THE PERFORMANCE OF PROTECTIVE SECURITY PERSONNEL OF THE POLICE SECURITY AND PROTECTION GROUP
Type
Thesis
Authors
Category
PSOSEC
[ Browse Items ]
Publication Year
2013
Abstract
A Protective Security Personnel (PSP) or commonly named as bodyguard or in other countries called it Close Protection Officer is a type of security operative or government agent who protects a person or persons usually a public, wealthy, or politically important figure from danger generally from theft, assault, kidnapping, homicide, harassment, loss of confidential information, threats, or other criminal offenses.
Most important public figures such as our head of state and politicians are protected by several Protective Security Personnel or by a team of bodyguards from Police Security and Protection Group of the Philippine National Police or from law enforcement agencies, security forces, or military forces. In most countries where the Head of state is and have always been also their military leader, the leader’s bodyguards have traditionally been done by Royal Guards, Republican Guards and other elite military units. In the Philippines, we called it the Presidential Security Group comprises of the different branches of the AFP, Philippine Coast Guard and the Philippine National Police such as PNP SWAT, Special Action Force but particularly the Police Security and Protection Group. This unit under the Philippine National Police provides Protective Security Personnel not only to the President of the Philippines but also to any other individuals authorized by the Chief of the Philippine National Police. And a number of high-profile celebrities, Chief Executive Officers, less-important public figures, or those with lower risk profiles, may be accompanied by a single PSP.
Consequently, by virtue of Republic Act 6975 or otherwise known as the “Department of the Interior and Local Government Act of 1990” as amended by Republic Act 8551 or otherwise known as “Philippine National Police Reform and Reorganization Act of 1998”, states that the PNP is tasked to provide protective security services to national and local government officials, heads of different national agencies of the government, foreign dignitaries and visitors, prominent business personalities deemed and other threatened private individuals as Protectees of Very Important Persons/People and to key government installations. Purposely, the Police Security and Protection Group (PSPG) is the operational support unit of the PNP tasked to provide such services.
The role of Protective Security Personnel or bodyguards is often misunderstood by the public, because the typical layperson’s only exposure to bodyguarding is usually is highly dramatized action film depictions of the profession, in which bodyguards are depicted in battle, fistfight or brawl with attackers. In contrast to the existing lifestyle depicted on the film screen, the role of a real-life bodyguard is much more mundane but exceptional: it consists mainly of planning routes, pre-searching rooms and buildings where the client will be visiting, researching the background of people that will have contact with the client, searching vehicles, and attentively escorting the client on their day-to-day activities.
The role of a PSP depends on several factors. First, it depends on the role oif a given PSP in a close protection team. A PSP can be a driver-bodyguard, a close protection officer who escorts the client, or part of a supplementary unit that provide support such as IED detection, electronic “bug” detection, counter-sniper monitoring pre-searches facilities, and background-checks people who will have contact with the client. Second, the role of a PSP depends on the level of risk that the client faces. A PSP protecting a client at high risk of assassination will be focusing on a very different roles for example checking cars for Improvised Explosive Devices, bombs, watching for potential shooters, etc. than a PSP escorting popular individuals, politicians or a celebrity who is being pursued by aggressive crowds or media personnel or reporters. Some PSP specialize in the close quarter protection of children of VIPs, to protect them from kidnapping, robbery, assault or assassinations.
Statement of the Problem
This study will assess the Performance of Protective Security Personnel (PSP) of the Police Escort Unit (PEU) under the Police Security and Protection Group (PSPG) in providing safety, security and protection to Protectees and Very Important Persons (VIP) or other persons authorized by the Chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP) as perceived by PNP Personnel and protectees.
Specifically, this study seeks to answer the following questions:
1. How do the respondents assess the performance of the Protective Security Personnel in providing safety, security and protection to Very Important Persons and persons authorized by the Chief, PNP to be given security in terms of:
1.1. Knowledge,
1.2 Attitude,
1.3. Skills,
‘ 1.4. Habits, and
1.5 Values?
2. What are the problems encountered by Protective Security Personnel that affect their performance in providing safety, security, and protection to Very Important Persons and persons authorized by the Chief of PNP as regards to the abovementioned variables?
3. What measures can be proposed to address the problems encountered by police personnel assigned in the Police Escort Unit serving as Protective Security Personnel that affect their performance in providing safety, security, and protection to Very Important Persons and persons authorized by the Chief of PNP relative to the aforementioned variables?
4. Is there a significant difference among the assessments of the three groups of respondents on the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing safety, security, and protection to Very Important Persons and persons authorized by the Chief of PNP, problems encountered and the corresponding measures in relation to the aforementioned variables?
