ARAT’s intuitive and slick user interface naturally guides you through risk assessment process, yet enables you to select your own workflow. You will not have any tab hassle, redundant actions or long trainings and support for complicated tools which you or process owners do not want to use.
The second, detailed risk assessment enables the assessor to focus on a single information asset only. This is the reason why the management screen and report in ARAT includes actions, action costs, action due date, action status, responsible person - all viewed at a single screen. The dashboard gives you and management a quick overview and detailed insight into problematic business processes, most effective actions, threat level and most risky assets. This insightful reporting, pointing to key areas enables you to focus on the most risky areas. Since this template is supplied in a .doc format with no file protection you are free to edit the template as needed. This Risk Assessment Annual Action Plan template is part of our range of Health and Safety documents which we have created and filed in the most relevant categories around the site.
This template is reserved for registered users only, if you have a free subscription please ensure you are logged in, if not please subscribe below. Please note that whilst most of our templates have been reviewed by a legal professional, due to the complexities of individual businesses we cannot guarantee their suitability for your intended application.
The concept of emergency planning is a derivative of the existence of innate manmade and naturally occurring risks and hazards.
Once risks are identified, mitigation measures can be implemented and emergency scenarios can be addressed. In order to plan for emergencies and mitigate as necessary, potential risks and hazards must be identified and evaluated. Evaluate each hazard rating for probability and severity resulting from an accident or emergency. Threats and risks to Canadians and Canada are becoming increasingly complex due to the diversity of natural hazards affecting our country and the growth of transnational threats arising from the consequences of terrorism, globalized disease outbreaks, climate change, critical infrastructure interdependencies and cyber attacks.
The development and employment of a SEMP is an important complement to such existing plans, because it promotes an integrated and coordinated approach to emergency management planning within federal institutions and across the federal government. The Emergency Management Planning Guide uses a step-by-step approach and provides instructions that are supplemented by the Blueprint and the Strategic Emergency Management Plan (SEMP) template provided in Annexes A and B, respectively. The EM plans of federal government institutions should address the risks to critical infrastructure within or related to the institution's areas of responsibility, as well as the measures for protecting this infrastructure.
It outlines the processes and mechanisms to facilitate an integrated Government of Canada response to an emergency and to eliminate the need for departments to coordinate a wider Government of Canada response. The National Strategy and Action Plan for Critical Infrastructure establishes a public-private sector approach to managing risks, responding effectively to disruptions, and recovering swiftly when incidents occur. Figure 1 highlights the four interdependent risk-based functions of EM: prevention and mitigation of, preparedness for, response to, and recovery from emergencies. This figure represents the optimal planning cycle federal institutions should consider for undertaking their emergency management planning activities. This step involves starting the formal planning process in recognition of the responsibility to prepare a SEMP. As part of the environmental scan, the institution defines the internal and external parameters to be taken into account when managing the risk and setting the scope and risk criteria for the remaining risk assessment process. Risk assessment is central to any risk management process as well as the EM planning cycle. The objective of risk analysis is to understand the nature and level of each risk in terms of its impact and likelihood.
Risks can be prioritized by comparing risks in terms of their individual likelihood and impact estimates. If a hazardous substance emergency could occur at your facility and you plan to have any of your employees participate in the emergency response, you are required to have an Emergency Response Plan in writing and available for inspection consistent with 29 CFR 1910.120(q) (Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response). This is why Public Safety Canada has developed this Emergency Management Planning Guide, which is intended to assist all federal government institutions in developing their all-hazards Strategic Emergency Management Plans (SEMPs). As a matter of process, the Emergency Management Planning Guide will be reviewed annually or as the situation dictates, and amendments will be made at that time.
As such, federal institutions are to base EM plans on mandate-specific all-hazards risk assessments, as well as put in place institutional structures to provide governance for EM activities and align them with government-wide EM governance structures. It reflects leading practices (such as those provided by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and Canadian Standards Association) and procedures within the Government of Canada, and should be read in conjunction with the Federal Emergency Response Plan, the Emergency Management Framework for Canada and the Federal Policy for Emergency Management. Those elements are as follows: Environmental Scan, Leadership Engagement, All-Hazards Risk Assessment, Training, Exercise, Capability Improvement Process, and Performance Assessment. Emergency Management resource requirements should be identified as early as possible to integrate into plans. The SEMP should be central to the federal government institution's EM activities and provide clear linkages for integrating and coordinating all other intra-departmental and inter-departmental emergency management plans. It provides improved insight into the effectiveness of risk controls already in place and enables the analysis of additional risk mitigation measures.
A risk assessment should generate a clear understanding of the risks, including their uncertainties, their likelihood and their potential impact on objectives. In order to prioritize risks, comparison is made based on their likelihood and impact estimates. Treatments that deal with negative consequences are also referred to as risk mitigation, risk elimination, risk prevention, risk reduction, risk repression and risk correction.
EM can save lives, preserve the environment and protect property by raising the understanding of risks and by contributing to a safer, more prosperous and resilient Canada. Planning can be triggered by the EM planning cycle or it can be initiated in preparation for, or in response to, an event that is induced either by nature or by human actions.


