Safety and Security Consultant
International Refugee Assistance Project
For the full description, please visit the official website.
Amman
Jordan /
Consultant /
On-site
About IRAP
The International Refugee Assistance Project (“IRAP”) is a dynamic and growing legal and policy advocacy organization that works to develop and enforce a system of legal and human rights for refugees and displaced people around the world. We are the leading organization providing free and comprehensive legal services to people in need of a safe place to live and a safe way to get there.
IRAP operates offices in the US (New York City), Jordan (Amman), Lebanon (Beirut), and Germany (Berlin).
IRAP Jordan
IRAP Jordan, a team of eight operational and program staff, provides legal aid to displaced people in Jordan. The team provides legal assistance to individuals navigating refugee resettlement, humanitarian protection pathways, and family reunification processes through in-house representation, legal information, and the mentorship of pro bono attorneys, students, and interns.
Opportunity
IRAP Jordan is seeking the consultancy services of a Safety and Security expert to conduct an independent, comprehensive evaluation of the physical security arrangements, operational procedures, and facility-related risks affecting IRAP Jordan Country Office. The assessment will identify vulnerabilities that could impact the safety of staff, interns, clients, visitors, assets, and confidential information, and will provide practical, risk-based recommendations to strengthen organizational resilience while maintaining a safe, accessible, and client-centered environment.
Context and Objective
Proximity to conflict-affected populations (Syrian, Iraqi, Yemeni, Sudanese caseloads)
Potential for client psychological distress, coercion, or external third-party pressure
Intern and junior staff exposure to high-stress client interactions
Regulatory oversight of NGOs under Jordan's Law on Societies (No. 51/2008, amended 2009), including the Ministry of Social Development's supervisory authority over registration, foreign funding approval, and organizational dissolution
The objective of this assessment is to develop appropriate measures in place pertaining to:
Physical security of the building envelope and entry systems
Interview room safety for staff, interns, and clients
Incident response and evacuation procedures
Information security related to physical access
Staff and intern security awareness and preparedness
Scope of Work, Key Deliverables, and Methodology
Scope of Work
- In Scope
| Domain | Specific Areas |
| Physical perimeter | Exterior doors, security door systems, gate/barrier assessment, CCTV coverage, lighting, blind spots |
| Access control | Entry protocols, visitor management, and tailgating vulnerabilities |
| Reception & waiting areas | Client flow, separation from staff-only zones, sight lines, furniture placement |
| Interview rooms | Door configurations, furniture layout, acoustic privacy, sight lines, and duress protocols |
| Staff-only zones | Staff offices, HR & Finance files, communications equipment |
| Emergency systems | Fire, evacuation routes, muster points, first aid, communication trees |
| Intern & staff protocols | Briefing adequacy, lone worker risk, incident reporting, and de-escalation training coverage |
| Information security (physical) | Document handling, clean desk, screen visibility from client areas |
| External threat environment | Neighborhood risk profile, historical incident mapping within a 500m radius |
| Game-theory threat mapping | Adversarial actor analysis — who benefits from compromising this office, and how |
- Out of Scope
IT/cybersecurity (unless directly linked to physical access)
Field operations outside the office
Personnel vetting/HR background checks
Risk Framework
- Risk Rating Scale
| Rating | Probability | Impact | Required Response Timeline |
| CRITICAL | Likely–Almost Certain | Severe | Immediate (within 72 hours) |
| HIGH | Possible–Likely | Major | Within 2 weeks |
| MEDIUM | Unlikely–Possible | Moderate | Within 60 days |
| LOW | Rare–Unlikely | Minor | Next planning cycle |
Game Theory Application
Actor mapping — who are the plausible adversarial actors (disgruntled clients, third-party coercers, criminal opportunists, state actors, insider threats)?
Dominant strategies — what is the most rational course of action for each actor given the current security posture?
Payoff asymmetry — where does current security create insufficient cost/friction to deter action?
Counter-strategy — what organizational responses alter the adversary's rational calculus?
