Chief Assessor & Deputy Chief Assessor Report

Chief Assessor & Deputy Chief Assessor Report

Since the launch of the Site Contamination Prevention Australia scheme in late November 2014, we have undertaken the assessment of 28 practitioner applications, totaling more than 180 hours of assessment. The assessment process is focused around the 6 key competencies which certified practitioners are required to demonstrate. These 6 competencies were developed over a two year period before the scheme was launched, during consultations with stakeholders including consultants, regulators and industry about what constitutes a certified practitioner.

Also during consultation with stakeholders a framework of 4 levels was determined and these would be applied to applicant statements addressing each of these 6 competencies. A summary of the four levels are provided in the table below.

For an applicant to be recommended for certification, they would need to demonstrate the following levels or greater across the 6 competencies which are listed in the table below.

Some Thoughts on the first year of Applicants and their Panel Assessment
When reviewing the aggregate results for the 28 practitioner applications received to-date (noting that 27 site auditor applicants were recommended to the Scheme’s National Executive Committee without further assessment), 53% were able to satisfy the Assessment Panels, in terms of the required Competency Levels. The assessment process itself operates on a number of different layers, with the first layer focused on the Panel’s objective analysis of the written application.
The dominant view of the Assessment Panels was that a certified practitioner would need to be able to demonstrate their knowledge and skills against the six competencies in a written form, as this communication method is a critical skill for a certified practitioner. As such, the agreed process does not initially consider an applicant’s curriculum vitae (such as how long someone has worked in the sector for or what position they hold within their organisation). Rather, the Panel initially focusses on finding a written demonstration of meeting the required level of skills and experience in the six industry-agreed competencies.

Assessors themselves are appointed by the National Executive Committee (NEC) for every round, from a list of suitably qualified and experienced volunteers (and currently all of these volunteers are accredited site auditors). We must say thank you to these people who have participated in the Assessment Panels and have taken on the role of analytically and objectively assessing applications, providing their time, energy and enthusiasm for the complex assessment process and for the Scheme. Their professionalism is greatly valued and much appreciated.

Each application is reviewed independently by each of the three Assessors who then come together to discuss and subsequently agree upon the allocation of final levels to each of the competencies. In situations where applicants are close to achieving the required competency level, an interview is recommended.

Some Patterns
There were some instances where applicants ranked higher than required on some competencies however, were not able to meet all of the minimum competency levels required for recommendation for certification. It was important applicants demonstrate the required level across all 6 competencies.
Reviewing the results of all 28 applications assessed to-date, an interesting pattern is evident.

 

It appears that Competency 4 and Competency 5 have the highest “levels of success” across all 6 of the competencies assessed. The reason for this performance may be because the required level of competency to be met is “Functional” rather than “Proficient”, although it may also reflect a better level of understanding across our industry, in terms of these competencies of “risk assessment” and “remediation and management”. In early industry consultation during the development of the Scheme, it was felt that many practitioners may not be able to meet a “Proficient” level for these 2 competencies. However, this initial industry view doesn’t appear to be borne out from the results to-date.
The weakest area for most applications was Competency 3 (Detailed Site Assessment) with only 46% (13) applications meeting the required level in their written application. The sub-elements associated with Competency 3 provide a more detail as what applicants are required to demonstrate in their written applications and so a higher level of analytical rigour may be possible for the assessment of this competency compared to the others.

Some Analysis of the Application Process
Of the 28 applications considered by the Assessment Panels, a total of nine (32% of applicants) were recommended to NEC for Certification on the basis of their written application alone, and 11 (39%) were recommended for Panel interview. Of these 11, just over half (6) were successful in their interviews, subsequently being recommended for Certification. A total of 13 applicants (47%) were unsuccessful, either in their written application or subsequently at interview. The following simple pie chart provides a simple illustration of the overall process from application to interview to recommendation for certification.

Level of Effort in Assessment Process
Completing the assessment of 28 applications does not sound like a great deal when considering the total number of potential practitioners working in the sector nationally, estimated at more than 1,000; but the resources and effort applied to assess these 28 applicants, in a framework which aims to be fair and transparent, has been substantial.
We would like to again extend thanks to the Assessors who spent many hours analytically working through each application, hopefully assisted by our assessment tools. As noted, more than 180 hours were willingly donated by the Assessment Panelists and their efforts are greatly appreciated.

Our great thanks also go to those applicants who took the step to place themselves under the scrutiny of such a rigorous assessment process and subsequently accept the decisions made by Panels in assessing their applications. Of course, the objective of the Scheme has never been to shut people out of the sector, nor does it strive to belittle the efforts of practitioners working to build their capacity, skills and capabilities; rather to establish a benchmark for all practitioners to achieve and hopefully to ultimately provide “a more level playing field” for those professionals who have committed their professionalism to this industry.

The first year of operation and the three assessment rounds now complete give us much more confidence in forging ahead in 2016. We will continue to monitor applicants’ performance against the Scheme’s requirements, with a view to suggesting improvements to NEC, as the Scheme further matures and we look forward to a continuing improvement for our industry, as we bring a long awaited independently certified benchmark to our profession.

Ross McFarland
Chief Assessor Site Contamination Prevention Australia

Ivan Kwan
Deputy Chief Assessor Site Contamination Prevention Australia