ITEM EX23

BEST VALUE COMMITTEE – 29 NOVEMBER 2001

Best Value Review
Review report and action plans
Fire Service Control Room Function

Core review team membership 	Review Leader 	John Parry and latterly John Hurren, Deputy County Fire Officer 
PPRU officer: 			  Ian Wilson and latterly Janet Bolam
Designated member:	Janet Godden
Other core team members:	Adrian Freeman, County Treasurers

Independent members	)	Steven Bates Thames Valley Police, 
	)	Control Supervisor
	)
	)	Steve Clinton Oxfordshire NHS 	
	)	Ambulance Trust
	Philip Baskerville Fire Control 
	Manager, OFS
	Peter Owen-Smith Head of 
	Operations, OFS
	Robert Burrell Fire Brigade Union 
	Darran Gough National Assoc of Fire 
	Officers Representative	
Service budget	£ 527,000 (1999-2000)	
The scope of the review, as outlined in the Best Value Review Specification November 2000:	1.Comparison with Thames Valley Police/Oxfordshire NHS Ambulance Trust control functions for best practice.

2.Exploration of complete externalisation to commercial sector 

3. Exploration of joint working with other Thames Valley brigades (Buckinghamshire and Berkshire)

4. Investigation of the areas identified by the benchmarking exercise to determine best practice from other brigades which should be applied to Oxfordshire

5. In addition to these, further work, including consultation with service users and staff, and analysis of non core work was undertaken	
Executive Summary

1.	The review of Fire Service Control Room Function was originally scheduled to report by March 2001, but was extended to November 2001 following the compilation and issue of the Matt McDonald report referred to in this report.

2.	The review considered a number of alternative ways to provide control room functions including combining with other Emergency Services, externalisation to the commercial sector and joining with other Thames Valley brigades .
The report recommends that the control centre is not combined with other emergency services, and that the function is not externalised to the private sector.  However, the possibility of combining with other Fire Brigades was considered and the work to review and evaluate this option is being progressed outside this review.

3.	The Review evaluated current performance of the Oxfordshire Fire Service by use of extensive benchmarking.
This showed that Oxfordshire is performing within the top quartile nationally in terms of overall costs and staffing costs.  The costs of the communication equipment was rated at the top of the second quartile.  The average call handling time was low and 94% of calls are answered within 3 seconds.  The service is therefore relatively low cost and is performing to a high standard.  However, the number of calls handled/shift/ operator is high and the number of staff is lower than the average, which indicates potential understaffing.

4.	Two consultation exercises were conducted, one with the public who had used the service recently, and with professional service users eg staff, utilities, fire alarm companies.
This showed that the service is viewed well by the public and by other Control Centre users.  The overall performance of Fire Control was regarded as “good” or “very good” in approximately 97 % of all responses .  The highest percentage of negative responses came from Control room staff in other emergency services and this will be evaluated to see how improvements can be made.

5.	An action plan to be completed between December 2001 and November 2002 was drawn up.  The action plan includes:

a.	Evaluation of the advantages of a combined Fire Control Centre for more than one authority. ( Elected members working group )
b.	Ensuring  consistency in the way benchmarking statistics are provided and compared
c.	A cost benefit analysis of service improvements that can be achieved to place Oxfordshire Fire Service within the top quartile in each comparative area
d.	Introduction of a national framework training program for Control Room Staff (Integrated Personal Development System)
e.	Establishment of an operational development group for all three Thames Valley Brigades to ensure consistency of future protocols as part of the initiative to improve collaborative working.
f.	Completion of the Home Office Staffing Model and to consider the recommendations in relation to non core activities in the Control Room
g.	Implementation of strategy for the reduction of Unwanted fire alarms.

h.	Review of results of User Survey, in particular for other emergency services and utilities to see how communication can be improved.

Area of work 1

Comparison with Thames Valley Police/Oxfordshire NHS Ambulance Trust control functions for best practice
Summary of work undertaken and evidence gathered
The potential to operate the key emergency services (police, ambulance and fire) from a combined control room was explored to see if there were cost and quality advantages.

