| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | The Safeguarding Risk Assessment and Management Tool can be used to: - inform and shape the design, proposal, and budget development of a project/award, humanitarian response or a specific activity or event - continuously review and manage risk during the implementation of a project or activity Remember: Some risks can apply to more than one of the category There may be more than one thematic risk area you need to consider e.g. child protection activities in relation to safer schools Safeguarding risks should be reviewed at a minimum every three months as part of the project management and review process or when there is a change in context. If you are using the risk assessment to assess a specific event or activity the risks should be monitored throughout the event/activity and relevant action taken if there is any action that needs to be taken to manage or prevent an increase in the risk to the safety and wellbeing of people. The Safeguarding Risk Assessment does not replace the PART Date of Initial Safeguarding Risk Assessment : | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | Identified Risk | Risk Factors | Current Processes & Practices in Place to Mitigate the Risk | Impact WITH planned mitigation in place (The consequences to children and adults if the risk actualizes) | Likelihood WITH planned mitigation in place | Impact WITH mitigation in place - Numeric Score | Likelihood WITH mitigation in place - Numeric Score | Risk Score Number | Risk Score Level | Actions/Mitigation to Further Improve the Management of the Risk | Who is responsible for each action/mitigation? | When are they due? | Required resources | Review Drop-Down | Date Last Reviewed | Comments | |||||||
3 | Context & External Environment | 1.1.1. Conduct a Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) survey with students, teachers and school managers about green school which will inform fine-tuning interventions to promote green school models. 1.1.2. Conduct annual customized training sessions toward students, teachers, school managers about GHG, energy, water, green traffic and others. 1.1.3. Establish a group of pioneer students in each school to lead and promote green practices among students in the schools and organize child-led periodically awareness raising activities through photo voice, video voice, contest, campaign events 1.1.4. Organize 01 experience sharing session among the core group of pioneer students and teachers to exchange experience in promoting the green school model 1.2.1 Train how to conduct carbon footprint audit and operate the audit to investigate current emission status 1.2.2 Assist school stakeholders to develop a green school statement and develop annual green school plan to implement and success green school model. 1.2.3 Support target schools to implement their green school plan properly by increasing knowledge and skill to handle indoor air quality, daylighting, waste water treatment, recycling, energy, water and material efficiency, and automatic light control or green interior gardening 1.3.1. Support schools to pilot solar panel power-based drinking water system 1.3.2. Training to school managers, teachers and students on operating and maintaining the solar energy model. 1.3.3. Conduct monitoring visit to check if the schools are operating the solar power models properly 2.1.1. Document good practices and lesson learnt from the pilots of green school model (including solar power solution) for further sharing and promotion. 2.1.2 Organize a sharing workshop at the end of the project to share good practices and lesson learnt from the pilot to other schools in Thanh Hoa province and Hanoi 2.3.1. Review provincial policies relevant to climate actions in schools to identify gaps for improvement. This include desk studies and consultation with key stakeholders 2.3.2. Develop the policy brief on the basis of the policy review and consultations with key stakeholders | Abuse and exploitation not reported and perpetrators continue to act with impunity | - Save the Children staff and representatives are failing to detect and or report abuse and harm - Weak law enforcement, policing or judiciary , with an emphasis on child protection - Abuses are less likely to be reported and responded to where there is poor local governance, - Incidents of abuse and harm dealt with by the community or within the family | - The budget for safeguarindg trainng for local partners has allocated in project budget. - All new SC staff are trained on safeguarding issues and the importancy of incident reporting. - The local implementing partner of this proejct in Ha Dong is working with SC in another project, therefore, they understand well on safeguarding issues and the importance of incident reporting while the other partner used to work with SC since 2009-2017. - Local government and communites in project area are applying strictly the safeguarding policies of Vietnam government. - The project has policy/ regulation that will require every project to be conducted partner assessment prior to the project implementation | Critical | Rare | 5 | 2 | 15 | H | + Organize refresher safeguarding training for local partners before project implementation. + Organize the safeguarding orientaiton for visitors/consultants if any before field trip. + Work along with visitors if any when conducting site visists in its project areas. + Introduce and display feedback and reporing machnism at the public areas and collect feedback from people and group during monitoring field trip. + Identify and understand the community based child protection system and share child safeguarding policies/ procedures of SC where possible. + Conduct partner assessment including child protection/ safe guarding prior to engaging them into the project implementation. | Project Manager | + At the beginning of project. + During project life | Yes | Not Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||
4 | Programmes- Design & Implementation | Project meetings, workshop,; training courses; experience learning trip; and awareness raising events and engagement with SCK colleagues | Incidents and / or concerns of safeguarding or unsafe programming are not reported and or appropriately addressed leading to repeated incidents | - SC staff including SCK colleauges and its partners do not understand that different groups of children and communities experience harm and abuse differently and may need different forms of programme intervention. - SC staff including SCK colleagues and its partners do not understand the signs and symptoms or the different types of abuse and harm and fail to detect and report abuse or unsafe programming | - As above; and: - CO has exising FRM for disssemintation when starting the project. | Critical | Possible | 5 | 3 | 20 | H | + Conduct risk assessment as part of the planning process when working at the field. + Engage with the children and adults within the project site and or community to prepare them for the visit and go over any safety measures /expectations, concerns/feedback they may have prior, during or after the visit + Ensure all partners are briefed prior to going to the project site and re-enforce what is and is not allowed with regard to behaviour and interaction with the programme participants. + SC staff should be identified to lead and manage the visit and ensure preparation and risk assessment and any mitigations actions have been applied + Ensure awareness and communication materials on FRM and methods are inclusive , visible and re-enforced during project activities and monitoring visits + Strong monitoring and management systems in place to identify poor or unsafe programming and take corrective action + Lessons from previous/similar programmes, safeguarding incidents are taken into consideration and built into programme design to prevent re-occurrence | Project Manager | Before trip to the field | No | Not Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||
