Policy Development and Challenges in Health and Safety for International Education: A Case Study of Queen's University,

1. Policy Development and Challengesin 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

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

3. Off-Campus Activity Safety Policy(OCASP)

4. OCASP History • 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

5. 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.

6. 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

7. 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

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

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. OCASP Risk Levels • Manageable • Low Risk • Higher Risk • Unmanageable

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. 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.

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

16. OCASP Documentation • Policy, Supporting Documents and Forms • www.safety.queensu.ca/ • Under OCASP section • OCASP Data Warehouse • https://www.queensu.ca/safety/ocasp

17. 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

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

19. 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

20. Websites http://www.queensu.ca/quic/intledu/esp/index.htm http://www.queensu.ca/quic/wsa/esp.htm