[scorpa3]

Many of us are still blindly, all be it with the very best of intentions, doing our best to complete and sign the RA forms for our events.

I was wondering how things are progressing with some kind of formal risk assessment training and/or a generic set of risk assessments for all trials Clerks of the Course to be able to refer to?

[John Collins]

As I think I may have already indicated - there are now a group of people designated to work on this in 2007 - so that hopefully we will at least make progress.

I know there was a meeting last week - which was I think combined with environmental matters - as soon as I get some feedback or report I will be better placed to answer.

[yamfan]

Likelyhood of Crash

_____________Catastrophic___Critical___Major_____Minor



Frequent___________1________3________7_________13
Probable___________2________5________9_________16
Occasional_________4________6________11________18
Remote____________8_______10_______14_________19
Improbable________12_______15_______17_________20

LOC 1 - 5 Extreme Intolerable
LOC 6 - 9 High Tolerable with Continuous Review
LOC 10 - 17 Medium Tolerable with Periodic Review
LOC 18 - 20 Low Acceptable with Periodic Review

My riding normally has a risk assessment of around 11, that means a new clutch lever every 8.2 trials and a rear mudgaurd every 10.3 months.

It can rise to around 7 if I choose to ride a grade higher where my risk of an prang is deemed Frequent/Major.

If I borrow my sons 270 Beta my risk assesment rises to 2 Probable/Catastrophic which means that I can't continue with the ride unless my wife gives me a waiver.

All joking aside to conduct a risk assessment as a clerk of course would mean that no one can ride unless we surround the sections in foam!!!!! and use that as mitigation..........

How do you fair in the Crash Assessment matrix????????

[overthehill]

superb yamfan;
i think the acu should adopt your matrix.

seriously; is this another paper chasing exercise that will prove that a clerk of the course is literate but will have no bearing on whether he/she is truly competent?
common sense must prevail or we are going to scare the true enthusiasts away from this sport.

[scorpa3]

overthehill, on Apr 28 2007, 10:54 PM, said:

superb yamfan;
i think the acu should adopt your matrix.

seriously; is this another paper chasing exercise that will prove that a clerk of the course is literate but will have no bearing on whether he/she is truly competent?
common sense must prevail or we are going to scare the true enthusiasts away from this sport.

Yes common sense needs to prevail, however we all have to come to terms with the fact that; in the world of huge compensation claims, organisers must ensure that they provide a minimum duty of care to a set standard. Organisers need to be protected from posible law suits and carrying out proper RA goes a long way.

[totalshell]

''World of huge compensation claims''

how many compensation claims have been made this month against trials officials, clubs, riders, how many in the last year, last 5 years?

i bet i could count them on one finger..

that dont mean it wont ever happen but that the risks of financial claims been made sucessfully must be very small .

surely more important than getting people to fill out forms would be to ensure that all trials are laid out by a competant person who the ACU/ AMCA has validated in that role. ( dont look for holes in the dyke, train / regulate the builders properly)

[scorpa3]

totalshell, on Apr 29 2007, 04:33 PM, said:

how many compensation claims have been made this month against trials officials, clubs, riders, how many in the last year, last 5 years?

i bet i could count them on one finger..

that dont mean it wont ever happen but that the risks of financial claims been made sucessfully must be very small .

surely more important than getting people to fill out forms would be to ensure that all trials are laid out by a competant person who the ACU/ AMCA has validated in that role. ( dont look for holes in the dyke, train / regulate the builders properly)

We've been fortunate, it rarely happens but it will for someone sooner or later.

Even competent, trained people can (and should) be held to account for their actions. It is at this point the person needs to show that they have considered the risks and taken the appropriate action.
To be able to do that, there needs to be evidence and that is where the RA form and process comes to play.

Remember, completing RA training also means that all officials are working to a common standard and that has to be good for all concerned.

[overthehill]

scorpa3, on Apr 29 2007, 08:59 PM, said:

Remember, completing RA training also means that all officials are working to a common standard and that has to be good for all concerned.

if only this was the case - a risk assessment assesses the risk - the important thing to do then is to control that risk. - this is where most fall down.
it is the implementation and monitoring of these control measures that matters.

In my 'other' job - the one i get paid for (not very well i may add) i regulate and enforce on legislation - Above anything else the thing that matters is having competent people managing the risks. More and more i see shelves full of risk assessments in neat binders but none of them converted into on-the-ground action.

sitting in a classroom and finding paragraphs in an ACU handbook bears no relation to how competent an individual is in laying out a trial.
when i got my CofC certificate - my Mother-in-law sat the same course and test that i did - and passed, but she would be first to admit that she couldnot act as CofC for a major trial.

dont get me wrong - i believe in good meaningful training but it has to be part of the picture not the only answer. What we do have are many many experienced officials out there with a wealth of knowledge - ther danger is that they get disilusioned by being told "your no longer competent" as you dont have the right bit of paper - lets use these individuals to mentor and pass on their knowledge to new blood; quite how its done i dont know, but if we are serious about protecting ourselves in a court of law then we should think about it.

Right - i'm off to finish writing my risk assessments for next week !

