GRIEF MANAGEMENT VS. RISK MANAGEMENT
DEALING WITH STUDENT TRAGEDIES
June 26-29, 2005
Jeffrey Alford, Assistant Vice Chancellor
for University Relations
Lee Tyner, University Attorney
University of Mississippi
Oxford, Mississippi
FRATERNITY HOUSE FIRE: A CRISIS CASE STUDY FROM
THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI
I.
Background -- The Setting.
The University of Mississippi is a medium-sized public university with about 14,000
students enrolled at its principle campus in Oxford, Mississippi. Oxford is a small town with a
similar number of year-round residents as the University has students. Thirty percent (30%) of
the student body belongs to one of 33 fraternities and sororities that play a significant role in the
life of the campus. Twenty-eight of those fraternities and sororities own and/or operate houses
located on university property leased to individual house corporations.
Like most universities, the University has had a Crisis Management Plan in place for a
number of years. In 2003, the University revisited this plan following damage to the campus
caused by late night straight-line winds. After the severe weather the Crisis Management Team
“table-topped” five different hypothetical emergency scenarios in a planning and preparedness
exercise in May, 2003, and completed revisions to the Plan in November, 2003.
II.
The Fire.
On the third day of classes in the fall of 2004, a fire breaks out at 4:30 a.m. in the student
living quarters of a prominent fraternity house. Three members of the fraternity die in the fire;
23 students and the house mother escape unharmed. The house is destroyed.
Two fire departments, university and city police departments, and the state fire marshal at
first respond to the fire and are involved in the investigation. At the request of the university, the
U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is asked to lead the investigation and
arrives on the scene within hours after the fire is extinguished.
III.
The Crisis Management Timeline – the Day of the Fire.

7 a.m. – Several members of the University’s management team meet with key
responders and fraternity representatives. At this point the University’s Crisis
Management Plan has not been formally consulted, but many aspects of the plan
National Association Of College and University Attorneys
1
are already in full swing. This initial group recognizes that the Crisis
Management Team needs to meet formally and review the Crisis Management
Plan. Law enforcement confirms fatalities. Law enforcement and fraternity
members have accounted for all but two of the fraternity house’s residents and one
other fraternity member who residents believe was in the house when the fire
began. A fraternity advisor agrees to contact the families of the young men that
are not accounted for.


10 a.m. – Crisis Management Team formally meets for the first time as a group,
although many of its members were present at the 7 a.m. meeting. The fire is
extinguished and the identities of the three victims are confirmed.
1.
A press conference is scheduled for 3 p.m.
2.
A senior administrator is assigned as liaison to each of the victims’
families and personal contact is established.
3.
Direct contact is made with the president of the national fraternity
organization and information sharing begins immediately.
4.
A campus building is made available for the displaced fraternity
members to be together, take their meals, receive counseling,
contact their families, and where messages of condolence can be
sent. Another campus building is designated as the repository for
donations of clothing and personal items. A campus dormitory is
opened for displaced fraternity members.
5.
Bursar’s bills are immediately cancelled for the deceased students.
Noon — ATF investigators arrive and begin conducting interviews.
All agencies and the national fraternity agree to allow the university to serve as
the clearinghouse for all public announcements and release of all information
regarding the fire.

2 p.m. — Donations from the community flood the campus including boxes of
clothing from local department stores and offers of free housing from area
landlords. A public announcement is made asking people to stop sending items.

3 p.m. — University chancellor, ATF special agent, police chief, state fire
marshal, and fraternity national president meet with the media.

5 p.m. — the Crisis Management Team meets again to review and assess the
day’s events. Emphasis is on maintaining contact with the victims’ families and
National Association Of College and University Attorneys
2
providing physical and emotional support for fraternity members and other
students.
Planning begins for a campus memorial service, participation by university
officials and students in funeral services, and cancellation of weekend events on
the campus.