5. What action plan can be formulated from the findings of this study?
Summary of Findings
Based on the data gathered by the researcher, the following findings are presented:
1. Assessment on the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing security services to protectees.
The assessment was based on the computed ratings given by the three groups of respondents on the identified indicators.
a. Knowledge
The findings revealed that the knowledge of Protective Security Personnel was seen by the Protectees who assessed it as poor with a rating of 2.14 while the two groups of respondents of Protective Security Personnel and Police Escort Unit Management Staff shared the same opinion that the knowledge of Protective Security Personnel was very satisfactory with an overall weighted mean of 4.07 and 3.92 respectively. Overall, the grand mean was 3.38 with a verbal interpretation of satisfactory
b. Attitude
Likewise, the results revealed a Grand Mean of 3.34 as to the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees or Very Important Person in terms of attitude which is translated in verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory” wherein the Protectees observed it as “Poor” garnering an overall weighted mean of 2.20, while the other two groups of respondents shared the same opinion whereas the Police Escort Unit Management Staff yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.82 corresponding to “Very Satisfactory” and the Protective Security Personnel also observed it to be “Very Satisfactory” garnering an overall weighted mean of 3.99.
c. Skills
The results revealed a Grand Mean of 3.25 as to the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of their skills with a verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory”. Wherein the Protectees observed it as “Poor” with an overall weighted mean of 2.17 and the Police Escort Unit Management Staff yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.62 equivalent to “Very Satisfactory”, while the Protective Security Personnel rated it also to a “Very Satisfactory” with an overall weighted mean of 3.97.
d. Habits
Similarly, the results revealed a Grand Mean of 3.31 as to the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of their habits with a verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory”. Wherein the Protectees observed the Protective Security Personnel with regards to their habits as “Poor” garnering an overall weighted mean of 2.16, although the Police Escort Unit Management Staff” yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.66 verbally interpreted as “Very Satisfactory”, and the Protective Security Personnel rated it also as “Very Satisfactory”: with an overall weighted mean of 4.11.
e. Values
In the same way, the result revealed a Grand Mean of 3.34 as to the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of their values with a verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory”. In which, the Protectees observed the Protective Security Personnel with regards to their values as “Poor” with an overall weighted mean of 2.31, although the Police Escort Unit Management Staff yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.68 equivalent to “Very Satisfactory”, and the Protective Security Personnel rated it also “Very Satisfactory” with an overall weighted mean of 4.03.
2. Problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees.
a. Knowledge
The two groups of respondents of Protectees and Protective Security Personnel assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of knowledge as serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.08 and 3.63 respectively, but the Police Escort Unit management Staff assessed it as moderately serious as manifested by the overall weighted mean of 3.10. This garnered a grand mean of 3.60 verbally interpreted as serious.
However, all the three groups of respondents assessed the problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in terms of knowledge as serious but the most noted problems under this area were the lack of trainings of Protective Security Personnel on Close Protection Course with an average weighted mean of 3.67 interpreted as serious followed by the absence of regular re-orientation regarding VIP Protection Courses with an average weighted mean of 3.64 verbally interpreted also as serious.
b. Attitude
The Protectees assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of attitude as very serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.20, whereas the Protective Security Personnel assessed it as serious as manifested by the overall weighted mean of 3.59, while the Police Escort Unit Management Staff assessed it with an overall weighted mean of 2.82 interpreted as moderately serious. As a result, it has a grand mean of 3.54 interpreted as serious.
Nevertheless, all the three groups of respondents assessed the problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel as serious but the most noted problems under this area were the lack of obedience and discipline towards work of other Protective Security Personnel members with an average weighted mean of 3.62 interpreted as serious trailed by the lack of respect to superiors and not attentive when instructed with an average weighted mean of 3.61 verbally interpreted also as serious.
c. Skills
The Protectees group of respondents assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of skills as very serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.29, while the Protective Security Personnel assessed it as serious shown by the overall weighted mean of 3.72, whereas, the Police Escort Unit Management Staff assessed it as moderately serious as shown by the overall weighted mean of 3.28. Overall, the grand mean was 3.77 verbally interpreted as serious.
Correspondingly, all the three groups of respondents assessed the problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel as serious nevertheless the most noted problems under this area where inadequate seminars and trainings that enhances firearm proficiencies of Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 3.89 interpreted as serious followed by lack of hand to hand combat techniques as Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 3.83 verbally interpreted also as serious.
d. Habits
‘
The two groups of respondents of Protectees and Protective Security Personnel assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of habits as serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 3.93 and 3.53 respectively, whereas the Police Escort Unit Management Staff assessed it as moderately serious as manifested by the overall weighted mean of 3.14 verbally interpreted as moderately serious. On the whole, it has a grand mean of 3.53 with a verbal interpretation of serious.