This subject was investigated in two ways:

•	As part of a national investigation into the future of Fire Service Control Rooms and Communications in England and Wales, which was commissioned by the Home Office and undertaken by Mott MacDonald

•	A local investigation with Oxfordshire Ambulance and Thames Valley Police

1	Mott MacDonald Report: 
The future of Fire Service Control Rooms and Communications in England and Wales

This report was commissioned to give authoritative advice on how best to meet future mobile communications and control room requirements.  Extensive  investigations were carried out into the current control room arrangements of police, ambulance and fire services nationally, and in addition, they looked at experience available from international projects.

The report concluded that although a multi-agency control room may improve liaison between emergency services and afford an opportunity to learn new ways of working, on balance, this type of control room was not recommended for the following reasons:

•	the risk of reduction of performance for fire calls was high 

–	multi-service control room staff may have less expertise in each specific discipline than single –service staff
–	The other emergency services do not have the same performance expectations with regard to call handling or mobilisation as the fire service
–	The other emergency services may wish to set the trade off between staffing levels and speed of response  at a lower level than is optimal for the fire service

•	impedes greater regional co-operation within the fire service (freezing fire brigades at a suboptimal size)
•	disparity in pay and conditions (salaries, duty systems, workloads are different)
•	differences in procedures and working practices
–	speed and accuracy of response pre eminent
–	police deal with a large number of calls but only a minority need an immediate and rapid response

•	organisational dynamics (control room staff are integral to the fire service)
•	differences in equipment and technology needed for optimal performance
2.	Local investigation

Against the background of the Mott MacDonald report, Thames Valley Police Controls and the Accident and Emergency Ambulance Control were considered for a joint command centre.  Many of the national findings were found to be true at a local level, in particular

•	incompatible technology
•	different methods of operation
•	Oxfordshire Ambulance Service is considering joint ambulance control with Buckinghamshire, Berkshire and Northamptonshire, which is a favoured option  for them
•	The Thames Valley Police Authority are in the process of commissioning two new emergency call-handling centres located at Milton Keynes and Abingdon to replace the 12 police areas control rooms.  The system of operation is in many ways similar to the ambulance service in that banks of call takers receive the incoming ‘999’ calls and pass them to the relevant specified dispatchers for each area.  This is significantly different to the fire service.  Fire Control operators take calls and dispatch resources which is very efficient in minimizing time delays and beneficial for the perspective of continuity of incident management.
Conclusions reached

Whilst there are some similarities between the ambulance and police call taking functions, the IT technology for the dispatch of fire resources is quite different, particularly  to the police systems.  The Mott MacDonald report indicates that the combination with police and ambulance services is not a viable proposition and given the changes being implemented by the police and ambulance services, this was therefore discounted.

The systems in use by police and ambulance services did not highlight any significant functions which Oxfordshire Fire Service could adopt.  However, the Ambulance Service use an Automatic Vehicle Location System(AVLS) for pinpointing the locations of their mobiles resources and this could have some benefit for the fire service.

Area of work 2

Exploration of complete externalisation of the control centre to the commercial sector
Summary of work undertaken and evidence gathered

To enable the review team to compare the core function and support activity of control two lines of research were undertaken
•	visit to similar organisations in the private sector 
•	discussion with other brigades who had undertaken a similar investigation

The terms of reference included examination of:-

•	IT equipment –overview of provision and use
•	Call handling – mode of operation and transaction times
•	Management information – PI’s, statistics etc
•	Incidents – type, spread, calls received
•	Support systems – to ensure continuous availability
•	Staffing conditions

1.	Visit to Mondial Assistance UK 

The review team challenge was to compare their business practice for call-centre operations and, see if it was feasible for them to provide the potential for business partnership.

Mondial Assistance deal with vehicle breakdowns, defect recalls and customer contacts for BMW (the flagship), Land Rover, Aston Martin, Mazda and Hyundai cars.

•	Comparison of IT equipment –overview of provision and use
The IT in the Fire Control Room is more reliable than that employed by Modial.  Mondial has no immediate backup system if the IT fails (they resort to the telephone).
  
•	Call handling – mode of operation and transaction times
Call to mobilisation times are much longer at Mondial because they deal with customer service and warranty claims within the same call.  
Mondial mode of operation is to diagnose problems over the phone prior to dispatch with the aim of avoiding dispatch. The fire service usually send a vehicle or officer upon receipt of basic information. Depending upon the circumstances of the call, additional resources can be deployed, coupled with reassurance and advice  given to the caller.