Each institution has its own strategic and operational objectives, with each being exposed to its own unique risks, and each having its own information and resource limitations.
Descriptive scales can be formed or adjusted to suit the circumstances, and different descriptions can be used for different risks. Risk evaluation is the process of comparing the results of the risk analysis against risk criteria to determine whether the level of risk is acceptable or intolerable. This part of the process consists of three main activities: risk identification, risk analysis and risk evaluation. Based on a risk diagram or rating matrix, a clustering of risks can be shown, leading to decisions on priorities.
Institutions may choose to assess a portfolio of risks, as opposed to specific individual risks, which enables a holistic review of risk treatment decisions. Simply by selecting the information asset, its typical threats and vulnerabilities are used to auto generate the potential risk incidents. For example, in this Risk Assessment Annual Action Plan template you will see where we have highlighted names, addresses and other details you will want to personalise. The chart below offers examples of hazards, assets at risk, and potential impacts created by those threats to existing hazards. Ready.gov offers a basic risk assessment guidance table to aid in performing risk assessments.
A SEMP establishes a federal government institution's objectives, approach and structure for protecting Canadians and Canada from threats and hazards in their areas of responsibility and sets out how the institution will assist the coordinated federal emergency response. Supporting templates and tools can contribute to effective emergency management planning and are provided with this Guide.
The Emergency Management Planning Unit, Public Safety Canada, is responsible for producing, revising and updating this Guide. A SEMP establishes a federal government institution's objectives, approach and structure for protecting Canadians and Canada from threats and hazards in their areas of responsibility, and sets out how the institution will assist the coordinated federal emergency response. Emergency management (EM) refers to the management of emergencies concerning all hazards, including all activities and risk management measures related to prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. This section of the Guide outlines a recommended approach for developing a tailored SEMP and is supported by a blueprint and a SEMP template provided in Annexes A and B, respectively. Additional supporting planning tools and templates as well as an EM glossary are provided in Annexes C and D, respectively. Additionally, federal government institutions are responsible for conducting mandate-specific risk assessments, including risks to critical infrastructure.
The output of the risk assessment process is a clear understanding of risks, their likelihood and potential impact on achieving objectives.
Qualitative analysis is conducted where non-tangible aspects of risk are to be considered, or where there is a lack of adequate information and the numerical data or resources necessary for a statistically significant quantitative approach.
The risk-rating matrix allows for decisions to be made about which risks need treatment and the priority for treatment implementation. Consider developing an overview of these priorities and identifying potential areas for attention given risk probabilities and vulnerabilities.
Companies should also consider the benefits of a business continuity plan (BCP) to counteract the impact of risks and hazards. Many federal government institutions already have specific planning documents or processes to deal with aspects of emergency management that relate to their particular mandates; many also have a long track record of preparing and refining BCPs. The Guide includes a Blueprint (see Annex A), a Strategic Emergency Management Plan (SEMP) template (see Annex B), and supporting step-by-step instructions, tools and tips to develop and maintain a comprehensive SEMP—an overarching plan that establishes a federal government institution's objectives, approach and structure, which generally sets out how the institution will assist with coordinated federal emergency management, including response. It is intended that governments and industry partners will work together to assess risks to the sector, develop plans to address these risks, and conduct exercises to validate the plans.
Risks should be described in a way that conveys their context, point of origin and potential impact.
These treatment options, forming recommendations, would be used to develop the risk treatment step in the risk management or emergency management cycle. As outlined in the Preface, many federal government institutions already have specific plans or processes to deal with aspects of emergency management; many also have a long track record of preparing and refining BCPs, which endeavour to ensure the continued availability of critical services. An all-hazards approach to risk management does not necessarily mean that all hazards will be assessed, evaluated and treated, but rather that all hazards will be considered. The one most commonly used is the risk matrix (Figure 4), which normally plots the likelihood and impact on the x- and y-axes (the measured components of risks). It involves the identification of risk sources, areas of impact, events and their causes, as well as potential consequences.
Such a plot can help establish acceptable or intolerable risk levels, and establish their respective actions. This makes it quick and easy for you to create detailed documents for you or your business without having to write them from scratch. The purpose of this Guide is to assist federal officials, managers and coordinators responsible for emergency management (EM) planning.
The Emergency Management Continuum is depicted in a wheel diagram where all four risk-based functions of emergency management are interconnected and interdependent in a system from prevention and mitigation to preparedness, response, and recovery. Understanding the internal context is essential to confirm that the risk assessment approach meets the needs of the institution and of its internal stakeholders.
The all-hazards risk assessment (AHRA) process should be open and transparent while respecting the federal institution's context.
The purpose of risk evaluation is to help make decisions about which risks need treatment and the priority for treatment implementation. Risk treatment options can be prioritized by considering risk severity, effectiveness of risk controls, cost and benefits, the horizontal nature of the risk, and existing constraints.
Risk recognition can occur through many paths, including inspections, audits, and job hazard analyses.


