Risk Responsibility Plan
The entire information which is necessary to control and manage the risks that are recognized on the individual project 3 program is first apprehended on risk regulation form below and then apprehended in the risk register complying with the regulation of the Risk Manager ( Glazer & McGuire 2017) . After that, all the risks analyzed in project 3 are regulated by the Risk Responsibility Plan depicted in figure 1.
Risk Control Form
| Risk No: | Raised By: | Date Raised: | Owner: |
| Short Title: | |||
| Status: | O Closed O Rejected O Open O Draft | Mail Form to Owner: | O No O Yes |
| Category: | Ref: | Priority Level: | O Project O Activity |
| Evaluation: | |||
| Containment Strategy: | |||
| Probability: | O Unlikely O Possible O Probable O Very Likely | Impact: | O Low O High O Medium |
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Qualitative Analysis:
Activity Number | Minimum | Mode | Maximum |
Risk Action Form
| Risk No: | Action No: | |
| Planned Action: | ||
| Action Manager: | Target Date: | Completion Date: |
Figure 1 - Risk Responsibility Plan
How the Risk Plan and the Risk Responses Would Be Manage
Risk Control
Risks shall solely be controlled efficiently by obligating accountable parties for activities that are geared positively to the risk plan or repression plan ( O'brien, Knight & Harris, 2017) . Effective Risk Responsibility Plan implies adjusting the degree of repression contrary to the likelihood and the effect of the risks.
All the risks that were identified in individual project three will be investigated by the risk owner so that he or she could establish the containment strategy that is most appropriate, albeit no response is necessary instantly ( Glazer & McGuire 2017) . Risks repression entails finding a plan for reducing the repercussion of the risks. Seldom can the risk be eradicated by the plan ( Preuner et al.2017) . Therefore, risk repression entails finding a plan for lessening the impacts of the risk to a point where the risk is manageable and controllable to warrants that the aim of the venture is attained.
When formulating the containment plan, the Risk holder similarly examines the likely possible risks. These are risks which emanate as an unswerving consequence of a containment plan( O'brien, Knight & Harris, 2017) . A containment plan can epitomize a profitable method to address the risk, but the risk it engenders might be undesirable.
However, strategies are generally one of the followings:
The actual tactics which are applied by the disk holder to formulate control plan will rely on distinct incidences of the risk and its valuation. Though, plans are usually one of the followings:
Risk reduction - determines the logistics which would reduce the impact and possibility of the hazard to a mark where it has attained an equivalency of suitability ( Glazer & McGuire 2017) . As formerly specified, it is not typically profitable to eradicate uncertainty.
Risk monitoring- The forecast effect would be adjudicated satisfactory when the mitigation costs are considered ( O'brien, Knight & Harris, 2017) . In this occurrence, the plan will be to oversee the risks and solely take exploit if the forecast of influence develops to be undesirable.
Risk Protection- the espousal of corresponding dealings which will minimize the effect supposed the risk happens ( Glazer & McGuire 2017) . An instance of this will be to pursue a second source of supply of portions of the system which could progress supply or technical snags.
Risk Transference- Measure which will transmit the effect of the uncertainty to the alternative part where the repercussions are well thought-out to be more tolerable ( Preuner et al.2017) .
Having formulated the risk containment plan, it is the responsibility of the risk owner to implement the plan by apportioning risk activities, with aiming accomplishment dates, to the suitable affiliates of the individual project program crew ( Glazer & McGuire 2017) . This risk exploit is documented the risk manager on a Risk Action Forms. After that, the risk manager passes the data obtained by action managers ( O'brien, Knight & Harris, 2017) . The risk proprietor should ensure that the activities are carried out, for modifying or altering the activities as mandatory to make sure that the risk repression continues to be suitable.
Risk Control
As a whole, risk control shall be assimilated into the daily managing of the project program and where it is suitable ( Preuner et al.2017) . The risk control plan shall be integrated into the Project Strategy categorized under new tasks or revision to the present tasks. The risk owners are required to be in control for observing the impact that the alters to strategy have on the risk.
