March 2010 IDip Unit ID

8/9/2019 March 2010 IDip Unit ID

1/10

March 2010

Examiners Report

NEBOSH National

Diploma in

Occupational Health

and Safety - Unit D


2/10

Examiners Report

NEBOSH LEVEL 6 DIPLOMA IN

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Unit D Assignment

MARCH 2010

CONTENTS

Introduction 2

General Comments 3

Unit D Assignment

2010 NEBOSH, Dominus Way, Meridian Business Park, Leicester LE19 1QW

tel: 0116 263 4700 fax: 0116 282 4000 email: [email protected] website: www.nebosh.org.uk

The National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health is a registered charity, number 1010444

T(s):exreps/UnitD/UnitD-1003 EXTERNAL JP/DA/REW


3/10

Introduction

NEBOSH (The National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health) was formed in 1979 asan independent examining board and awarding body with charitable status. We offer a comprehensive

range of globally-recognised, vocationally-related qualifications designed to meet the health, safety,environmental and risk management needs of all places of work in both the private and public sectors.Courses leading to NEBOSH qualifications attract over 25,000 candidates annually and are offered byover 400 course providers in 65 countries around the world. Our qualifications are recognised by therelevant professional membership bodies including the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health(IOSH) and the International Institute of Risk and Safety Management (IIRSM).

NEBOSH is an awarding body to be recognised and regulated by the UK regulatory authorities:

The Office of the Qualifications and Examinations Regulator (Ofqual) in England

The Department for Children, Education, Lifelong Learning and Skills (DCELLS) in Wales

The Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) in Northern Ireland

NEBOSH follows the GCSE, GCE, VCE, GNVQ and AEA Code of Practice 2007/8published by theregulatory authorities in relation to examination setting and marking (available at the Ofqual websitewww.ofqual.gov.uk). While not obliged to adhere to this code, NEBOSH regards it as best practice todo so.

Candidates scripts are marked by a team of Examiners appointed by NEBOSH on the basis of theirqualifications and experience. The standard of the qualification is determined by NEBOSH, which isoverseen by the NEBOSH Council comprising nominees from, amongst others, the Health and SafetyExecutive (HSE), the Department for Education and Skills (D f ES), the Confederation of BritishIndustry (CBI), the Trades Union Congress (TUC) and the Institution of Occupational Safety andHealth (IOSH). Representatives of course providers, from both the public and private sectors, areelected to the NEBOSH Council.

This report on the Examination provides information on the performance of candidates which it ishoped will be useful to candidates and tutors in preparation for future examinations. It is intended tobe constructive and informative and to promote better understanding of the syllabus content and theapplication of assessment criteria.

NEBOSH 2010

Any enquiries about this report publication should be addressed to:

NEBOSHDominus WayMeridian Business Park

LeicesterLE10 1QW

Tel: 0116 263 4700Fax: 0116 282 4000Email: [email protected]

2 EXTERNAL
http://www.ofqual.gov.uk/http://www.ofqual.gov.uk/


4/10

General comments

The submission date for the NEBOSH National Diploma Unit D workplace based assignment was 10March 2010. 551 candidates submitted their assignment and 391 passed giving a pass rate of 71%.

The focus of the Unit D assignment should be the application of the knowledge and understandingdeveloped in Units A, B and C to a real workplace situation. It provides opportunities for the candidateto carry out research appropriate to a level 6 qualification. Candidates are required to demonstratetheir ability to carry out a range of activities that would be expected of a health and safety practitioner.

The aim of the assignment is to produce an overall review of the health and safety managementsystem of an organisation and indicate, through the application of risk assessment, the priorities for theorganisation for the future.

Before attempting the Unit D assignment it is necessary for candidates to be fully conversant with keyelements of the syllabus for Units A, B and C. To facilitate this formative learning process it is essentialthat candidates hold regular discussions with their tutor(s) throughout the period of their studies, and

complete the Assignment Log provided in the NEBOSH Unit D Candidate Guidance, which is availablefrom the NEBOSH web-site. Candidates should visit www.nebosh.org.uk/students/currently_studyingand then click on 2006 Specification before selecting the PDF document entitled Unit D CandidateGuidance. There is strong evidence to suggest that candidates who perform better in Unit D use theAssignment Log from the very beginning of their studies, and at appropriate points on their learningjourney. Candidates who complete their Assignment Log retrospectively at the end of their studies willobtain little or no benefit, and may well struggle to perform well in Unit D. Course providers arerequested to ensure that candidates use their Assignment Logs accordingly.