5 | Quality Indicators for monitoring whether programmes are being delivered safely not included in programme design & MEAL | - Project managers and those monitoring do not recognise and respond to safeguarding and un-safe programming concerns - Project managers and those monitoring do not ask questions to understand whether the programme/activities are being delivered safely | CO is appling the safer partnership and COSA and it will be apply in this project too. | Severe | Possible | 4 | 3 | 16 | H | + Conduct risk assessment as part of the planning process when working in the field. + Technical Experts and safeguarding leads collaborate to develop clear indicators for monitoring potential harm and abuse caused by the programme. + Continuous and learning and development to increase capacity of staff to detect , monitor and address risks and gaps which may put programme participants at risk of abuse and harm. + Safeguarding indicators developed and included to monitor and measure progress/impact | Project Manager | Before trip to the field | No | Not Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||||
6 | Children are harmed when joining the project event out of their communites and they have to travel by car from their sites to meeting rooms. | Road infrastructure conditions are weak in project sites | CO has framework agreement with car's suppliers in project site and has safety and security management policy to ensure the safety for both SC staff, partners, and people and group. They will be applied in this project too. | Severe | Possible | 4 | 3 | 16 | H | - Select the good condiction car. - Travel in day-time only. - Use seat-bell during travelling. | Supply Chain Project Manager and project manager | During project life | No | Part Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||||
7 | Weak local reporting and response mechanisms | - Project participants and the school staff are less likely to make use of Community Feedback & Reporting if they are not involved in the design . This may also result in mechanisms not being safe or meeting the specific needs of vulnerable groups at target schools such as children, women, people with disability etc. - Lack of mechanisms in place to feedback / inform the community about how SC will respond to a report - Project participants and target schools are not aware of or do not trust SC reporting and response mechanisms -Failure of programme team to identify and address barriers to reporting as part the design & project management process -Failure to have multiple channels for reporting which are appropriate for the local context and/or based on existing communication systems | The project is under proposal stage but SC have the feedback and complaint mechanism are in place and SC will introduce it to the local partner during the project implementation. | Severe | Possible | 4 | 3 | 16 | H | + Introduce feedback and complaint mechanism to all project participants at the begining of project and repeat it in each activities. + Establish multiple reporting mechanisms and communicate this to staff and people within the community + Engage with children and adults in target schools to design and establish safe and accessible Feedback & Reporting Mechanisms (FRM), address barriers to reporting and take the appropriate action. Identifying & addressing barriers to reporting with regard to people in the community and SCI staff and partners is a continuous process + Collaboration between safeguarding & MEAL teams of reporting systems. This should include aligning the CFRM with Datix + Collaboration between MEAL, Safeguarding and other relevant functions to engage with the community to establish/ strengthen reporting and response mechanisms in relation to safeguarding + Establish multiple reporting mechanisms and communicate this, through different mediums to staff and people within the target schools | Project Manager | When kickoff the project and in each activity | No | Part Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||||
8 | Poor understanding of safeguarding requirements by project team leads to non-compliance and poor safeguarding practice | SC and donor safeguarding standards and requirement not embedded into the project, proposal and budget development from the initial concept to close-out. | - Technical Experts, Project Managers, New Business development and Awards colleagues understand contractual safeguarding requirements and ensure they are embedded within the award - Adequate safeguarding capacity and resources secured to ensure safeguarding technical expertise is available to support full oversight of programme design and implementation. | Moderate | Unlikely | 2 | 2 | 6 | L | The project team updates the safeguarding annually and apply in all project activities. | Project Manager | During project life | No | Not Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||||
9 | Partnerships | All project activitiies are implemented by local partners through Subgrant. | Partners staff and representatives abuse and exploit children and adults engaged in SCI funded activities | - Non-compliance of SCI's 12 Core Operational Safeguarding Activity (COSAs) for partners - Low level of commitment to safeguarding issues by partner's managers and personnel - SCI does not have capacity to properly assess the safeguarding component of the partner assessment - Resources and budget not built into awards to address safeguarding gaps within the Partner Strengthening Plan | - The budget for safeguarindg trainng for local partners has allocated in project budget. - All new SC staff are trained on safeguarding issues and the importancy of incident reporting. - The local partner of this proejct is working with SC in another project, therefore, they understand well on safeguarding issues and the importance of incident reporting. - Local government and communites in project area are applying strictly the safeguarding policies of Vietnam government. | Critical | Possible | 5 | 3 | 20 | H | + Partners' are aware of SCI and donor safeguarding requirements from the start. + Safeguarding risks, donor requirements and reporting requirements included in kick-off meeting and re-enforced throughout project cycle. + COSA review conducted on bi-annually basis to address the gaps in SG requirements | Project Manager & MEAL focal point | Before and during project implementation | No | Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||