In the same manner, all the three groups of respondents assessed the problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in terms of habits as serious nonetheless the most noted problems under this area were disregarding the proper turnover and assumption of post which will lead to lack of direction or continuity of accomplishing tasks with an average weighted mean of 3.60 verbally interpreted as serious followed by reporting late when taking their post as relief to the outgoing Protective Security Personnel and unauthorized wearing of Police Uniforms when reporting to PNP Headquarters or PSPG Office or failure to dress up appropriately and act properly as police officers both have an average weighted mean of 3.53 verbally interpreted also as serious.
e. Values
The two groups of respondents of Protectees and Protective Security Personnel assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of values as serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.02 and 3.64 respectively, while the Police Escort Unit Management Staff assessed it as 3.10. As a result, it garnered a grand mean of 3.59 interpreted as serious.
Moreover, majority of the respondents assessed the problem affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in terms of values as serious however the most noted problems under this area were the inadequate senses of nationality and loyalty to the organization and the lack of bravery, responsibility, integrity and morally uprightness towards the completion of assigned tasks both had an average weighted mean of 3.62 interpreted as serious followed by develop dishonesty and untruthfulness among Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 3.60 verbally interpreted also as serious.
3. Proposed measures to address the problems encountered by Protective Security Personnel to enhance their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees.
a. Knowledge
The three groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff, Protectees, and Protective Security Personnel assessed that the measures which can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affect their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of knowledge as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.82, 4.55, and 4.44 respectively, with a grand mean of 4.60.
However, the measures that got the highest rating was require all Protective Security Personnel to take Close Protection Course as a mandatory requirement for deployment to Police Escort Unit with an average weighted mean of 4.71 with an interpretation of highly recommended followed by reiteration to PSPs about the Vision, Mission, and Objectives of the Police Security and Protection Group and also reminding the Protectees of the mandata and mission of PSPs in providing security to them with an average weighted mean of 4.63 with a verbal interpretation also of highly recommended and followed by conduct other related trainings on Close Protection Courses to all Police personnel assigned to Police Escort Unit with an average weighted mean of 4.62 with a verbal interpretation of highly recommended.
b. Attitude
The two groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff and Protectees assessed that the measures that can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affect their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of attitude as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.70 and 4.42 respectively, while the Protective Security Personnel assessed it with an overall weighted mean of 4.12 interpreted as recommended. Overall, it resulted having a grand mean of 4.41 interpreted as highly recommended.
However the measures that got the highest rating was the conduct of regular Police Information and Continuing Education (PICE) program to all Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 4.51 with an interpretation of highly recommended followed by conduct of investigation on police personnel who lacks obedience and discipline on their jobs or tasks with an average weighted mean of 4.48 with an interpretation also of highly recommended and followed by encouraging Protective Security Personnel to undergo advance trainings and seminars and giving them awards and commendations after completion of the course with an average weighted mean of 4.39 with a verbal interpretation of highly recommended.
c. Skills
All the three groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff, Protectees, and Protective Security Personnel assessed that the measures that can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affects their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of skills as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.64, 4.40, and 4.26 respectively, with a grand mean of 4.43 also verbally interpreted as highly recommended.
However, the measures that got the highest rating was the conduct of seminars and trainings that will enhance firearm proficiencies of Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 4.60 with a verbal interpretation of highly recommended followed by encourage Protective Security Personnel to undergo combat calisthenics provided by the PNP Special Services with an average weighted mean of 4.43 with a verbal interpretation also of highly recommended and followed by conduct of investigation courses or seminars to enhance the Protective Security Personnel capabilities in handling investigation works with an average weighted mean of 4.41 with an interpretation of highly recommended.
d. Habits
The two groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff and Protectees assessed that the measures that can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affects their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of habits as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.60 and 4.24 respectively, while the Protective Security Personnel assessed it as shown with an overall weighted mean of 3.99 verbally interpreted as recommended. Overall, it resulted having a grand mean of 4.28 verbally interpreted as highly recommended.
Correspondingly, majority of the respondents shared the common opinion that the measures to address the problems that affects the performance of Protective Security Personnel in terms of habits in the aspects of giving stern warnings to Protective Security Personnel or reprimand who are always late when reporting for duty, requiring all Protective Security Personnel to attend Police Information and Continuing Education regularly and re-educate them their allegiance and commitment to the PNP Organization, and summon the problem subordinate and give corrective measures immediately or conduct pre charge investigation as highly recommended with an average weighted mean of 4.38, 4.32, and 4.29 respectively.
e. Values
The two groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff and Protectees assessed that the measures that can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affects their performance in providing security services to Protectees in terms of values as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.70 and 4.37 respectively, while the Protective Security Personnel assessed it as shown with an overall weighted mean of 4.13 interpreted as recommended. Overall, it resulted having a grand mean of 4.40 interpreted as highly recommended.