3 EXTERNAL
http://www.nebosh.org.uk/students/currently_studyinghttp://www.nebosh.org.uk/students/currently_studyinghttp://www.nebosh.org.uk/students/currently_studying


5/10

Assignment

Assignment Brief

The candidate is required to carry out a detailed review of the health and safety performance of aworkplace or organisation and to produce a justified action plan to improve performance.

The assignment will require the candidate to apply the knowledge and understanding gained fromtheir studies of elements of Units A, B and C in a practical environment and to carry out criticalanalysis and evaluation of information gathered during the review. The level of work should be thatexpected of a competent occupational health and safety practitioner working within an organisation.

The report should include:

an introduction that sets the scene by stating clear aims and objectives and a description ofthe methodology employed to carry out the assignment;

a description of the chosen workplace/organisation to set a context for the assignment. Thecandidate will need to consider the legal framework within which the workplace / organisation

operates;

an overview of the current health and safety management arrangements in which thecandidate should critically review the health and safety management system;

a survey of a wide range of significant hazards within the workplace. The candidate shouldprioritise the identified hazards and, depending on the nature and extent of identified hazards,for each of two of the hazards, one physical and one appropriate to health and welfare, carryout a risk assessment. This should include an evaluation of the effectiveness of theorganisation in controlling the risk arising from the hazards identified and proposals to furthercontrol the hazard(s) and reduce risks;

conclusions which summarise the main issues identified in the candidates work together withjustified recommendations for improvement;

a costed and prioritised action plan for implementation of the candidates recommendations ineach of the two areas;

an executive summary of the report.

4 EXTERNAL


6/10

Examiners Comments

Those candidates who performed well in this assignment were evidently following the detailedguidance (in the Guide to the NEBOSH National Diploma in Occupational Health and Safetyand onthe NEBOSH website) very closely. It was clear that they were using the requirements of the saidguidance to structure their report, often using the guidance content to produce section headings intheir work. It is disappointing, though, that far too many candidates are failing to follow the guidanceprovided by NEBOSH. It is particularly disappointing to see that many candidates are failing to followthe additional information provided in previous Examiners Reports, and that many of the common(and most easily avoided) problems are being repeated by candidates in successive sittings.

Executive Summary

The executive summary should provide a concise overview of the important points arising from thework and summarise the main conclusions and recommendations arising from it that can be read in ashort time to accommodate the schedule of a busy reader. To achieve this, candidates should use theallowed one side of A4 using single-spaced Arial font (size 11) and 2cm print margins. Somecandidates provided half page executive summaries which failed to provide the comprehensivecontent required of findings or a summary of the main conclusions and recommendations. At leastone full page is required to do justice to both main conclusions and main recommendations.

Some candidates still try to include more content by reducing the font size, which led to maximummarks not being awarded in some instances. There is a particular need for candidates to demonstratetheir ability to write in a concise and persuasive manner when composing their executive summaries.

Executive summaries were generally well done, although the highest marks were given to candidateswho clearly and concisely gave an overview of the report and its conclusions and recommendations.Exemplary reports included well structured executive summaries, which were very persuasive andwould have engaged the intended audience for such summaries senior managers, directors, etc.

Introduction

The introduction provides a foundation for the report and enables the reader to place the followinginformation and judgements in context. Most candidates provided a good or satisfactory introduction,however, some omitted clearly stated aims and objectives and provided limited information onmethodology. Properly written aims, objectives and methodology are the key to producing a goodassignment. Valuable marks can be obtained in this section by candidates properly outlining whattheyintend to do and howthey are going to do it.

For candidates to set the scene Examiners were looking for a description of the chosenworkplace/organisation and a brief description of the essential features of the legal environment within

which the workplace/organisation operates. There is no need for candidates to spend vast amounts ofeffort on describing their chosen workplace in minute detail, and there is definitely no need for copiousamounts of information on the chosen workplace, its history or its management systems to be includedin the appendices. Better submissions kept the general description of the chosen workplace relativelyshort and concise and relevant to the assignment brief. It is important that working arrangements,work environment, shift patterns and peripatetic worker activities are covered in this section.

