Spend more than a few minutes in the executive protection profession and it will become obvious that two of the major components of any protective visit is Logistics and Ground Transportation. By major, we mean, where some of the “greatest” challenges in terms of executive protection are likely to be encountered. After all, the old tongue-in-cheek cliché about “getting there” being ‘half the fun” came from somewhere, right? It’s not because getting there was all that much fun, but because it was more like the trip depicted in the comedy movie Planes, Trains & Automobiles. Because of the limited availability of time and resource most protective details are challenged with, one of the most critical aspects of logistics, providing safe and secure ground transportation, is often contracted to local service providers.
In many places this is practical – think of Washington, DC, with its one-way streets where traffic flows are reversed during certain times of the day. Or in Boston, MA with a street grid that was obviously given seconds, if not whole minutes, of serious thought before the urban planners of their day were cut loose with their axes and saws to clear paths for new roads. For many in this profession, working with contracted security drivers is the norm, particularly when a protectee is traveling beyond their local commuting area, or the organization has no dedicated resources in the region being visited.
So, adding “managing people that don’t work directly for you”, as well as “working with a vendor sporadically or infrequently” to the list of logistical challenges protection practitioners and managers face on a regular basis creates additional work. With that in mind, planning and managing a successful trip requires an understanding of the threats, vulnerabilities and risks associated with your transportation needs, to include small details that must be mitigated when it comes to getting the protectee from Point A to Point B safely.
Generally speaking, logistics and ground transportation planning should begin as soon as possible once notification of the prospective travel schedule is received from the protectee or his/her staff. In those instances where the trip or visit falls outside of the organization’s existing capacity to provide internal support, this planning process begins with selecting the appropriate vendor (or vendors, for a multiple destination itinerary) for ground transportation needs. This holds true no matter how much – or how little – lead time you may have before the planned departure or arrival.
Many experienced EP agents consider selecting the appropriate vendor as the single most critical component of the transportation planning process. In reality, which vendor may be best suited to support your secure transportation requirements may vary based on several factors.
First and foremost is the current threat profile of your protectee, as ALL protection related decisions should be based on the known or assessed threat level. For instance, if the protectee’s threat profile is generally low, the trip hadn’t been announced in advance, and the itinerary consists of a small number of discrete meetings taking place within relatively secure locations closed to the public, the threat level would likely be much different than other visits.
If the protectee is a very high profile, public figure, is subject to intense media coverage, was recently involved in a controversy, and is making a series of highly publicized and public appearances, one of which is at a rally in support of a polarizing political figure, your transportation advance and needs will be significantly elevated. Given the vastly different threat profiles associated with your protectee, the secure transportation requirements – from type of vehicle, number of vehicles, level of training and experience the assigned drivers have – might also be vastly different. Each of these decisions are driven, pun intended, by whatever short term and persistent threats the protectee may be subject to.
Once any known and potential threats are considered, selecting the most appropriate transportation vendor is one of the most critical risk management/mitigation decisions the protection practitioner, detail leader, or protective security manager may make in preparation for a planned visit. If for no other reason than, from a historical perspective, the security risk to a protectee is greatest when he or she is in or around their vehicle; a fact which is borne out in the analysis detailed in the book Just 2 Seconds (De Becker, Taylor, Marquart, 2008, De Becker Center for the Study and Reduction of Violence).
When coupled with the overarching general safety, and life-safety, risks associated with vehicle crashes, the importance of selecting the appropriate transportation provider cannot be understated. Safety risks? Vehicle crashes? When viewed objectively, the highest risk period for the vast majority of protectee’s are those periods when they are being transported in a vehicle; therefore, selecting the vendor that is best qualified to address whatever threats or risks the protectee may face should also be a very high priority. When it comes to providing safe and secure ground transportation in the United States, with very few exceptions, the most prevalent threat and highest risk many protectees are subject to is an automobile crash. It should be noted that auto crashes often result in injuries (medical emergencies), but also present crimes of opportunity and could be staged as a targeted attack.
While it may be critical to the overall success of the movement, trip, or detail, selecting the appropriate transportation provider is just one of many facets that contribute to that success. Other factors to consider when selecting the provider in your advance include:
- Ease of ingress/egress for protectee
- Road and weather conditions
- Number of passengers
- Type and volume of luggage
- Licensed for vehicle operation at FBO’s on tarmacs
- Common vs. uncommon vehicle types, makes, model
These items are all pieces of information that an experienced, local secure transportation provider should be able to address and provide solutions for. While short and direct, this list not only shows what some of the more valuable insights a local transportation provider can provide, it also points to the detailed information a prospective service provider should be asking for from a potential client before they submit a formal proposal or quote.