However, the measures that got the highest rating was the conduct of character building and ethical enhancement discussion to develop honesty and truthfulness among Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 4.49 with an interpretation of highly recommended followed by the conduct of regular rank formation and inspection and conduct Police Information and Continuing Education including the plans and programs of the existing government with an average weighted mean of 4.45 with an interpretation also of highly recommended and followed by the conduct of strategic planning activities and reiteration to PSP’s to practice the core values of PSPG in accomplishing assigned tasks with an average weighted mean of 4.39 with an interpretation of highly recommended.
4. Significant differences on how these three groups of respondents assessed the performance of Protective Security Personnel on the extent of providing protective security services to Protectees, the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel that affects their performance in providing protective security services, and the proposed measures to address these problems.
Using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Single Factor, the null hypothesis was rejected since the Computed F-Value is greater than the Critical F-Value. This shows that there is significant difference on the assessment of the three groups on the performance of Protective Security Personnel. Likewise, there is a significant difference on the assessment among the respondents on the problems encountered that affects the performance of Protective Security Personnel because the Computed F-Value is greater than the Critical F-Value hence the null hypothesis is rejected.
Moreover, there is a significant difference on the assessment among the respondents on the proposed measures to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel that affects their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees because the Computed F-Value is greater than the Critical F-Value hence the null hypothesis is rejected. However they differ in variable knowledge because the Computed F-Value is lower than the Critical F-Value, which implies that there is no significant difference exists among respondents’ assessment in terms of knowledge. Hence the hypothesis is accepted.
5. The adoption and implementation of the proposed Public Safety Development Plan to enhance the knowledge, attitude, skills, habits and values to improve the quality performance of the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security Protection and Security Group in providing protective security services to Protectees in order to address the problems encountered as presented in the study and contains possible measures to eventually deliver excellent protective security services to the people. The plan delineates the effort and program to improve and enhance the level and quality of performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services.
Conclusions
On the basis of results from the data gathered, following conclusions were drawn:
1. Based on the assessment by the three groups of respondents on the performance of the Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees, it was concluded that there were some lapses as noted by the respondents on the five (5) areas of study.
2. All of the problems were observed and identified by the groups of respondents as serious but the most serious problem is on variable skills which got the highest mean rating followed by knowledge and then values. However, most of the problems can be immediately corrected and implemented through proper advance trainings, seminars and regular Police Information and Continuing Education.
3. The proposed measures offered to improve and enhance the performance of the Protective Security Personnel are the conduct of Close Protection Course to all Protective Security Personnel, conduct regular seminars about the role of Protective Security Personnel and right conduct towards handling Protectees, conduct of regular Police Information and Continuing Education Program to Protective Security Personnel, conduct trainings on firearms proficiency and tactical driving skills, and undergo Moral Recovery or Moral Enhancement Seminars and capability building activities identifying the strengths and weaknesses of personnel.
4. Significant differences were noted on how the three (3) groups of respondents of Protective Security Personnel, Police Escort Unit Management Staff, and Protectees assessed the extent of the performance of the Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees, the problems encountered and the proposed measures.
5. Possible measures to address the problems to correct the lapses on the performance of the Protective Security Personnel have been identified.
Recommendations
Based on the conclusions drawn from the findings of the study, the following recommendations are henceforth submitted:
1. An overview of the Police Security and Protection Group policies and guidelines in the development of a modified program of instruction of Close Protection Course and the establishment and implementation of performance appraisal for Protective Security Personnel to recognize and detect the factors affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in order to enhance and strengthen their capabilities in providing protective security services to Protectees.
2. All identified problems that were identified by the group of respondents should be given priority as they affect the overall level of performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees.
3. The proposed measures should be accepted and be given consideration for adaptation and implementation to improve the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees.
4. With the significant differences in the assessment of the three groups of respondents, there is a need for the Police Security and Protection Group to develop and improved the training program for Protective Security Personnel incorporating all the necessary trainings that will include the five areas such as knowledge, attitude, skills, habits and values of a Protective Security Personnel to enhance their performance to ensure that they are responsive in delivering their mandated functions as a member of the Police Security and Protection Group in this changing times.
5. In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions of the study, the researcher recommends the adoption of the proposed Public Safety Development Plan to enhance the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing security services to Protectees and Very Important Persons.
