Risk Analysis Report

Play space Renovation

Qinghan Gao
09/29/2023
 1. Overview of the risk analysis

We have been working to address playspace inequities between low-income

and high-income neighborhoods. Now we want to achieve our mission in this
neighborhood. We will be replacing an outdated playground on a 4,000 sq. ft. lot!

We will be working with a trio of organizations. The FP is our funding foundation.

The CP provides us with good playground space and in-kind assistance. These two
partners will gather volunteers for us to work on the build. The PV provides us with
playground equipment and will be our supervisor during the build.

Before the project lands, we categorize the possible risks into three main parts based
on their impact. All the risks of this project are leading to no more than three major
issues: security, finance which means extra costs and delays. And the good
communication and cooperation between us and our partners is the greatest guarantee
against all potential risks.

2. Identification of risks

We develop a list of risk breakdown structures (RBS) in line with the progress of the
project. The Table 1 shows potential risks and stakeholders of each task of the project.

Task Risks relevant agencies

Prepare the playground space
Perform soil tests
Perform utility checks
Apply for and obtain a
construction permit
Purchase commercial liability
insurance
Fundraise portion of
equipment costs
Identify community resources
Recruit volunteers
Purchase and install
playground equipment
Safety monitoring and
maintenance of site
Table 1 Risk Breakdown Structures
 Soil surface is not flat CP
 Soil quality is not up to standard CP
 Infrastructure needs maintenance CP
 Application blocks CP
 Coverage is less than $1m CP, NPO, FP, PV
 Certificate of Insurance Approval Extends
 The fundraising amount didn't reach $5k CP, NPO, FP, PV
 Fundraising time is overdue
 Insufficient amounts of in-kind contributions CP, NPO, FP
 Poor quality of the items provided
 Insufficient number of volunteers CP, FP, NPO
 Volunteer lists are submitted late
 Some volunteers quit
 Damage or other quality problems with equipment CP, FP, NPO, PV
 Volunteers are injured or have other safety issues
 Equipment does not arrive on time on Build Day
 The quality of equipment after installation is not up CP, NPO, FP, PV
to standard

The primary work for the playground is soil tests and utility checks. Both of them
have a direct impact on the construction permit application. Since the playground has
been in use before, the ground is likely to be uneven. Applications for construction
permits may also face obstacles.

After getting the construction permit, we need to carry out a lot of financial, supplies
and HR work before Build Day. The CP enrolls in business insurance and fundraising
for financial or in-kind assistance that may not meet expectations. All work for
submission deadlines is also difficult to avoid the potential for delays.

Volunteers and equipment are a major source of risk during the construction process.
Even with the presence of safety inspectors, the risk of injury to volunteers or damage
to equipment still remains. Because the volunteers are not professional construction
workers, and equipment always has quality control issues. Therefore, we also consider
that the installed facilities may also have the possibility of substandard quality.

3. Risk assessment

We use a risk assessment matrix (see Table 2) to evaluate risks and develop relevant
strategies to address them. The outcomes resulting from the various risks in this
project can be categorized into safety, finance and delay. Delay is a more complex
outcome. In addition to the risks that can lead directly to delays, financial shortages
and safety conditions can also affect the progress of the project. The project can
progress better by addressing risks that create additional costs and by avoiding
volunteer security issues as a matter of priority. We generally assign a "Critical" rating
to risks that directly impact security or directly cause additional expense. The
significance of the different risk severities is as follows:
 Catastrophic: May result in the termination of the project.
 Critical: May cause severe injury or illness, major property damage, significant
financial loss, and/or result in great negative publicity for the institution
 Marginal: May cause minor injury or illness, property damage, financial loss,
and/or result in negative publicity for the institution
 Negligible: Hazard presents a minimal threat to safety, health and well, being of the
participants and institution

The significance of the possibility of risk is as follows:

 Frequent: likely to occur immediately or in a short period of time (95% chance).
 Likely: Quit likely to occur in time (75% chance).
 Occasionally: May occur in time (50% chance).
 Seldom: No likely to occur, but possible (25% chance).
 Unlikely: Unlikely to occur (5% chance).

As the playground has been used before, soil problems are unlikely to arise, but the
surface is likely to be uneven. Uneven surfaces can make it more difficult to build the
equipment, affecting the variation of forces on the equipment, and may also present a
potential risk to subsequent play by children. If the permit is not applied for, the whole
project will fall apart. But this risk can be mitigated by adequate preparation, such as
adequate soil inspections, facility inspections and a proper risk response program.
The risks associated with volunteers are mainly “Moderate Risk” rating because the
volunteers are not professional workers. And volunteers have many variables of
instability, such as dropping out for personal reasons and getting injured during the
construction process when they are not used to the in-kind contributions. Possibility of
volunteer-related risks is generally higher than "Unlikely".

4. Risk mitigation

 Financial risk mitigation

We and the FP will have contingency funds in place to address potential risks that
may result in extra costs. Furthermore, we will prepare alternative insurance for
different subjects to avoid the risk.

