1. What This Criterion Is For
Consistency assesses whether a control is applied reliably across time, people, and settings.
Inconsistency weakens trust. If a control is used in one location but ignored in another, or if some staff are held to it and others are not, its credibility — and effectiveness — deteriorates. Teams begin to ask: Does this really matter?
This criterion helps organizations identify where a control might be functioning as a symbol, not a standard.
2. How to Use It
Use the Consistency criterion when:
- Exploring uneven implementation across teams or programs
- Identifying confusion or skepticism around fairness or follow-through
- Reviewing how policies are enforced (or not) in practice
Consistency is critical for reinforcing expectations, creating predictable protection, and enabling learning across the system.
3. Examples Across Controls
| Control Type | Example of How Consistency Applies |
|---|---|
| Behavior Expectations | Are the same standards applied to senior staff, volunteers, and contractors? |
| Training | Is training content and delivery comparable across teams, shifts, or sites? |
| Incident Response | Do similar incidents receive similar levels of attention and follow-through? |
| Supervision | Is oversight structured and dependable, or does it vary day to day? |
| Audit | Are audit processes repeated regularly and across all relevant areas? |
4. What Strong, Fragile, and Failing Look Like
| Level | Indicators |
|---|---|
| Strong | Staff know what to expect. Controls operate the same way across programs and over time. Fairness is visible. |
| Fragile | Implementation varies depending on who is in charge or how busy the team is. Some gaps are tolerated. |
| Failing | The control is enforced selectively or ignored entirely in some areas. Staff roll their eyes or quietly opt out. |
5. Common Pitfalls
- Allowing flexibility to drift into inequality
- Setting expectations without monitoring follow-through
- Failing to build control use into routine rhythms and accountability
- Tolerating exceptions without reflective review
6. Design Prompts
When designing or reviewing a control:
- Is this control practiced the same way across all relevant teams or sites?
- Do staff know what to expect?
- Are differences in application intentional, documented, and explained?
- How is consistency monitored?
- What signals do people receive when consistency breaks down?
Consistency is what turns expectations into norms. Without it, controls feel arbitrary. With it, they become credible, repeatable, and worthy of belief.