To reiterate, the transportation provider should be identified and engaged as early in the Transportation Advance as possible. Whether or not the service provider will be directly involved in conducting the Transportation Advance (or advances for multiple destination trips or movements,) will be determined by several factors. In many EP teams, the Transportation Advance may be an additional responsibility of the detail leader, or protection manager.; he or she may choose to leverage the local knowledge of the transportation vendor in the beginning, or given the threats, vulnerabilities, and risks, may elect to provide only limited information the drivers during the protective advance. The detail may be configured in a way that someone is assigned advance responsibilities for each trip, though it may not always be the same person. Regardless of who is responsible for conducting the Transportation Advance, or exactly the how the advance will be executed, there are focal points throughout this process which can make or break a visit.
Among these, is the protectee’s preference, which should be considered whenever possible. Meaning whenever the findings of the threat assessment offer some latitude or flexibility, the protectee’s preferences should always be a consideration…so long as they aren’t likely to lead to increased safety or security threats, vulnerabilities, or risks. In instances where those preferences can’t be accommodated due to safety or security risks, the value of a well-documented Transportation Advance increases exponentially, as it provides the individual responsible for planning and managing the transportation function the ability to speak intelligently to why certain choices were made, especially when those choices may not align the protectee’s desires. In executive protection, it’s not our job to tell a protectee NO, rather tell them the consequences of YES. As an example, if the protectee prefers a sedan to an SUV, but the locale in question has:
- A higher-than-average fatal accident rate
- Experienced a series of large-scale protests in the vicinity of one of the meeting locations
- Major roads are divided by wide medians, planted with tree and shrubs
- Curbing consists of tall, Belgian block,
Given the circumstances described above, from both a safety and security risk management perspective an SUV may well be the preferred choice of the advance agent. Having the ability to articulate that decision to key stakeholders, and the factors that it is based upon can be invaluable. While the protectee may not be happy with the decision, he or she will have the opportunity to understand that the decision made was an informed one. They may not agree with it, they may ultimately override it, but at least they’ll know that:
- There is a planning process that considers threats, risks, vulnerabilities
- Preferences are weighed against those factors in deciding the best available options
- The protection detail didn’t settle for whichever vehicle happened to be available but made an informed choice based on the available information
In the end, protection is a matter of ultimate trust. The decision for a specific type of vehicle may never come into question by a protectee that trusts you but being knowledgeable of the decision-making process leading into that choice will be invaluable later if it does.
Not All Vehicles are Created Equal – or are Best Suited for the Job
Typically, the decision as to which vehicle to utilize on a particular trip or movement will usually be based, in some part, upon criteria like that listed above. It is also worth mentioning that, at least with the majority of protectees, teams usually don’t have to use the exact same vehicle on every trip or visit. In some cases, doing so may make the logistics of some trips nearly impossible to manage as a particular make, model, or color, of vehicle may not be readily available everywhere the protectee travels to. From a security perspective, some vehicles draw unwanted attention to the protectee. For example, moving around Miami in a blacked-out Cadillac SUV is not likely to draw much attention to your protectee. Moving that same Principal around Flagstaff, AZ, where 4 of the top 10 vehicles are pick-up trucks, in a blacked-out Cadillac SUV may not be discreet.
Following the “Keep It Simple, Stupid” principle, when it comes to logistics and transportation for larger groups, consider using Sprinter Vans or even Luxury Freightliner “coaches”, as opposed to full sized SUVs may also be an attractive option. These larger vehicles tend to simplify the logistics effort by providing the opportunity to manage the protectee and their entourage in one larger group as opposed to having to manage multiple, smaller groups, (often referred to as herding cats) with several vehicles, and an equal number of drivers.
Of course, no matter how well trained the driver is, performing evasive maneuvers in such a large vehicle is not likely to end well, so choosing wisely when it comes to which vehicle or vehicles to use for any particular trip should never take a backseat to known threats, vulnerabilities and risks. An additional consideration when it comes to utilizing larger, multi-passenger vehicles is whether or not there are any “key person” restrictions that limit the number of senior executives, key stakeholders, or decision makers who can be transported in any one vehicle together. While such restrictions are not as commonplace as those rules that apply to corporate aircraft, there are some organizations that categorize the risk of a fatal car crash involving multiple executives, stakeholders, or decision makers as being the same to the organization as a crash involving a corporate or commercial aircraft carrying more than one.
Similarly, larger platforms may improve efficiency when it comes to accounting for, loading, and unloading baggage and/or personal items belonging to the passengers. Conversely, if the passengers on a given a trip or visit are limited to your protectee and just one additional person, and the terrain permits it, the use of a sedan might just be the best option and certainly one worth considering.