6. Future researchers to conduct further study or research for supplementary, development and advancement of this research.
Most important public figures such as our head of state and politicians are protected by several Protective Security Personnel or by a team of bodyguards from Police Security and Protection Group of the Philippine National Police or from law enforcement agencies, security forces, or military forces. In most countries where the Head of state is and have always been also their military leader, the leader’s bodyguards have traditionally been done by Royal Guards, Republican Guards and other elite military units. In the Philippines, we called it the Presidential Security Group comprises of the different branches of the AFP, Philippine Coast Guard and the Philippine National Police such as PNP SWAT, Special Action Force but particularly the Police Security and Protection Group. This unit under the Philippine National Police provides Protective Security Personnel not only to the President of the Philippines but also to any other individuals authorized by the Chief of the Philippine National Police. And a number of high-profile celebrities, Chief Executive Officers, less-important public figures, or those with lower risk profiles, may be accompanied by a single PSP.
Consequently, by virtue of Republic Act 6975 or otherwise known as the “Department of the Interior and Local Government Act of 1990” as amended by Republic Act 8551 or otherwise known as “Philippine National Police Reform and Reorganization Act of 1998”, states that the PNP is tasked to provide protective security services to national and local government officials, heads of different national agencies of the government, foreign dignitaries and visitors, prominent business personalities deemed and other threatened private individuals as Protectees of Very Important Persons/People and to key government installations. Purposely, the Police Security and Protection Group (PSPG) is the operational support unit of the PNP tasked to provide such services.
The role of Protective Security Personnel or bodyguards is often misunderstood by the public, because the typical layperson’s only exposure to bodyguarding is usually is highly dramatized action film depictions of the profession, in which bodyguards are depicted in battle, fistfight or brawl with attackers. In contrast to the existing lifestyle depicted on the film screen, the role of a real-life bodyguard is much more mundane but exceptional: it consists mainly of planning routes, pre-searching rooms and buildings where the client will be visiting, researching the background of people that will have contact with the client, searching vehicles, and attentively escorting the client on their day-to-day activities.
The role of a PSP depends on several factors. First, it depends on the role oif a given PSP in a close protection team. A PSP can be a driver-bodyguard, a close protection officer who escorts the client, or part of a supplementary unit that provide support such as IED detection, electronic “bug” detection, counter-sniper monitoring pre-searches facilities, and background-checks people who will have contact with the client. Second, the role of a PSP depends on the level of risk that the client faces. A PSP protecting a client at high risk of assassination will be focusing on a very different roles for example checking cars for Improvised Explosive Devices, bombs, watching for potential shooters, etc. than a PSP escorting popular individuals, politicians or a celebrity who is being pursued by aggressive crowds or media personnel or reporters. Some PSP specialize in the close quarter protection of children of VIPs, to protect them from kidnapping, robbery, assault or assassinations.
Statement of the Problem
This study will assess the Performance of Protective Security Personnel (PSP) of the Police Escort Unit (PEU) under the Police Security and Protection Group (PSPG) in providing safety, security and protection to Protectees and Very Important Persons (VIP) or other persons authorized by the Chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP) as perceived by PNP Personnel and protectees.
Specifically, this study seeks to answer the following questions:
1. How do the respondents assess the performance of the Protective Security Personnel in providing safety, security and protection to Very Important Persons and persons authorized by the Chief, PNP to be given security in terms of:
1.1. Knowledge,
1.2 Attitude,
1.3. Skills,
‘ 1.4. Habits, and
1.5 Values?
2. What are the problems encountered by Protective Security Personnel that affect their performance in providing safety, security, and protection to Very Important Persons and persons authorized by the Chief of PNP as regards to the abovementioned variables?
3. What measures can be proposed to address the problems encountered by police personnel assigned in the Police Escort Unit serving as Protective Security Personnel that affect their performance in providing safety, security, and protection to Very Important Persons and persons authorized by the Chief of PNP relative to the aforementioned variables?
4. Is there a significant difference among the assessments of the three groups of respondents on the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing safety, security, and protection to Very Important Persons and persons authorized by the Chief of PNP, problems encountered and the corresponding measures in relation to the aforementioned variables?
