When an international crisis develops, university leaders need answers quickly.
Answers like:
- Which students are affected?
- Where are they supposed to be?
- Who has confirmed they are safe?
- Which students need assistance?
- And who is responsible for following up with anyone who has not responded?
Answering those questions becomes difficult when student travel information is spread across spreadsheets, faculty records, partner organizations, email threads, booking systems, and individual itineraries.
Effective student accountability therefore begins long before an emergency. Universities need a process that connects pre-travel preparation, reliable traveler information, threat monitoring, communication, Check-Ins, escalation procedures, and emergency response. Technology can strengthen that process, but the institution first needs to establish how the system should work.
Know Who Is Traveling and Where
The foundation of student accountability is reliable travel information. Universities should maintain an authoritative record of students participating in university-sponsored international travel. At minimum, that record should include destinations, program dates, accommodations when appropriate, local contacts, emergency contact information, relevant faculty or program leaders, and reliable methods for reaching each participant.
The challenge is keeping that information current. Students frequently travel independently during weekends and breaks, change accommodations, take side trips, or make transportation arrangements outside the original program itinerary. Faculty-led programs can change schedules as well.
Universities therefore need to distinguish between itinerary information and real-time accountability.
- An itinerary tells administrators where someone planned to be.
- Check-Ins tell them whether the student can be reached and has reported being safe.
Both are useful, but they solve different problems.
NAFSA and The Forum on Education Abroad emphasize that responsible education abroad programs require cooperation among students, institutions, program providers, and other stakeholders. Their health, safety, and security guidance recommends maintaining current knowledge about program locations and establishing emergency preparedness and communication processes before participants arrive.
Define What “Accounted For” Actually Means
Universities should establish a common definition of student accountability before a crisis. Seeing that a student has recently used a mobile application is not necessarily confirmation of safety. Neither is knowing that the student was scheduled to attend class that morning.
During an emergency, institutions need clear status categories. A practical accountability process might distinguish among students who have confirmed safe, reported needing assistance, have not yet responded, or are known to be directly affected.
This allows the response team to focus resources where they are needed rather than repeatedly contacting students who have already confirmed their status.
The same principle applies to communications. Institutions should determine in advance what constitutes an acceptable confirmation. A response to a university Check-In request may be sufficient during a localized incident. More serious events may require direct communication with students, faculty leaders, host institutions, or program providers.
The purpose of the system is not simply to collect locations.
It is to turn incomplete information into a reliable picture of who is safe and who still requires attention.
Establish Check-In Protocols Before They Are Needed
Students should know before departure how the university will communicate with them during an emergency and what is expected when a Check-In request is received.
Those expectations should be part of pre-departure orientation.
Universities can explain when Check-Ins may be requested, how quickly students should respond, what happens if they do not respond, whom they should contact if they need help, and what emergency communication channels are available.
The U.S. Department of State’s guidance for students abroad similarly recommends regular communication with trusted contacts, knowing how to reach local authorities and the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate, preparing for crises, and enrolling in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP).
FoneTrac’s Check-In functionality can support institutional accountability by allowing students to report their status and location. IMG GlobalSecur describes the Check-In function as a tool that can be paired with predetermined response protocols when an expected Check-In is not received.
That last part is critical. A Check-In system is only as effective as the follow-up process behind it.
Build an Escalation Process for Non-Responders
Universities should never have to invent a missing-student procedure in the middle of a crisis. Before programs depart, establish what happens when a student does not respond.
The first step may be an automated reminder or second message. The next could involve calling the student directly, contacting the faculty leader or on-site program staff, checking with roommates or program participants when appropriate, contacting the host institution, and escalating to institutional emergency leadership.
Circumstances determine how quickly those steps should occur. A missed routine Check-In is different from a student failing to respond after an earthquake, violent incident, or evacuation order in their immediate area. Universities should therefore connect accountability procedures to incident severity and proximity rather than relying on a single response timeline for every situation.
Our crisis-management team address both individual student emergencies and large-scale incidents, including missing students, serious illness or injury, natural disasters, political unrest, and evacuation. A mature program defines those response pathways before they are required.
Monitor Threats Against Student Locations
Accountability becomes considerably more effective when universities can identify which students may actually be affected by an event. A major incident in a country does not necessarily affect every student in that country. Conversely, a relatively localized event can be highly significant when students are nearby.
This is where threat monitoring and traveler information need to work together.
Universities should monitor reliable intelligence for the destinations where they have students and establish thresholds for when an event warrants outreach.
