Work Health and Safety Practice Manual

Developmental Professional Portfolio Assessment

Safe, ethical and professionally accountable assistance animal Occupational Therapy practice requires more than understanding Work Health and Safety theory.

An Assistance Animal Occupational Therapist must be able to develop and maintain a professional safety system that reflects the interaction between:

Person + Assistance Animal + Occupation + Task + Environment + Equipment + Other People + Organisation

For Unit 1, you will begin developing your:

AAOT Work Health and Safety Practice Manual

The WHS Practice Manual is a practical professional resource that will continue to develop throughout the AAOT credential.

It is not intended to be completed once and then remain unchanged.

Unit 1 establishes the foundations of your WHS system. As you progress through later AAOT units, you will develop additional policies, procedures, plans, registers and other professional documentation that may need to be incorporated into, or cross-referenced by, your WHS Practice Manual.

By the time you submit your final AAOT Professional Portfolio at the end of the credential, your WHS Practice Manual should represent the WHS system you reasonably need for your own current or intended assistance animal Occupational Therapy practice.

Because AAOTs may work in very different professional settings, no two final WHS Practice Manuals are expected to be identical. This reflects the existing developmental design of the assessment.

---

Purpose of the Assessment

This assessment is designed to demonstrate that you can translate WHS knowledge into an integrated professional system relevant to assistance animal Occupational Therapy practice.

You are not being assessed simply on whether you can reproduce WHS theory or complete workplace templates.

You are expected to demonstrate your ability to:

• critically analyse complex WHS issues;
• identify and interpret relevant legal and professional responsibilities;
• apply WHS principles within assistance animal Occupational Therapy;
• integrate disability rights and accessibility;
• support occupational participation;
• apply dignity of risk and positive risk-taking;
• identify and implement reasonable adjustments;
• use least-restrictive effective risk controls;
• protect assistance animal health and welfare;
• consider worker, client and public safety;
• develop appropriate workplace documentation;
• determine which workplace documents are actually required;
• establish appropriate WHS training, induction and competency arrangements;
• consult meaningfully with relevant people;
• plan for emergencies and continuity;
• manage incidents and near misses;
• distinguish internal incident reporting from statutory notification;
• investigate contributing and systemic factors;
• implement corrective and preventive actions;
• manage psychosocial hazards;
• monitor actual workplace practices and procedural compliance;
• analyse WHS information and emerging trends;
• establish monitoring and review systems;
• respond critically to professional feedback;
• identify limitations and gaps in your own systems; and
• continue developing the WHS system as your professional practice changes.

---

Assessment Level

This assessment is designed to require professional reasoning consistent with approximately AQF Level 9 complexity.

You are expected to move beyond simply identifying, describing or explaining.

Your assessment should demonstrate your ability to:

critically analyse → synthesise → formulate → justify → apply → evaluate → revise

There will not necessarily be one correct solution to every practice issue.

Assessment therefore focuses on the quality of your:

• professional reasoning;
• integration;
• justification;
• application;
• critical evaluation;
• professional judgement; and
• reflexivity.

The number of documents you produce does not determine the quality of your assessment.

---

What You Will Submit

Your Unit 1 assessment consists of connected professional evidence.

AAOT WHS Practice Manual – Unit 1 Draft

This is the professional workplace resource you are developing.

The Unit 1 Draft is submitted for assessment and professional feedback.

Following feedback, you will revise the manual and maintain a:

Professional Feedback and Revision Record

Your revised Unit 1 version becomes the completed professional product for the Unit 1 summative assessment decision.

It is not the final whole-of-course WHS Practice Manual.

---

Unit 1 Critical Professional Analysis

Submit a separate:

Unit 1 Critical Professional Analysis

Recommended length:

approximately 1,500–2,000 words

This is a separate academic/professional assessment document examining your:

• professional reasoning;
• current system;
• strengths;
• limitations;
• identified gaps;
• uncertainties;
• further learning needs; and
• future development priorities.

The Critical Professional Analysis is not inserted into the WHS Practice Manual.

---

Professional Feedback and Revision Record

Following assessor feedback, complete a record demonstrating:

Feedback received → Candidate consideration → Change made → Location → Rationale

Where significant feedback is not adopted, provide a professionally defensible rationale.

---

AAOT WHS Practice Manual – Unit 1 Revised Version

Following the assessment and feedback process, submit or confirm your revised professional product.

This is the summative Unit 1 version of your WHS Practice Manual.

It will continue developing through later AAOT units.

---

Your Professional Practice Context

Develop your WHS Practice Manual for a professional context that is meaningful to your current or intended work.

This may include:

• your current workplace;
• your current private practice;
• a professional placement setting;
• a deidentified workplace or organisation;
• a proposed future AAOT practice; or
• a realistic simulated AAOT practice.

Where possible, select a context that will allow you to continue developing and using your manual after completing the credential.

If you work within a large organisation, you may scope your manual to:

• your department;
• service;
• program;
• discipline;
• professional team; or
• other area relevant to your actual work.

Clearly identify any assumptions made where your practice is proposed or simulated.

---

Your Manual Should Reflect Your Own Practice

The final WHS Practice Manual is not intended to be an identical WAFA manual used by every graduate.

AAOTs may work:

• as sole practitioners;
• within multidisciplinary clinics;
• within assistance animal organisations;
• in hospitals;
• in schools;
• in workplaces;
• in client homes;
• in community environments;
• in public environments;
• with owner-trained teams;
• with program-trained teams;
• with different assistance animal species;
• in rural or remote locations;
• with employees;
• with contractors;
• with students;
• with volunteers; or
• within large organisations.

These differences affect what documentation and systems are required.

Continually ask:

What does my actual or intended AAOT practice require?

---

Minimum Requirements and Professional Judgement

The professional evidence specified by WAFA represents the minimum assessment evidence required where relevant to your practice context.

It does not necessarily represent the maximum contents of your final WHS Practice Manual.

As you progress through the credential, you may identify additional systems relating to matters such as:

• vehicle and animal transport;
• extreme weather;
• bushfire;
• flood;
• remote work;
• hospital practice;
• school environments;
• animal medication;
• multiple species;
• complex animal behaviour;
• student supervision;
• contractors;
• volunteers;
• telehealth;
• public-access assessment;
• workplace assessment;
• specialist equipment;
• animal retirement;
• emergency temporary animal care; or
• other foreseeable practice needs.

Where another professional document is reasonably required, you should:

• add it;
• adapt an existing document; or
• appropriately cross-reference it.

You should not omit an important safety system simply because WAFA did not specifically name it.

You should also not create unnecessary documents merely because another candidate’s practice requires them.