5. What action plan can be formulated from the findings of this study?
Summary of Findings
Based on the data gathered by the researcher, the following findings are presented:
1. Assessment on the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing security services to protectees.
The assessment was based on the computed ratings given by the three groups of respondents on the identified indicators.
a. Knowledge
The findings revealed that the knowledge of Protective Security Personnel was seen by the Protectees who assessed it as poor with a rating of 2.14 while the two groups of respondents of Protective Security Personnel and Police Escort Unit Management Staff shared the same opinion that the knowledge of Protective Security Personnel was very satisfactory with an overall weighted mean of 4.07 and 3.92 respectively. Overall, the grand mean was 3.38 with a verbal interpretation of satisfactory
b. Attitude
Likewise, the results revealed a Grand Mean of 3.34 as to the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees or Very Important Person in terms of attitude which is translated in verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory” wherein the Protectees observed it as “Poor” garnering an overall weighted mean of 2.20, while the other two groups of respondents shared the same opinion whereas the Police Escort Unit Management Staff yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.82 corresponding to “Very Satisfactory” and the Protective Security Personnel also observed it to be “Very Satisfactory” garnering an overall weighted mean of 3.99.
c. Skills
The results revealed a Grand Mean of 3.25 as to the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of their skills with a verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory”. Wherein the Protectees observed it as “Poor” with an overall weighted mean of 2.17 and the Police Escort Unit Management Staff yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.62 equivalent to “Very Satisfactory”, while the Protective Security Personnel rated it also to a “Very Satisfactory” with an overall weighted mean of 3.97.
d. Habits
Similarly, the results revealed a Grand Mean of 3.31 as to the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of their habits with a verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory”. Wherein the Protectees observed the Protective Security Personnel with regards to their habits as “Poor” garnering an overall weighted mean of 2.16, although the Police Escort Unit Management Staff” yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.66 verbally interpreted as “Very Satisfactory”, and the Protective Security Personnel rated it also as “Very Satisfactory”: with an overall weighted mean of 4.11.
e. Values
In the same way, the result revealed a Grand Mean of 3.34 as to the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of their values with a verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory”. In which, the Protectees observed the Protective Security Personnel with regards to their values as “Poor” with an overall weighted mean of 2.31, although the Police Escort Unit Management Staff yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.68 equivalent to “Very Satisfactory”, and the Protective Security Personnel rated it also “Very Satisfactory” with an overall weighted mean of 4.03.
2. Problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees.
a. Knowledge
The two groups of respondents of Protectees and Protective Security Personnel assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of knowledge as serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.08 and 3.63 respectively, but the Police Escort Unit management Staff assessed it as moderately serious as manifested by the overall weighted mean of 3.10. This garnered a grand mean of 3.60 verbally interpreted as serious.
However, all the three groups of respondents assessed the problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in terms of knowledge as serious but the most noted problems under this area were the lack of trainings of Protective Security Personnel on Close Protection Course with an average weighted mean of 3.67 interpreted as serious followed by the absence of regular re-orientation regarding VIP Protection Courses with an average weighted mean of 3.64 verbally interpreted also as serious.
b. Attitude
The Protectees assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of attitude as very serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.20, whereas the Protective Security Personnel assessed it as serious as manifested by the overall weighted mean of 3.59, while the Police Escort Unit Management Staff assessed it with an overall weighted mean of 2.82 interpreted as moderately serious. As a result, it has a grand mean of 3.54 interpreted as serious.
Nevertheless, all the three groups of respondents assessed the problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel as serious but the most noted problems under this area were the lack of obedience and discipline towards work of other Protective Security Personnel members with an average weighted mean of 3.62 interpreted as serious trailed by the lack of respect to superiors and not attentive when instructed with an average weighted mean of 3.61 verbally interpreted also as serious.
c. Skills
The Protectees group of respondents assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of skills as very serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.29, while the Protective Security Personnel assessed it as serious shown by the overall weighted mean of 3.72, whereas, the Police Escort Unit Management Staff assessed it as moderately serious as shown by the overall weighted mean of 3.28. Overall, the grand mean was 3.77 verbally interpreted as serious.
Correspondingly, all the three groups of respondents assessed the problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel as serious nevertheless the most noted problems under this area where inadequate seminars and trainings that enhances firearm proficiencies of Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 3.89 interpreted as serious followed by lack of hand to hand combat techniques as Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 3.83 verbally interpreted also as serious.
d. Habits
‘
The two groups of respondents of Protectees and Protective Security Personnel assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of habits as serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 3.93 and 3.53 respectively, whereas the Police Escort Unit Management Staff assessed it as moderately serious as manifested by the overall weighted mean of 3.14 verbally interpreted as moderately serious. On the whole, it has a grand mean of 3.53 with a verbal interpretation of serious.