Key Deliverables
Executive Summary (3–5 pages)
Overall risk rating for the facility
Top 5 prioritized findings
- Immediate actions required before the next operational day (if any)
Full Security Assessment Report
Current state description (observation-based)
Gap identification
Risk rating (probability + impact)
The threat actor most likely to exploit the gap
Recommended mitigation measure(s)
Cost estimate category (low/medium/high)
- Responsible party for implementation
Interview Room Security Protocol (standalone document)
Room configuration standards — furniture placement, door opening direction, staff positioning relative to exit
Pre-interview checklist — room clearance, panic device test, colleague notification
Duress signal system — verbal and non-verbal protocols, staff response procedure
Escalation ladder — from client agitation through staff concern to active incident
Intern-specific protocols — buddy system required
Post-incident procedure — reporting, staff support, room lockdown sequence
Client dignity safeguards — balancing security measures against client experience
Prioritized Risk Register
Security Management Plan (SMP) Draft
Daily opening/closing procedures
Visitor and client management flow
Key holder policy
After-hours incident contacts
Emergency communication tree
- Quarterly review schedule
Training Needs Assessment
Methodology
| Method | Purpose |
| Physical walkthrough | Full facility inspection, minimum two passes (announced and unannounced) |
| Structured staff interviews | Minimum 80% of staff, all interns, confidential format |
| Document review | Existing SOPs, incident logs, etc |
| Observation periods | Morning arrival, client-peak hours, end-of-day — minimum one session each |
| Simulated access test | Attempt to access staff-only areas using client pathways (with management consent) |
| Neighborhood assessment | 500m perimeter walk, local incident history review via OSINT and community sources |
| Red team scenario modeling | Three adversarial scenarios gamed against the current security posture |
Specific Focus Area — Interview Rooms
- Physical Layout
Can staff exit the room without passing the client if needed?
Is there a secondary communication point (phone/alarm) visible to staff but not obstructive to the client?
Are there objects in the room that could be used as weapons of opportunity?
Is acoustic privacy sufficient to prevent corridor eavesdropping (client confidentiality risk as well as security risk)?
- Staffing Configuration
Is there a clear policy prohibiting solo interviews by interns?
Is there a colleague designated as a monitor during all interview sessions?
What is the response time from alert to the physical presence of a second staff member?
- Duress Systems
Is there a functioning duress alarm or panic button? If yes — tested when? Linked to what response?
Is there an agreed verbal duress code known to all staff AND interns?
Is the code refreshed regularly enough to prevent client community familiarity?
- Client Risk Profiling
Is there a pre-interview risk-flagging system for clients with a history of incidents?
Who has access to flag data, and when in the client journey does it appear?
Does the intake process screen for indicators of third-party coercion or external surveillance of the client?
Timeline and Reporting
Timeline
| Phase | Activity | Duration |
| Mobilization | Contracting, briefing, document provision | Days 1–2 |
| Field Assessment | Physical inspection, interviews, observation | Days 3–7 |
| Analysis | Risk scoring, source triangulation, scenario modeling | Days 8–9 |
| Reporting | Draft report, protocols, risk register | Days 10–12 |
| Review & Finalization | Management review, assessor response to queries | Days 13–15 |
| Debrief | Presentation to Country Director | Day 16 |
Reporting Line & Authorization
| Role | Responsibility |
| Operations Manager | Day-to-day liaison with assessor, provides access and documentation, receives final report |
| Senior Security Officer (Assessor) | Conducts assessment, produces all deliverables |
Qualifications
Minimum 7 years of security management experience, with at least 3 years in Southwest Asia (Middle East) contexts
Direct experience assessing NGO or humanitarian operations in urban environments
Familiarity with Jordan's legal and regulatory framework for civil society organizations, including current Ministry of Social Development registration and foreign funding approval requirements
Working knowledge of UNHCR, ICRC, GISF, or equivalent facility security standards
Demonstrated competency in threat and risk assessment methodology (HEAT-equivalent or higher)
No conflict of interest with the organization or its donor base
Clearance/reference check completed prior to engagement
Conduct & Confidentiality
The assessor shall sign a confidentiality agreement before accessing any facility, staff, or documentary information.
All findings are for internal use only unless explicitly authorized for external sharing.
Staff interviews shall be conducted on a no-attribution basis.
The final report shall be stored in accordance with the organization's data protection policy.
The assessor shall disclose any findings of immediate danger to the Operations Manager within 24 hours of identification, regardless of the overall reporting timeline.
$0 – $2,500 one-time
Compensation
The total compensation for this consultancy is USD 2,500, payable upon successful completion of the assignment and upon the organization's submission and acceptance of all agreed deliverables.
Application
Applications should include:
A brief cover letter and understanding of the assignment. addressing the purpose, objectives, scope, criteria, and deliverables of the project.
Updated profile/ CV listing similar experiences/assignments
Experience / Survey / Study – similar work with References / Recommendation letters
Three references from a previous employer.
Review of applications will begin immediately and continue on a rolling basis.
IRAP is an equal-opportunity employer; people of color and individuals from diverse backgrounds are encouraged to apply. IRAP does not discriminate based on race, color, national origin, citizenship status, ethnic background, religion, political orientation, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, disability, or any other protected class. We consider all qualified applicants with criminal histories in a manner consistent with the requirements of all local, state, and federal laws related to the Fair Chance Act.