Documented crisis intervention pathways
Evaluates documented procedures for responding to individuals in acute crisis. This embodies the Islamic duties of *Naṣrah* (active aid), *Riʿāyah* (dutiful care), and *Sadd al-dharā’iʿ* (blocking means to harm), safeguarding vulnerable stakeholders through swift, effective responses that prioritize the preservation of life (*ḥifẓ al‑nafs*) and well-being. Establishing these clear pathways fulfills the mandate of *Ighāthat al-Malhūf* (rescuing the distressed). Such structured interventions ensure vulnerabilities are addressed with *Iḥsān* (excellence), upholding the *Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah* (objectives of Islamic law).
| Metric | Crisis Intervention Performance |
|---|---|
| Target | Triage ≤10m; Escalate ≤15m; RSI decision logged within 24h; 95% RSI documentation rate. |
| Frequency | Quarterly |
| Method | Metrics for triage time, escalation time, RSI decision logging, training coverage, and drill frequency. |
| Unit | Minutes, Percentage, Frequency |
Level 1: Initial/Ad-hoc
Crisis response is ad-hoc and reactive. There are no formal procedures, and intervention relies entirely on the initiative of individuals present at the time.
Level 2: Developing
Informal guidelines for crisis response exist and are known to a few key individuals. Volunteer roles are undefined. There is an awareness of the need for a formal process, but it is not yet documented or consistently applied.
Level 3: Established
Formal, documented child and adult crisis procedures (including suicide/self‑harm, DA, mental health) with DSL/deputies named; on‑call rota in place; immediate steps and referral tools (e.g., DASH, local mental health crisis numbers) are defined and communicated.
Level 4: Advanced
Formal MoUs with LA safeguarding/NHS crisis/DA agencies; evidence of at least 2 drills/year; RSI process embedded with consistent decision logging; threshold tables used effectively.
Level 5: Optimizing
Independent assurance (audit) every 2 years; quarterly PDCA reviews with KPI dashboards; preventive programmes (well‑being, safety plans) reduce incident frequency/severity year‑on‑year.
Organisation Types
By Organisation Size
| Size | Applicability | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Micro | partial | Basic emergency contacts and referral steps required; full threshold tables and complex pathways are disproportionate. |
| Small | partial | Simplified pathways and basic logging required; full RAG threshold tables can be scaled down. |
| Medium | full | |
| Large | full | |
| Major | full |
Applicable When
- The organization has direct contact with service users
- The organization provides services that may expose individuals to situations where they could experience a crisis
Not Applicable When
- The organization is purely focused on advocacy or research
- The organization has no direct interaction with the public or beneficiaries
Related Criteria
Discussion (1)
📋 **Version updated: 1.0.0 → 2.9.7** **Changes:** Updated islamic_references from mizan-297.json
Sign in to post a comment.