In the same manner, all the three groups of respondents assessed the problems affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in terms of habits as serious nonetheless the most noted problems under this area were disregarding the proper turnover and assumption of post which will lead to lack of direction or continuity of accomplishing tasks with an average weighted mean of 3.60 verbally interpreted as serious followed by reporting late when taking their post as relief to the outgoing Protective Security Personnel and unauthorized wearing of Police Uniforms when reporting to PNP Headquarters or PSPG Office or failure to dress up appropriately and act properly as police officers both have an average weighted mean of 3.53 verbally interpreted also as serious.
e. Values
The two groups of respondents of Protectees and Protective Security Personnel assessed the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel in terms of values as serious as shown by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.02 and 3.64 respectively, while the Police Escort Unit Management Staff assessed it as 3.10. As a result, it garnered a grand mean of 3.59 interpreted as serious.
Moreover, majority of the respondents assessed the problem affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in terms of values as serious however the most noted problems under this area were the inadequate senses of nationality and loyalty to the organization and the lack of bravery, responsibility, integrity and morally uprightness towards the completion of assigned tasks both had an average weighted mean of 3.62 interpreted as serious followed by develop dishonesty and untruthfulness among Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 3.60 verbally interpreted also as serious.
3. Proposed measures to address the problems encountered by Protective Security Personnel to enhance their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees.
a. Knowledge
The three groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff, Protectees, and Protective Security Personnel assessed that the measures which can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affect their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of knowledge as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.82, 4.55, and 4.44 respectively, with a grand mean of 4.60.
However, the measures that got the highest rating was require all Protective Security Personnel to take Close Protection Course as a mandatory requirement for deployment to Police Escort Unit with an average weighted mean of 4.71 with an interpretation of highly recommended followed by reiteration to PSPs about the Vision, Mission, and Objectives of the Police Security and Protection Group and also reminding the Protectees of the mandata and mission of PSPs in providing security to them with an average weighted mean of 4.63 with a verbal interpretation also of highly recommended and followed by conduct other related trainings on Close Protection Courses to all Police personnel assigned to Police Escort Unit with an average weighted mean of 4.62 with a verbal interpretation of highly recommended.
b. Attitude
The two groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff and Protectees assessed that the measures that can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affect their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of attitude as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.70 and 4.42 respectively, while the Protective Security Personnel assessed it with an overall weighted mean of 4.12 interpreted as recommended. Overall, it resulted having a grand mean of 4.41 interpreted as highly recommended.
However the measures that got the highest rating was the conduct of regular Police Information and Continuing Education (PICE) program to all Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 4.51 with an interpretation of highly recommended followed by conduct of investigation on police personnel who lacks obedience and discipline on their jobs or tasks with an average weighted mean of 4.48 with an interpretation also of highly recommended and followed by encouraging Protective Security Personnel to undergo advance trainings and seminars and giving them awards and commendations after completion of the course with an average weighted mean of 4.39 with a verbal interpretation of highly recommended.
c. Skills
All the three groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff, Protectees, and Protective Security Personnel assessed that the measures that can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affects their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of skills as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.64, 4.40, and 4.26 respectively, with a grand mean of 4.43 also verbally interpreted as highly recommended.
However, the measures that got the highest rating was the conduct of seminars and trainings that will enhance firearm proficiencies of Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 4.60 with a verbal interpretation of highly recommended followed by encourage Protective Security Personnel to undergo combat calisthenics provided by the PNP Special Services with an average weighted mean of 4.43 with a verbal interpretation also of highly recommended and followed by conduct of investigation courses or seminars to enhance the Protective Security Personnel capabilities in handling investigation works with an average weighted mean of 4.41 with an interpretation of highly recommended.
d. Habits
The two groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff and Protectees assessed that the measures that can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affects their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees in terms of habits as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.60 and 4.24 respectively, while the Protective Security Personnel assessed it as shown with an overall weighted mean of 3.99 verbally interpreted as recommended. Overall, it resulted having a grand mean of 4.28 verbally interpreted as highly recommended.
Correspondingly, majority of the respondents shared the common opinion that the measures to address the problems that affects the performance of Protective Security Personnel in terms of habits in the aspects of giving stern warnings to Protective Security Personnel or reprimand who are always late when reporting for duty, requiring all Protective Security Personnel to attend Police Information and Continuing Education regularly and re-educate them their allegiance and commitment to the PNP Organization, and summon the problem subordinate and give corrective measures immediately or conduct pre charge investigation as highly recommended with an average weighted mean of 4.38, 4.32, and 4.29 respectively.
e. Values
The two groups of respondents of Police Escort Unit Management Staff and Protectees assessed that the measures that can be proposed to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security and Protection Group that affects their performance in providing security services to Protectees in terms of values as highly recommended as manifested by the obtained overall weighted mean of 4.70 and 4.37 respectively, while the Protective Security Personnel assessed it as shown with an overall weighted mean of 4.13 interpreted as recommended. Overall, it resulted having a grand mean of 4.40 interpreted as highly recommended.
