George Mason University Center for Infrastructure Protection and Homeland Security

1. George Mason UniversityCenter for Infrastructure Protection and Homeland Security Infrastructure Protection Higher Education Programs 7th Annual International Association for Intelligence Education (IAFIE) Conference June 8, 2011

2. CIP/HS Overview • Established at the Mason School of Law in May 2002 • Integrates the disciplines of law, policy, and technology in order to conduct comprehensive infrastructure protection analysis and research relevant to improving United States and international security • Publish the monthly newsletter, The CIP Report, which highlights key infrastructure protection issues • 15 full time employees supplemented by over 50 subject matter experts

3. Overview • Support the U.S. Department of Homeland Security through the development of critical infrastructure courses and programs that will become part of a comprehensive, unified approach to homeland security education. • The critical infrastructure higher education initiative includes: • Assessment • Curricula Development • Deployment

4. Overview • Courses and other materials will be made available and shared with colleges and universities to provide a consistent foundation for critical infrastructure education programs. • The long-term objective is to foster critical infrastructure education programs that produce and sustain the leaders and workforce required for government and the private sector to effectively achieve this Nation’s critical infrastructure mission.

5. Execution • Year 1: Create seven graduate courses in critical infrastructure protection – electives for Schools of Business, Public Policy, Engineering, Public Heath, and Government • Year 2: Create and modify courses for a critical infrastructure protection concentration in an executive master’s and a graduate/professional certificate program • Long Term: Obtain funding to develop and deploy an executive master’s program, a graduate and/or professional certificate program, and a master’s degree program

6. Base Year • Base Year : June 1, 2010 to May 31, 2011 • Assessment (4 months): Completed September 30, 2010 • Higher Education Assessment Final Report • Curricula Development (8 months) • Subject matter experts • Roundtables • Seven graduate courses

7. Assessment • Searched a total of 785 U.S. institutions for courses, concentrations/minors, degree programs, and training programs in critical infrastructure protection. • Sources searched: • The Center for Homeland Defense and Security at the Naval Postgraduate School • The Federal Emergency Management Agency Emergency Management Institute • A random sampling of other accredited institutions (525 institutions)

8. Results • The team found the following: • 69courses provide significant instruction in critical infrastructure protection (some courses were no longer taught and some courses were the same course at different universities, etc.) • 2 new degree programs at the same university are offered (a third degree program is temporarily on hiatus) • 1 training program • 1 concentration (may no longer be offered)

9. Results • Academic Fields: The courses collected were separated (subjectively) into academic fields: • Homeland Security; • Emergency/Disaster Management; • Criminal Justice; • Public Policy/Administration; • Public Safety; • Engineering; • Government/National Security; • Business Administration; • Urban Planning and Design • Leadership

10. Key Findings • Needs Assessment: Critical infrastructure protection courses exist but there is no cohesion in the development and there are challenges in execution: • Offered only on demand • Being modified • No longer taught or are on hiatus • Taught through a consortium

11. Key Findings • Core Competencies: Some of the core competencies are being addressed, but not identified as a professional competency area • Risk Analysis • Protective Measures/Mitigation Strategies Development • Technical and Tactical Expertise (Sector-Specific) • Partnership Building/Networking • Metrics and Program Evaluation • Information Collection and Reporting (Information Sharing) • Program Management

12. Key Findings • Best Practices: Not always evident in the course syllabi • Clearly stated objectives • Clear expectations • Learner Centered Principles • Critical Thinking/Reflective Thinking • Rationale for course content listed in the syllabus • Authentic, real-world assessments and rubrics • Use of technology • Reflective practices • Use of different instructional modalities • Flexible grouping practices and cooperative learning

13. Recommendations Develop career paths in critical infrastructure protection Guidance required on course content in critical infrastructure programs Critical infrastructure core competencies need continuous validation Implement higher education best practices

14. Assemble SMEs Armstrong Atlantic State University CENTRA Technology Dutko Worldwide George Mason University (Education Department) InfraGard MITRE National Security Professional Development Integration Office Naval Postgraduate School Office of the Secretary of Defense Pennsylvania State University Security Analysis and Risk Management Association (SARMA) Stockholm University Tougaloo College National Transportation Security Center of Excellence (NTSCOE) University of New Haven University of Virginia U.S. Department of Homeland Security (former) Westfield State University

15. First Roundtable • October 2010 • Small groups of topical subject matter experts • Reviewed, critiqued, and advised on the assessment and the development of new critical infrastructure protection graduate courses • Result: Identification of seven graduate courses in critical infrastructure protection

