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?
Establish the planning context and framework
|
|
A planning committee is established with an appropriate balance of expertise, representation and authority to achieve desired outcomes Completed |
Evidence:
|
Authority to plan is confirmed by reference to legislation, government direction, community or other managerial agreement Completed |
Evidence:
|
Planning environment is clarified by analysing drivers Completed |
Evidence:
|
Legislative, regulatory and organisational requirements, policy, procedures, existing arrangements and plans that may impact on the planning framework are identified and analysed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Key stakeholders, are identified along with their potential interests, sensitivities, roles and responsibilities Completed |
Evidence:
|
Planning aims and objectives are developed and refined with management and other key stakeholders Completed |
Evidence:
|
Develop agreed planning processes and methodology
|
|
Practical constraints are considered when developing a feasible project scope Completed |
Evidence:
|
Frameworks for project planning, management and evaluation are jointly developed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Processes for negotiating outcomes and making decisions are developed within existing accountabilities Completed |
Evidence:
|
Consultation and community education strategies are developed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Information management, reporting and accountability strategies are developed and agreed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Project is broken down into a logical sequence of manageable and time related activities and the required resources identified Completed |
Evidence:
|
Ability of committee members and their organisations to undertake specific planning activities is jointly assessed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Sources of expertise are identified to contribute specialised information and analysis as required Completed |
Evidence:
|
Accountability for specific tasks or planning components is negotiated with the appropriate individual, organisation or service provider Completed |
Evidence:
|
Undertake research and analysis
|
|
Project scope is regularly reviewed in response to new information or changes in resources and planning environment Completed |
Evidence:
|
Appropriate research tools and consultation strategies are chosen Completed |
Evidence:
|
A comprehensive body of community information, risks and safety expectations is built/updated using credible sources Completed |
Evidence:
|
Effectiveness of current prevention/mitigation, response and recovery strategies is assessed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Vulnerability of communities and environments is determined by analysing their susceptibility and resilience to risk Completed |
Evidence:
|
Need for new/updated response, evacuation and recovery plans is confirmed for risks that have the potential to become an emergency event Completed |
Evidence:
|
Develop/refineplanning outcomes
|
|
Emergency management arrangements related to the effective control of operations and coordination of resources are reviewed or developed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Potential gaps or duplication in roles and responsibilities of all organisations are identified Completed |
Evidence:
|
Broad categories and types of resources and services that are likely to be required are identified Completed |
Evidence:
|
Financial and contractual arrangements for accessing or acquiring resources and services are developed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Arrangements for the command, control and coordination of the response to an emergency incident are addressed in the plan Completed |
Evidence:
|
Round trip nature of the evacuation process and the stages of evacuation are addressed in the plan Completed |
Evidence:
|
Arrangements for the restoration of the community structure and facilities and provision of support to affected people are addressed in the plan Completed |
Evidence:
|
Potentially critical resource/service shortfalls and communication deficiencies between organisations are identified Completed |
Evidence:
|
Contingencies to address potential problems are developed with relevant organisations and service providers Completed |
Evidence:
|
Implications of new/revised plans for business planning, review of legislation/policy/procedures and provision of training and community education programs are assessed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Document the planning outcomes
|
|
Draft plan is jointly developed Completed |
Evidence:
|
Draft plan's structure enables all users to quickly access essential information and any amendments Completed |
Evidence:
|
Draft plan's purpose, control/coordination arrangements and any functional/threat specific sub plans are specified in sufficient detail Completed |
Evidence:
|
Language used is clear, concise and appropriate for the community Completed |
Evidence:
|
Plans and sub plans are consistent Completed |
Evidence:
|
Planning records, supporting documentation and contact information are maintained by the organisation responsible for version control Completed |
Evidence:
|
Validate and implement planning outcomes
|
|
Feedback on the draft plan is obtained from stakeholders Completed |
Evidence:
|
Crucial arrangements and systems are tested for robustness and flexibility in response to likely scenarios Completed |
Evidence:
|
Outcomes of testing plan components or sub plans by lead/supporting organisations are used to refine the draft plan Completed |
Evidence:
|
Compatibility, links and interactions between the draft plan, sub plans and other community safety strategies are tested Completed |
Evidence:
|
Revisions are signed off by lead/supporting organisations prior to seeking formal plan endorsement by the relevant authority Completed |
Evidence:
|
Endorsed plan is published and distributed to all relevant parties Completed |
Evidence:
|
Support for the plan is established by promoting its specific benefits to stakeholders Completed |
Evidence:
|
Monitor and review the planning process and outcomes
|
|
A maintenance and audit schedule is established in accordance with relevant legislation, policy or procedures Completed |
Evidence:
|
Plans or components are exercised according to priorities identified in risk assessment Completed |
Evidence:
|
Deficiencies in operational systems and procedures identified during audit, activation or exercising of the plan are analysed and reported to the relevant party Completed |
Evidence:
|
Significant changes in risk, vulnerability or available resources are recognised and accommodated Completed |
Evidence:
|
Contact information for key personnel is regularly updated Completed |
Evidence:
|
Plan amendments are negotiated, documented and authorised in accordance with version control procedures Completed |
Evidence:
|
Opportunities for improving emergency planning processes are reported Completed |
Evidence:
|
Audit and reporting requirements are completed Completed |
Evidence:
|