However, the measures that got the highest rating was the conduct of character building and ethical enhancement discussion to develop honesty and truthfulness among Protective Security Personnel with an average weighted mean of 4.49 with an interpretation of highly recommended followed by the conduct of regular rank formation and inspection and conduct Police Information and Continuing Education including the plans and programs of the existing government with an average weighted mean of 4.45 with an interpretation also of highly recommended and followed by the conduct of strategic planning activities and reiteration to PSP’s to practice the core values of PSPG in accomplishing assigned tasks with an average weighted mean of 4.39 with an interpretation of highly recommended.
4. Significant differences on how these three groups of respondents assessed the performance of Protective Security Personnel on the extent of providing protective security services to Protectees, the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel that affects their performance in providing protective security services, and the proposed measures to address these problems.
Using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Single Factor, the null hypothesis was rejected since the Computed F-Value is greater than the Critical F-Value. This shows that there is significant difference on the assessment of the three groups on the performance of Protective Security Personnel. Likewise, there is a significant difference on the assessment among the respondents on the problems encountered that affects the performance of Protective Security Personnel because the Computed F-Value is greater than the Critical F-Value hence the null hypothesis is rejected.
Moreover, there is a significant difference on the assessment among the respondents on the proposed measures to address the problems encountered by the Protective Security Personnel that affects their performance in providing protective security services to Protectees because the Computed F-Value is greater than the Critical F-Value hence the null hypothesis is rejected. However they differ in variable knowledge because the Computed F-Value is lower than the Critical F-Value, which implies that there is no significant difference exists among respondents’ assessment in terms of knowledge. Hence the hypothesis is accepted.
5. The adoption and implementation of the proposed Public Safety Development Plan to enhance the knowledge, attitude, skills, habits and values to improve the quality performance of the Protective Security Personnel of the Police Security Protection and Security Group in providing protective security services to Protectees in order to address the problems encountered as presented in the study and contains possible measures to eventually deliver excellent protective security services to the people. The plan delineates the effort and program to improve and enhance the level and quality of performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services.
Conclusions
On the basis of results from the data gathered, following conclusions were drawn:
1. Based on the assessment by the three groups of respondents on the performance of the Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees, it was concluded that there were some lapses as noted by the respondents on the five (5) areas of study.
2. All of the problems were observed and identified by the groups of respondents as serious but the most serious problem is on variable skills which got the highest mean rating followed by knowledge and then values. However, most of the problems can be immediately corrected and implemented through proper advance trainings, seminars and regular Police Information and Continuing Education.
3. The proposed measures offered to improve and enhance the performance of the Protective Security Personnel are the conduct of Close Protection Course to all Protective Security Personnel, conduct regular seminars about the role of Protective Security Personnel and right conduct towards handling Protectees, conduct of regular Police Information and Continuing Education Program to Protective Security Personnel, conduct trainings on firearms proficiency and tactical driving skills, and undergo Moral Recovery or Moral Enhancement Seminars and capability building activities identifying the strengths and weaknesses of personnel.
4. Significant differences were noted on how the three (3) groups of respondents of Protective Security Personnel, Police Escort Unit Management Staff, and Protectees assessed the extent of the performance of the Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees, the problems encountered and the proposed measures.
5. Possible measures to address the problems to correct the lapses on the performance of the Protective Security Personnel have been identified.
Recommendations
Based on the conclusions drawn from the findings of the study, the following recommendations are henceforth submitted:
1. An overview of the Police Security and Protection Group policies and guidelines in the development of a modified program of instruction of Close Protection Course and the establishment and implementation of performance appraisal for Protective Security Personnel to recognize and detect the factors affecting the performance of Protective Security Personnel in order to enhance and strengthen their capabilities in providing protective security services to Protectees.
2. All identified problems that were identified by the group of respondents should be given priority as they affect the overall level of performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees.
3. The proposed measures should be accepted and be given consideration for adaptation and implementation to improve the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing protective security services to Protectees.
4. With the significant differences in the assessment of the three groups of respondents, there is a need for the Police Security and Protection Group to develop and improved the training program for Protective Security Personnel incorporating all the necessary trainings that will include the five areas such as knowledge, attitude, skills, habits and values of a Protective Security Personnel to enhance their performance to ensure that they are responsive in delivering their mandated functions as a member of the Police Security and Protection Group in this changing times.
5. In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions of the study, the researcher recommends the adoption of the proposed Public Safety Development Plan to enhance the performance of Protective Security Personnel in providing security services to Protectees and Very Important Persons.
6. Future researchers to conduct further study or research for supplementary, development and advancement of this research.
Number of Copies
1
