Template No.: T226
Template Title: Conflict & Security Case Intake and Triage Form (Admin Use)
Related Research Case IDs / Cluster: F66–F85 / Cluster F
Linked Templates / Policies: T66, T67; Security & Access Control; Incident Reporting; Risk & Emergency Plans; 15 Principles
Date of form: ____ / ____ / ______
Prepared by / Role: _______________________
Office / Unit: ____________________________
Country / Location: _______________________
Confidentiality Level:
Internal only [ ] Restricted [ ] Sacred-Restricted / Sensitive [ ]
Use of this form (tick):
New case / action [ ] Follow-up [ ] Annual review [ ] Archive only [ ]
1) Case identification (Office use)
1.1 Case ID (new or existing): _______________________________
1.2 Related case(s) / cross-reference (if any): ________________
1.3 File location (cabinet / drive path): _____________________
1.4 Who reported the issue (role / code, not full name): _______
1.5 Report channel: Email [ ] Phone [ ] In-person [ ] Message app [ ] Other: ______
1.6 Date/time first received: ____ / ____ / ______ Time: _______
2) Neutral short summary (no blaming language)
Write 10–20 lines max. Facts only.
3) Immediate safety check (first 0–6 hours)
3.1 People safe right now? Yes [ ] No [ ] Unsure [ ]
If “No/Unsure”, what action taken and by who (role): _____________________
3.2 Relics / sacred objects safe right now? Yes [ ] No [ ] Unsure [ ]
If “No/Unsure”, temporary protection step taken (tick):
Restrict access to relic area now [ ]
Move to secure storage (authorised) [ ]
Start incident reporting chain (custodian/head/risk officer) [ ]
Contact authorities (if required) [ ]
3.3 Type of case (tick all that apply)
Ownership / custody dispute [ ]
Threat, intimidation, harassment [ ]
Forged / fake letter or fake “authority” claim [ ]
Screenshot / message claiming ministry order [ ]
Theft / attempted theft / unauthorised access [ ]
Damage / vandalism / suspected tampering [ ]
Online rumour / reputational attack [ ]
Other: _______________________________
4) Verification rule (anti-fake / anti-panic)
4.1 Is the key trigger based on screenshots or informal messages? Yes [ ] No [ ]
If Yes, tick the rule applied:
No major relic decision is made only from screenshots/messages. [ ]
Verify by official letterhead or official email / direct confirmation. [ ]
4.2 Verification steps done (date/time + method)
Step 1: __________________ Date: //____ Time: ____ Result: ______
Step 2: __________________ Date: //____ Time: ____ Result: ______
5) Stakeholders and roles (use codes)
(Use the Cluster F style: roles and relationships matter.)
Main custodian / holder (code): __________ Role: _______________________
Complainant / claimant (code): __________ Role: ________________________
Witness(es) (code): _____________________ Role: _______________________
Institution(s) involved: _____________________________________________
Board contact (role): ___________________
Other key persons (codes): __________________________________________
6) Documents and evidence (start an index now)
Tick what exists today (attach copies/screenshots and label them):
Official letters / emails [ ] File names / IDs: _________________________
Screenshots / chat logs [ ] File names / IDs: ___________________________
Photos / video [ ] File names / IDs: ___________________________________
Meeting minutes [ ] File names / IDs: _________________________________
Relic register / movement log entries [ ] IDs: ___________________________
Other: _______________________________
Evidence handling note: keep originals safe; log what was received, when, and from whom (role). (Strong documentation reduces disputes and rumours.)
7) Security context (access, keys, storage)
7.1 Area involved: Storage room [ ] Shrine [ ] Display [ ] Office [ ] Online only [ ] Other: ____
7.2 Access control status (tick):
Limited key holders listed [ ] Key log exists [ ] Dual-control used [ ]
Locks/doors/display cases adequate [ ] CCTV/alarm present [ ]
7.3 Key/action needed now:Update key/access list [ ] Recover/revoke access [ ] Add supervision [ ]
8) Risk and impact rating (quick triage)
Rate each risk: LOW [ ] MED [ ] HIGH [ ]
Physical risk to people: LOW [ ] MED [ ] HIGH [ ]
Risk to relic safety (theft/tamper): LOW [ ] MED [ ] HIGH [ ]
Reputational / rumour risk: LOW [ ] MED [ ] HIGH [ ]
Legal / governance risk: LOW [ ] MED [ ] HIGH [ ]
Psychological stress / duty of care risk: LOW [ ] MED [ ] HIGH [ ]
Short notes (why):
9) Actions and decisions (first plan)
(Assign one owner per action. Add deadline.)
Action 1: __________________________________ Owner (role): ______ Due: //____
Action 2: __________________________________ Owner (role): ______ Due: //____
Action 3: __________________________________ Owner (role): ______ Due: //____
Escalation triggers (tick if needed):
Inform Primary Relic Custodian now [ ]
Inform Head of Relic & Heritage now [ ]
Inform Compliance/Risk Officer now [ ]
Inform authorities (if required) [ ]
10) Communication control (non-escalation)
10.1 Internal message needed (who, what, when): __________________________
10.2 External communication allowed? Yes [ ] No [ ] Board only [ ]
10.3 Media rule (tick):
Use documents, accept fact-checking, avoid sensational talk. [ ]
11) Archival and access decision
11.1 Access level for this file:
Internal [ ] Restricted [ ] Sacred-Restricted [ ]
11.2 Storage method:
Printed file [ ] Encrypted digital folder [ ] Both [ ]
11.3 Next review date: ____ / ____ / ______
12) Sign-off
Prepared by (Name): __________________ Role: ___________________
Signature: ___________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______
Reviewed by (Supervisor/Head): ________________________________
Signature: ___________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______