While for some protection practitioners, it’s merely a fact of life that their protectee wants to be seen in luxury vehicles, and in some circumstances he or she may insist. There are circumstances that support a low-profile vehicle as the most efficient and effective means of reducing the threat by reducing the visibility of the protectee – and his or her protection. In some locations, low profile vehicles are becoming increasingly popular as the Paparazzi has become hyper-focused on high-end luxury vehicles that are commonly used to transport VIPs. In other locations, including some here in the U.S., open displays of affluence have led to individuals being targeted for carjacking or other types of crimes.
In some cases, luxury vehicles were followed to a residence, resulting in home invasion robberies. Factors that contribute to a “low profile vehicle” include, but may not be limited to:
- Common make and model for the local environment (i.e. a Kia Sedan in Lebanon, a Mitsubishi Pajero in East Africa, a Tesla Model S in Silicon Valley)
- A neutral color, common to the environment (i.e. grey, tan, white, etc.)
- Tinted windows (if commonly available in the operating area)
- No identifying graphics, parking decals, etc.
- Up-to-date registration, license plates, insurance, etc.
- Appropriate level of exterior cleanliness for the environment
Not All Drivers are Created Equal – or Appropriately Trained
Whether opting for the use of an unarmored vehicle for a short-term visit as opposed to long term, daily usage, or operating a two-vehicle convoy consisting of full-size SUVs, it is just as important to verify the level of driving training of the Security Driver operating the vehicle as it is to verify the specific features of the vehicles themselves. Similarly, to “not all vehicles are created equal”, not all drivers are appropriately trained in Security Driving techniques.
Additionally, not all Security Drivers may be appropriately trained in the various types of vehicles they may be called upon to operate. The time to finds out what type of drivers training a contracted driver may or may not have should be determined as far as possible in advance of the trip. Regardless of the specific vehicles which they may find themselves behind the wheel of for a particular trip or visit, the driver should be trained in the specific type of vehicle they will be operating.
In a perfect world, the driver will always be trained in the exact same make and model vehicle that will be utilized in the movement in the location the security drivers operate. However, that is not likely to be the case. Depending largely upon the protectees threat profile, as well as his or her preferences, anything from a VPAM Level 7 Armored SUV, a B4 level armored sedan, or an even unarmored sedan can be used during a visit and your security driver is likely to find themselves behind-the-wheel of a wide variety of vehicles throughout the course of their career.
Therefore, understanding how and what, the security driver is trained in is important, as the vehicle dynamics and performance characteristics of each vehicle vary greatly. Drivers with the most experience in numerous vehicle configurations and current training certifications tend to be the busiest among contract service providers. This is a point we’ll take a closer look at in Part 2 of this article.
While it is always recommended to do business with providers you trust, it is just as important to trust, but verify, any information received from the service provider you select. It’s not only acceptable to ask for licenses, certifications, and training documentation from your preferred vendor, in today’s litigious society it would be exceedingly naive not too. Professional service providers typically maintain detailed training records, along with supporting documentation, and should have no reason not to provide them to a perspective client upon request.
Additionally, any legitimate training provider will also maintain documentation for those students who have attended their courses and, when authorized either by the student or their employer, should also have no issue sharing that information. On the other hand, if the vendor is unwilling or unable to provide licensing information, driving record abstracts, detailed training records for their driver (or their attendance cannot be verified by the training provider in question), then it may very well be time to explore other options for transportation.
Drivers Drive…and May Have Some Other Responsibilities
While it may come as a surprise to some, the fact is that not all drivers are properly and appropriately trained. In fact, depending on the locale, the event, or the circumstances, surrounding a planned trip, it’s entirely possible that there may not be enough trained, experienced security drivers to meet an increase in demand, especially if it’s being driven by a short-term event, such as a professional conference or awards ceremony.
If your protectee waited until the very last moment to commit to taking the trip, you may have to choose from the best of several bad options when it comes to hiring a transportation provider. Regardless, the vendor should have an established protocol for vetting and selecting drivers. At an absolute minimum, proof of licensure and training certificates for any security driver the vendor has proposed assigning to you should be available.
In some instances, depending on prevailing threats/risks, needs, and sensitivity, a limited background investigation for each driver may be necessary to determine suitability for the assignment. After all, would you want your protectee being chauffeured by a convicted felon or a driver previously arrested for DUI; or, conversely, someone whose views and opinions expressed on various social media platforms are wholly incompatible with the protectee’s?
In keeping with the “one is none” mindset, when selecting a driver, the most viable candidate for back up driver should also be identified and agreed upon with the vendor. This alternate driver should be, vetted, and their availability confirmed, so that if the primary candidate is unavailable or unable to continue the assignment as planned a vetted, the approved alternative is readily available.
