![]() ![]() ![]() Given our distinct backgrounds, at our first meeting we each shared our strengths and weaknesses, and from this we allocated roles. One of the many learning points from this project was the value of teamwork and cooperation. Our task was essentially to review all the documents and find evidence to answer the research question: how can Save the Children contribute to improved child outcomes through CVA? The client shared with us 25 projects, spanning across 17 regions and five regions: Middle East and North Africa, Asia, Eastern and Southern Africa, West and Central Africa, and South America. Following discussions with the client, during which we suggested several analytical lenses such as a regional comparison, it was decided that our report should be deductive, meaning an identification of key findings, recommendations and lessons learnt across all the projects. In order to design holistic CVA programs, our client requested research on existing evidence, gaps, best practices and innovative approaches to improve CVA impacts for multi-sectoral outcomes.ĭuring our first few meetings with our coach, Dr Stephanie Levy, it was established that our report should have an analytical perspective. Our project aimed to streamline Save the Children’s (SC) cash and voucher (CVA) assistance by reviewing previous initiatives and identifying recommendations. Our client was Save the Children’s Humanitarian team, specifically their Humanitarian Cash and Markets division. I was allocated to a team with three others Layal El-Hage, Emily Gean and Claire Calvel. This is the highlight of the MSc program for many students and their first experience with consultancy work in the humanitarian and development field. The project aimed to streamline SC cash and voucher (CVA) assistance by reviewing previous initiatives and identifying recommendations.Īs part of the MSc International Development and Humanitarian Emergencies programme, we are required to work on a 6-month consultancy project for a client on a live topic. Demonstrates that the Rapid Transit System (RTS) operator has the appropriate organisational structure and processes in place to operate and maintain the RTS system safely.Īfter a project is opened for revenue service, an Operation Safety Submission Follow-up Audit will be conducted to check if the RTS operator has operated and maintained the systems in accordance to the procedures and work instructions needed for hazard mitigation.MSc International Development and Humanitarian Emergencies student, Srabosti Basu, writes about her team’s consultancy project experience with Save the Children (SC).It also shows that the system can be considered safe for the commencement of trials and subsequent revenue service. Demonstrates that the system has been successfully tested and commissioned to achieve the level of safety intended at the concept stage and subsequent approved modifications at the design and installation stages.Demonstrates that the safety requirements have been met and the identified hazards have been addressed in the design stage as far as reasonably practicable to achieve the level of safety intended at the concept stage and subsequent approved modifications at the design stage.It also shows that all safety requirements of the systems have been clearly and adequately specified in the contracts. Demonstrates that the system concept is sound and has no unacceptable impact on safety.Safety Submissions are made at key milestones of each project, which includes the: The fundamental element of the Project Safety Review (PSR) is the Safety Submission, which requires the contractor to demonstrate "proof of safety" at each stage of the project. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |