Understanding how often a facility must undergo a security review

How often should a facility undergo a security review? The five-year baseline you can rely on

Let’s start with a straightforward answer and then unpack why it matters. A facility must undergo a security review at least every five years. It’s the minimum cadence that keeps security thinking fresh, compliant, and aligned with real-world threats. Five years isn’t arbitrary; it’s long enough to cover the big-picture checks, yet short enough to stay responsive to change.

What a security review really is—and isn’t

If you’re new to this, picture a thorough health check for a building’s security posture. It’s not just about gates and cameras. A solid security review looks across people, process, and physical features to see how well the program is doing and where it could improve. Think of it as a balanced audit: you examine policies, access controls, surveillance, incident response, training, and emergency plans, then you verify that what’s on paper actually works on the ground.

FSO responsibilities come into clear view during the review. The Facility Security Officer coordinates the effort, gathers the right records, solicits input from security staff, and ensures findings lead to concrete actions. The goal isn’t blame or praise; it’s a practical, defensible view of the security posture that you can act on with confidence.

Why five years, not forever

Beneath the five-year rule lies a practical logic. Threat environments aren’t static. New risks appear as technology evolves, tenants change, or building layouts shift. Regulations get updated, and lessons learned from incidents—whether inside your sector or in neighboring ones—inform better safeguards. A five-year cycle gives you enough time to implement meaningful improvements, test them, and document why they work, while still guaranteeing you don’t drift too far from current realities.

That said, the five-year baseline isn’t a ceiling. Some facilities face higher risk—critical infrastructure, sensitive government sites, or locations with specialized hazards. In those cases, reviews may occur more often. A high-risk environment isn’t a badge to brag about; it’s a signal to tighten governance, keep procedures up to date, and stay physically and administratively agile. The key idea is to keep security decisions current, not let them grow stale.

What a review covers in practical terms

A typical review touches several layers. Here’s what often shows up, in plain language:

• Policy and governance health check: Are secure-by-default policies documented, accessible, and followed? Is there a clear chain of command for security decisions?

• Access controls and personnel security: Who has access to sensitive areas? Are background checks, badge issuance, revocation procedures, and visitor management functioning smoothly? Are there any gaps in how privileges are granted or removed?

• Physical security controls: Do fences, lighting, cameras, ballistic protections, and barriers align with current risk assessments? Are maintenance records up to date, and are any aging components replaced before they fail?

• Information and cyber-physical interfaces: How well do the IT and physical security systems talk to each other? Is there protection against tampering, supply-chain risks for security hardware, and adequate monitoring of critical sensors?

• Incident response and recovery planning: Is there a tested plan for incidents, drills that reflect realistic scenarios, and a clear path to recover operations? Is contact information accurate, and are alternate sites or procedures in place if needed?

• Training and awareness: Do personnel know how to spot suspicious activity, report incidents, and follow established procedures? Is refresher training part of the plan so skills don’t atrophy?

• Documentation and record keeping: Can you demonstrate a paper trail of security decisions, actions taken, and the results of tests and drills? Is data kept in a way that’s accessible for future reviews?

• Compliance and regulatory alignment: Are you meeting applicable standards and requirements? Is there a process to stay current with new rules and guidance?

• Corrective actions and tracking: When gaps are found, is there a realistic plan, owners, timelines, and evidence that fixes were implemented?

A few practical notes

• The cadence isn’t just about ticking boxes. It’s about creating a cycle of improvement. The review should spark updates to procedures, training materials, and how security is integrated into daily operations.

• Documentation matters. A review is more than a snapshot; it’s a documented history that proves you’ve monitored, learned, and adapted. That history itself is a defense—showing regulators, insurers, or stakeholders that security remains a priority.

• Different facilities, different rhythms. A small data center and a campus with multiple tenants won’t have identical review calendars, but the five-year baseline often serves as a shared anchor. Adjustments happen in response to risk, changes in personnel, or significant incidents or near-misses.

• High-risk environments may warrant more frequent checks. If you’re in a sector with elevated threats, you’ll want shorter intervals, tighter monitoring, and more frequent tests of your readiness.

• External and internal perspectives both matter. Bring in internal security staff, tenants or occupants (where appropriate), and, occasionally, an outside reviewer to offer fresh eyes and independent insights.

How the cadence shows up in real life

Let me explain with a simple picture. Imagine you’re maintaining a community building. Over five years, you renovate a wing, upgrade lighting, and replace old access doors. You don’t wait for a crisis to fix things—each review cycles you through what’s working and what isn’t, guiding prudent investments and timely replacements. The same logic applies to security programs in larger facilities. The five-year cadence acts as a steady drumbeat that keeps everyone aligned and prepared.

When a review is triggered sooner

Although the rule is “every five years,” certain events can trigger an earlier look:

• Major changes to the facility, such as significant renovations, new tenants, or changes in operation that alter risk.

• A security incident or near-miss that reveals gaps in procedures or controls.

• Regulatory updates or new standards that require updated controls or documentation.

• A shift in threat intelligence that changes the risk profile of the site.

Even when life is busy, a proactive, earlier review can prevent costly gaps later. It’s easier to adjust plans now than to patch vulnerabilities after an incident.

Turning reviews into real protection

A good review isn’t a one-off. It’s the start of a continuous improvement cycle. The most effective programs tie findings to concrete actions: updating procedures, re-training staff, replacing aging equipment, and refreshing emergency plans. The best teams close the loop by rechecking that actions were completed and that the changes actually reduced risk.

If you’re an FSO or someone who works with facility security, here are quick tips to make the cadence work smoothly:

• Build a simple, repeatable checklist. The fewer surprises, the easier it is to keep on top of things year after year.

• Keep a living risk register. Update it as new information comes in, so the review focuses on the right priorities.

• Schedule the review well in advance. Reserve time for stakeholders across security, operations, and management to be part of the process.

• Tie the review to budget cycles. When possible, align recommended improvements with funding windows, so you can implement changes without delay.

• Communicate clearly about results. Share a concise summary with leadership and front-line teams, so everyone understands what’s changing and why.

A few closing reflections

Security isn’t a one-and-done task. It’s a practice of staying attentive to where risk lives and how it can shift. The five-year review cadence provides a reliable framework, ensuring that your facility’s defenses remain effective, current, and adaptable. It’s not about chasing the latest gadget or ticking a box; it’s about sustaining a protective posture that can withstand the test of time and evolving threats.

If you’re curious about how this fits into the bigger picture of facility security, think about the everyday rhythm of a building: doors that open with intention, cameras that capture what matters, and people who know what to do when the unexpected happens. A well-planned security review isn’t flashy, but it’s powerful. It creates a clearer path from risk assessment to practical protections, and that path can make all the difference when it counts.

In short: aim for a security review at least every five years, but stay ready to adjust when life—and risk—demands it. The outcome isn’t just compliance; it’s greater confidence that the facility can endure, protect what matters, and keep people safe.

If you want a quick takeaway to share with teammates, here it is: five years is the floor, not the ceiling. Use that baseline to guide meaningful improvements, track progress, and keep the security program robust in the face of changing threats and needs.