Preplan/Committee/Task Review

New tasks are given to the committee by:
 * the Board
 * identified by the committee members
 * arise from critiques
 * are brought forward by individual PCSAR members

Evaluating tasks
As new tasks (or suggested tasks) are brought to the committee, we check to see if they fall within our mandate. If not we forward them on to the appropriate committee or agency.

Using consensus, we rate our tasks on two scales: The task is filed on the corresponding list.
 * the value to our mandate
 * the difficulty in implementing

The value of a task
In September 2004, we discussed the complexity that comes with all the Standard Operating Procedures, forms, and preplans which we are producing. Do we need this complication? What difficulty does it cause for our members? Does it make handling the incident easier? How can we cut down on our workload?

We reviewed all the tasks that the committee has identified before. In the process we came up with three questions that can help us decide the value of a task:


 * Have we ever had to deal with the issue in a real incident?
 * Is it about the things we do most?
 * Can we defer to people that have more understanding of the issue?

Tasks or suggested tasks are rated on a value scale
 * High Value
 * Medium Value
 * Low Value
 * No or Negative Value

No/negative value tasks are dropped, sometimes with a note as to the rationale.

In general, low value tasks are filed but given our resources are unlikely to ever be addressed.

The difficulty of a task
We also rate each task on the amount of effort required from the organization.


 * Easy
 * Medium Difficulty
 * Hard

Execution
We work on the tasks in the priority order above, recognizing that we are limited by the skills and resources we have. In a volunteer organization, one of the limitations we have is interest in the work. This may mean that lower priority tasks are done because it meets the organizational need to keep volunteers interested.