Policy Development and Challenges in Health and Safety for International Education: A Case Study of Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada Risk and Responsibility for Education Abroad Programmes: The Caribbean Perspective University of the West Indies June 23, 2005

 Review Queen’s Policy Off-Campus Activity Safety Policy (OCASP) Emergency Support Program (ESP)  Policy Challenges  Good Practice Outcomes Objectives

Off-Campus Activity Safety Policy (OCASP)

 1997 – Emergency Support Program  1998 – Field Research Accident  2000 – Field Research Safety Policy approved by the Board of Trustees  2002 – Policy Committee formed  2004 – OCASP approved by Board of Trustees in March  2004 – OCASP comes into effect September 1 OCASP History

OCASP Goals  Meeting the University’s obligations, both legal and moral, with respect to the health and safety of all members of its community when participating in University-sanctioned off-campus activities.  Increasing the level of awareness of safety issues of individuals who are participating in off-campus activities.  Exercising due diligence in identifying and managing the risks inherent in off-campus activities.

OCASP Scope  “off-campus activities that are organized or sanctioned by the University”.  Field research  International study/work/travel (Exchanges, LOP, field schools)  Activities that are part of academic courses and programs  Travel on University business (conferences, meetings, etc.)  Road trips by athletics teams and clubs  Other extra-curricular activities organized, sanctioned or funded by the University

OCASP Exemptions  “activities over which the University exercises no control and for which it can therefore take no responsibility”  External activities that are not part of employment responsibilities or academic programs.  Activities organized exclusively by students or students groups without expressed approval, sanction or funding from the University.  Travel or activities of any person who is not a member of the University community

What is the Chain of Responsibility? Person in Authority PI/Activity Coordinator Off-Campus Activity Leader Participants

Activity Coordinator, Off-Campus Activity Leader & Participant  Understand and comply with OCASP.  Designing and planning of the activity.  Determining the risk level of the activity and conducting the full risk assessment for the hazards identified.  Attend all applicable training programs.  Act safety and in a responsible manner.  Reporting incidents to the PIA.  Responsible for documentation, including submittal of the Post Activity Incident Report.

Person in Authority  Ensure that the department is aware of the policy and comply with the provisions.  Approve the Safety Planning Record for higher risk activities.  Ensure that time sensitive occurrences are reported to the appropriate University office.  Assess the continuation of an activity in the event a critical accident occurs.  Receive and review the Post-Activity Incident Report  Ensure information about hazards or incidents encountered during activities are communicated within the department/student.

OCASP Risk Levels  Manageable  Low Risk  Higher Risk  Unmanageable

Low Risk  “entails hazards no greater than those encountered by the participants in their everyday lives.”  Examples  Travel for conferences, seminars, meetings  Visits to academic or related institutions  Local field trips  Clinical placements  Travel to the United States  No formal approval from a safety perspective under the policy.  Appropriate planning and preparation by the leader(s) and participants is required.

Higher Risk  “potential to expose participants to hazards significantly greater than those likely to be encountered in their everyday lives.”  Examples  Research or study at industrial sites or medical facilities which pose health or safety risks.  Working/travel in remote locations, areas with natural hazards, politically unstable locations.  Travel to locations for which a travel or health advisory is in effect.  Events at which alcohol plays a significant role.  International activities involving undergraduate students.  Planning, preparation, training, documentation and approvals are required in advance of the activity.

Unmanageable Risk  “taking into account the category of the participants, circumstances and resources available, an activity may ultimately be deemed to entail unmanageable risk.”  Examples  Travel to war zones  Travel to area with high medical risk  Travel to areas with high risk of natural disasters  Solitary research in remote or hazardous area in some circumstances.  Activities that are classified as unmanageable may be revised in such a way that the risk is reduced to manageable.

Hazard Assessment IDENTIFY Identify hazard issues and concerns ANALYZE Risk Assessment (impact/severity, probability, time frame), classify, and prioritize risks PLAN/CONTROL Decide what, if anything, should be done about risks MONITOR Monitor activities and verify/validate mitigation plans and controls List of Hazards Risk evaluation OCASP classification Risk prioritization Mitigation plans Risk acceptance rationale Risk tracking requirements Hazard status reports on: - Risks - Hazard mitigation plans Nature of Activity / Location / Participants / Hazard Families Resources Program / project information Research: test data, expert opinion, hazard analysis, lessons learned, technical analysis

Hazard Identification  The first step in practical assessment is to identify the hazards which are or may be present.  Hazards can be grouped into families: 1.Physical 2.Chemical 3.Environmental 4.Health 5.Personal Safety 6.Legal

Hazard Analysis  Involves conducting a risk assessment.  Risk is likelihood that harm will actually be done by the realization of the hazard during the activity. Risk = likelihood of an event x severity of outcome  Although the assessment process is somewhat subjective, it is a logical way of asking questions that will produce enough information for sensible conclusions to be drawn.

Hazard Analysis  The questions which should be asked in the assessment process are: –What are the hazards? –What are the sorts of circumstances that can be realistically expected to occur which are capable of leading to injury or ill health? –When are the circumstances likely to arise? –Who are the people who might be at risk? –Are there some people likely to be at particular risk? –Is the likely outcome minor or major? –What is the nature of extent of the risk? –Are the existing precautions appropriate and adequate? –Are we fully complying with the law, guidelines, standards? –In not, what action is required to control the risks?

EMERGENCY SUPPORT PROGRAM For Study/Work/Travel Abroad (ESP)  Created in 1997 & facilitated by Queen’s University International Centre (QUIC)  Raise awareness of participants around risks and responsibility of study/work/ travel abroad  Provide emergency support to participants  Safeguard institution in matters pertaining to legal liability in study/work/travel abroad.

EMERGENCY SUPPORT PROGRAM For Study/Work/Travel Abroad (ESP) Key Components  Well Defined Emergency Protocol –Emergency Management Committee –“Program” Emergency Contacts  Emergency Contact Card  Queen’s 24-hour Emergency Telephone Hotline  Pre-Departure Orientation Briefings  Enrolment Form, Education Abroad Workbook, Information sheets  Emergency Contact Database  In-Field Support: travel advisories, “early warning” calls  Re-entry Support & Emergency/Incident Follow-up

ESP Enrolment  Under provisions of OCASP all undergrad students involved in international activities must enroll in ESP (including ISC students)  Grad and staff encouraged to enroll  On-line enrolment process –Data saved directly to database –Emergency Reports for Committee  All Exchange and LOP approved by the International Centre  International Centre approval of all ESP participants once pre- departure briefing is complete

OCASP Documentation  Policy, Supporting Documents and Forms Under OCASP section  OCASP Data Warehouse

OCASP Implementation  Reviewed by Departments  Reference to case history ( SARS, Field Inquiry, Injuries/Deaths )  Identified Chain of Responsibility  Utilization of Departmental ESP network  Educational Workshops  Compliance Follow-up

Policy Challenges High Risk Activities Human Rights –Special Needs Waivers or Informed Consent Support Programs Compliance

Good Practices  Clearly define who is responsible  Communicate across institution  Address participation of special needs students  Choose recognized authorities  Use policy to deal with real risks;  Use education to deal with perceived risks  Develop an on-going emergency committee  Develop a policy you can enforce

Websites