Since a contracted driver is not usually involved in the normal, day-to-day operations of a specific security team, he or she may not be familiar with the terminology, processes, and protocols of the team. With this in mind, whoever is responsible for the conducting the Transportation Advance must also be prepared to fully brief the driver – or drivers, as the case may be, on their responsibilities and duties for the duration of the assignment, as well as the team’s expectations for how they will fulfill those responsibilities and duties.
Some important pieces of information that should be collected and disseminated as appropriate, as far in advance of the trip or visit as possible, include:
- Identify if the driver is armed/unarmed,
- Obtain (and provide) full contact information
- Discuss/review acceptable attire
- Discuss/review acceptable behavior (i.e., no smoking in the vehicle, no eating in the vehicle, check fuel levels at every stop, etc)
- Disseminate tentative schedules (with as much, or as little, detail as deemed appropriate given threat profile, risk assessment, driver’s background, experience, etc.)
- Driver responsibilities in the event of an attack on protectee/principal (AOP)
As a rule, when working with a security driver, he or she should never leave the vehicle and should always be seated and prepared to depart prior to the protectee leaving a site/venue. In doing so, the driver will not be expected to open doors, carry luggage, perform any other duties, or perform any other services…they only drive, and must prepared to do so at a moment’s notice.
This can be one of the most difficult concepts to communicate to a driver who normally earns a significant share of his or her compensation by providing great customer service, which may include jumping out and opening or closing doors, loading/unloading luggage, handling, parcels, bags, briefcases, etc. It may very well take a couple of gentle reminders at the outset of the assigned driver to break through the “muscle memory” formed by years of providing the level of customer service that most passengers expect.
Conversely, when possible, a relief schedule should be established that will allow the driver to use the restroom, have a quick bite to eat at the vehicle, or simply stretch their legs for short periods when the protectee is unlikely to require transportation. If such relief is provided, there must be someone with the vehicle who is fully capable of operating it in the absence of the assigned security driver, and any relief periods should be exceptionally brief, no more than 5 minutes for restroom or getting out to stretch their legs, no more than 10 or 15 minutes to eat while staying with the vehicle.
One of the key elements of providing the driver some relief is key control, meaning the vehicle keys never leave the control of whomever will be behind the wheel should the need arise. So, when the primary driver is provided a restroom break, the person relieving them at the vehicle should have the keys in their possession. Once the assigned driver returns to the vehicle, he or she should immediately take possession of the key. It is also advisable for the detail or shift lead, whomever is the senior person on duty at that time, to have in their possession a second key for the vehicle. Even now, when copies of RFID keys range from more than $120.00 to as much as $500, having a spare or back-up key is cheap insurance and something that transportation vendors should be contractually obligated to provide.
Other responsibilities the driver may be tasked with include providing the protection practitioners with active situational awareness by observing and reporting on the types of activities taking place in and around the venue and the general vicinity of the planned entrances/exits. Drivers should communicate immediately with the detail if they observe any indicators or warning signs of existing, emerging, or evolving threats or risks they may see. This is certainly one aspect where a trained, experienced Security Driver tends to provide far more value than an untrained driver.
In the timeframes associated with short trips or visits, it’s virtually impossible to effectively train someone to provide the same level of detail and clarity that a person with several years of experience, applicable training, and, when available, firsthand knowledge of a locale or venue can provide. In addition to being trained observers, professional Security Drivers are also expected to understand the internal layout of the venue, locations where the protectee is expected to be within the venue, and possible alternative pick up points to be utilized in the event of an emergency.
But, Wait, There’s More…Much More
As you can see, the selection of an appropriate vehicle and an appropriately trained, experienced driver is paramount to the success of any protective visit. Having been on the receiving end of some uncomfortable conversations over the years, the most of uncomfortable of which started with “…help me to understand exactly how this happened…” we speak from firsthand experience when it comes to the small details involved in planning, managing, and providing safe and secure transportation
Transportation advances reward “brilliance in the basics” far more than most other parts of your protective advance. When it comes to secure transportation, the most basic elements are defining the prevailing threats that the protectee is subject to. Once this has been established, the real work of the Transportation Advance begins with selecting the appropriate service provider, vetting the driver and alternate driver, and deciding on which vehicle is best suited for this trip or visit. While simple, we hope this article has shed some light on areas where an advance can go sideways.
In part two of this article, we will explore the next steps toward achieving brilliance in the basics in providing secure ground transportation for protective operations, including a look at specialized vehicles, motorcade operations and the route survey/selection process.
Joe Autera has for the past 20 years, designed, developed, and delivered highly advanced security driving and secure transportation-related training programs to private and public sector clients in more than 36 countries on 6 continents.
Kevin Dye is a retired U.S. Secret Service supervisor with more than 28 years of experience providing protection at the highest levels of government and industry worldwide.