16. First Roundtable • Introduction to Critical Infrastructure Protection and Resilience • Critical Infrastructure Protection and Information Sharing • Critical Infrastructure Protection and Risk Management • Critical Infrastructure Protection Systems Analysis • Critical Infrastructure Protection Methods, Policies, and Strategies • Critical Infrastructure Protection: The Cyber Dimension • Critical Infrastructure Protection Capstone

17. Week 1 Lesson Goals – Intro Course • Lesson 1 Topic: Introduction to Critical Infrastructure Protection and Resilience • Lesson Goals/Objectives: • Become familiar with the scope of course, administrative requirements, instructional methodology, evaluation criteria and feedback processes • Understand the evolution of critical infrastructure protection and resilience as a national policy focus area • Become familiar with the various statutes and Presidential policy documents governing the application of critical infrastructure protection and resilience in the U.S. • Understand how critical infrastructure protection and resilience policy has changed as a function of the all-hazards risk environment, including specific threats and hazards • Understand why the definition of critical infrastructure and the scope of the critical infrastructure protection and resilience Sector construct have changed over time • Understand the general critical infrastructure operational landscape across the sectors and the U.S. regionally

18. Week 1 Discussion Topics – Intro Course • Discussion Topics: • What are critical infrastructures and why are they important to us? • Why does critical infrastructure protection and resilience represent such a challenge? • How has the critical infrastructure protection and resilience mission changed over time from a historical perspective? • What are the general principles we typically associate with critical infrastructure protection and resilience in the U.S. context? • How has the Nation’s approach to critical infrastructure protection and resilience changed over time with regard to certain threats/hazards? • How would you characterize critical infrastructure protection and resilience as a policy area prior to the Clinton Administration? • What are the differences between and what are the strengths and weaknesses of the various Presidential policies focused on critical infrastructure protection and resilience over the last 15 years? • How does the United States Congress view the critical infrastructure protection and resilience mission area? • Does legislation clarify or complicate the critical infrastructure protection and resilience mission space? • Where should the next Administration/Congress take the critical infrastructure protection and resilience mission area?

19. Exercise – Intro Course • Module 1: Pre-Incident • 1. Scenario Build • A new Al Qaeda video is released on several Arabic internet sites focused on attacks targeting European and American interests worldwide, with a particular emphasis on transportation, commercial facilities and sports venues, religious worship sites, iconic symbols, systems, and government centers. The video describes “striking the infidels where they are most vulnerable.” • There is only a brief mention of the video in daily news reporting, and the general public is unaware of any threat. • Officials in the UK apprehend a person described as being an “Operational Chief to multiple terrorist cells worldwide.” The man’s name is withheld, but he provides information describing future attacks within Europe (timing unspecified) and admits to planning a failed attack in Rome late last year. • Extremist group Internet “chatter” and Jihadi website activity are on the increase, with focused pronouncements of violent intent with near-term implications. The number of websites featuring home bomb-making instructions has proliferated greatly in recent months. • 2. One Month Later…

20. Second Roundtable • February 2011 • Small groups of subject matter experts (non-Federal and Federal) • Discussed the issues emerging from the syllabi reviews (case studies, international, deployment, etc.) • Discussed, evaluated, and strategized about the development of an executive master’s degree, a graduate and/or professional certificate, and a master’s degree in critical infrastructure protection • Discussed outreach strategies/opportunities

21. Outreach • June 1, 2011, -- seven courses ready for deployment • Outreach: • Conferences • Newsletters and journals • Academic collaboration • Practitioner collaboration

22. Option Year • The option year extends from June 1, 2011 to May 31, 2012 • The option year includes the following tasks: • Develop five certificate courses (adapt base year curricula) • Modify an executive master’s degree to provide a concentration in critical infrastructure protection • Evaluate all tasks under the project, with near- and long-term recommendations for improving critical infrastructure protection education, training, and professional development

23. Long-Term Goals • Reading list and “library” of case studies • International assessment • Accreditation and revisions • Deployment and instruction • Update Critical Path: A Brief History of Critical Infrastructure Protection in the United States (2006)

24. Contact Information Devon Kathleen Hardy Center for Infrastructure Protection and Homeland Security (CIP/HS) George Mason University, School of Law 3301 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 1G7 Arlington, VA 22201 Phone: 703-993-8591 Email: dhardy1@gmu.edu Website: http://cip.gmu.edu/