DRAFT ITEM CM9 CABINET MEMBER FOR COMMUNITY SAFETY – 30 APRIL 2007 FIRE & RESCUE – RESPONSE STANDARDS PERFORMANCE 2006/07 Report by Director for Community Safety & Chief Fire Officer Introduction 1. Since April 2005 Oxfordshire Fire & Rescue Service (OF&RS) has had local Response Standards for attending emergency incidents in the county. Cabinet approved these standards on 22 June 2006 (Reference Item CA11). Additionally, the Director for Community Safety and Chief Fire Officer was required to report annually on the F&RS’s performance against these standards and bring forward any recommendations as appropriate for future improvements, particularly to address life-threatening situations, which involve people. This report fulfils that requirement. Response Standards 2. Local Response Standards are based on the historical location and status of our current fire stations and are used as a basis for improvement planning in the future. The Standards provide a common performance target across the County, based on risk and acknowledging that fire deaths and casualty reduction is a National Performance Target which will drive future improvement options. The standards are as follows:
3. Note: The above is measured by the time it takes to get the first fire appliance to the scene from the time at which the fire station is first alerted. 4. In addition to the Response Standards for the first attending appliance, the Fire & Rescue Service will despatch a sufficient number of vehicles and personnel to safely and effectively deal with the type of incident reported as determined by national and local risk assessments. 5. OF&RS attend a wide variety of incidents and not all are emergencies. Therefore it is necessary to categorise incidents to enable improvement plans to concentrate on the highest priority areas. All Incident Commanders classify incidents they attend into one of five categories: (a) life threatening emergency (b)
serious, but non life threatening
emergency (c) other emergencies (d) urgent, but not an emergency (e) non-urgent. 6. Our operational effectiveness is measured against these first three categories (a, b and c) which all involve emergencies. 2006/07 Performance 7. In 2006/07, OF&RS attended 7349 incidents of which 4088 were classed as an emergency (a, b and c categories). The overall performance is as follows:
8. The target set, as can be seen above, has not been achieved. This can be attributed to a number of factors. The F&RS was aware of potential under-performance in this area and consequently commissioned a review of Response Standards. This was carried out in January 2007. The findings of that review are as follows: • A number of incidents have been included as ‘in-scope’ that should have been filtered out as the “normal provision of fire cover” was not available at the time of an incident. This is due to either the nearest appliance already attending another incident or the crew not being available due to other reasons; • There have been a number of occasions where a poor address has been given by the caller, sometimes several miles from the actual incident and therefore response times are virtually impossible to meet due to any delay in locating the correct address; • Stolen/abandoned vehicles are often driven to remote locations and then set on fire. Often these remote locations are in fields or down lanes where appliances have difficulty in accessing and offer no threat to life or to a third party property; • A number of incidents have been wrongly categorised. This was particularly evident in the ‘c’ category. On investigation it was found that this was partially due to the definition of ‘c’ incidents and a training need has been identified for some of the newly promoted Incident Commanders; • A few incidents concerning the rescue of animals from rivers, lakes, bogs and slurry pits have been identified. Again these are often in remote locations and are difficult to find and access; • At the time the original proposals outlined in the report to Cabinet were made, the ‘standards’ were identified as a ‘stretching’ although achievable target. We believe that the use of the word ‘target’ as opposed to ‘standard’ is more appropriate and better aligned to the original intentions of that report. 9. The Fire Authority can only be expected to achieve response standards targets in ‘normal circumstances’ as stated in the Service Pledge. In this instance, ‘normal circumstances’ is defined as ‘when the normal provision of fire cover on any station ground where an emergency incident has been reported is available’. Any incident occurring outside of normal circumstances would therefore be ‘out of scope’ and discounted for performance purposes. Initial investigations into the effect these proposed ‘modifications’ might have on current reporting methodology indicate that, whilst still stretching, the targets become much more realistic and achievable. 10. If the above was applied to the 2006/07 response standards* OF&RS’s performance would be adjusted to the following level: (*Note: Incidents in scope = 3908)
11. It should also be borne in mind that these new targets do not show any worsening of emergency cover provided when compared to the original a, b, c, and d standards of fire cover expected by central government. 12. Subject to approval by the Cabinet Member for Community Safety it would be OF&RS’s intention to tighten the parameters of the ‘incidents-in-scope’. Additional training for all Incident Commanders will be provided and the definition of ‘C’ categories will be reviewed. Community Fire Safety Activities 13. Through the Fire Service Emergency Cover modelling tool (FSEC) the F&RS has now identified all the areas that fall outside the 14 minute response time and are currently carrying out Community Fire Safety work in the form of Home Risk Assessments (HRA) and, where determined through the HRA, the fitting of smoke detectors. This is in addition to those known areas where vulnerable groups are located. Conclusion 14. The local response standards have now been in operation for two years. Unlike the old Standards of Fire Cover the new standards are designed to be challenging and improve the service provided to the community. The standards require the F&RS to examine closely the reasons for failure and to understand both internal and external factors that impinge on this performance indicator. Following the recent review it is acknowledged that the ‘incidents-in-scope’ definition needs to be refined to reflect ‘normal’ fire cover provision in the county and those other factors listed above. This will indeed provide a level playing field for the F&RS to aspire to and to achieve response standards which are considered to be challenging and fit for purpose. RECOMMENDATION 15. The Cabinet Member for Community Safety is RECOMMENDED to acknowledge the attached report, note the reasons for under performance in this area and approve the amendment of the definition of ‘incidents-in-scope’. JOHN PARRY Background papers: Cabinet 22 June 2006 CA11 Contact Officer: Mike Smyth (Tel: 01865-855206) April 2007
|