Determining what your practice reasonably requires forms part of the professional judgement assessed in this credential.

---

Privacy and Confidentiality

Protect the privacy of:

• clients;
• workers;
• organisations;
• colleagues;
• families;
• support people; and
• other identifiable individuals.

You may:

• deidentify client information;
• use fictional names;
• redact workplace information;
• modify organisational details;
• use simulated scenarios; or
• base the assessment on a proposed future practice.

Do not include confidential organisational documentation unless you have appropriate permission.

Do not include unnecessary personal, health or identifying information.

You will not be disadvantaged for using a simulated or deidentified context.

---

Existing Workplace Documents

You may use existing workplace policies, procedures or systems where you have permission.

Simply reproducing an existing workplace document is not sufficient.

Where an existing document is used, critically evaluate whether it is:

• current;
• legally appropriate;
• relevant to assistance animal Occupational Therapy;
• disability-inclusive;
• accessible;
• appropriate for assistance animal welfare;
• proportionate to the identified risks;
• consistent with your professional role;
• suitable for your actual practice environment; and
• integrated with the remainder of your WHS system.

You may revise or adapt existing documentation where appropriate.

---

Using the WAFA WHS Template Library

The AAOT WHS Template Library follows this assessment document in your Unit 1 candidate pack.

Templates are provided to support professional documentation development.

They are:

resources, not a compulsory checklist

You are not required to use every template.

You may:

• use a WAFA template as provided;
• adapt a WAFA template;
• combine templates;
• create your own document;
• use an authorised workplace document; or
• cross-reference another appropriate professional document.

Your choice should reflect the purpose of the document and your professional practice context.

The strongest assessment is not the one containing the largest number of templates.

It is the one containing an integrated, appropriate and usable WHS system.

---

AAOT WHS Practice Manual Requirements

Practice Context, Scope and WHS Governance

Establish the professional and organisational context in which your WHS system operates.

Address relevant features such as:

• type of practice or organisation;
• jurisdiction;
• size and structure;
• services provided;
• client population;
• assistance animal work undertaken;
• species within scope;
• environments in which services occur;
• home, community and public practice;
• travel and transport;
• workers;
• contractors;
• students;
• volunteers;
• relevant external organisations;
• your Occupational Therapy role;
• your professional scope; and
• limitations of the manual.

Duty Holders

Critically analyse the WHS/OHS duty-holder arrangements applicable to your professional context.

Depending on your context, this may include:

• PCBU or equivalent duty holder;
• self-employed practitioner;
• officer;
• worker;
• other person;
• contractor;
• another organisation; and
• overlapping PCBUs or equivalent duty holders.

Consider how responsibilities may change when working:

• in client homes;
• in schools;
• in workplaces;
• in hospitals;
• in clinics;
• in training environments;
• in community locations;
• in public spaces; or
• within another organisation’s workplace.

Do not simply reproduce definitions.

Apply them to your professional context.

Required Evidence

• Practice Context and WHS Governance Statement
• WHS Roles and Responsibilities Matrix

---

Legal, Regulatory, Professional and Ethical Framework

Develop a practical framework identifying the requirements relevant to your AAOT practice.

WHS/OHS Framework

Consider:

• applicable WHS/OHS legislation;
• regulations;
• Codes of Practice;
• regulator guidance;
• jurisdiction-specific requirements;
• consultation obligations; and
• statutory incident-notification requirements.

Disability and Access

Consider:

• disability discrimination legislation;
• assistance animal access;
• reasonable adjustment;
• accessibility;
• legitimate safety considerations; and
• the risk of incorrectly using WHS as justification for unnecessarily excluding a disabled person or assistance animal.

Occupational Therapy Responsibilities

Consider:

• professional standards;
• competence;
• scope of practice;
• documentation;
• referral;
• consultation;
• interprofessional practice; and
• professional accountability.

Animal-Related Requirements

Consider:

• animal welfare;
• animal management;
• biosecurity;
• veterinary boundaries;
• preventive veterinary healthcare where clinically indicated or otherwise required;
• species-specific considerations; and
• relevant animal-related legislation or requirements.

Distinguishing Different Requirements

Where relevant, distinguish between:

law | regulatory guidance | professional obligation | organisational requirement | funding requirement | credential requirement | evidence-informed recommendation | good practice

NDIS, funding and organisational requirements may interact with WHS requirements, but these frameworks are not interchangeable.

Required Evidence

• Legal, Regulatory and Professional Compliance Register

---

WHS Policy and Safety Management Framework

Develop an overarching:

AAOT Work Health and Safety Policy

Your policy should establish commitments concerning:

• WHS responsibilities;
• hazard identification;
• risk management;
• worker safety;
• client safety;
• public safety;
• assistance animal welfare;
• consultation;
• accessibility;
• reasonable adjustment;
• dignity of risk;
• positive risk-taking;
• least-restrictive effective risk management;
• incident management;
• emergency preparedness;
• psychosocial health;
• training and competency;
• documentation;
• monitoring;
• review; and
• continuous improvement.

Demonstrate how different forms of professional documentation relate to one another.

For example:

Policy → Procedure → Risk Assessment → SWP/SOP → Work Instruction → Checklist → Plan → Register

Not every activity requires every type of document.

Your system should be proportionate.

---

WHS Training, Induction and Competency

Develop a system for identifying and managing relevant WHS training, induction and competency requirements.

Consider:

• existing knowledge and skills;
• previous experience;
• WHS induction;
• role-specific requirements;
• assistance animal interaction and handling;
• hazard identification;
• risk assessment;
• risk controls;
• Safe Work Procedures;
• incident reporting;
• emergency procedures;
• infection prevention;
• biosecurity;
• manual tasks;
• PPE;
• equipment;
• assistive technology;
• psychosocial hazards;
• violence and aggression;
• lone/community work;
• changes to procedures;
• incidents;
• near misses;
• audit findings;
• refresher training;
• supervision;
• competency assessment;
• professional development; and
• record keeping.

Training and competency requirements should be proportionate to:

• role;
• responsibility;
• task;
• complexity; and
• level of risk.

Completion of training should not automatically be treated as demonstration of practical competence where practical competence is required.

For sole practitioners, consider your own:

• continuing competence;
• CPD;
• supervision;
• consultation;
• scope limits; and
• future systems if you engage employees, contractors, students or volunteers.

Required Evidence

• AAOT Work Health and Safety Policy
• WHS Documentation Framework
• WHS Training, Induction and Competency Plan or Matrix

---

Consultation, Communication and Participation

Develop an appropriate consultation and communication system.