The objective is not to alert students about every minor incident. Excessive notifications can create alert fatigue. Instead, institutions should prioritize developments that could meaningfully affect student safety, movement, communications, medical access, transportation, or program operations.
IMG GlobalSecur’s Travel Safety Programs combine traveler information with threat monitoring and notification. The service is designed to compare traveler locations with developing security, political, medical, and natural-disaster threats so relevant travelers and organizational contacts can be notified according to agreed procedures.
That creates an important operational connection:
- What happened?
- Who might be affected?
- Have we contacted them?
Don’t Depend on a Single Communication Channel
Global crises frequently disrupt the same infrastructure universities depend on to communicate. Cellular networks can become overloaded. Internet access can fail. Electricity can be interrupted. Students can lose phones or run out of battery power.
A university’s study abroad emergency response plan should therefore include redundant communication methods.
Students should have primary and secondary university emergency contacts. Institutions should maintain multiple ways of reaching students where practical. Important phone numbers should be available outside a single app or email account.
The State Department’s current guidance for communicating abroad recommends planning international connectivity before departure, saving emergency contacts, knowing local emergency numbers, keeping backup communication options, and maintaining important contacts somewhere accessible if a primary phone is lost or stolen.
Students should also be encouraged to enroll in STEP, which allows U.S. citizens to receive relevant embassy or consular security information and can help officials contact travelers or their emergency contacts during a crisis.
Redundancy should be intentional, not something improvised after communications fail.
Determine Who Has Authority to Make Decisions
Accountability is only one part of crisis management. Once students are accounted for, someone may still need to decide whether a program continues, students shelter in place, transportation changes, activities are suspended, participants relocate, or evacuation planning begins. Universities should establish these decision rights in advance.
IMG recommends that institutions consider a cross-campus international travel risk structure because decisions can involve multiple areas of responsibility. Depending on the institution, participants may include international education, risk management, student affairs, legal counsel, health services, security, communications, senior leadership, and other relevant departments.
The goal is not to create bureaucracy during an emergency: it is to prevent it.
Leadership should know who is authorized to assess the situation, communicate with students, approve significant changes, coordinate outside assistance, communicate with families when appropriate, and escalate decisions to senior university leadership.
Prepare Students to Participate in Their Own Safety
Universities have significant responsibilities, but they cannot control every decision a student makes abroad. Institutions cannot eliminate all risks or monitor every personal choice made by participants. That makes student preparation essential.
Pre-departure training should explain not only destination risks but the university’s actual emergency system: how students receive alerts, how to Check-In, when to contact the university, what to do if communications fail, where to find emergency contacts, and how to request immediate assistance.
FoneTrac’s student travel security resources are designed around this connection. Students can receive information about changing conditions, Check-In through the application, and use emergency functionality when assistance is needed.
Technology becomes considerably more effective when students understand both how and when to use it.
Test the System Before a Real Crisis Does
Universities should periodically test their international emergency response process.
A tabletop exercise can begin with a simple question: A significant incident has occurred in a city where the university has students. What happens during the next hour?
Next, review the following check-list and ensure that these systems are functional:
- Can administrators produce an accurate list of potentially affected students?
- Can they initiate a Check-In, or otherwise verify location quickly?
- Who monitors responses?
- How are non-responders escalated?
- Who verifies information about the incident?
- Who has authority to alter the program?
- Who communicates with university leadership?
- What happens if the primary communications platform is unavailable?
Exercises reveal weaknesses that policy documents often conceal. They also help study abroad offices, risk managers, faculty leaders, and senior administrators understand how their responsibilities connect.
Accountability Is a Process, Not a Map
The purpose of student travel tracking should not be to watch every movement a student makes. The more useful objective is accountability: giving the university a reliable way to determine whether students may be affected by an incident, establish contact, identify who needs assistance, and coordinate an appropriate response.
That requires several capabilities working together: accurate travel information, destination intelligence, clear Check-In procedures, threat monitoring, redundant communications, escalation protocols, trained personnel, and established decision authority.
IMG GlobalSecur can help universities develop those capabilities through Global Travel Safety Programs, destination intelligence, threat monitoring, and emergency response planning. FoneTrac adds student Check-Ins, Panic Alerts, location-enabled emergency communications, and security information designed to help maintain the connection between students and their institution.
During a global crisis, the first challenge is often not solving the entire emergency. A university that can quickly answer questions like the ones above has already created the foundation for a more coordinated response.
Contact IMG at (954) 458-5500, or fill out our form to discuss strengthening student accountability and building an international travel safety program around your university’s study abroad population.
