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?
Identify, define and engage the community
|
|
A community profile is developed to identify broad characteristics and special needs Completed |
Evidence:
|
Known risks, stakeholders, community and agency sources of information are used to identify networks that may be useful Completed |
Evidence:
|
A working group is established with an appropriate balance of expertise, representation and authority Completed |
Evidence:
|
Group's knowledge of emergency risk management principles, terminology and processes is developed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Means of implementing the emergency risk management process is negotiated with the community Completed |
Evidence:
|
Feasible consultation and project management strategies are developed with stakeholders Completed |
Evidence:
|
Need for specialised information, additional skills and expertise is identified Completed |
Evidence:
|
Develop context and risk evaluation criteria
|
|
Community concerns, drivers/triggers; applicable legislative, regulatory and organisational requirements; policies, procedures and desired outcomes are identified Completed |
Evidence:
|
Information on community characteristics, safety expectations, risk perceptions and the roles and requirements of stakeholders is collected Completed |
Evidence:
|
Practical constraints, existing treatment strategies and community expectations are considered when developing relevant risk evaluation criteria Completed |
Evidence:
|
Draft criteria and supporting explanations are circulated widely for comment Completed |
Evidence:
|
Identify and analyse risks
|
|
Sources of risk are identified and described using research and broad input from specialists and stakeholders Completed |
Evidence:
|
Elements at risk are identified by examining the interaction between sources of risk, communities and the environment Completed |
Evidence:
|
Vulnerability of communities and/or the environment is determined by considering their susceptibility and resilience to sources of risk Completed |
Evidence:
|
Risk statements are developed that clearly describe the interaction between sources of risk and the elements at risk Completed |
Evidence:
|
Risk statements are analysed by considering the likelihood and consequences of impacts on the community and/or environment Completed |
Evidence:
|
Levels of risks are established and documented so that they can be understood by a wide range of audiences Completed |
Evidence:
|
Evaluate risks
|
|
Criteria to evaluate risks are agreed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Risks are prioritised by considering vulnerability and priority for treatment Completed |
Evidence:
|
Stakeholder agreement is sought through their involvement in refining the risk register Completed |
Evidence:
|
A risk assessment report is disseminated to relevant stakeholders Completed |
Evidence:
|
Promote ongoing commitment and ownership for the process and outcomes
|
|
Consultation is undertaken at all stages of the process using a wide range of networks and individuals Completed |
Evidence:
|
A variety of communication strategies is used Completed |
Evidence:
|
All stages of the process, decisions taken and outcomes are documented accurately in accordance with accountability and audit requirements Completed |
Evidence:
|
Information is provided to the community in ways that suit their language, literacy and cultural needs Completed |
Evidence:
|
Monitor and review the process and outcomes
|
|
Emergency risk assessment is completed efficiently Completed |
Evidence:
|
All relevant data and contact information for key individuals and organisations is regularly reviewed for currency and updated Completed |
Evidence:
|
Risk register is reviewed in accordance with the review schedule or in response to drivers/triggers Completed |
Evidence:
|
Opportunities for improving emergency management processes are reported Completed |
Evidence:
|