IV.
By the end of the day, every resident of the destroyed house, including the
housemother, has a dormitory room equipped with linens, toiletries, and basic
supplies; every resident has been offered a new set of books, a new student ID,
and clothing; University and other fraternities and sororities have offered meals;
The University has assured that all residents have replaced prescription
medications; Every resident and fraternity member and other closely affected
students has been introduced to counselors and campus ministers.
The Follow Up
In the days that followed, University liaisons met with each of the families in their homes
and assisted in funeral arrangements, sent official delegations and provided transportation for
fraternity members to attend funerals in Batesville, MS, Atlanta, GA, and Martinsville, VA.
Periodic contact with the families continues to the present.
More than 2,000 people, including the victims’ families, firefighters, and investigators
attended a campus memorial service.
The University communications office continued to work closely with the ATF office in
New Orleans and in October announced the results of the ATF investigation that concluded the
cause of the fire could not be determined.
V.
Debriefing the University’s Crisis Response and Lessons Learned.
A few weeks after the fire, members of the Crisis Management Team met to evaluate the
University’s response to the crisis and to consider changes to the Crisis Management Plan.
Below are some of the University’s observations.
A.
Formal plans concerning internal notification of the Crisis Management Team and
other responders were not followed. No one unit had clear responsibility and
ownership of the communications chain. But informal communications networks
worked well, and the appropriate and necessary people were timely notified.
Since the fire the University has developed a much more detailed notification
process.
B.
The Plan did not anticipate or plan for the use of cell phones, which was a key in
National Association Of College and University Attorneys
3
maintaining lines of communication throughout the day. Since that time every
member of the Crisis Management Team has received a back-up cell phone
battery with a charging station that is able to charge the phone and the extra
battery and a wallet-sized card with contact numbers for other team members.
C.
The crisis confirmed that a good crisis management plan is like a budget. It is
more valuable as a planning tool and to help identify issues and concerns than as a
firm plan for managing a particular crisis. Do not hesitate to improvise solutions
to issues as they arise.
D.
Tabletops and de-briefing smaller emergencies and hypothetical crises helped
tremendously. Even though the Plan was not formally consulted throughout the
day, the various University responders were familiar with the communications and
other issues addressed in the Plan, and the Team tailored appropriate solutions to
the particular crisis.
E.
The Plan did not adequately provide for appropriate ways to distribute information
to different University constituents and audiences (general public, media,
students, parents, victim’s families, displaced fraternity residents). The primary
contact for inquiries from students and parents, for example, often needs to be
different than the primary contact for the media. The Crisis Management Plan
should include communications planning for different constituencies. For
example, the University utilized standard means (website, press releases, student
press, interviews with key leaders, press conferences) for distributing information
to the general public and to students but set-up hotlines for fraternity members and
their families staffed by the Division of Student Life. For the families of the
deceased students, a senior administrator (Dean of Students or a Vice Chancellor)
became the key contact.
F.
The Plan did not anticipate or plan for the management of others’ generosity.
This is foreseeable and should be included in any crisis management plan.
Consider whether to ask that the community refrain from giving until the
institution can better direct giving to particular needs.
G.
Designate a place to segregate and hold witnesses/victims where institution can
control access, address physical and emotional needs, and preserve evidence.
H.
Do not let the legal tail wag the dog. Throughout a crisis others will look to
attorneys for guidance and direction. Concerns voiced by an attorney can have a
disproportionate effect on the institution’s response. Remember that the best risk
management strategy is to be kind to and focus on the needs of those who have
suffered loss.
I.
Be careful about those with dual roles and waiver of the privilege. In almost
National Association Of College and University Attorneys
4
every meeting during a crisis someone outside the institution’s control group will
be present. Often those present may have dual roles, such as a university
employee who is a volunteer firefighter or a staff member who is an advisor to a
student organization or an officer in a house corporation.
VI.
J.
Update plans regularly to account for personnel and phone number changes.
Regular planning sessions are crucial to assure that new personnel are familiar
with Plan and with others on the Crisis Management Team.
K.
Inviting the ATF to lead the fire investigation in the early hours of the fire cut-off
potential criticism and second-guessing and added to the University’s credibility
as it responded to various inquiries throughout the crisis.
L.
University identified three key groups and focused on addressing their immediate
needs: the media by providing timely and accurate information and a safe area
from which to shoot visual images of the damaged house; law enforcement and
emergency responders by meeting physical and technical needs and other
logistical support; and victims by providing physical needs and support.
M.
The University needs more joint crisis management planning with area emergency
services to settle issues such as who has responsibility for assuring that utilities
are shut-off to affected buildings, etc…
Conclusion and Present Litigation Risk.
In many ways the University charted a crisis-specific response to the fire rather than
following the generic Crisis Management Plan. But the University has received strong positive
feedback from the ATF and other emergency responders and investigators, from the media, and
from the victims and their families. Although the University’s Plan did not play a crucial role in
managing the crisis, its planning did. By regularly reviewing the Plan, de-briefing small campus
emergencies, and recent tabletop exercises, University personnel were prepared, flexible, and
creative.
An early institutional focus on meeting the needs of the victims, on building
relationships, and on transparency has created much relational capital among the fraternity
leadership, its members, the University, and the victims’ families. Since the fire the victim’s
families have been extremely gracious and effusive with praise for the University and its
handling of the crisis. None have filed a notice of tort claim under the Mississippi Tort Claims
Act, but the time for doing so has not yet expired.
National Association Of College and University Attorneys
5
National Association Of College and University Attorneys
6