10 | Partners fail to detect , report and respond to safeguarding violations | - Culture of not raising concerns or reporting in-appropriate behaviour of personnel - Partners lack capacity to respond to incidents, including conducting investigations and providing support and care to survivors - Partners fail to report safeguarding incidents to SCI | - The local partner of this proejct in Hanoi is working with SC in another project, therefore, they understand well on safeguarding issues and the importance of incident reporting while the other partner used to work with SC during the period 2009-2017 so they could partly understand SCs regulations/ incident reporting. | Critical | Possible | 5 | 3 | 20 | H | + Organize refresher safeguarding training for partners before project implementation + Distribute FRM before starting any activity at the field and dispaly it in public area. + Sork together with local partners to engage with programme participants and members of the community to identify and address barriers to reporting and design safe and inclusive community feedback and reporting mechanisms. + Sport check of reporting mechanisms + SG discussions are included in regular meetings with partners, comunities and children | Project Manager & MEAL focal point | Before and during project implementation | Yes | Part Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||||
12 | Media & Communications | Photos of the project taken by partner's staff and its presentative during project implementation | Photos of programme participants and put on social media platforms without consent or organisational approval | - Partner's staff and its presentsative take photos on their personal phones for personal social media use (e.g. on Facebook, Instagram). This is not allowed, only authorised staff can take photos of children. - Photos of people are taken without their consent and then shared on WhatsApp and other messaging platforms , because it is not considered 'social media' and thus not considered to fall under media/comms guidance | SC has policies on communicaiton and data protection and will apply them in this project too. Those policies will be oriented to local partners before project implementation. | Critical | Possible | 5 | 3 | 20 | H | - Provide SC's reguations related to taken photos --> Induction on Media poclicy included in project kick-off workshop - Rules of taking of photos in briefings prior to project visits. - All staff , representatives and visitors understand the rules of not taking photographs at project sites e.g. schools, health facilities | Project Manager | before project implementation | No | Part Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||
14 | People (staff, volunteers, representatives) | SCI staff joins the project implementation in the field | Children and adults are harmed by the action of Save the Children staff and representatives | - Poor awareness amongst staff and representatives (volunteers, suppliers , contractors, consultants) of the safeguarding risks, types and impact of abuse on children and vulnerable adults in affected communities, how to prevent and report concerns - Staff and representatives fail to apply the relevant procedures, regulations and or standards and cut corners when doing their work e.g. children travelling in an SCI or hired vehicle without authorisation and accompanying staff; failing to correct unsafe practices which have been identified; failing to apply lessons learnt to reduce risk of re-occurrence of incidents; failing to apply the 2-adult rule | - All new SC staff are trained on safeguarding issues and the importancy of incident reporting. - All visitors to project site are oriented about safeguarding policies and be accompanied by SC staff at the field. | Severe | Possible | 4 | 3 | 16 | H | + Awareness materials contextualised and accessible to ensure all parties understand required procedures, regulations and standards , how to apply them , their role and responsibility to prevent the risk of harm + Safeguarding role and responsibilities (actions/objectives) included in job descriptions and DtP process for staff + Senior Managers promote and maintain a safeguarding culture across all functions and projects + SG Risk assessment regularly reviewed and shared with other stakeholders for their awareness and accountability during activities implementation | Project Manager | during project implementation | No | Part Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||
15 | Safeguarding incidents and or concerns of safeguarding or unsafe programming are not reported or appropriately addressed | - Staff, volunteers and representatives are not properly briefed on their responsibility to report and the reporting channels available - Reporting channels not accessible or trusted by people | - All new SC staff are trained on safeguarding issues and the importancy of incident reporting. - All visitors to project site are oriented about safeguarding policies and be accompanied by SC staff at the field. | Severe | Possible | 4 | 3 | 16 | H | + Staff and representatives briefed on what and who to report to if they have any concerns with regard to unsafe programming , risk of harm or abuse committed by Save the Children colleagues , or another representative or visitor to the programme. + Regular awareness and learning sessions conducted for all staff e.g. lunchtime sessions on safeguarding and importance of reporting. + Engaging with community to establish/improve community feedback and reporting mechanisms and building their trust to report. + Staff are vigilant and ask the right questions when engaging with people in the community/project sites to detect , prevent and respond to any safeguarding risks and unsafe programming practices. + SG issues included and followed-up in meetings with partners and communities | Project Manager | during project implementation | No | Part Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||||