Consider consultation with:

• clients;
• workers;
• managers;
• support people;
• assistance animal trainers;
• veterinarians;
• employers;
• schools;
• healthcare providers;
• disability support providers;
• contractors;
• other duty holders; and
• other relevant stakeholders.

Where applicable, consider formal WHS consultation arrangements such as:

• Health and Safety Representatives;
• Health and Safety Committees;
• designated work groups; or
• equivalent organisational consultation structures.

You are not required to create a formal structure where this is not relevant to your workplace.

Address:

• when consultation occurs;
• how people participate;
• accessible communication;
• reasonable adjustments;
• supported decision-making;
• informed participation;
• consent;
• privacy;
• communicating risks;
• documenting decisions;
• escalating concerns; and
• responding to stakeholder feedback.

Consultation should involve people in relevant decision-making.

It should not simply involve notifying them after a decision has already been made.

Required Evidence

• WHS Consultation and Communication Procedure
• Completed or Simulated WHS Consultation Record

---

Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment

Develop a systematic process for identifying foreseeable hazards relevant to your practice.

Consider:

• assistance animal health;
• animal behaviour;
• welfare;
• workload;
• other animals;
• person–task interactions;
• environments;
• equipment;
• assistive technology;
• manual tasks;
• biological hazards;
• infection-related hazards;
• hazardous chemicals;
• transport;
• public access;
• home/community practice;
• lone or remote work;
• psychosocial hazards;
• occupational violence and aggression;
• third parties;
• emergencies; and
• organisational systems.

Your system must demonstrate the principle:

Disability, diagnosis, communication difference, support need or assistance animal use is not automatically a hazard. Identify the actual circumstance capable of causing harm.

Risk Assessment

Address:

• who or what may be affected;
• likelihood;
• consequence;
• existing controls;
• control effectiveness;
• additional controls;
• residual risk;
• formal assessment;
• dynamic assessment;
• review triggers; and
• documentation.

Every new or materially changed environment should be considered through an appropriate risk-assessment process, with the formality and extent proportionate to the circumstances and level of risk.

This may include:

• review of existing controls;
• pre-visit assessment;
• review/update of an existing assessment;
• informal situational assessment;
• task-specific assessment;
• dynamic assessment; or
• formal documented assessment.

Required Evidence

• Hazard Identification System or Checklist
• WHS Risk Assessment Procedure
• Completed Complex Assistance Animal WHS Risk Assessment

---

Risk Control, Dignity of Risk and Occupational Participation

Demonstrate how you apply the hierarchy of controls while recognising the occupational and human-rights context of disability practice.

Your approach should integrate:

• safety;
• occupational participation;
• client autonomy;
• dignity of risk;
• positive risk-taking;
• reasonable adjustment;
• supported decision-making;
• least-restrictive effective controls;
• worker safety;
• public safety; and
• assistance animal welfare.

Risk analysis should consider both:

What are the risks associated with participation?

and

What are the risks and consequences of restricting participation?

Complex Risk-Control Analyses

Complete three significant risk-control analyses relevant to your professional context.

Across these analyses, demonstrate that you can:

• identify the actual hazard;
• identify who or what may be harmed;
• analyse likelihood and consequence;
• identify existing controls;
• evaluate control effectiveness;
• consider relevant levels of the hierarchy of controls;
• identify possible reasonable adjustments;
• consider the person’s goals and preferences;
• consider assistance animal welfare;
• consider consequences of restricting participation;
• formulate controls;
• justify the controls selected;
• identify residual risk; and
• identify appropriate review triggers.

At least one analysis must consider a situation in which exclusion of the assistance animal or restriction of the person’s participation may initially appear to be the simplest control.

Critically consider whether an effective, less restrictive control is reasonably available.

Required Evidence

• Three Complex Risk-Control Analyses
• WHS Risk Control Plan

---

Safe Work Systems and Operational Documentation

Develop three task-specific operational or safety documents relevant to your professional practice.

Choose the document type that best suits the task.

Possible formats include:

• Safe Work Procedure;
• Safe Operating Procedure;
• work instruction;
• checklist;
• task-specific safety plan; or
• another professionally justified operational document.

At least one must specifically relate to assistance animal practice.

For each document, briefly explain:

Why is this type of document appropriate for this activity?

SWMS

A Safe Work Method Statement is not required for ordinary AAOT work unless it is legally applicable to the specific work being undertaken.

Do not use SWMS terminology as a generic substitute for:

• an SWP;
• SOP;
• risk assessment; or
• other operational safety document.

Required Evidence

• Three Task-Specific Operational/Safety Documents

---

Specialist WHS Hazards

Demonstrate how your current Unit 1 WHS system addresses specialist hazards relevant to your professional practice.

Consider, where relevant:

• PPE;
• hazardous chemicals;
• manual tasks;
• equipment;
• assistive technology;
• animal handling;
• environmental risks;
• housekeeping;
• psychosocial hazards;
• occupational violence and aggression;
• fatigue;
• workload;
• lone work; and
• other specialist hazards.

---

Personal Protective Equipment

Where PPE is relevant, consider:

• whether higher-order controls are reasonably available;
• selection;
• suitability;
• fit;
• sizing;
• accessibility;
• compatibility with other equipment;
• availability;
• limitations;
• information and training;
• correct use;
• inspection;
• cleaning;
• storage;
• maintenance;
• replacement; and
• disposal.

PPE should not be treated as the default response where a more effective higher-order control is reasonably available.

---

Workplace Housekeeping and Environmental Safety

Consider:

• access and egress;
• walkways;
• movement spaces;
• slip hazards;
• trip hazards;
• spills;
• lighting;
• ventilation;
• waste;
• animal waste;
• equipment placement;
• animal leads and harnesses;
• mobility devices;
• assistive technology;
• storage; and
• emergency exits.

Within client homes and community settings, focus on identifiable hazards relevant to the work being undertaken.

Do not impose institutional standards concerning:

• tidiness;
• presentation;
• lifestyle; or
• ordinary household arrangements.

---

Psychosocial Hazards

Psychosocial risk management should prioritise appropriate:

• work-design controls;
• organisational controls; and
• systems-level responses.

Self-care, resilience strategies or Employee Assistance Programs may complement controls but should not substitute for controlling workplace hazards.

Relevant AAOT psychosocial risks may include:

• workload;
• role ambiguity;
• public-access conflict;
• discrimination;
• aggression;
• traumatic events;
• animal injury;
• animal retirement;
• animal death;
• failed placements;
• moral distress;
• vicarious trauma;
• online abuse;
• complaints;
• lone work; and
• organisational conflict.

