Determining what to train—and how often and with what priority—is an ongoing responsibility for the wilderness search and rescue training officer. To support consistent, defensible training plans, this document uses a modified Severity, Probability, and Exposure (SEP) risk assessment model.
In this application, the model calculates a training-priority score by multiplying the likelihood that a squad member will need to perform the task by the estimated severity of an event. A third factor, proficiency decay, reflects the time elapsed since the topic was last covered within the established training cycle.
Accordingly, this adapted approach is more accurately described as the Likelihood, Severity, and Proficiency Decay (LSP) model.
The resulting score helps establish the relative importance of tasks and supports the development of meaningful, prioritized training plans.
Likelihood Levels for Wilderness SAR Risk Matrix
The likelihood scale describes how probable it is that a given hazard will occur under the current mission conditions. The five levels—Almost Certain, Likely, Possible, Unlikely, Rare—represent a graduated spectrum from “expected to happen” to “conceivable but highly improbable.” When relating this to training evaluations this is the probability that a squad member will be required to perform the task being rated.
Below is a clear, SAR‑specific interpretation of each level.
5. Almost Certain
The squad member is expected to perform this task during the mission.
- Conditions strongly favor the hazard.
- Similar incidents have occurred frequently in comparable terrain or weather.
- Example: Heat‑related illness during a midsummer desert search with prolonged exertion.
4. Likely
The squad member will probably perform this task if conditions persist.
- There is a strong possibility, though not guaranteed.
- Contributing factors are present and significant.
- Example: A sprained ankle in steep, loose talus terrain.
3. Possible
The squad member might perform this task; conditions allow for it but do not strongly drive it.
- A moderate probability—neither expected nor remote.
- Often used when hazards depend on variable human factors (fatigue, navigation errors).
- Example: Mild hypothermia during a cool, windy night search if teams are moving slowly.
2. Unlikely
The squad member is not expected to perform this task under normal conditions, but it is still plausible.
- Requires an unusual combination of factors.
- Example: Lightning strike on a clear‑weather day with no storms in the forecast.
1. Rare
It is conceivable but extremely improbable the squad member will perform this task.
- Would require abnormal, unexpected, or highly unusual circumstances.
- Example: Rockfall on a well‑maintained, low‑angle trail with no cliffs or loose slopes above.
Severity Levels for Wilderness SAR Risk Matrix
The severity levels in this wilderness search and rescue (SAR) risk matrix indicate the potential consequences if a hazard occurs. The LSP model uses a five-point scale, ranging from negligible or slight consequences to catastrophic outcomes. Mission elements with greater potential severity should receive greater priority in the training plan.
1. Negligible
Consequences of a poorly trained squad member perfuming the task being rated are minimal and easily managed in the field. Use a value of 1 for calculating the risk level.
- Minor discomfort, no injury
- No mission delay
- No equipment damage
- No environmental impact
- No effect on team safety or operational capability
2. Minor
Consequences of a poorly trained squad member perfuming the task being rated require simple intervention but do not threaten life or mission success. Use a value of 2 for calculating the risk level.
- Small cuts, blisters, mild dehydration
- Minor equipment issues (e.g., broken strap, drained battery)
- Brief mission delay (<30 minutes)
- Easily corrected with standard field
3. Moderate
Consequences of a poorly trained squad member perfuming the task being rated impact mission flow and require deliberate mitigation. Use a value of 3 for calculating the risk level.
- Injuries needing treatment but not evacuation (sprains, mild hypothermia, mild heat exhaustion)
- Equipment failure requiring workaround or replacement
- Mission delay of 30–120 minutes
- Increased exposure risk to team members
4. Major
Consequences of a poorly trained squad member perfuming the task being rated threaten life, require evacuation, or significantly degrade mission capability. Use a value of 4 for calculating the risk level.
- Serious injuries (fractures, severe bleeding, advanced hypothermia/heat illness)
- Loss of critical equipment (radio failure, vehicle breakdown)
- Mission delay >2 hours or mission compromise
- High likelihood of secondary hazards
5. Catastrophic
Consequences of a poorly trained squad member perfuming the task being rated result in death, permanent disability, or complete mission failure. Use a value of 5 for calculating the risk level.
- Fatality or life‑threatening injury
- Team becomes stranded or requires rescue themselves
- Total loss of critical assets (vehicle rollover, comms blackout during high‑risk operation)
- Severe environmental impact (e.g., responder swept away in floodwater)
Risk Levels for Wilderness SAR Training Plan
Wilderness SAR risk levels—Low, Medium, High, and Extreme—describe how dangerous a mission would be if the team is not sufficiently trained to execute the mission tasks. The higher the risk the higher priority the training task has in the training plan.
