Almost all of the comments expressed concern that the front doors are not visible to the Main Office staff. Several of these indicated that it is easy to turn right and therefore enter without being seen. Many of you who commented suggested installing security cameras at the doors and/or a buzzer system that notifies office staff of someone entering the building, with the buzzer option as a minimum and cameras as the most effective solution. A few people suggested renovations to make a window from the Main Office onto the front doors for example replacing the display case (on the left upon entering) by a window was a popular idea. Locking doors Several comments were supportive of keeping doors locked and allowing office staff to buzz people in, using one of the suggestions above (a camera or buzzer notifying office staff that someone wants admittance). One person suggested a security guard. A few respondents felt that locking the doors is not desirable. Visitor Badges Many comments were supportive of the current security protocol, including the requirement to sign in and wear a Visitor Badge, and felt that these are more enforced this year. However, it was also expressed that this practice relies on the honor-system and is only effective if someone is regularly patrolling the corridors. Anyone familiar with the school knows that you 2010-2011 Security Survey Summary Page 2
can proceed around the entire school without being noticed, and can access students in the hallways and washrooms. OTHER ENTRANCES (excluding the front doors) Currently, the other school entrances are locked during instructional times with the exception of the South end door which is used by students entering from portables to use the washrooms etc. 72% of families who responded were satisfied or very satisfied with the current security of the other school doors. Only 18% were dissatisfied and 10% were neutral. Comments were similar to those regarding the Main Entrance and suggested that there be cameras at all the school entrances. Respondents were uncomfortable that there was another vulnerable area around the South end door. It is understood that students need access to the South end door but suggest a video camera there to monitor traffic at the door, or perhaps use of keys or electronic key passes in portables that students can use to unlock the door when they need to come in. SCHOOL GROUNDS Currently, there is a boundary fence along a portion of the school yard. Recesses are supervised by a minimum of 4 staff persons with additional staff on duty when available (i.e. co-op students, administration) 65% of parents who responded were satisfied or very satisfied with security outside on school grounds. 15% were dissatisfied and 19% were neutral. The 29 comments in this section can be grouped into 3 categories: the fence around the school, the number of staff supervising students outside, and issues specific to the kindergarten yard. There were several important comments about bullying that go beyond the purview of this survey and the School Council. These comments have been compiled and brought to the attention of Principal Fournier. Fence Most of the comments were critical of the current lack of adequate fencing. Parents who commented about the fence felt the school yard was too open to strangers, especially from the back street and through the wooded area. They would prefer to see an uninterrupted fence around the whole school yard for several reasons: to keep out intruders and animals who may pose a threat or leave behind unwanted gifts ; to keep students from going into the shrub area, etc. There should be gates that lock if any uninterrupted fence is built. Staff Supervision Several parents commented that the current staff to student ratio on school grounds is low, especially if the current ratio includes the kindergarten yard, and that there have been incidents that monitors haven t seen or haven t reported. More supervision is preferred and one parent suggested that perhaps school yard supervision can be supplemented by parent volunteers if at all possible. One parent was impressed that the Principal and/or Vice Principal are often seen in the yard and hallways. JK/SK Yard 2010-2011 Security Survey Summary Page 3
Several comments pertained specifically to the kindergarten yard. The JK/SK yard opens to the drop-off loop and car park and this could be dangerous. Also, there should be more of an enclosed JK/SK area to ensure easier supervision. Other Areas of Concern There were individual comments about segregating students so that grades 4 and up were separate from the younger kids. Another was for older grades (7 and 8) to participate in some of the patrolling during outside breaks. Also, one person commented that the kindergarten play structure isn t fun to play on. DISMISSAL Currently, parents are asked to pick up students in the North parking lot (near the Kindergarten rooms). Walkers are dismissed at the same time as bus students and cross the driveway via the crosswalk in front of the Main Doors. Kindergarten to Grade 3 teachers ensure the safe delivery of students onto their correct buses. 84% of parents who responded were satisfied or very satisfied with the current dismissal processes. Only 9% were dissatisfied and 5% were neutral. This was the highest percentage of positive responses in the survey. Satisfaction In general there was support for the current policies and practices. Some people may be able to identify situations where these don t work but overall there is balance between reasonable safety and functionality. There is appreciation of staff and teachers to make sure parents are there before letting walkers go and getting primary kids to where they need to be. Traffic Circle Once again, the Traffic Circle/Drop-off loop was a concern. It is very busy at dismissal and there is a lot of traffic. It would be nice to have preference for parents with infants/toddlers to park here. Also there was concern for the number of parents who park in the lane between the Traffic Circle and the parking lot, making it difficult and dangerous to get by them. Other Areas of Concern Due to the congestion at dismissal, a few suggestions were made to help with student safety. Staggered dismissal times would keep walkers out of the way of the bus traffic in the front of the school. Another suggestion was for walkers to leave through the North door instead of the front door. Also, related to the issue of visitors signing in etc above, there are a lot of Visitors /parents coming in at dismissal without going to the office and signing in first. One commenter felt that the dismissal procedures seemed unorganized and changed often. Finally, one commenter suggested that the teachers/staff should be reassured to go with their intuition and double check with parents before they let a child go with someone other than the usual parent, especially if the teacher/staff did not get the note and/or hesitates. 2010-2011 Security Survey Summary Page 4
CONCLUSIONS In general, of the almost 20% of parents/families who responded to the Security Survey, responses were favorable to the current security policies and practices at the school. The main areas of concern that elicited a lot of similar comments were: Problems associated with the Traffic Circle at the North end drop off/pick up loop (congestion of students, safety, vehicle traffic) The need for better visibility of the Main Entrance and South door to portables by office staff Security cameras and/or a buzzer system for entrance, especially at the Main Entrance An uninterrupted fence around the school yard and more outdoor supervision generally This table shows the number of responses to how satisfied parents are to the current practices of each of the 6 areas covered in the survey. The percentage of the total responses for each response is also shown. Survey Scale Arrival Attendance Main Entrance Other Entrances Grounds Dismissal Very Satisfied 44 or 56% 56 or 71% 27 or 34% 43 or 54% 29 or 37% 49 or 62% Satisfied 15 or 19% 6 or 8% 14 or 18% 14 or 18% 22 or 28% 17 or 22% Neutral 8 or 10% 7 or 9% 10 or 13% 8 or 10% 15 or 19% 4 or 5% Dissatisfied 8 or 10% 8 or 10% 16 or 20% 10 or 13% 9 or 11% 5 or 6% Very Dissatisfied 2 or 3% 2 or 3% 12 or 15% 4 or 5% 3 or 4% 2 or 3% No answer 2 or 3% - - - - 2 or 3% 400 surveys, 79 were returned (19.5%) 2010-2011 Security Survey Summary Page 5
2010-2011 Security Survey Summary Page 6