An All-Hazards Risk Assessment Framework and associated tools are also under development and will be included in a subsequent version of the Guide.
After completing the above steps, the planning team should consider developing a detailed work plan that includes a schedule with realistic timelines, milestones that reflect the institutional planning cycle, and a responsibility assignment matrix with assigned tasks and deadlines. Characterization of risks should use an appropriate breadth and scope; it can be difficult to establish a course of action to treat risks if the scope is too broad, while a scope that is too narrow will create too much information, thereby making it difficult to establish priorities. A sample cross-reference table of existing plans by identified institutional risks is provided in Annex C, Appendix 4. The aim is to generate a comprehensive list of risks based on those events that might prevent, degrade or delay the achievement of objectives. EM planning, in particular, aims to strengthen resiliency by promoting an integrated and comprehensive approach that includes the four pillars of EM: prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. A risk portfolio or profile can be created from the register, helping to compile common risks in order to assess interdependencies and to prioritize groups of risks. This approach significantly reduces the workload to get the first impression of risk situation. In the center of the wheel are the main elements that influence the development of a Strategic Emergency Management Plan (SEMP). An inventory of critical assets and services will assist the planning team in identifying the associated threats, hazards, vulnerabilities and risks unique to their institution.
In this section, risks translate into events or circumstances that, if they materialize, could negatively affect the achievement of government objectives. Risk criteria are based on internal and external contexts and reflect the institution's values, objectives, resources and risk appetite (over-arching expression of the amount and type of risk an institution is prepared to take). Consider gathering a list of institutional risks and cross-referencing the existing plans (as identified in Step 2-1c) that address each risk. The probability and impact severity of a risk should determine the priority level for planning and mitigation the hazard.
It sets the time, scope and scale and contributes to adopting an approach that is appropriate to the situation of the institution and to the risks affecting the achievement of its objectives. A risk register will typically describe each risk, assess the likelihood that it will occur, list possible consequences if it does occur, provide a grading or prioritization for each risk, and identify proposed mitigation strategies. The resulting SEMP building blocks will reflect strategic priorities—the desired balance between developing measures that respond to emergencies versus mitigating the risk.
Risks should be realistic, based on drivers that exist in the institution's operating environment.
In addition, there are other existing EM planning documents and initiatives that apply to a range of federal government institutions, such as the Federal Emergency Response Plan (FERP) and deliverables under the National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure.
Existing controls, the cost of further risk treatment and any policy requirement implications are considered when deciding on additional mitigation measures.
If a business impact analysis (BIA) has already been completed for your federal government institution's BCP, this analysis can greatly inform your criticality assessment. Once the institution's context is clearly understood (refer to the environmental scan in Step 2-1), the next step is to find and recognize hazards, threats and possibly trends and drivers, and to describe them in risk statements. This step will contribute to the concept that sound EM decision-making can be based on an understanding and evaluation of hazards, vulnerabilities and related risks.
The key to any emergency planning is awareness of the potential situations that could impose risks on the organization and on Canadians and to assess those risks in terms of their impact and potential mitigation measures.
Probabilistic methods provide more information on the range of risks and can effectively capture uncertainty, but require more data and resources.
It can be a useful tool for managing and addressing risks, as well as facilitating risk communication to stakeholders.
When conducting a criticality assessment, it is important to be objective when prioritizing the importance of institutional assets, as not all assets are critical to an institution's operations. Risks can be identified though several mechanisms: structured interviews, brainstorming, affinity grouping, risk source analysis, checklists and scenario analysis.
Federal government institutions are increasing their focus on emergency management (EM) activities, given the evolving risk environment in their areas of responsibility.
It is the environment in which the institution operates to achieve its objectives and which can be influenced by the institution to manage risk. Additional information on analyzing likelihood and impact is provided in the Treasury Board Integrated Risk Management Framework Guidelines. Traditionally, a threat assessment is an analysis of intent and capabilities in the occurrence of a threat.
A risk register or log is used to record information about identified risks and to facilitate the monitoring and management of risks. All available threat assessments should ideally be reviewed by analyzing the assessment's evaluation of hostile capability, intentions and activity, the environment influencing hostile and potentially hostile groups, and environmental considerations, including natural, health and safety hazards.
Prioritization can be shown graphically in a logarithmic risk diagram, risk-rating matrix or other forms of visual representations. A vulnerability assessment looks at an inadequacy or gap in the design, implementation or operation of an asset that could enable a threat or hazard to cause injury or disruption. It is a formal, systematic process for estimating the level of risk in terms of likelihood and consequences for the purpose of informing decision-making.



Disaster preparedness jobs
Southern wisconsin emergency preparedness team
Government car safety ratings 2011


Comments

  1. 18.12.2013 at 22:48:31


    ??That's named electromagnetic that employs.

    Author: Lenardo_dicaprio
  2. 18.12.2013 at 23:24:18


    Scale EMP's, we do have other effects that react take away.

    Author: Lotu_Hikmet
  3. 18.12.2013 at 21:19:32


    Firm line is borne pitched-in anything and every object you.

    Author: now