---

Later Specialist Units

At Unit 1 stage, recognise where:

• Infection Prevention and Control; and
• Sustainability

intersect with WHS.

You are not expected to develop the final specialist policies before completing their dedicated units.

Formal Sustainability documentation will be developed through Unit 2.

Formal Infection Prevention and Control documentation will be developed through Unit 3.

Following assessment, feedback and revision, relevant documents should be incorporated into or cross-referenced by the final WHS Practice Manual.

Required Evidence

• Specialist WHS Hazard Management Plan
• Additional supporting documentation where reasonably required

---

Home, Community, Lone and Public Practice

Where relevant to your current or intended practice, consider the WHS implications of providing Occupational Therapy outside a conventional controlled workplace.

Relevant issues may include:

• pre-visit information;
• proportionate pre-visit assessment;
• dynamic risk assessment;
• client homes;
• household members;
• visitors;
• support workers;
• other service providers;
• household pets;
• other animals;
• violence or aggression;
• potentially dangerous objects;
• alcohol or other drugs;
• smoking;
• vaping;
• airborne exposure;
• environmental hazards;
• blocked exits;
• neighbourhood conditions;
• travel;
• transport;
• weather;
• communication;
• mobile coverage;
• lone work;
• emergency assistance;
• public spaces; and
• external organisations.

Explain circumstances in which you might:

• continue normally;
• introduce additional controls;
• modify the activity;
• modify the environment;
• change location;
• obtain assistance;
• postpone;
• leave; or
• discontinue a particular unsafe activity.

Distinguish between:

modifying or terminating an unsafe activity or visit

and

withdrawing the person’s ongoing access to professional services

Risk decisions should be based on identifiable hazards rather than assumptions concerning:

• disability;
• diagnosis;
• support needs;
• socioeconomic circumstances; or
• lifestyle.

Required Evidence Where Relevant

• Home and Community Practice Safety Procedure
• Lone Worker Safety Plan

You may use one or both where relevant.

Where one or both documents are not relevant, briefly explain why.

Where appropriate, provide equivalent documentation addressing another significant:

• out-of-clinic;
• environmental;
• travel;
• remote-work; or
• practice-specific risk.

You are not required to manufacture a home-visit or lone-worker system where it has no reasonable application to your practice.

---

Emergency Preparedness and Continuity

Develop an:

Assistance Animal Emergency and Continuity Plan

The plan should recognise that an emergency may involve:

• the client;
• the assistance animal;
• both members of the team;
• the Occupational Therapist;
• another worker;
• another person; or
• the environment.

---

Person-Related Emergencies

Consider circumstances in which the person:

• becomes unconscious;
• cannot communicate;
• requires ambulance transport;
• requires hospital admission;
• becomes temporarily unable to manage the animal; or
• cannot provide the animal’s usual care.

Address:

• immediate medical response;
• accessible communication;
• animal safety;
• temporary carers;
• emergency contacts;
• transport;
• veterinary details;
• medication;
• feeding;
• toileting;
• handling;
• equipment;
• privacy;
• transfer of responsibility; and
• reunification.

---

Assistance Animal Emergencies

Consider:

• injury;
• acute illness;
• emergency veterinary treatment;
• behavioural inability to continue working;
• temporary inability to work;
• unexpected retirement;
• unavailability; and
• death.

Identify:

• which disability-related functions may be affected; and
• how continuity might be supported.

Do not assume an alternative support is automatically equivalent to the assistance animal.

---

Temporary Separation

Address:

• authorised temporary carers;
• transfer of responsibility;
• transport;
• medication;
• feeding;
• toileting;
• handling;
• equipment;
• privacy;
• communication; and
• reunification.

Where safe and practicable, planning should support the assistance animal team remaining together.

Planning should also account for situations where temporary separation cannot be avoided.

---

Environmental Emergencies

Consider, where relevant:

• fire;
• evacuation;
• severe weather;
• bushfire;
• flood;
• natural disaster;
• security incidents;
• chemical or biological events;
• transport emergencies;
• utility failure; and
• equipment failure.

---

Emergency Equipment and Preparedness Testing

Where relevant, address:

• availability and accessibility of emergency equipment;
• first aid supplies;
• first aid equipment;
• expiry dates;
• inspection;
• maintenance;
• responsibility for checks;
• replacement;
• replenishment;
• emergency communication arrangements;
• drills;
• simulations;
• scenario testing; and
• post-exercise or post-event review.

Emergency exercises should be:

• proportionate;
• accessible; and
• designed so that an assistance animal is not exposed to unnecessary fear, distress or welfare compromise merely to create realism.

Required Evidence

• Assistance Animal Emergency and Continuity Plan
• Emergency Contact and Temporary Animal Care Information Sheet

---

Incident Management, Investigation and Corrective Action

Develop an incident-management system appropriate to your professional context.

Address relevant events including:

• injuries;
• illnesses;
• near misses;
• animal incidents;
• animal-welfare incidents;
• public incidents;
• violence and aggression;
• biological exposure;
• equipment failure;
• environmental incidents; and
• other relevant WHS events.

Clearly distinguish:

internal workplace incident and near-miss reporting

from

statutory notification to the relevant WHS/OHS regulator

Your system should address:

• immediate response;
• first aid;
• emergency response;
• internal reporting;
• escalation;
• assessment of potential statutory notification;
• responsible duty holder;
• relevant regulator;
• notification where required;
• site preservation where applicable;
• veterinary pathways;
• animal-welfare pathways;
• privacy;
• documentation; and
• communication.

Safe Work Australia develops national policy and model WHS materials but is not the regulator responsible for receiving individual workplace notifications.

Animal injury or illness is not automatically a WHS-notifiable incident.

Other:

• veterinary;
• welfare;
• organisational;
• funding;
• insurance; or
• professional

reporting pathways may still apply.

---

Applied Incident Analysis

Use one:

• actual deidentified incident;
• actual deidentified near miss; or
• realistic simulated incident.

Analyse:

• what occurred;
• immediate response;
• who or what was affected;
• internal reporting;
• potential statutory notification;
• contributing factors;
• systemic factors;
• root causes;
• corrective actions;
• preventive actions;
• responsibility;
• timeframes;
• review arrangements; and
• verification of effectiveness.

The purpose of investigation should be system improvement rather than inappropriate individual blame.

Required Evidence

• Incident Report
• Incident Investigation and Root Cause Analysis
• Corrective and Preventive Action Plan/Evidence

---

Monitoring, Audit, Evaluation and Continuous Improvement

Develop a system for ensuring your WHS arrangements remain effective.

