What will you be able to do?
From outcomes to observable evidence
cpx-design · v0.1.0Intended outcomes
Knowledge
Explain links between objectives, injects and evidence.
Skills
Design injects that test coordination.
Ethics
Establish safe exercise rules and fair assessment.
Character
Receive feedback with a focus on process improvement.
Practise through an activity
Design a 45-minute fictional flood CPX with two objectives, three injects, controller/evaluator roles, an evidence sheet and a stop rule.
Collect evidence for assessment
- Knowledge
An exercise design alignment table.
CPX-K- Skills
Three injects with observable behaviours.
CPX-S- Ethics
A safety brief and pre-exercise assessment criteria.
CPX-E- Character
An improvement plan explaining the learning.
CPX-C
Project learning synthesis showing proposed outcomes, activity and evidence. This is not a university-endorsed assessment framework.
Module references:[who-simex-2017][who-aar-2019][aunqa-2020]
Suggested preparation: HADR coordination in Thailand
Decide what to learn or test
WHO describes simulation exercises as practice and capability assessment, supported by preparation, conduct and reporting. Here we adapt that approach to an educational HADR command-post exercise, in which participants make decisions and coordinate from simulated headquarters. We do not claim CPX is a distinct WHO exercise category. Begin with a problem such as requests being lost during handover, then formulate an observable objective rather than the vague aim of understanding coordination.
Align objectives, events and evidence
Design proposal: for each objective, specify the conditions participants encounter, the expected action and the evidence an evaluator records. For conflicting shelter counts, learners might verify time and scope before producing a qualified brief. Evidence consists of their questions and revised report, not an impression that the team looked confident. AUN-QA supports alignment of outcomes, learning and assessment; the particular criteria here are our educational proposals rather than an accredited programme standard.
Organise participants, controllers and evaluators
Exercise proposal: distinguish scenario participants, inject controllers and observers so the event can progress without revealing answers. If staffing requires combined roles, record that limitation. Prepare simulated contact channels, an exercise label and a real-emergency stop procedure. Never send fictional requests to live emergency services. Rehearse document and communication flows before delivery so accidental technical breakdowns do not obscure the intended learning. Any deliberately simulated failure should link to a stated objective.
Close the loop with trackable improvement
WHO AAR guidance supports learning and continuous improvement through formats including debriefs and working groups. For this CPX, compare intended actions, observed events, evidence and explanations before selecting changes. Assign an owner, due date and verification method to each improvement. A completed meeting or report does not establish that a problem is resolved. Preserve successful practices and exercise limitations as well as gaps so the next exercise can test meaningful progress.
See the process at a glance
A synthesized learning diagram. Read it alongside the lesson and original sources.
Set objectives
Select important gaps and observable behaviours.
Design
Match objectives to injects and evidence.
Rehearse
Check roles, simulated channels and stop rules.
Exercise and review
Record decisions and turn lessons into follow-up actions.
Explore a decision
Fictional scenario: a planner wants to add a dramatic rumour inject that serves no stated objective. What should happen?
Complexity should serve learning or required evidence; otherwise it can distract assessment. This is the module's synthesised design principle.
From knowledge to evidence
Design a 45-minute fictional flood CPX with two objectives, three injects, controller/evaluator roles, an evidence sheet and a stop rule.
| Criterion | Proficient | Developing |
|---|---|---|
| Alignment | Every inject links to an objective and evidence | Events have no clear assessment purpose |
| Safety and fairness | Briefs criteria, simulated channels and stop procedures | Uses undisclosed criteria or live channels |
| Improvement | Includes corrective actions with owners and verification | Lists problems only |
A proposed rubric for educators to adapt, not a university accreditation standard.
Check your understanding
Answer all 5 questions, then review the explanations. This score is for self-study.
References & further verification
- WHO Simulation Exercise Manual ↗World Health Organization · 1 February 2017; WHO/WHE/CPI/2017.10
Publication overview; manual glossary (exercise project, exercise report); exercise planning/conduct/evaluation - Guidance for After Action Review (AAR) ↗World Health Organization · 1 April 2019; WHO/WHE/CPI/2019.4
Overview: purpose and four formats; accompanying AAR toolkits - Guide to AUN-QA Assessment at Programme Level, Version 4.0 ↗ASEAN University Network · October 2020
Sections 2.1–2.4, printed pp. 16–27: outcomes, curriculum, teaching and assessment
Cite this module
PK-Research. (2026). Design a CPX from intended outcomes (cpx-design, v0.1.0). HADR–CPX Knowledge Commons. https://hadr-cpx.pk-research.work/en/modules/cpx-design/