vaayaa Inclusive Education
Hospitality risk assessment

Alternative and Experiential Accommodation Management Risk Assessment: Fire, Food, Guest Safety and Booking Controls

A worked example of how a small operator of glamping, treehouse and farm stay accommodation finds, scores and controls risks, from fire and food hygiene to guest safety, staffing, booking payments, guest data and supplier reliance.

Updated November 2026 8 hazards assessed Review every 6 months Highest risk: Critical to Medium
See the Alternative and Experiential Accommodation Management course

Executive summary

This assessment shows how a small experiential accommodation business can find, score and control the risks that matter most to guests and staff. Eight hazards were chosen because they are plausible in everyday work with timber units, shared meals, outdoor activities, remote sites and online bookings. Fire and food allergen risks score highest before controls, while booking, data and supplier risks are less severe but still affect trust. Each hazard is scored before controls and again after existing and added controls. Most hazards fall to Medium or Low once added controls are in place, but fire stays Medium because a single event can be severe. The first actions are a fire risk review of each unit, an allergen matrix for every meal, a water test plan and a fatigue rota for remote working. The business is a teaching example, so every score illustrates method, not a real operator.

Focus area
Alternative and experiential accommodation management
Setting
Small operator of glamping, treehouse and farm stay accommodation with shared meals and outdoor guest activities
Method
Five by five likelihood and impact risk register

Scope

This assessment covers a small experiential accommodation business with timber lodges, safari style tents, a treehouse, a shared dining barn, hot tubs, guided outdoor activities and online booking. It covers guest and staff safety, food and water, fire, booking and payments, guest data and supplier reliance. It does not cover any real site's planning, licensing or insurance. Jurisdiction, building standards and the exact activities offered are assumptions made for teaching.

Context

Guests stay in remote units on a working farm, with a central kitchen and dining barn serving breakfast and an evening meal. Staff include a site manager, two housekeepers, a chef, seasonal guides and an office administrator. Bookings come through a third party platform and a website that takes deposits. Water comes from a private supply, heating uses wood burners and gas, and waste is collected by a contractor. Each hazard is scored before controls to show its natural level, then again after the existing controls and the additional controls that should be added.

Objectives, assets and stakeholders

The objective is to give guests a safe, comfortable and honest stay, protect people and property, keep food and water safe, handle payments and guest data properly, and meet the duties that apply to accommodation providers. The assets in scope are guest units and their fittings, the dining barn and kitchen, water and heating systems, outdoor features, booking and payment systems, guest records and the reputation of the business. Stakeholders include guests, especially children and guests with access needs, staff, seasonal guides, contractors, the landowner, booking platforms, local authorities and insurers. Each risk has one owner role. The site manager keeps the register current and reports to the owner each quarter.

Risk matrix: before and after controls

Each cell shows hazard numbers placed by likelihood and impact. Compare the two grids to see how controls move each hazard.

Before controls

Inherent risk

Risk before controls: rows are likelihood from almost certain to rare, columns are impact from insignificant to catastrophic. Cells list hazard numbers.
1
Insignificant		 2
Minor		 3
Moderate		 4
Major		 5
Catastrophic
5 Almost certain
4 Likely Likelihood 4, impact 3, score 12, high: H04 Likelihood 4, impact 4, score 16, high: H02 Likelihood 4, impact 5, score 20, critical: H01
3 Possible Likelihood 3, impact 3, score 9, medium: H06 H07 Likelihood 3, impact 4, score 12, high: H03
2 Unlikely Likelihood 2, impact 4, score 8, medium: H08 Likelihood 2, impact 5, score 10, high: H05
1 Rare

After controls

Residual risk

Risk after controls: rows are likelihood from almost certain to rare, columns are impact from insignificant to catastrophic. Cells list hazard numbers.
1
Insignificant		 2
Minor		 3
Moderate		 4
Major		 5
Catastrophic
5 Almost certain
4 Likely
3 Possible
2 Unlikely Likelihood 2, impact 2, score 4, low: H06 H07 H08 Likelihood 2, impact 3, score 6, medium: H02 H03 H04 H05 Likelihood 2, impact 4, score 8, medium: H01
1 Rare
  • Low 1 to 4
  • Medium 5 to 9
  • High 10 to 16
  • Critical 17 to 25

Hazard register

A summary first, then the detail for each hazard.