17 | Information & Digital Technology & Information Management | Share good practice and lessons learned, green tips..etc pictures including but not limited to Facebook, online engagement, events with other schools. | Increased online activity by staff, volunteers and partners increases the risk of online abuse against program participants and violations of data protection | - Online programming started before safety measures, procedures, guidance and other learning materials have been developed and implemented at all levels increases vulnerability of children and preventable safeguarding incidents - Poor knowledge and understanding of safeguarding risks or incidents associated with use of digital technology and online safety in relation to staff, children, parents, the wider community and volunteers. | SC has policies on communicaiton and data protection and will apply them in this project too. Those policies will be oriented to local partners before project implementation. | Significant | Possible | 4 | 3 | 16 | H | ICT and Data protection risks and considerations addressed in the project design . Proposal budget & planning process. Online safety education and training adapted/developed and contextualised for staff, children, young people and their caregivers Country office has the capacity and resources to prevent, monitor and respond to any breaches . +cyber satefy included in the SG induction for parnters and other parties | Project Manager | Before project implementation | No | Part Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||
19 | Supply Chain | Hire car for project staff and local partners when conduting monitoring field trip | Fleet - Poorly maintained or inappropriate vehicles being used and/or failure to adhere to SCI transport policies and procedures(e.g. break failure, not enough seats, lack of working seat belts) - which could result in road accidents, and poor on boarding processes resulting in opportunities for child and adult safeguarding issues | - Be failure to follow procedures and possible accidents and CSG incidents - Drivers poorly briefed on expected professional and personal behaviour and report safeguarding - Drivers being alone with children and adults, and use the opportunity to sexual abuse, exploit, or trafficking and child labour - Drivers failing to follow procedures such as speeding, language etc. resulting in accidents and loss of reputation | CO has framework agreement with car's suppliers in project site and has safety and security management policy to ensure the safety for both SC staff, partners, and people and group. They will be applied in this project too. | Severe | Possible | 3 | 3 | 12 | M | + On boarding and continued briefings of drivers (SCI and of rented vehicles) on SG policies + Management follow ups and checks on policy and procedures + Ensure that drivers understand they should not be alone in cars with women or children. This regulation is reflected in poliies/ regualtions when signning the framework contract with the car supplier. | Supply Chain Team | Before project implementation | No | Done | This project is under proposal stage only. | ||||||
22 | Thematic ( Medical Services, Health & Nutrition, Child Protection, Education, Cash & Voucher Transfers, CRG etc.) | Not applicable for this aspect | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||
23 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
24 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
25 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
26 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
27 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
28 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
29 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
30 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
31 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
32 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
33 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
34 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
35 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
36 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
37 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
38 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
39 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
40 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
41 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
42 | 0 | X | |||||||||||||||||||||
43 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
44 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
45 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
46 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
47 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
48 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
49 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
50 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
51 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
52 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
53 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
54 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
55 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
56 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
57 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
58 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
59 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
60 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
61 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
62 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
63 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
64 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
66 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
68 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
69 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
70 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
71 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
74 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
75 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
76 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
77 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
79 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
80 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
81 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
82 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
83 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
84 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
85 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
86 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
87 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
88 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
90 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
91 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
92 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
93 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
94 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
95 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
96 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
97 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
98 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
99 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
100 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
101 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
102 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
103 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
104 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
105 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
106 | |||||||||||||||||||||||