•	Management information – Performance Indicators
The Fire Service are required to meet Home Office performance indicators and standards.  Mondial is geared to a different set of objectives based solely on commercial considerations.  

•	Incidents – type, spread, calls received
The Mondial workload is predictable since it relates to peak traffic use and holidays.  The staffing is therefore geared to this.  The Fire Service has a more unpredictable workload for which they must always be prepared.  This mismatch is incompatible.

•	Staffing conditions
Mondial were not prepared to fully share all their information about staffing, pay and conditions.  However, it is clear that the staff are not as well paid as an equivalent in the Fire Service, and the levels of staff  and their performance were not as closely monitored .

•	Costs
This was commercially sensitive, and Mondial were not prepared to provide comparative costs.
			
For the reasons above,  the visit to Mondial showed that the mode of operation, the priorities, the working practices and level of technological support would not meet Fire Service needs. 

2.	Survey of other Brigades

Oxfordshire directly interviewed Mondial as part of their research, and it was felt that more information about other call centres  was needed.  Therefore all other Brigades were contacted to determine:

•	if a similar study had been undertaken
•	which call centers had been approached
•	conclusions reached

17 Fire Services responded and the following call centres had been approached:
AA				Transco
Green Flag			SWEB
Hydra				RAC
Water Companies 		Electricity Companies			

In all 17 cases, the fire services had concluded that the call centre would not meet needs for the same reasons concluded for Mondial.

Conclusions reached

•	The Fire Service is an emergency service, which must meet Home Office performance standards.  The private call centers are profit making organisations, influenced by market pressures.  This difference in ethos may compromise the standards a Fire Service must attain.

•	The Fire Service control must remain focused upon the response to calls and in this sense is mono functional.    In contrast to this, private sector companies are often multifunctional, using the calls and the call centers  to deal with a number of business aspects e.g. customer care follow-up, out of office administrative calls, taking income generation opportunities

It is concluded that Oxfordshire should not use a private sector call handling organisation for its control room functions

Area of work 3

Exploration of joint working with other brigades (likely to be other Thames Valley brigades (Buckinghamshire and Berkshire) because of good working relationships).

Summary of work undertaken and evidence gathered

The Mott MacDonald report concluded that this was a viable option nationally. Locally, a group of elected members from Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire have established a working party to determine if collaboration would be feasible for these counties.  The group has not yet finalised the programme of work and is not due to report within the timescale of this review. 

Area of work 4

Investigation of the areas identified by the benchmarking exercise to determine best practice from other brigades which should be applied to Oxfordshire.
Summary of work undertaken and evidence gathered

The main thrust of this element of the review has been carried out within the Chief and Assistant Chief Fire Officers Association ( CACFOA)  Benchmarking Club in partnership with the Institute of Public Finances (IPF).  In early 2000 a benchmarking survey questionnaire, on behalf of CACFOA, was circulated and responses collated by Staffordshire Fire & Rescue Service.  The purpose was to collate information gained in a uniform manner in order to give accurate comparisons between brigade controls.  The information gained can be identified follows:

•	Costs –staff
•	Communications & IT
•	Other direct costs
•	Credits for non-core services carried out by control staff – This is taken to be income received or value of other services to the fire authority.
•	Staffing levels and grade.
•	Workload measures - the number of emergency calls and emergency incidents managed.
•	Performance indicators – Response times to incoming calls, and the average time from receipt of call to dispatch.

Information about Oxfordshire was compared nationally (against 50 Brigades) and with our family group, with which statistical comparisons are made.  

The family group is:
FIRE SERVICE – FAMILY GROUP 2	
Bedford and Luton
Berkshire
Buckingham and Milton Keynes
Cambridgeshire
Dorset
Durham
East Sussex	Norfolk
Northamptonshire
Oxfordshire
Suffolk
West Sussex
Wiltshire	

Further investigation by Oxfordshire Fire Service showed that in most cases, the comparisons made in the study were accurate.  However, there were some anomalies which will be discussed against the relevant indicator.