Summary of hazards with scores before and after controls
No.HazardBeforeAfterOwner
H01 Fire spread in timber units, wood burners and shared kitchen 20 Critical 8 Medium Site manager
H02 Food hygiene and allergen cross contact at shared meals 16 High 6 Medium Head chef
H03 Legionella and water contamination in private supply and hot tubs 12 High 6 Medium Maintenance lead
H04 Staff fatigue and lone working on remote sites 12 High 6 Medium Operations manager
H05 Injury from outdoor features and guided activities 10 High 6 Medium Guide lead
H06 Booking, deposit and payment system failure or fraud 9 Medium 4 Low Finance lead
H07 Guest personal data and privacy breach 9 Medium 4 Low Data protection lead
H08 Supplier disruption and service failure damaging reviews 8 Medium 4 Low Operations manager
H01

Fire spread in timber units, wood burners and shared kitchen

Safety Before 20 After 8

A fire starts from a wood burner, cooker, electrical fault or candle and spreads quickly through timber, canvas and dry grass, trapping guests who sleep in upper floors or remote units.

Who or what is affected: Guests, staff, neighbours and the landowner

Causes

Wood burners, cooking equipment, dry vegetation and fittings installed without repeated fire checks.

Consequences

Loss of life or serious injury, destroyed units, closure and legal action.

Existing controls

  • Smoke alarms are fitted in every unit and tested on arrival.
  • Fire extinguishers and blankets are placed in the kitchen and dining barn.

Control gaps

Fire checks are done at opening only and are not repeated after changes to heating or layout.

Additional controls

  • Prevent: Carry out a documented fire risk review for each unit and clear ground around burners and tents.
  • Respond: Brief guests on the evacuation route and assembly point at check in and mark routes clearly.
Likelihood 4 x impact 5 before; 2 x 4 after Owner: Site manager Target: Within 30 days Early warning: Smoke alarm or fire door check missed for any unit in the month.
H02

Food hygiene and allergen cross contact at shared meals

Safety Before 16 After 6

Food is held or cooled at unsafe temperatures, cooked and raw items touch, or an allergen is missed on a dish, so guests become ill or have a severe reaction.

Who or what is affected: Guests with allergies, guests of all ages and kitchen staff

Causes

Rushed service, changing menus, shared utensils and suppliers changing ingredients without notice.

Consequences

Food poisoning, allergic reaction, closure of dining service and serious harm to a guest.

Existing controls

  • Kitchen staff hold basic food hygiene training.
  • Menus list the main allergens for each dish.

Control gaps

Allergen checks depend on memory, and supplier ingredient changes are not rechecked against the matrix.

Additional controls

  • Prevent: Build an allergen matrix and check every recipe against it before each service.
  • Detect: Log fridge and cooking temperatures twice each day and review the log weekly.
Likelihood 4 x impact 4 before; 2 x 3 after Owner: Head chef Target: Within 14 days Early warning: Menu items served without a current allergen check for the day.
H03

Legionella and water contamination in private supply and hot tubs

Safety Before 12 After 6

Water from a private supply or a hot tub is not treated or tested, so bacteria such as legionella grow in tanks, pipes and showers and reach guests and staff.

Who or what is affected: Guests, staff and maintenance workers

Causes

Stagnant water in little used units, low storage temperatures and poor treatment records.

Consequences

Serious illness, guest claims, closure of units and lasting damage to trust.

Existing controls

  • The hot tub is drained and cleaned on a fixed schedule.
  • The water supply is inspected once each season by the maintenance lead.

Control gaps

Test results are filed but not reviewed, and outlets are not flushed after long gaps between stays.

Additional controls

  • Prevent: Set a written water treatment and temperature plan with a named specialist contractor.
  • Recover: Shut off and disinfect any affected outlet and retest the water before reopening it.
Likelihood 3 x impact 4 before; 2 x 3 after Owner: Maintenance lead Target: Within 45 days Early warning: Water test result outside agreed limits or a guest report of discoloured water.
H04

Staff fatigue and lone working on remote sites

People Before 12 After 6

Staff work long hours, cover night duties alone on remote units and carry heavy loads, so tiredness or an injury goes unnoticed and errors rise.

Who or what is affected: Staff, guests and emergency responders

Causes

Seasonal peaks, a small team and long distances between units.

Consequences

Accidents, poor service, staff turnover and legal exposure.

Existing controls

  • Staff carry a radio and a mobile phone on duty.
  • Shifts are planned at least a week in advance.

Control gaps

Hours are recorded but not compared with the rest limit, and missed check ins are not followed up.

Additional controls

  • Prevent: Set a fatigue rota with minimum rest between shifts and a limit on consecutive shifts.
  • Detect: Check in with lone workers at set times and log every missed check in.
Likelihood 4 x impact 3 before; 2 x 3 after Owner: Operations manager Target: Within 30 days Early warning: Staff working more than agreed hours in a week or without rest between shifts.
H05

Injury from outdoor features and guided activities

Safety Before 10 After 6

Guests use hot tubs, rope climbs to a treehouse, steps, boats or fire pits without supervision or clear instructions, and slips, falls, burns or drowning occur.

