Unit of competency details

Elements describe the essential outcomes of a Unit of Competency.

Performance Criteria describe the required performance needed to demonstrate achievement of the element. Where bold italicised  text is used, further information is detailed in the Range Statement. Assessment of performance is to be consistent with the Evidence Guide.

ELEMENT 

PERFORMANCE CRITERIA 

1 Clarify the community context 

1.1 Information  about known risks , safety concerns, expectations and desired outcomes is collected and analysed.

1.2 Safety concerns, drivers , recent events, community views and sensitivities are identified.

1.3 Relevant legislation, policies, procedures  and existing emergency management documentation and arrangements are identified.

1.4 Input to building an initial picture of community characteristics, safety expectations and perceptions of risk is provided.

1.5 Significance of available information for own organisation/constituency is assessed and reported.

1.6 Scope and focus of a feasible emergency risk management project are determined.

2 Apply the emergency risk management methodology 

2.1 Own role, organisational responsibilities, limits of authority, scope of community knowledge and expertise are outlined to other group members.

2.2 Organisational resources that can be provided to support the emergency risk management process are identified.

2.3 Sources of useful, credible information  are identified through stakeholders , community networks and interested parties.

2.4 Practical consultation, communication and decision making strategies are agreed.

2.5 Processes for accountability and timely communication of accurate, consistent information to stakeholders are developed.

3 Develop risk statements and treatment options 

3.1 Credibility, accuracy and currency of available risk information is assessed.

3.2 Additional information is sought from specialists, organisations and other stakeholders regarding information gaps and conflicting data or views.

3.3 Risk statements are jointly developed by considering sources of risk, elements at risk and vulnerability.

3.4 Risk statements are jointly analysed by considering the consequences and likelihood of occurrences.

3.5 Input is provided to help assess the effectiveness of existing treatment strategies.

3.6 Treatment options  for risks are suggested that take into account implications for stakeholders, practical constraints  and established assessment criteria.

3.7 Feedback on risks and treatment options is obtained from own organisation/constituency and other stakeholders.

3.8 Recommendations are jointly developed and submitted for approval.

4 Promote ownership for the process and outcomes 

4.1 Comprehensive consultation is undertaken at all stages.

4.2 All positions and commitments are properly authorised before being communicated to others.

4.3 Management is kept informed of project progress, proposed variations in strategy, decisions and recommendations.

4.4 Variations to commitment of resources are negotiated with management.

4.5 All stages of the process, decisions and outcomes are documented in accordance with accountability, legislative, regulatory and organisational requirements.

4.6 Opportunities for improving emergency risk management processes are reported.

5 Work cooperatively with other participants and stakeholders 

5.1 Commitment is demonstrated by sharing knowledge and expertise, completing allocated tasks on time and encouraging others to help achieve common goals.

5.2 Meeting procedures are observed.

5.3 Accurate information is provided at all times.

5.4 Opinions and advice are contributed while appreciating the boundaries and cultures of organisations and diverse views of other participants.

5.5 A wide range of reactions and views are actively sought.

5.6 Language used in meetings is appropriate to the broad range of participants.

5.7 Confidentiality and sensitivity of information and meeting processes are respected.

5.8 Conflicts are resolved constructively with a minimum of fuss.

5.9 Overall community safety outcomes are placed above personal or organisational/constituency interests.

This describes the essential skills and knowledge and their level, required for this unit.

Required Skills 

• analyse risks and implications and impacts of proposed treatments
• demonstrate effective interpersonal interactions
• ability to work effectively in small groups
• negotiate commitment of organisation/constituency
• promote two-way communication with organisation/constituency
• research skills to identify sources of risk to the social, built, economic and natural environments
• resolve conflicts constructively
• summarise and explain key information clearly
• value diversity of views and perceptions of risks