Consider:

• inspections;
• audits;
• self-audits;
• hazard reports;
• incident data;
• near-miss data;
• corrective actions;
• consultation;
• worker feedback;
• client feedback;
• animal-welfare indicators;
• training;
• competency;
• equipment;
• psychosocial hazards;
• emergency exercises;
• legislative changes;
• regulatory guidance changes;
• evidence changes;
• document review;
• changed service models; and
• control effectiveness.

Include both:

leading indicators

and

lagging indicators

Leading indicators may include:

• training;
• consultation;
• inspections;
• hazard reporting;
• corrective-action completion;
• emergency exercises;
• policy reviews; and
• competency activities.

Lagging indicators may include:

• injury;
• illness;
• incidents;
• animal injury;
• near misses;
• lost time;
• complaints; and
• repeated control failures.

Incident numbers alone are not a complete measure of workplace safety.

---

Monitoring Actual Practice and Procedural Compliance

Monitoring should consider not only whether WHS documentation exists but whether procedures and controls are:

• understood;
• accessible;
• practicable;
• appropriately resourced;
• actually followed; and
• effective.

Where actual practice differs from an established procedure, control or workplace requirement, determine:

• what occurred;
• why it occurred;
• whether immediate action is required;
• whether the existing control remains effective;
• whether the procedure is realistic;
• whether training is required;
• whether supervision is required;
• whether equipment or resources are inadequate;
• whether workload or work design contributed;
• whether the procedure requires revision;
• whether corrective or preventive action is required; and
• whether escalation is necessary.

Do not automatically attribute procedural deviation to individual failure.

Consider:

• organisational factors;
• environmental factors;
• communication;
• training;
• equipment;
• workload;
• human factors; and
• the design of the procedure itself.

---

WHS Information and Trend Analysis

Where sufficient information is available, analyse WHS data collectively rather than considering individual records in isolation.

Relevant information may include:

• hazard reports;
• incidents;
• near misses;
• injury;
• illness;
• animal-welfare events;
• animal injury;
• equipment failures;
• psychosocial hazards;
• complaints;
• public-access incidents;
• training information;
• competency information;
• audit findings;
• inspection findings;
• procedural deviations;
• corrective actions; and
• repeated control failures.

Use trends and patterns to:

• identify emerging hazards;
• identify recurring problems;
• evaluate control effectiveness;
• identify training needs;
• identify resource needs;
• inform WHS priorities; and
• support continuous improvement.

Required Evidence

• WHS Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
• Completed WHS Audit or Self-Audit
• Corrective Action Register
• Continuous Improvement Plan

---

Unit 1 Critical Professional Analysis

Submit a separate:

Unit 1 Critical Professional Analysis

Recommended length:

approximately 1,500–2,000 words

The Critical Professional Analysis does not form part of the working WHS Practice Manual.

The manual is the professional workplace product.

The Critical Professional Analysis demonstrates your professional reasoning at the end of Unit 1.

Your analysis should address the following areas in a coherent professional discussion.

You do not need to answer them as separate numbered questions.

---

Your Approach

Discuss:

• how you approached developing your manual;
• your selected practice context;
• major assumptions;
• professional priorities; and
• significant decisions you made.

---

Strengths of Your Current WHS System

Critically evaluate what currently works well.

Explain why.

---

Gaps, Weaknesses and What May Be Missing

Identify:

• gaps;
• limitations;
• weaknesses;
• uncertainty;
• incomplete areas;
• conflicting requirements; and
• areas needing further development.

---

Additional Documentation

Consider whether your practice reasonably requires documentation beyond the minimum WAFA requirements.

Also consider whether particular documents would be unnecessary.

Explain your reasoning.

---

Further Learning and Professional Development

Identify where you may require:

• further learning;
• CPD;
• supervision;
• consultation;
• mentoring;
• specialist input; or
• referral.

---

Client Autonomy, Participation and Dignity of Risk

Critically evaluate how your WHS system supports:

• autonomy;
• participation;
• reasonable adjustment;
• dignity of risk;
• positive risk-taking;
• supported decision-making; and
• least-restrictive effective approaches.

---

Assistance Animal Health and Welfare

Evaluate how animal welfare is integrated throughout your WHS system.

Do not limit this discussion to a single welfare section.

---

Application to Real-World AAOT Practice

Consider:

• usability;
• administrative burden;
• accessibility;
• resources;
• implementation;
• workplace culture;
• time;
• practicality;
• duplication; and
• sustainability.

---

Emergency and Incident Preparedness

Evaluate the strengths and limitations of your:

• emergency systems;
• continuity arrangements;
• incident response;
• investigation processes; and
• corrective-action systems.

---

Later AAOT Units and Future Development

Identify aspects that will require development as later units are completed.

This may include:

• Sustainability;
• Infection Prevention and Control; and
• other areas introduced later in the credential.

---

Priorities for Improvement

Identify your highest priorities for further development and justify why they are priorities.

---

Important Professional Principle

There is no expectation that your Unit 1 manual will be perfect or permanently complete.

A candidate who identifies a genuine gap, explains its significance and proposes an appropriate response may demonstrate stronger professional reasoning than a candidate who claims their system requires no further development.

---

Assessment and Revision Process

Develop Your Unit 1 Draft

Develop your:

AAOT WHS Practice Manual – Unit 1 Draft

progressively during Unit 1.

Formative activities and the WAFA Template Library can assist you in developing individual components.

---

Submit Your Unit 1 Evidence

Submit separately:

AAOT WHS Practice Manual – Unit 1 Draft

and

Unit 1 Critical Professional Analysis

---

Assessment and Professional Feedback

Your assessor will evaluate the evidence against the Unit 1 marking criteria and provide professional feedback.

Feedback may address:

• legal inaccuracies;
• professional inaccuracies;
• incomplete analysis;
• inadequate controls;
• gaps;
• unclear responsibility;
• documentation issues;
• disability-access concerns;
• unnecessarily restrictive controls;
• animal-welfare concerns;
• emergency-planning weaknesses;
• insufficient evidence;
• inconsistent documentation;
• implementation issues; or
• areas requiring stronger justification.

The assessor will not rewrite the manual for you.

---

Revise the Manual and Record Your Response

Critically consider the feedback and revise the manual where appropriate.

Maintain a:

Professional Feedback and Revision Record

Your record should show:

Feedback Received	Candidate Analysis/Response	Change Made	Location in Manual	Rationale if Not Adopted

You are not expected to accept every recommendation automatically.

Where significant feedback is not adopted, provide a defensible professional rationale.