Who or what is affected: Guests, children, guides and visitors

Causes

Uneven ground, wet surfaces, untrained guests and children left unsupervised near water or fire.

Consequences

Injury, claims, closure of activities and damage to reputation.

Existing controls

  • Each guided activity has a written briefing and a signed consent form.
  • Steps and walkways have handrails and lighting after dark.

Control gaps

Equipment is inspected only at the start of the season and accessible routes are not tested.

Additional controls

  • Prevent: Remove or fence unsafe features and test routes for guests with limited mobility.
  • Respond: Keep a first aid kit and a trained first aider on site during guided activities.
Likelihood 2 x impact 5 before; 2 x 3 after Owner: Guide lead Target: Within 60 days Early warning: Guest incident or near miss involving an activity feature in a month.
H06

Booking, deposit and payment system failure or fraud

Financial Before 9 After 4

Online booking or card systems fail, double bookings occur, or deposits are diverted by fake booking requests, leaving guests stranded and income lost.

Who or what is affected: Guests, finance staff and booking partners

Causes

Reliance on one booking platform, phishing emails and manual rekeying between systems.

Consequences

Lost income, double booked units, refunds and distress for guests.

Existing controls

  • Payments are taken through a card processor that uses secure hosting.
  • Bookings are reconciled against deposits each week.

Control gaps

Refunds are approved by one person, and the manual booking sheet is not updated during outages.

Additional controls

  • Prevent: Require a second approval for any change to deposit or payout details.
  • Recover: Keep a manual booking sheet and a call back list for use during outages.
Likelihood 3 x impact 3 before; 2 x 2 after Owner: Finance lead Target: Within 60 days Early warning: Deposits changed or refunded without a second approval in a week.
H07

Guest personal data and privacy breach

Technology and data Before 9 After 4

Guest names, contact details, health and access notes and identity copies are kept on shared devices or in email, and are sent to the wrong person or exposed.

Who or what is affected: Guests, staff and booking partners

Causes

Shared logins, email attachments and paper lists left on desks or in vehicles.

Consequences

Loss of trust, complaints, penalties in some places and harm to guests.

Existing controls

  • Guest records are stored in a password protected system.
  • Staff sign a confidentiality agreement when they join.

Control gaps

Access notes are copied into spreadsheets and never removed when the stay ends.

Additional controls

  • Prevent: Limit access to health and access notes to people who need them and delete data after the stay period.
  • Detect: Review access logs each quarter and check shared devices for unsecured files.
Likelihood 3 x impact 3 before; 2 x 2 after Owner: Data protection lead Target: Within 60 days Early warning: Guest data found in an unsecured file, email or shared device during a check.
H08

Supplier disruption and service failure damaging reviews

Supplier Before 8 After 4

A key supplier of food, bottled gas, firewood, cleaning or waste collection fails or runs late, so units cannot be cleaned, meals cannot be served and guests post poor reviews.

Who or what is affected: Guests, staff and local suppliers

Causes

A single supplier for key items, long supply chains and weather disruption to access roads.

Consequences

Cancelled meals, cancelled stays, poor reviews and lost repeat bookings.

Existing controls

  • Two suppliers are listed for the main food and gas deliveries.
  • Stock levels for consumables are checked each week.

Control gaps

Backup suppliers are not tested and delivery failures are not logged for trend review.

Additional controls

  • Prevent: Agree written delivery times and backup suppliers from a short list of approved alternatives.
  • Respond: Contact guests quickly, offer a clear alternative and record the cause of each failure.
Likelihood 2 x impact 4 before; 2 x 2 after Owner: Operations manager Target: Within 90 days Early warning: Two or more late or missed deliveries from the same supplier within a month.

Rating method and evaluation

Each risk is rated on two five-point scales. Likelihood runs from Rare to Almost certain, and impact runs from Insignificant to Catastrophic, covering harm to people, cost, reputation, booking income and legal exposure. Multiplying the two gives a score from 1 to 25, which falls into one of four bands: Low from 1 to 4, Medium from 5 to 9, High from 10 to 16 and Critical from 17 to 25. Inherent risk is the score before any controls, judged as if existing controls were absent. Residual risk is the score after existing and additional controls are in place, and it must never be higher than the inherent score. Anything Critical needs immediate action and a senior owner. Anything High needs a dated plan and monthly review. Medium risks need routine controls with a named owner, and Low risks are accepted and watched. Ratings are challenged by the staff who do the work, by a second reviewer who was not involved in scoring, and by incident learning. A rating is reopened whenever an indicator reaches its threshold, a near miss occurs or a unit, menu or booking channel changes.