[rabie]

the national CofC (Trials & Enduro) i sat recently (last year IIRC) had a great section on risk assessment, including many model forms of varying complexity (including one with a matrix like above). IMHO doing one is "good practise" on our part for when something goes wrong, and you need to be prepared, as incidents do happen.

overthehill - having been to Rugby for National Council on Saturday, there is a guy form the environmental committee who has written a risk assessment for major events (ie big crowds, rather than the motorcylcesport side of it), as some club have been asked by local councils to produce one. Those of us in the business of dealing with serious crowds (the benchmark of 3,000+ was given) really do need to be on the ball with this one (or someone will change the law and enforce the "purple book" on us)

[overthehill]

rabie, on May 21 2007, 06:53 PM, said:

the national CofC (Trials & Enduro) i sat recently (last year IIRC) had a great section on risk assessment, including many model forms of varying complexity (including one with a matrix like above). IMHO doing one is "good practise" on our part for when something goes wrong, and you need to be prepared, as incidents do happen.

overthehill - having been to Rugby for National Council on Saturday, there is a guy form the environmental committee who has written a risk assessment for major events (ie big crowds, rather than the motorcylcesport side of it), as some club have been asked by local councils to produce one. Those of us in the business of dealing with serious crowds (the benchmark of 3,000+ was given) really do need to be on the ball with this one (or someone will change the law and enforce the "purple book" on us)

fully agree
when you start managing crowds you have responsibilities - and if you take an entrance fee you have even more.
i'm first to state risk assessments are essential but the point i'm making is that they alone are not sufficient and having a competent person who can show that he has considered all the risks is what is needed (and of course it is good practice to record these)

It would be good to have a forum to share best practice and perhaps the ACU should have a section on their website with downloadable examples, guidance etc.

It sounds like the ACU national CofC seminar is somewhat better than the SACU one i sat (although it was nearly 3 yrs ago) - i will find out this year when i resit it!

[scorpa3]

scorpa3, on Apr 24 2007, 11:31 AM, said:

Many of us are still blindly, all be it with the very best of intentions, doing our best to complete and sign the RA forms for our events.

I was wondering how things are progressing with some kind of formal risk assessment training and/or a generic set of risk assessments for all trials Clerks of the Course to be able to refer to?

Now this is starting to look a bit more encouraging. See copy of ACU RA below. Any chance of a training seminar on this?

-------------------------------------------------------------------


PROFORMA FOR RISK MANAGEMENT AT
ACU PERMITTED TRIAL EVENTS.

2008.1

INTRODUCTION

The assessment of risks associated with the sporting element of Trial events has been undertaken by the ACU Trial & Enduro Committee, and is reviewed annually.

The steps required to be taken by event organisers are included in the ACU Handbook which is published annually.

This Risk Management Form is a simple proforma which allows organisers to check that they have put in place all of the necessary requirements, and to demonstrate to public bodies if required that a proper risk assessment for the event has been undertaken.

The only exception to this is at item 1, Start layout, where organisers are required to assess the risks associated with the location and layout of their own venue.

A blank space is provided at the end of this form to allow clubs to undertake their own risk assessment for items which are not covered by the ACU’s annual publications. (eg. Beer Tents or Children’s Entertainments)

For large events, the ACU will provide a template to assist with the “event management

Description of Columns.

• Heading – Identifies each area where risk is identified.
• Column 1. – Potential Risk in each area.
• Column 2. – Level of Risk (H - high, M – medium, L – low) this is a combination of the likelihood of an incident and the consequence.
• Column 3. – Action to Manage Risk (fencing, classes etc)
• Column 4. – Is Action in Place, to be completed by organising club. (Y – yes, N – no)
• Column 5. – If Answer is No, Identify The Reason.

1 2 3 4 5

1. Start Layout.
This will depend on location of start (assessment of traffic flow on roads adjacent to the site entrance) and size of event and considerations for Column 3 may be Warning signs, marshals, roped areas
Danger entering or leaving the site
Segregation of officials, competitors and spectators.
Access to the circuit for emergency vehicles.

2. Course.
Suitability for type of event. TSR20 Course/Route
Event details in Supp. Reg’s
Suitable for all levels of competitors entered. TSR38 Joint Adult/Youth Events
Number of competitors. Individual starting times
Any parts of the Course with exceptional difficulty. C of C to produce sections to suit skill level of expected Entry.
Any parts of the Course requiring safety barriers.





3. Spectators.
This section will only apply where more than 100 spectators are anticipated to attend.
Numbers expected.

Separation of
Spectators and competitors.
Protection from debris.








4. Paddock Area.
This section to be addressed where a separate Riders Paddock is established.

Control of spectator entry.


Major incident plan to deal with evacuation.
Major incident plan to deal with casualties.


5. Officials.

Adequate numbers:-
In accordance with ACU Trials Official requirements
Adequate briefing. In accordance with 6.03 of Sporting Code

Ease of identification. Not an issue for Trials
Risk of hearing damage Not an issue with the machines catered for.


6. Competitors.

Competitors able to handle level of Sections. TSR1. Age Groups Ability Classes
Compatibility of competitive equipment. TSR1. Age Groups and capacity classes
Risk of danger to officials and spectators. Minimal but to be reviewed by T&E Committee
Risk of injury in accident.
TSR12 Cut out buttons
TSR13 Chainguards
TSR15 Clothing
TSR33 Medical Services


7. Event Control.

System for starting event. Riders are started individually.
System for stopping event. No time limit. **
Adequate time allowance **





8. First Aid / Rescue Services.

Adequacy of provision. Local hospital identified and location displayed
Fire Hazard. Fire extinguisher present at Start Area.



9. Electricity.

Shock.
Fatality.
Fire. No electricity used **



10. Falls. (Spectator and Officials areas)
This section will only apply where spectators’ area is established.

Falls from less than 2 metres.
Falls from more than 2 metres.

11. Liquid Storage.

Spillage leading to contamination or slip hazard. Not Applicable








Assessment of Additional Event Specific Activities
To be undertaken by Organiser.
(if none, indicate none below)













Name of Club/Organisation: ………………………………………………………….

Venue: ………………………………………………… Permit No. ……………….

I confirm that, to the best of my knowledge, the information provided above was correct at the time of completion.


Signed._____________________ Name. __________________________


Position within organisation. __________________________________


Date. _____________________ Time . ____________________________