---

Unit 1 Revised Version and Summative Decision

Following feedback, revise the WHS Practice Manual and submit or confirm your:

AAOT WHS Practice Manual – Unit 1 Revised Version

together with the:

Professional Feedback and Revision Record

The assessor then determines the Unit 1 summative outcome.

The revised manual should remain a usable professional resource, not a record of assessment commentary.

For the Unit 1 summative decision, evidence includes:

Unit 1 WHS Practice Manual
+ Critical Professional Analysis
+ Assessor Feedback
+ Professional Feedback and Revision Record
+ Unit 1 Revised Version

The Unit 1 Revised Version is the summative professional product for Unit 1.

It remains developmental in relation to the final whole-of-course manual.

---

Continuing Development Across the AAOT Credential

Following Unit 1, the WHS Practice Manual becomes a living professional document.

The general process is:

Learning → Development → Unit Assessment → Feedback → Revision → Integration

Documentation developed and assessed during later units should be incorporated or cross-referenced where appropriate.

Not every document developed during the credential necessarily belongs in the WHS Practice Manual.

Determining whether it belongs there forms part of professional judgement.

---

Final AAOT WHS Practice Manual

At the end of the credential, submit:

AAOT WHS Practice Manual – Final Professional Version

as part of your AAOT Professional Portfolio.

Before submission, review the manual as one integrated professional system.

Check for:

• contradictions;
• duplication;
• inconsistent terminology;
• outdated legislation;
• outdated regulator information;
• outdated references;
• conflicting responsibilities;
• conflicting procedures;
• gaps;
• inaccessible formats;
• broken cross-references;
• version-control issues;
• missing documents; and
• systems that are no longer appropriate.

Your:

• WHS Policy;
• Sustainability documentation;
• Infection Prevention and Control documentation;
• emergency systems;
• animal-welfare systems;
• risk-management processes; and
• incident-management systems

should operate together rather than as isolated course assignments.

Ask:

If I commenced or continued working as an Assistance Animal Occupational Therapist tomorrow, does this manual contain the WHS systems I reasonably need for the work I actually undertake or intend to undertake?

This question is more important than asking whether every WAFA template has been completed.

---

Accessibility and Reasonable Adjustments

WAFA recognises that candidates may have different:

• disabilities;
• communication styles;
• processing needs;
• professional backgrounds; and
• preferred methods of demonstrating knowledge.

Reasonable adjustments may be provided where required, provided the essential professional requirements of the assessment remain demonstrated.

Adjustments may include:

• accessible document formats;
• assistive technology;
• speech-to-text;
• additional processing time;
• flexible submission arrangements;
• written clarification;
• alternative communication methods; and
• other reasonable adjustments.

Candidates should not be assessed negatively because of their preferred communication method.

Assessment focuses on the quality of:

• evidence;
• professional judgement; and
• demonstrated competence.

Where the assessment requires creation of an actual professional workplace document, the final document must nevertheless exist in a usable and inspectable form appropriate to its professional purpose.

---

Referencing and Evidence

Use current and authoritative sources where appropriate.

These may include:

• legislation;
• regulations;
• Codes of Practice;
• WHS/OHS regulator guidance;
• disability discrimination legislation;
• Occupational Therapy professional standards;
• animal-welfare legislation;
• animal-management legislation;
• biosecurity requirements;
• recognised professional standards;
• peer-reviewed literature; and
• relevant organisational documentation.

Distinguish between:

law | regulatory guidance | professional obligation | organisational requirement | funding requirement | credential requirement | evidence-informed recommendation | good practice

Supplementary resources such as explanatory websites or videos may support learning but should not be treated as equivalent to:

• legislation;
• regulatory guidance;
• professional standards; or
• peer-reviewed evidence.

Use the referencing style specified by WAFA.

---

Required Evidence Summary

Practice Area	Candidate Evidence
Practice Context and Governance	Practice Context and WHS Governance Statement; WHS Roles and Responsibilities Matrix
Legal and Professional Framework	Legal, Regulatory and Professional Compliance Register
WHS Policy and Systems	AAOT WHS Policy; WHS Documentation Framework; WHS Training, Induction and Competency Plan or Matrix
Consultation	WHS Consultation and Communication Procedure; completed/simulated Consultation Record
Hazard and Risk Assessment	Hazard Identification System/Checklist; Risk Assessment Procedure; completed Complex AAOT Risk Assessment
Risk Control and Participation	Three Complex Risk-Control Analyses; WHS Risk Control Plan
Operational Documentation	Three justified task-specific operational/safety documents
Specialist Hazards	Specialist WHS Hazard Management Plan and relevant additional evidence
Home/Community/Lone Work	Relevant procedure/plan or justified equivalent evidence
Emergency Preparedness	Emergency and Continuity Plan; Emergency Contact and Temporary Animal Care Information Sheet
Incident Management	Incident Report; Investigation/Root Cause Analysis; Corrective and Preventive Action evidence
Monitoring and Improvement	Monitoring and Evaluation Plan; Audit/Self-Audit; Corrective Action Register; Continuous Improvement Plan
Separate Assessment	Unit 1 Critical Professional Analysis
Revision Evidence	Professional Feedback and Revision Record; Unit 1 Revised Version

---

Marking Scale

Grade	Mark	Standard
Pass	50–64	Competent professional practice
Credit	65–74	Sound analysis and well-integrated professional practice
Distinction	75–84	Highly developed critical reasoning and integration
High Distinction	85–100	Exceptional synthesis, professional judgement, systems thinking and insight