After the Risk Management Committee has approved a risk, the manager of the risk re-examines it each month together with the risk owner, to it could be re-assessed considering changing the circumstances of the projects and altering the nature of risks as a containment plan starts functioning. If this re-evaluation alters the risk activities and quantitative and qualitative evaluation, then the risk register is rationalized or refurbished by the risk director ( O'brien, Knight & Harris, 2017) . Uncertainties are carefully chosen from the top twenty ranked risk list to be revised exclusively at the Risk Management Committee summons which is held on a monthly basis ( Preuner et al.2017) . The Risk Manager makes sure that the action managers and the risk owners are circulated with any alteration to the Risk Action Forms and Risk Control ( Glazer & McGuire 2017) . The regulation procedure remains up to the period when the uncertainty has been controlled and eradicated to the standards which can be acceptable and therefore, is closed.
Closing Risks
In instances where the risk is not viewed as a danger, the risker manager liaising with the risk owners endorses the closing of the risks that the project faced to the Risk Management Committee ( Glazer & McGuire 2017) . Risks are folded in the events Risk Management Committee approves the commendation. If the various stakeholders unanimously approve the folding of the risk, then the risk managers alter the position of the risks on the records, and Risk Register from Open to Closed, the purpose for folding the uncertainty is also mentioned in the records and Risk Action Forms.
Security of Risk Information
Information that is classified would not be hoarded in a register known as Risk Register since the information in this kind of register is freely available to the entire workers of the project program ( Glazer & McGuire 2017) . In incidences where risks discuss to subjects which are confidential, then the Risk Register shall entail references to documents that this confidential data was obtained. All told, the cases of project broader standard for security regulation of materials that are classified will apply.
Risk Responsibility Plan
| Category | Risks | Impact | P (Risk Probability) |
| Planning | Dependence on limited data or information during this phase Lack of a team-based approach, which would allow input from stakeholders | High | .7 |
| Initiation | Lack of clear goals Poor or inaccurate estimates | High | .6 |
| Scheduling | Delay in tasks Poor prioritization | Low | .3 |
| Resource | Insufficient storage of merchandise Lack of sufficient or qualified personnel Poor allocation of resources to certain tasks | Medium | .5 |
| Procurement | Contracts and agreement Management of vendors | Medium | .4 |
| Communication | Inadequate communication Ease or complexity of a message Ineffective feedback channel | Low | .2 |
| Relationship | Vendor relationship User relationship Supplier relationship Stakeholder relationship Sponsor relationship | Low | .15 |
| Budgetary | Cost-benefit analysis Budget overrun | Medium | .45 |
A Contingency Budget for The Risk Responses
| Risk | P (Risk Probability) | I (Cost Impact) | Risk Contingency |
| Planning | .7 | $10,000.00 | $7,000.00 |
| Initiation | .6 | $30,000.00 | $18,000.00 |
| Scheduling | .3 | $15,000.00 | $4,500.00 |
| Resource | .5 | $10,000.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Procurement | .4 | $20,000.00 | $8,000.00 |
| Communication | .2 | $ 20,000.00 | $4,000.00 |
| Relationship | .15 | $8,000.00 | $1,200.00 |
| Budgetary | .45 | $30,000.00 | $13,500.00 |
| Total | $ 143,000 | $ 61,200 .oo |
References
Glazer, J., & McGuire, T. G. (2017). Setting health plan premiums to ensure efficient quality in health care: minimum variance optimal risk adjustment. In Models of Health Plan Payment and Quality Reporting (pp. 59-82).
O'brien, K. H. M., Knight, J. R., & Harris, S. K. (2017). A call for social responsibility and suicide risk screening, prevention, and early intervention following the release of the Netflix series 13 Reasons Why. JAMA internal medicine , 177 (10), 1418-1419.
Preuner, P., Scolobig, A., Linnerooth Bayer, J., Ottowitz, D., Hoyer, S., & Jochum, B. (2017). A Participatory Process to Develop a Landslide Warning System: Paradoxes of Responsibility Sharing in a Case Study in Upper Austria. Resources , 6 (4), 54.