Risk levels are calculated by multiplying the Severity by the Likelihood.
Low Risk (Green)
Definition: Conditions are favorable; hazards are minimal; the mission is considered safe to proceed: 1–4 total score (low risk)
Characteristics:
- Stable weather, good visibility, mild temperatures
- Straightforward terrain (established trails, low-angle ground)
- Well-rested, properly equipped team
- Clear mission plan and strong communication
- No time pressure; subject location is reasonably known
Training Meaning: Assigning an untrained squad member to this task presents a low level of risk. This situation should generally be limited to new members working under close supervision. Operations may proceed normally, with routine situational awareness and no special mitigation measures. The task should remain in the training plan at a lower priority; however, foundational tasks may warrant a higher priority when they are prerequisites for more complex skills, even if their individual risk is low.
Medium Risk (Amber)
Definition: Noticeable hazards exist; mission requires caution and additional controls: 5–9 total score (moderate risk)
Characteristics:
- Weather deteriorating or variable (wind, cold, heat)
- Moderate terrain difficulty (loose rock, steep slopes, dense vegetation)
- Team fatigue, limited daylight, or minor equipment issues
- Uncertain subject location or complex search patterns
- Communications may be intermittent
Training Meaning: Assigning an untrained or undertrained squad member to this task presents a moderate level of risk and should be avoided when possible. If operational needs require their participation, they should work under close supervision and be paired with an experienced team leader who maintains direct oversight. The usefulness of undertrained personnel decreases rapidly at this risk level. These tasks should remain in the training plan and may be combined with lower-risk tasks to use training time efficiently.
High Risk (Orange)
Definition: Significant hazards likely to cause injury or mission failure; serious reconsideration required: 10–14 total score (high risk)
Characteristics:
- Severe weather (storms, extreme heat/cold, lightning)
- Highly technical terrain (cliffs, avalanche slopes, swiftwater, scree fields)
- Team exhaustion, poor morale, or inadequate training for the task
- Critical equipment missing or malfunctioning
- Complex rescue scenario (multiple subjects, medical emergencies, night operations)
Training Meaning: Untrained squad members should not be assigned to this task. Only highly trained, experienced, and trusted team members should perform it. Undertrained members may support the operation only outside the hazard area by handling lower-risk duties, such as crowd control. Although these tasks may arise infrequently during missions, their high consequences warrant top priority in the training plan.
Extreme Risk (Red)
Definition: Hazards are life‑threatening to rescuers; probability of serious injury or death is unacceptable: 15-25 total score (extreme risk; exceed any reasonable mitigation).
Characteristics:
- Catastrophic weather (flash flooding, blizzard, wildfire encroachment)
- Terrain requiring capabilities beyond team qualification (vertical big-wall rescue, unstable collapse zones, active rockfall)
- Zero visibility, no communication, or no viable evacuation route
- Subject located in a place rescuers cannot safely reach
- Insufficient resources statewide; no safe alternative plan
Training Meaning: This is where this methodology begins to break down. Rescuer survival risk outweighs mission objectives. Only extensively seasoned members on a fully informed voluntary basis should attempt these tasks with the understanding that the mission may be postponed for team safety with a detrimental outcome for the subject. This adds additional menial heath risks for team members. These tasks also require training, but they should receive a lower priority than High Risk tasks. The training officer must use sound judgment, recognize that training time is limited, and accept that some compromise is unavoidable.
The Likelihood and Severity Matrix
| Severity | ||||||
| Negligible | Minor | Moderate | Major | Catastrophic | ||
| Likelihood | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| Almost Certain | 5 | 5 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 |
| Likely | 4 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 16 | 20 |
| Possible | 3 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 12 | 15 |
| Unlikely | 2 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 10 |
| Rare | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Risk Level Key: | Low (1–4) | Medium (5–9) | High (10–14) | Extreme (15–25) | ||
Proficiency Decay for Wilderness SAR Training Plan
Proficiency decay measures the expected loss of a member’s ability to perform a task safely and effectively as time passes without instruction, practice, or operational use. This is the least subjective factor in this model because it is calculated from collectable date. For a two-year training plan, assign a decay value from 1 to 5 according to the time since the member last demonstrated the skill to the squad’s standard. The value is intended for planning, not as a substitute for required certifications, task-specific recertification periods, or an instructor’s assessment of current competence.