---

Analytic Marking Rubric

Criterion	Weight	Pass	Credit	Distinction	High Distinction
Practice Context, Governance and Duty Holders	7	Correctly identifies context and responsibilities.	Clearly applies responsibilities, control and overlapping duties.	Critically analyses complex governance arrangements.	Exceptional synthesis of changing roles, control and overlapping responsibilities.
Legal, Regulatory, Professional and Ethical Framework	10	Identifies major applicable requirements.	Accurately applies relevant frameworks.	Critically distinguishes and integrates different requirements and guidance.	Exceptional analysis of interactions, limitations, uncertainty and professional implications.
WHS Policy, Systems, Training and Competency	8	Develops a functional WHS system.	Coherently integrates policy, documentation, training and competency.	Creates a highly integrated and proportionate professional system.	Demonstrates exceptional judgement regarding necessary systems, competence and documentation.
Consultation, Accessibility and Participation	7	Demonstrates appropriate consultation and accessibility.	Meaningfully integrates participation and reasonable adjustment.	Critically applies supported decision-making and complex consultation.	Consultation materially shapes decisions; accessibility is embedded throughout.
Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment	10	Identifies and assesses foreseeable hazards.	Systematically considers interacting factors.	Critically analyses complex and changing risk.	Anticipates emerging/systemic risk and consistently distinguishes actual hazards from disability or assistance animal use.
Risk Control, Dignity of Risk and Participation	12	Selects appropriate controls considering participation and welfare.	Justifies controls using hierarchy, reasonable adjustment and dignity of risk.	Critically evaluates competing risks and least-restrictive effective controls.	Exceptionally integrates WHS, rights, participation, positive risk-taking and animal welfare.
Safe Work Systems and Operational Documentation	7	Produces functional documentation.	Produces clear, usable and appropriate documentation.	Develops highly professional integrated operational systems.	Shows exceptional judgement regarding what documentation is and is not required.
Specialist and Context-Specific Hazards	7	Addresses major relevant specialist hazards.	Applies appropriate specialist controls.	Critically prioritises higher-order and work-design controls.	Demonstrates sophisticated anticipation and integration of complex specialist hazards.
Emergency Preparedness and Continuity	8	Provides workable human/animal emergency arrangements.	Integrates equipment, accessibility, animal care and continuity.	Anticipates complex emergencies, separation and preparedness testing.	Demonstrates exceptional contingency, continuity, transfer, recovery and reunification planning.
Incident Management, Investigation and Corrective Action	7	Appropriately reports, investigates and responds to incidents.	Distinguishes internal/statutory pathways and appropriate action.	Critically analyses systemic/root causes.	Demonstrates exceptional systems thinking without inappropriate individual blame.
Monitoring, Evaluation and Continuous Improvement	7	Establishes functional monitoring and review.	Uses appropriate indicators and examines implementation.	Integrates actual practice, procedural deviations, trends, audit and improvement.	Exceptionally evaluates whether the system genuinely works and anticipates systemic weaknesses.
Critical Professional Analysis and Response to Feedback	10	Identifies strengths, limitations and development needs.	Provides thoughtful analysis and meaningful revision.	Demonstrates strong reflexivity and substantive gap analysis.	Demonstrates exceptional intellectual independence, self-critique and professional development.
TOTAL	100

The marking approach retains the intended distinction between competent professional work and progressively more sophisticated critical reasoning, with HD representing exceptional professional integration rather than simply a more complete set of documents.

---

Understanding the Grade Standard

Pass

Apply → Identify → Implement → Explain

A Pass demonstrates competent professional practice at the required stage of the credential.

The WHS system is functional, safe and professionally appropriate.

---

Credit

Apply → Analyse → Connect → Justify

A Credit demonstrates professional performance clearly above the minimum required standard.

The system is coherent and demonstrates good evidence use and integration.

---

Distinction

Analyse → Evaluate → Integrate → Justify

A Distinction demonstrates highly developed professional reasoning.

The candidate recognises:

• complexity;
• uncertainty;
• competing considerations; and
• interaction between professional systems.

---

High Distinction

Critically Evaluate → Synthesise → Anticipate → Innovate → Reflect

A High Distinction demonstrates exceptional professional performance.

The WHS Practice Manual operates as an integrated professional system rather than a collection of assessment tasks.

An HD does not require perfection.

Sophisticated identification of uncertainty, limitations or remaining gaps may support a High Distinction where the candidate demonstrates appropriate professional reasoning about how those issues should be addressed.

---

Minimum Competency Requirement

A numerical mark alone does not establish professional competence.

To pass Unit 1 you must:

achieve at least 50/100

and

demonstrate satisfactory professional competence across essential safety, legal, ethical, disability-inclusive and animal-welfare requirements

A candidate cannot receive a final Pass while an unresolved critical professional deficiency remains.

Critical deficiencies may include:

• unsafe professional practice;
• serious misunderstanding of WHS/OHS duties;
• materially incorrect legal claims affecting practice;
• failure to recognise a foreseeable serious risk;
• discriminatory risk-management practice;
• unjustified exclusion of a disabled person or assistance animal;
• serious failure to consider reasonable adjustment;
• treating disability, diagnosis, communication difference or assistance animal use itself as the hazard;
• significant assistance animal welfare concerns;
• materially unsafe emergency arrangements;
• serious misunderstanding of statutory incident-notification responsibilities;
• significant practice outside professional scope;
• serious privacy/confidentiality concerns; or
• another deficiency capable of creating significant harm.

Where a critical deficiency remains, the assessment outcome will be:

Further Evidence Required

This applies irrespective of the provisional numerical mark.

The assessor will identify:

• the critical deficiency;
• why it prevents a competent outcome;
• what further evidence or correction is required; and
• the applicable reassessment process.

Candidates will not ordinarily be required to repeat unrelated components that have already demonstrated the required standard.

This maintains the principle that a high total mark cannot compensate for an unresolved major professional, legal, safety, disability-rights or animal-welfare concern.

---

High Distinction Indicators

HD Indicator	What This Looks Like
Integration	The manual functions as one connected professional system.
Criticality	Controls and conventional approaches are evaluated rather than merely accepted.
Independent Professional Judgement	Additional needs are identified where relevant, or unnecessary systems are appropriately excluded.
Disability-Inclusive Reasoning	The disabled person is consistently distinguished from the actual hazard.
Risk-Benefit Analysis	Both participation and restriction are critically considered.
Animal Welfare Integration	Welfare is embedded throughout WHS decision-making.
Systems Thinking	Person + Animal + Occupation + Task + Environment + Equipment + People + Organisation are considered together.
Professional Reflexivity	The candidate identifies weaknesses and development in their own thinking.
Evidence Literacy	Law, guidance, policy, funding and recommended practice are accurately distinguished.
Professional Usability	The manual could realistically be used and maintained in practice.

---

WAFA Commendation for Outstanding Achievement

Exceptional work within the High Distinction range may additionally be considered for:

High Distinction with WAFA Commendation for Outstanding Achievement

The Commendation is separate from the numerical grade.

It is not automatically awarded because a candidate achieves:

• 90%;
• 95%;
• 100%; or
• another very high mark.

A Commendation recognises exceptional professional contribution or insight beyond the normal High Distinction standard.

The candidate must:

• achieve an overall High Distinction;
• demonstrate HD-level performance across major professional-reasoning criteria;
• have no unresolved critical professional deficiency; and
• demonstrate exceptional professional contribution beyond outstanding completion of the assessment.

Examples may include:

• exceptional evidence-informed innovation;
• identification of a significant issue not prompted by the assessment;
• creation of a professional resource with potential value beyond the candidate’s own practice;
• exceptional integration of disability rights, occupational participation, WHS and animal welfare;
• unusually sophisticated analysis of competing risks, rights or responsibilities;
• exemplary interpretation of authoritative evidence;
• exceptional translation of complex theory into professional practice;
• exceptional reflective development;
• sophisticated response to assessor feedback; or
• work capable of informing exemplary AAOT practice.