Required Knowledge 

• principles of risk management outlined in Australian Standard AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk management—Principles and guidelines
• principles of emergency risk management outlined in National Emergency, Management Committee (2010), National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines
• culture, diversity and history of communities, environments and associated concerns, issues and sensitivities, perception of risks
• concepts and principles of emergency management
• group dynamics, strategies for resolving conflict
• legislative and regulatory requirements, agency/organisational arrangements relevant to emergency risk management
• meeting procedures
• organisational requirements for the provision of information, and authorisation of resources, and approval of reports/recommendations
• roles and responsibilities of key response/recovery agencies and organisations
• spatial information databases and presentation options
• state/territory emergency risk management guidelines

Critical aspects for assessment and evidence required to demonstrate competency in this unit 

Assessment must confirm the ability to:

• provide constructive information and advice based on expertise, knowledge and experience of an organisation, constituency or community
• keep their organisation/constituency informed of the emergency risk management process and outcomes and seek their regular input and feedback
• work collaboratively with other participants to achieve outcomes that contribute to improved community safety
• provide constructive input and gain organisational/constituency support for the outcomes through effective consultation and feedback

Consistency in performance 

Competency should be demonstrated in a range of contexts throughout the life of a community emergency risk management project, or during components of a number of projects.

Context of and specific resources for assessment 

Context of assessment 

Competency should be assessed participating in a group emergency risk management process and contributing to the joint development of a set of recommendations that address community safety in the workplace. Assessment is commonly undertaken in the context of an action learning project on-the-job.

Specific resources for assessment 

Access to a community and the opportunity to contribute to an actual emergency risk management process and consider a range of community safety concerns.

Guidance information for assessment  

This unit contains many transferrable skills, such as communication, consultation, research and analysis skills that can be applied in the emergency risk management context.

Assessors should use formative assessment strategies in a simulated environment to contextualise underpinning knowledge. Summative assessment requires application of the unit in a real-life project, often in an action-learning context.

The Range Statement relates to the Unit of Competency as a whole. It allows for different work environments and situations that may affect performance. Bold italicised  wording in the Performance Criteria is detailed below.

Information  may include:

• characteristics of natural, local and built environments
• demographics (population distribution, social, cultural, health status and education data)
• details of key infrastructure and emergency/support services
• economic activity reports (employment, products, services, revenue)
• government reports (e.g. environmental impacts)

Known risks  may include:

• commercial activity and legal relationships
• economic
• human behaviour and individual activities
• management activities and controls
• natural events
• political circumstances
• technology/technical issues
• terrorism

Drivers  may include:

• changes in community characteristics
• changes in legislation, policies and disaster/emergency management plans
• changes in insurance policies and premiums
• new sources of risk or changed perception of risk
• planning deficiencies
• recent emergency incident reports/debriefs, safety issues
• recent judicial decisions
• strategic and corporate plans

Legislation, policies and procedures  may include:

• arrangements specified in emergency management, land-use, environmental or other legislation
• organisational or jurisdictional emergency risk management policies or procedures
• existing disaster plans, agreements or memoranda of understanding
• local planning regulations, development controls and environmental plans

Sources of useful, credible information  may include:

• community information booklets
• credible individuals, group and community leaders
• documented risk assessments by companies, organisations libraries, research reports, Australian bureau of statistics data, special needs groups, significant cultural organisations
• family and historical records
• media, council and emergency service personnel and records
• spatial information databases

Stakeholders  may include:

• staff
• client groups
• decision makers
• members of the public
• community groups
• industry groups
• public and private sector organisations
• non-government organisations
• elected officials

Treatment options  may include:

• avoidance of the risk
• removing a risk source
• changing the likelihood of
• an initiating event or source of risk occurring
• a hazard impacting on elements at risk
• changing the consequences of an identified hazard impact
• sharing the risk
• retaining the risk based on an informed decision

Practical constraints  may include:

• arrangements, roles and responsibilities set down in existing emergency management plans
• availability of technical expertise, technology, equipment
• budgets, time, availability and capability of people
• land use planning
• legislation covering emergency management, environmental management, safety standards, local government regulations
• limited community knowledge of emergency risk management processes and benefits
• political, social and cultural considerations