For assessment 1, you are required to work with the given partner organisation to conduct a disaster risk assessment and develop disaster risk reduction strategies.

There are two (2) parts to this assessment:

• Part A: Disaster Risk Assessment.
• Part B: Disaster Risk Reduction Strategies.

Part A: Disaster Risk Assessment

You have been asked to provide a disaster risk assessment for an organisation (see Moodle). By completing the template provided, you are to identify hazards that would impact the organisation during a disaster. Assess the disaster risk each hazard presents, supporting your assessment with evidence from the literature and information from your partner organisation.

Part B: Disaster Risk Reduction Strategies

For Part B, you are to identify the disaster hazards you wish to prioritise for action. Design and develop strategies for reducing the risk these hazards present during times of disaster. Write a report addressed to the organisation clearly describing a range of strategies targeting each of the disaster hazards that you have identified. Provide a clear description of each strategy; explain the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats; and recommend the option you consider the best choice in terms of organisational capacity.

Support your assessment with evidence from the literature and information from the organisation (see documents and forms provided in Moodle). Use relevant examples from published case studies and published peer-reviewed literature to assist you in designing and developing your strategies. Your report should adopt good practices for risk reduction and sustainable solutions for reducing the identified risk(s) (apply the Sendai Framework). Ensure you facilitate evidence-based decision-making regarding disaster resilience, preparedness and hazard mitigation.

Please submit both Part A and Part B as one combined document through Moodle. 

A detailed marking rubric is available on Moodle.

• uses relevant information from credible and reputable sources to support ideas
  
• the report is relevant to the context under investigation
• hazards identified are realistic
• strategies identified are realistic
• effectiveness of the response activities is evaluated
• evidence of understanding of the organisation's risks
  
• depth and extent of discussion
• accuracy of risk assessment
• prioritisation based on critical thought and analysis of the risk
• recommendations based on critical thought and analysis
• depth and range of research to support strategy development
• creativity and innovation in strategy design and development
• organisational capacity is clearly considered when making recommendations.

For assessment two, you may select a community and evaluate the community's social and physical vulnerability and resilience to hazard(s). You will then identify two (2) stakeholders in the community whose actions could currently contribute to disaster resilience in that community. Your analysis will need to evaluate how your chosen stakeholders currently contribute to the community's social and physical infrastructure and offer suggestions for how the stakeholders can work together or co-operate – or deepen their cooperation if they already work together – to increase the resilience of the community's social and physical infrastructure over time.

The assessment should use existing publicly available data/literature about the community and should adopt good practices for risk reduction (apply the Sendai Framework). You must present your evaluation in the form of a report that can be acted upon by relevant stakeholders within your selected community.

Examples of relevant stakeholders include – but are not limited to – the following:

- Local government

- State/provincial government

- National/federal government

- Local business interests/corporate actors

- National business interests/corporate actors

- Community organisations (e.g. social clubs or fraternities, cultural societies, religious organisations)

- International agencies (e.g. United Nations, World Bank, WHO).

Write a 3000 word report on your chosen community.

• You may select a community of any size, from a small village to a major metropolitan city or country.

• The community may be from a developing country or a developed country.

• You may focus on a specific hazard or a range of hazards that threaten the community. The hazard(s) may be natural or human-induced.

• The report must identify, apply and fully reference appropriate concepts and models.

As a minimum, your report should include:

• The geography and demographics of the community.

• The natural and man-made hazards that threaten the community.

• A disaster risk analysis within your chosen community.

• A summary of the existing disaster resilience strategy for the community.

• An analysis of existing and potential private and/or public sector partnerships and how they do or could enhance disaster resilience.

• An assessment of the varied perspectives (e.g. economic priorities, social goals, or others) of your selected stakeholders on issues related to disaster resilience.

• A discussion of how your selected stakeholders currently contribute to existing disaster management plans and governance.

• An identification of elements of physical, social, economic, and/or environmental perspectives of resilience that apply to your selected community.

Notes

This is an individual assessment, and teamwork is not permitted for this assessment.

The word count is considered to be from the first word of the introduction to the last word of the conclusion. It excludes the cover page, abstract, contents page, reference page and appendices. It includes in-text references and direct quotations. Paraphrasing of information is preferred rather than the use of direct quotations.

1. An assessment of the varied perspectives (eg. economic priorities, social goals, or others) of your community and selected stakeholders on issues related to disaster resilience
2. A discussion of how your selected stakeholders currently contribute to existing disaster management plans and governance 
3. An identification of elements of physical, social, economic, and/or environmental perspectives of resilience that apply to your selected community
4. An analysis of existing and potential private and/or public sector partnerships and how they do or could enhance disaster resilience
5. Evidence of research, quality of sources, and referencing style
6. Quality of presentation, including appropriateness of format and adherence to word count
7. Adherence to requirements of the task.

In the form of a PowerPoint presentation, you are required to present a detailed implementation plan from your identified strategy/ies in Assessment 2. You will be presenting to the council members of your chosen community and your identified stakeholders.

• Requirements:

– Present your detailed implementation plan from your identified strategy/ies in assessment 2 to the community leader/s and the stakeholders.

– You have been allocated 8 minutes (+/- 10%) to deliver a presentation outlining at a minimum:

• A detailed implementation plan for your identified disaster risk reduction strategy/ies and rationale for your implementation choices. Ensure your implementation plan recommendations are based on critical thought, analysis and appropriate research to support the implementation plan. Ensure organisational and community capacity clearly considered in the development of the plan.

You are required to present the assessment using PowerPoint with your embedded audio recording. This will not be a live presentation and should be submitted via Moodle.

A detailed marking rubric is available on Moodle. Assessment criteria includes:

1. Quality of summary of the community

2. Knowledge of the hazards to the community and vulnerability of the community/specific demographic groups

3. Discussion of community resilience via stakeholder relationships or cooperations, including any barriers to this cooperation or additional resources that would be required

4. Detailed implementation plan with recommendations based on critical thought and analysis, depth and range of research to support the implementation plan, creativity and innovation in the development of the plan, and organisational capacity clearly considered in the development of the plan

5. Evidence of research, quality of sources, and referencing style

6. The ability to communicate information

7. Quality of presentation, including voice over

8. Adherence to requirements of the task.