High Distinction = outstanding achievement of the assessment criteria

WAFA Commendation = exceptional professional contribution or insight beyond that outstanding standard

---

Candidate Submission Checklist

Before submitting your Unit 1 Draft, check that the following are addressed.

Practice Context and Governance

☐ My professional context is clear.
☐ My jurisdiction is identified.
☐ Relevant duty holders are identified.
☐ Responsibilities reflect actual control and influence.
☐ Overlapping duties are considered where relevant.

Legal and Professional Framework

☐ I have used current authoritative sources.
☐ I have distinguished law from guidance, policy and recommended practice.
☐ Disability and access requirements are addressed.
☐ Professional scope is addressed.
☐ Animal-related requirements are addressed.

WHS Policy and Systems

☐ My WHS Policy is complete.
☐ My documentation framework is coherent.
☐ Training and induction requirements are addressed.
☐ Competency requirements are addressed.
☐ I have not created unnecessary documentation merely to increase the size of the manual.

Consultation

☐ Consultation is meaningful.
☐ Communication is accessible.
☐ Reasonable adjustments are considered.
☐ Supported decision-making is considered.
☐ Formal consultation arrangements are addressed where relevant.

Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment

☐ Hazards are clearly identified.
☐ Disability is not incorrectly treated as the hazard.
☐ Assistance animal use is not incorrectly treated as the hazard.
☐ Risk assessment is proportionate.
☐ Dynamic risk is considered where relevant.

Risk Control

☐ The hierarchy of controls has been applied.
☐ Reasonable adjustment is considered.
☐ Dignity of risk is addressed.
☐ Positive risk-taking is addressed.
☐ Occupational participation is addressed.
☐ Animal welfare is addressed.
☐ I have considered the consequences of restricting participation.
☐ Controls are no more restrictive than reasonably necessary.

Operational Documentation

☐ I have developed three relevant task-specific documents.
☐ At least one relates specifically to assistance animal practice.
☐ I have justified the document type selected.
☐ I have not used SWMS terminology incorrectly.

Specialist Hazards

☐ Relevant PPE issues are addressed.
☐ Relevant chemical risks are addressed.
☐ Relevant manual-task risks are addressed.
☐ Equipment risks are addressed.
☐ Environmental/housekeeping issues are addressed proportionately.
☐ Psychosocial hazards are addressed.
☐ Work-design or organisational controls are prioritised where appropriate.

Home, Community and Lone Work

☐ Relevant out-of-clinic risks are addressed.
☐ Controls are proportionate.
☐ I have not imposed institutional housekeeping standards on client homes.
☐ I have developed relevant documentation or justified why it is not required.

Emergency Preparedness

☐ Human emergencies are addressed.
☐ Assistance animal emergencies are addressed.
☐ Handler incapacity is addressed.
☐ Temporary separation is addressed.
☐ Temporary animal care is addressed.
☐ Continuity of disability-related functions is considered.
☐ Emergency equipment is addressed.
☐ Inspection/maintenance is addressed.
☐ Emergency testing or exercises are addressed.

Incident Management

☐ Internal reporting is addressed.
☐ Statutory notification is distinguished.
☐ Root causes and systemic factors are considered.
☐ Corrective action is included.
☐ Preventive action is included.
☐ Effectiveness will be reviewed.

Monitoring and Continuous Improvement

☐ Leading indicators are included.
☐ Lagging indicators are included.
☐ Actual practice is monitored.
☐ Procedural deviations can be identified.
☐ System causes are considered.
☐ WHS trends can be analysed.
☐ Corrective actions can be monitored.
☐ Continuous improvement is documented.

Critical Professional Analysis

☐ I have critically analysed my approach.
☐ Strengths are identified.
☐ Genuine gaps are identified.
☐ Limitations and uncertainty are acknowledged.
☐ Further learning needs are identified.
☐ Autonomy and participation are analysed.
☐ Dignity of risk is analysed.
☐ Animal welfare is integrated.
☐ Real-world usability is considered.
☐ Emergency and incident systems are evaluated.
☐ Later-unit development is considered.
☐ Priorities for improvement are identified.

Submission

☐ My Unit 1 Draft is complete.
☐ My Critical Professional Analysis is separate from the manual.
☐ Client and organisational information is appropriately deidentified.
☐ Sources are acknowledged.
☐ Documents are readable and professionally usable.
☐ Cross-references work.
☐ Version information is clear where relevant.

---

Candidate Declaration

I confirm that this submission represents my own professional work except where sources, workplace materials, templates or other contributions have been appropriately acknowledged.

I confirm that confidential client and organisational information has been appropriately protected.

I understand that this assessment evaluates professional reasoning and not simply completion of templates.

I understand that my WHS Practice Manual will continue to develop across later AAOT units.

I understand that identifying genuine limitations, gaps or uncertainty is part of professional practice and does not itself indicate assessment failure.

Candidate Name: ______________________________________

Signature: ____________________________________________

Date: ________________________________________________

---

Following Unit 1

After completing Unit 1:

Learn → Develop → Assess → Receive Feedback → Revise → Integrate

Your WHS Practice Manual should continue developing throughout the credential.

At the final Professional Portfolio stage, review the whole manual for:

• coherence;
• duplication;
• contradictions;
• terminology;
• current legislation;
• current guidance;
• responsibilities;
• accessibility;
• document control;
• cross-references;
• outdated material;
• missing systems; and
• professional usability.

---

Final WHS Practice Manual Reflection

Near the end of the credential, critically reflect on how your WHS system has changed from the Unit 1 version to the final professional version.

Consider:

• how your understanding changed;
• what you added;
• what you removed;
• what you combined;
• what you redesigned;
• how feedback affected your work;
• how later units changed earlier decisions;
• how your understanding of disability and participation developed;
• how your understanding of dignity of risk changed;
• how reasonable adjustment was integrated;
• how psychosocial WHS evolved;
• how animal welfare became embedded;
• how emergency planning developed;
• what uncertainties remain; and
• how you will maintain the system in professional practice.

Compare:

What did I think my WHS system needed at the end of Unit 1?

with:

What do I now believe it needs, and what changed my thinking?

The Final WHS Practice Manual Reflection contributes to the Professional Reflection component of the AAOT Professional Portfolio.

Candidates are not required to complete an additional standalone WHS reflection where the required critical reflection has been appropriately incorporated into the final Professional Reflection Assessment.