The important thing to remember when gathering evidence is that the more evidence the better - that is, the more evidence you gather to demonstrate your skills, the more confident an assessor can be that you have learned the skills not just at one point in time, but are continuing to apply and develop those skills (as opposed to just learning for the test!). Furthermore, one piece of evidence that you collect will not usualy demonstrate all the required criteria for a unit of competency, whereas multiple overlapping pieces of evidence will usually do the trick!
From the Wiki University
What evidence can you provide to prove your understanding of each of the following citeria?
Develop a sustainable emergency risk management methodology
|
|
Own role, organisational responsibilities, limits of authority, scope of community knowledge and expertise are outlined to other group members Completed |
Evidence:
|
Organisational resources that can be provided to support the emergency risk management process are identified Completed |
Evidence:
|
Sources of useful, credible information are identified through stakeholders, community networks and interested parties Completed |
Evidence:
|
Practical consultation and decision making strategies are suggested and debated Completed |
Evidence:
|
Processes for accountability and timely communication of accurate, consistent information to stakeholders are developed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Feedback on the proposed project scope and objectives and emergency risk management process is obtained from own organisation/constituency Completed |
Evidence:
|
Draft project plan is jointly refined and finalised prior to communication with stakeholders Completed |
Evidence:
|
Clarify the community context
|
|
Information about known risks, safety concerns, expectations and desired outcomes is collected and analysed. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Safety concerns, drivers, recent events, community views and sensitivities are identified. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Relevant legislation, policies, procedures and existing emergency management documentation and arrangements are identified. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Input to building an initial picture of community characteristics, safety expectations and perceptions of risk is provided. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Significance of available information for own organisation/constituency is assessed and reported. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Scope and focus of a feasible emergency risk management project are determined. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Apply the emergency risk management methodology
|
|
Own role, organisational responsibilities, limits of authority, scope of community knowledge and expertise are outlined to other group members. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Organisational resources that can be provided to support the emergency risk management process are identified. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Sources of useful, credible information are identified through stakeholders, community networks and interested parties. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Practical consultation, communicationand decision making strategies are agreed. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Processes for accountability and timely communication of accurate, consistent information to stakeholders are developed. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Develop risk statements and treatment options
|
|
Credibility, accuracy and currency of available risk information is assessed. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Additional information is sought from specialists, organisations and other stakeholders regarding information gaps and conflicting data or views. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Risk statements are jointly developed by considering sources of risk, elements at risk and vulnerability. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Risk statements are jointly analysed by considering the consequences and likelihood of occurrences. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Input is provided to help assess the effectiveness of existing treatment strategies. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Treatment options for risks are suggested that take into account implications for stakeholders, practical constraints and established assessment criteria. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Feedback on risks and treatment options is obtained from own organisation/constituency and other stakeholders. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Recommendations are jointly developed and submitted for approval. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Promote ownership for the process and outcomes
|
|
Comprehensive consultation is undertaken at all stages. Completed |
Evidence:
|
All positions and commitments are properly authorised before being communicated to others. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Management is kept informed of project progress, proposed variations in strategy, decisions and recommendations. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Variations to commitment of resources are negotiated with management. Completed |
Evidence:
|
All stages of the process, decisions and outcomes are documented in accordance with accountability, legislative, regulatory and organisational requirements. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Opportunities for improving emergency risk management processes are reported. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Work cooperatively with other participants and stakeholders
|
|
Commitment is demonstrated by sharing knowledge and expertise, completing allocated tasks on time and encouraging others to help achieve common goals. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Meeting procedures are observed. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Accurate information is provided at all times. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Opinions and advice are contributed while appreciating the boundaries and cultures of organisations and diverse views of other participants. Completed |
Evidence:
|
A wide range of reactions and views are actively sought. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Language used in meetings is appropriate to the broad range of participants. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Confidentiality and sensitivity of information and meeting processes are respected. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Conflicts are resolved constructively with a minimum of fuss. Completed |
Evidence:
|
Overall community safety outcomes are placed above personal or organisational/constituency interests. Completed |
Evidence:
|