ACA Submission Guide

This workflow describes how incident reports submitted to American Caving Accidents (ACA) are reviewed, edited, analyzed, and ultimately published. The goal is to present accurate, concise, and educational accounts of caving incidents in a consistent, neutral voice that supports accident analysis and prevention.

SUBMISSION

• Incident reports are submitted by cavers, rescuers, grottos, agencies, or other knowledgeable parties.
• Submissions may include:
  • A factual narrative of events
  • Contextual details (location, cave type, conditions, equipment, experience level)
  • Outcomes (injuries, rescue, fatality, near-miss)
  • Optional analysis or lessons learned from the submitter’s perspective
• Submitters are encouraged to be as complete and candid as possible, recognizing that clarity improves the educational value of the report.

 

REVIEW AND EDITING

• All submissions are reviewed by the ACA editor.
• Reports are edited for:
  • Length – to fit publication constraints and improve readability (reports are generally less than 750 words)
  • Clarity – to reduce ambiguity, jargon, or unnecessary detail
  • Consistency – to align with established NSS News formatting and terminology
  • Neutral ACA Voice – to ensure a factual, non-judgmental, and educational tone
• During this process, the editor may seek clarification or additional details from the submitter
• Information from reliable secondary sources (e.g., rescue summaries or news reports) may be used to clarify timelines or fill gaps.
• Editorial changes are intended to preserve the submitter’s meaning; however, errors or misinterpretations may occasionally be introduced during editing.

 

SUBMITTER REVIEW

• At the ACA editor’s discretion the edited report is returned to the original submitter for review.
• Submitters are encouraged to:
  • Verify factual accuracy
  • Clarify intent where wording has changed
  • Identify any errors introduced during editing
• The ACA retains editorial discretion in incorporating submitters comments
• Not all reports will be returned for review.
• The ACA committee’s accident analysis is not provided to the submitter prior to publication.

 

ANALYSIS DEVELOPMENT

• Submitters are welcome—and encouraged—to include their own analysis, observations, or lessons learned.
• All analyses included in the final publication are subject to editorial review.
• The final analysis presented in ACA is developed or approved at the discretion of a third-party ACA expert panel, which includes experienced cavers, rescue personnel, and subject-matter experts.
• The panel’s role is to:
  • Ensure analytical consistency across reports
  • Focus on broader safety lessons and risk factors
  • Avoid speculation or attribution of blame

 

FINAL REVIEW AND PUBLICATION

• The editor integrates the approved narrative and final analysis into the annual ACA publication.
• Reports are reviewed for overall coherence, neutrality, and educational value.
• The ACA is published bi-annually

 

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

• Accuracy over attribution: The emphasis is on what happened and why, not on assigning fault.
• Neutral tone: Reports are written to inform and educate, not to criticize.
• Educational value: Each report should contribute to a broader understanding of caving risks and prevention strategies.
• Respect for contributors: ACA values the time, effort, and trust of those who submit reports.

This workflow is intended to promote transparency in the ACA reporting process while maintaining the editorial and analytical standards that make American Caving Accidents a trusted resource for the caving community.