Likelihood, impact and rating bands

Likelihood

  • 5 Almost certain: Expected to happen in most circumstances.
  • 4 Likely: Will probably happen in many circumstances.
  • 3 Possible: Could happen at some time.
  • 2 Unlikely: Not expected, but it could happen.
  • 1 Rare: Only in exceptional circumstances.

Impact

  • 1 Insignificant: No lasting effect. Handled within routine work.
  • 2 Minor: Small effect that is quickly corrected.
  • 3 Moderate: Noticeable effect that needs managed effort to correct.
  • 4 Major: Serious effect on people, delivery or reputation.
  • 5 Catastrophic: Severe or lasting effect that threatens the whole activity.

Bands (likelihood x impact)

  • Low (1 to 4): Accept and monitor.
  • Medium (5 to 9): Manage with routine controls.
  • High (10 to 16): Senior attention and a treatment plan.
  • Critical (17 to 25): Act first. Do not proceed until reduced.

Monitoring, escalation and review

Review this assessment every 6 months, and sooner when an indicator below reaches its threshold.

Early-warning indicators and escalation thresholds
Indicator to watchEscalate when
Smoke alarm or fire door checks missed for any unit in the month.Escalate to the site manager at once and to the owner after 7 days if the check is still open.
Menu items served without a current allergen check for the day.Escalate to the head chef before service, and stop the item until the check is complete.
Staff working more than the agreed hours in a week or without rest between shifts.Escalate to the operations manager when a limit is breached, and reassign duties the same day.
Booking deposits changed or refunded without a second approval.Escalate to the finance lead at once, and hold the payment until it has been checked.
Guest complaints about water quality, heating or unsafe features in the same month.Escalate to the site manager within 24 hours, and to the owner if two or more arise on one unit.

Contingency arrangements

If a fire, serious injury, food poisoning cluster or water contamination occurs, staff call emergency services first and move guests to a safe assembly point. The site manager stops use of the affected unit, kitchen or water supply and keeps records. The office contacts guests with clear information and alternative accommodation arranged in advance with a partner site. Insurers, the landowner and the relevant authorities are told as their rules require. Staff are given a debrief and support, and the incident is recorded for learning.

Prioritized action plan

  1. Complete a documented fire risk review for each unit and the dining barn, owner site manager, within 30 days.
  2. Build an allergen matrix for every menu item and brief staff before each service, owner head chef, within 14 days.
  3. Set a legionella and water test plan with a named contractor and log every result, owner maintenance lead, within 45 days.
  4. Introduce a fatigue rota with minimum rest between shifts for remote staff, owner operations manager, within 30 days.
  5. Confirm booking deposit changes and guest data access by two person checks, owner finance lead, within 60 days.

Conclusion

Safe and enjoyable experiential stays depend on a few steady habits: fire checks for every unit, allergen information for every meal, water testing, rested staff, clear guest instructions and tested recovery plans. The highest scores sit with fire and food risks, and each has actions that bring the residual score down. Treat the register as a living record, review it on the stated cycle and seek qualified advice for any real building, food, water, licensing or insurance question.

Assumptions and limitations

Assumptions

  • The business operates in one jurisdiction whose fire, food, water and tourism rules are not named, so duties are described in general terms only.
  • Units are partly off grid, with wood burners, gas appliances and a private water supply maintained by the site team.
  • Guests may join guided activities, and no formal record of past incidents is held for this teaching example.

Limitations

  • The scores are teaching examples and do not describe any real accommodation business, site or inspection.
  • Fire, food safety, water, licensing and tourism rules vary by place and change over time, so specialist review is needed.
  • This is educational content and does not replace a formal site-specific risk assessment or licensed professional advice.

Related frameworks to study

  • Hazard identification and risk assessment with likelihood and impact scoring
  • Hierarchy of controls: eliminate, substitute, engineer, administer, protect
  • Three lines model of risk ownership
  • Food safety management based on hazard analysis and critical control points

Hospitality Risk Assessment

China, India, United States, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Brazil, Bangladesh, Russia, Japan, Mexico, Philippines, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada, South Korea, Australia, Spain.

For Learning Reference Only: This assessment demonstrates how risk assessment principles are applied in a practical setting, providing a useful reference for learning and understanding. Actual assessments may be adapted to suit specific site conditions and circumstances.

Keep learning

Study the subject behind this assessment.

Alternative and Experiential Accommodation Management course Read the best practices for this course

More Hospitality risk assessments

Hourly Active: 39,047 Learners