 Safety risk mitigation

In response to the risks of the playground surface, we prefer to accept them and
are willing to take on higher costs. We consider the outcome of land leveling and
soil quality tests to be unpredictable. The expense of the handling work after a
risk arises is equally unpredictable. But to ensure that construction permits arrive
on time, we are willing to set a high budget for pre-construction preparation work,
such as rollers, soil replacement and infrastructure repairs. We believe that is the
best way to avoid the risks associated with permits.

For volunteers, we first need the CP and the FP to work together to share risks. CP
and FP will work together to recruit volunteers and sign a team charter to jointly
manage volunteers. Secondly, we can reduce safety risks through training. The
week prior to build day, all project stakeholders (The CP, the FP, the PV, the
NPO and volunteers) will participate in a common meeting. The meeting will
clarify all the details of the construction process and the options for dealing with
the various potential risks. During this week, the volunteers will attend a training
session on the construction equipment, which will take place under the
responsibility of the PV.

When remaining budget is enough, we can also hire the PV's professionals who
install the equipment to avoid the risks that can occur when hiring volunteers. The
same goes for equipment, as we can add clauses to our contracts with the PV to
share the risk
 Risk Possible Severity of risk: Possibility of risk: Risk Risk Control Measures
impacts Ratin
 Catastrophic  Frequent g
 Critical  Likely
 Marginal  Occasionally
 Negligible  Seldom
 Unlikely
Soil surface is not flat DELAYS, Marginal Occasionally M  Flatten the surface
FINANCE  Add a leveling check to
soil test
Soil quality is not up DELAYS, Marginal Unlikely L  Replace failed soils
to standard FINANCE
Infrastructure needs DELAYS, Marginal Seldom L  Repair equipment
maintenance FINANCE
Application for the DELAYS Catastrophic Seldom H  Ensure that the site
permit blocks meets construction
conditions before
applying for a permit
Coverage is less than DELAYS, Negligible Unlikely L  Prepare for alternative
$1m FINANCE insurance
Certificate of DELAYS Negligible Seldom L  Prepare well before
Insurance Approval submitting
Extends
The fundraising FINANCE Critical Unlikely L  Prepare for Emergency
amount didn't reach Assistance Funding
$5k with FP
Fundraising time is DELAYS Marginal Unlikely L  Accelerating pace of
overdue fund-raising
 Prepare well before
submitting
Insufficient amounts SAFET Marginal Occasionally M  Prepare an emergency
of in-kind Y, fund to purchase
contributions DELA supplies
YS
Poor quality of the SAFETY Marginal Unlikely L
items provided
Insufficient number of DELAYS Critical Seldom M  Planned recruitment
volunteers slightly higher than
Some volunteers quit DELAYS Marginal Seldom L required
Volunteer lists are DELAYS Negligible Seldom L  The CP and the FP
submitted late work together with a
clear
division of work
Equipment does not DELAYS Marginal Occasionally M  Ensure that the CP and
arrive on time on the FP funds are
Build Day delivered on time
 Add a delivery time
term to the contract
with the PV

Volunteers are injured DELAYS, Critical Seldom M  Prepare an emergency

or have other safety FINANCE, medical plan
issues SAFETY  The PV conduct
additional training for
volunteers
 Purchase short-term
insurance for
volunteers


The quality of SAFETY, Critical Unlikely L  The PV conduct

equipment after FINANCE additional training for
installation is not up volunteers
to standard  Sign of a maintenance
contract with the PV

Table 2 Risk Assessment Matrix

5. Conclusion

With risk breakdown structures (RBS) and risk assessment matrix, we analyze the various
potential risks that may occur at various stages of the project process. We also formulate the
appropriate response plan for each risk. We believe that with our combined efforts, we can
rebuild a fantastic paradise for children!
 Playspace Renovation project
MEMORANDUM

TO: Dr. Shuwen Li, Instructor

From: Qinghan Gao, Student
Date: Oct 20, 2023
Subject: Reflection of the revised risk analysis report

This memo focuses on ideas for revising the risk analysis report after discussion and reflection. I
would like to thank you, my instructor, for the detailed suggestions and guidance. I also
appreciate the suggestions from Nemo (Xiaoyu Xue) and Eric (Zicheng Zhao). The changes I
made are more of additions to the content. And I make further improvement on the details of tone
and wording.

Discussion details
Nemo, Eric, and I mainly discussed pre-construction testing tasks, construction noise, financial
issues, and some discourse issues. Faced with the task of soil testing, Nemo and I held different
views. I think that the results of the testing are uncontrollable, and so is the extra budget that will
be spent if there is a risk. I see this as a task that needs to be handled as much as possible within
the planned time, so the extra expense is acceptable to me. Nemo's perspective focuses the
impact of the task's risks on delays. We have different requirements for this task. I have not
previously been overly concerned about the issue of construction noise because I do not believe
that assembling the playground equipment at the required construction time would be noisy. I
also explored with Eric the risk of potentially expending additional funds.

By the way, I haven't thought out the name of the NPO organization yet. I may present it in the
final report.

I hope you can review my memo and offer me feedback