A brief description of the principal legal (statute, common, civil and criminal) and other requirementswithin which the organisation operates should be included. Some candidates produced a list of variouslaws and regulations and only the better answers attempted to apply these legislative requirements totheir workplace as required. Candidates are required to demonstrate their knowledge andunderstanding of relevant statutes, regulations, ACoPs, standards and guidance and outline these inthe context of the development of an effective health and safety management programme. An

exhaustive list of statutes, regulations etc. was not expected.

5 EXTERNAL


7/10

Better submissions showed evidence of candidates putting a lot of thought into developing a clear andconcise aim explaining and justifying the purpose of the report. They also developed a set ofmeaningful objectives for the report, which could be used throughout the writing / preparation of thereport to sense check their own progress.

Those candidates who then went onto explain their chosen methods, explaining and justifying basic

principles as they did so, achieved good marks in this area. Clear statements of what research hadbeen carried out, which models had been chosen and why, were most useful and evident in betterreports.

Many candidates outlined criminal law issues in the introduction, with some of the better submissionsexplaining the organisational context and the relevance of such acts and regulations to the chosenorganisations activities. Those candidates who scored particularly well in this section ensured thatthey gave time and effort to identifying and explaining the relevant civil cases, giving clear andaccurate references to carefully selected case law. Better submissions painted a balanced picture ofthe criminal and civil organisational context.

Better submissions ensured that gaps and areas for improvement from the main body of the reportwere carried forward into the final part of the report. The conclusions should refer to things identified

in the main body, and recommendations should be similarly rooted in things discussed earlier in thereport. Recommendations should then be carried forward into the respective action plans, whereconsideration should also be given to priorities, costs, time scale and how and when progress againstthe plans would be reviewed.

Review of the Health and Safety Management System

Candidates were required to give an overview of the current health and safety management system intheir chosen workplace/organisation. Most candidates outlined or described a generic health andsafety model (eg. HSG65) without making clear reference to their own management system, and couldnot therefore be awarded maximum marks. Candidates who did this were generally unable to producean adequate critical review of the organisations health and safety management system. The brief

required candidates to compare their current system with a recognised model and provide a clearsystematic description of gaps and where no gaps exist, for all areas of the management system,identify priorities for improvement.

Reports awarded the highest marks included sections which clearly demonstrated the writersunderstanding of chosen models for health and safety management systems. Better reports outlinedthe selected model before explaining the relevance of the models elements to existing policy,arrangements, etc. A good working knowledge of HSG65 (or a similar model) is essential for thosecandidates wishing to perform well.

The gap analysis section requires candidates to assess their chosen organisations health and safetymanagement systems against a recognised model such as HSG65. Better submissions clearlyidentified shortcomings in the chosen health and safety management systems against such a

standard, carrying forward these identified gaps into the recommendations and action plans requiredlater in the report. Better submissions summarised the gaps identified in tabular format, which is auseful technique and allows candidates to display the gaps, required improvements andpriorities in aclear and concise manner.

Hazards and Risk Assessments

Most candidates managed to outline 15 different hazardsor more, a few falling short and only finding11 12 or so. Several had 15 under each category Physical and Health and Welfare. A number ofthe candidates were confusing activities (particularly generic references to Working at Height) withhazards, which limited the hazards that were outlined (and marks awarded) and some failed to discussthe implications. Other candidates clearly took great care to ensure that they clearly differentiated

between Physical and Health and Welfare hazards, using the Unit B and Unit C syllabus content as away of correctly categorising their hazards.

6 EXTERNAL


8/10

Many risk assessments were found to be satisfactory, but some candidates failed to describe theirCompanys process and their companys risk assessment methodology. Risk quantifications modelswere included without adequate explanation of their meaning / interpretation in relevance.

Higher scoring reports were those where candidates demonstrated a clear understanding of thedifference between the terms hazard and risk. Better submissions took a methodical approach to

breaking down and differentiating between work activities, hazards, risks and possible outcomes.Candidates must be able to demonstrate their understanding of risk assessment principles theyshould clearly explain the risk assessment process being used, detailing how any ranking or scoringsystems are used for comparison, prioritisation and consideration of improvements required.

It is essential that candidates ensure that they select one Physical hazard and one Health hazard forcloser assessment using a recognised risk assessment approach. Some candidates failed to scoremarks due to the selection of two Physical or two Health hazards rather than one of each.