| Decay Value | Time Since Last Demonstrated | Planning Interpretation |
| 1 — Current | 0–3 months | Skill was recently trained, practiced, or used successfully during a mission. Normal cycle scheduling is appropriate. |
| 2 — Low Decay | 4–6 months | Minor loss of speed or recall may begin. Reinforce through a short drill, review, or integration into another exercise. |
| 3 — Moderate Decay | 7–12 months | Noticeable deterioration is possible, especially for multi-step or infrequently used tasks. Schedule hands-on practice during the current training year. |
| 4 — High Decay | 13–18 months | The member may no longer perform reliably without coaching. Schedule formal refresher training and a documented performance check. |
| 5 — Critical Decay | 19–24 months, more than 24 months, or never demonstrated | Competence should not be assumed. Give the task high training priority and require instruction and successful demonstration before independent assignment. |
Applying the value: Calculate the training-priority score as Likelihood × Severity × Proficiency Decay. Likelihood and Severity each range from 1 to 5, and Proficiency Decay ranges from 1 to 5, producing an LSP score from 1 to 125. Use this score to rank tasks against one another when building the two-year calendar. The Low, Medium, High, and Extreme bands in the preceding matrix remain descriptions of the underlying Likelihood × Severity risk and should not be applied directly to the three-factor LSP score.
LSP Training Priority Matrix
| LSP Score | Priority | Short Description | Training Window |
| 1–10 | Routine | Maintain in cycle | Within 18–24 months |
| 11–25 | Moderate | Reinforce when practical | Within 12–18 months |
| 26–50 | High | Schedule soon | Within 6–12 months |
| 51–80 | Very High | Prioritize early | Within 3–6 months |
| 81–125 | Critical | Train first | Earliest opportunity |
Scheduling guidance: Place the highest LSP scores earliest in the two-year plan, then distribute lower-scoring tasks across the remaining training periods. Regardless of score, review high-consequence tasks at least annually and use short drills between formal sessions when equipment, procedures, terrain, or team composition changes. Operational use may reset the decay clock only when performance was observed and met the squad standard; simple exposure to a mission should not count as successful demonstration.
Implementation: Record the date and method of each member’s successful demonstration for every rated task. Reassess decay values when the training plan is reviewed, after a significant procedure or equipment change, and after any performance issue identified during training or operations. When members have different last-demonstration dates, use the least-current qualified member’s value for team-wide scheduling or maintain individual values when assignments and records are managed separately.
Sources
The following sources support the SEP/SPE model, severity–likelihood risk assessment, land-SAR competency documentation, exercise-based capability evaluation, and the concept of proficiency decay after periods of nonuse. The standard SEP/SPE model multiplies severity, probability, and exposure; this document intentionally adapts that approach for training prioritization. The specific five-level proficiency-decay intervals used here are a local planning framework for a two-year cycle, not externally prescribed recertification periods.
Brouwers, Sue, and Wendy Joung
Predicting Skill Decay: A Practical Application of the Skill Decay Analysis Tool. Describes skill decay as reduced access to trained knowledge and skills after nonuse and discusses using decay estimates to guide refresher-training frequency and training-resource allocation.
SAGE Journals article
ASTM International
ASTM F2209-20, Standard Guide for Training of Land Search Team Member. Establishes minimum land-search knowledge, skills, and abilities; calls for training documentation through a position task book or supervised field demonstration; and leaves the frequency of renewed proficiency demonstration to the authority having jurisdiction.
ASTM F2209-20 standard page
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP). Provides a risk- and capability-informed approach to exercise design, observed performance evaluation, corrective-action planning, and sustaining organizational readiness.
FEMA HSEEP guidance
National Park Service
Joshua Tree National Park Search and Rescue. Describes an operational wilderness SAR program that uses annual and monthly training, including basic SAR, technical, tracking, emergency medical, and operational leadership topics, and expects members to attend training regularly.
NPS Joshua Tree Search and Rescue program
University of Montana, Wilderness Institute
Severity, Exposure & Probability (SEP) Risk Assessment Model. Defines the field-oriented SEP method as Risk = Severity × Probability × Exposure, provides numerical scales for each factor, and directs users to rank hazards from highest to lowest so limited resources can be focused on the greatest concerns.
SEP Risk Assessment Model
National Interagency Fire Center / Bureau of Land Management Aviation
Risk Assessment Tools and Methods—Risk Matrix. Explains severity, likelihood, exposure considerations, and the use of a matrix to prioritize hazards for control.
https://www.nifc.gov/sites/default/files/blm/aviation/BLMsafety/RiskAssessment_RiskMatrix.pdf
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs: Hazard Identification and Assessment. Directs users to determine the severity and likelihood of possible incidents and use that information to prioritize corrective actions.
https://www.osha.gov/safety-management/hazard-Identification