Many candidates adopted an approach to risk assessment based on the HSEs 5 steps to riskassessment, which may be appropriate in many circumstances, but it cannot be stressed enough that insome situations this approach is not appropriate. The content of the diploma syllabus outlines moredetailed and technical approaches to assessing risks that should be considered where an initial appraisal

suggests risk may be significant. The classic examples include the failure by some to use specific riskassessment tools for manual handling, noise or hazardous substance assessments. The 5 Stepsapproach is not appropriate when carrying out a CoSHH assessment. Those candidates who recognisedthe requirement to use the correct risk assessment tool for the task in hand, and, as a result,demonstrated the required level of depth, did achieve good scores in this area.

When using the 5 Steps approach candidates must ensure that they place sufficient emphasis anddetail when identifying who might be harmed and how, rather than including generic headings ofgroups of people or stating staff, contractors and visitors.

Candidates should avoid using their companys risk assessment templates, without checking them forcompleteness and adequacy beforehand. Inclusion of risk assessments completed many months priorto the relevant submission date is not acceptable, particularly if there is evidence that such templates

were not completed by the candidate. Risk assessments submitted for this assignment should be thecandidates own original work.

Conclusions

Some candidates did not refer back to aims and objectives when writing their conclusions. Many didnot include their findings and failed to summarise them, whilst many others included recommendationsand other suggestions for improvements in their conclusions. Quality checks on the work done shouldbe made including referring back to their aims and objectives and critically appraising theirperformance against those in their conclusion.

Recommendations and Action Plans

Recommendations were generally good, and followed on from main conclusions, but many candidatesstill fail to provide a comprehensive prioritisation, justification and/or Cost Benefit Analysis torecommendations. Action plans 1 and 2 are on the whole good, with most providing tabulated formatswith all the relevant headings considered. Too many still do not include any provisions for review.

Planning and Presentation

Although the standard of presentation of many reports was generally fair, some candidates reportswere let down by some simple omissions and mistakes. Candidates should run a spelling check ontheir reports and ask an independent lay person to read the report before submission. In some

instances the reports were difficult to read, used too many unnecessary tables or inserted images. Theinclusion of scanned copies of handwritten work or flip charts should be avoided. Some reports werepoorly formatted, with headers and footers not included some even failed to include pagination.

7 EXTERNAL


9/10

8 EXTERNAL

It is important to remember that the intended audience for this type of report is senior managers, and,as such, should be clear, concise and well structured. Some reports were far too long withunnecessary or unrelated information included.

Tutors should ensure that candidates carry out the required level of planning and preparation for the

completion of their assignment reports, and that candidates complete their learning logs at relevantpoints during their studies. Tutrors should provide critical review of the work being done by theirrespective candidates and should ensure that information included in examiners reports is brought tothe attention of all candidates.

References and Research

Bibliography and references still remain poorly produced and many still dont indicate any evidence ofresearch done. Better submissions made reference to text books and ACoPs/HSE Guidance Notes,clearly citing the details of the reference (full title, ISBN number, date of publication, publisher, etc). Manysimply opted to give an extensive list of legislation, which may well have been used from course notes,which should not be considered as a suitable primary source of reference in most cases. There is clear

advice on the use of suitable referencing systems in the NEBOSH Guide, and tutors should ensure thatall candidates are capable of using a tried and tested referencing convention.

Concluding Examiners Comments

The information above should give some clear pointers to candidates and tutors regarding thesuccessful completion of Unit D assignments. This information complements other published guidancefrom NEBOSH. The main points to remember are:

Write the reports in a clear and concise manner

Use the mark scheme to help structure reports

In the introduction state what is to be done and how

Be clear about the differences between activities, hazards and risk Check that at least 15 hazards are identified

Check that two highest priority hazards are identified

Ensure that two selected hazards are not both from the same syllabus unit (B or C)

Use the most appropriate risk assessment tool for the two chosen hazards

Include information on review periodicity and mechanisms

Include cost benefit justifications for recommendations

Support main recommendations with a persuasive argument for implementation

Check accuracy and clarity of references.


10/10

The National ExaminationBoard in OccupationalSafety and Health

Dominus WayMeridian Business ParkLeicester LE19 1QW

telephone +44 (0)116 2634700fax +44 (0)116 2824000email [email protected]

Documents

March 2010 IDip Unit ID