1	Overall Costs  (1999-2000)
	OFS	National Average	Lowest 	Highest	
Cost / call	£35.9	£49	£34	£100	
Cost / incident	£72	£88.3	£66	£150	

Nationally, Oxfordshire’s overall costs / call  were the 12th lowest  (in the top quartile) and the costs  / incident were 16th lowest (at the top of the second quartile). This draws a relationship between resources and the number of calls. Oxfordshire fire service is committed to reducing the number of incidents it attends, which will result in a higher cost per operator. This will be viewed positively by the public but will appear as a negative change to these comparisons.

2.	Staff Costs (1999-2000)
	OFS	National	Lowest	Highest	
Cost per FTE	£22,813	£22,851	£20,000	£27,000	
Average Watch Strength (FTEs)	3.34 	5.75	  3.34	6.6	

Nationally, Oxfordshire’s staffing costs were the 6th lowest (in the top quartile).  This low cost is due to employment of  less control room staff.  

3.	Staff Availability – Shifts “Lost”  (1999 –2000)
This is a comparison of the number of shifts per operator, per annum,  that have been spent away from the control room
	Type of Loss	Oxon	Peer Group	UK Ave	
Annual Leave ( incl. P/H’s )	30	29.8	31	
Other Leave	4	9.4	7.3	
Training	8	2.6	3.4	
Secondment	0	1.4	3.1	
Short Term Sickness	8	7.5	5.9	
Long Term Sickness	0	5.9	7.3	
Shifts Lost	50	56.6	57.7	
Shifts available	132.5	124	124.8	
Overall, it can be seen that in 1999 –2000 Oxfordshire
•	had more shifts / operator available pa. in comparison with the peer group and nationally.  This was due to the structure of the duty rota and how staff were assigned to it.
•	The overall level of sickness was lower than both national and Peer group averages.
•	had more shifts assigned to training ( see investment in Training, below )

Further research showed that the shifts lost due to short term sickness were atypical.  Between January 1st and September 30th  this was reduced to 3.75 shifts / operator (4.89 shifts / operator prorata)
.
The conclusion reached is that the level of staff availability is more effectively managed in Oxfordshire than in many other authorities.

4.	Investment in Training

	OFS	National
(highest)	National (and family)
Lowest 	National average	Family average	
Shifts released for Training 
(shifts lost/FTE/pa)	8	14	0	3.4	2.6	

Nationally, Oxfordshire Fire Service had the 6th highest number of shifts dedicated to training, although this is largely due to the inconsistent way that data has been collected.

Investigations were made to find out why staff were detached for training appeared to be higher than other brigades.  
Enquiries showed that the way training is provided and the methods in which it is delivered varies between brigades.  Once these variations had been taken into account, it was found that all brigades provide broadly similar amounts of training. Although Induction and Basic training is provided in a watch environment, individuals are not counted on the watch strength until this training is completed.

5.	Non Core Working
As part of the benchmarking exercise, there was a differentiation between core and non core work activities undertaken by staff. The non core work was assigned a credit value based upon costed staff hours and also costed / call to enable comparison.  

	OFS	National av
	Lowest	Highest	
Credit Values	£2	£3.3	£0	£15	

Nationally, OFS was ranked 32nd, and so is at the top of the third quartile for credit assigned to non core working. 
In the benchmarking exercise, the element of non core work that contributed to a cost/call was calculated and was shown that Oxfordshire Fire Service was 32nd  in this table.  However, on contact with brigades in the family group, it was found that the basis of comparisons were very different and not all the non core work undertaken by control room staff was accounted for in this figure..  This comparator must therefore be considered with caution.
6.	
Activity Per Operator

Activity per operator is a comparison often used to measure differences in workloads. The figures most commonly published are the number of ‘999 calls’ received divided by the number of operators employed over a 12 month period. 

OFS operators handled 667  calls / operator per year (1999-2000). This compares to the Audit Commission indicator of efficient use staff  (550 calls /operator ). 

In addition to incident related calls operators deal  with repeat calls (more than one call to the same incident) and associated mobilising transactions.  Taking these into account, the number of calls/ operator rose to 1268. These figures are of some concern because they may be an indicator that staff may be overstretched on occasions. ( see Home Office staffing Model )

7.	Costs of Communications

This is a measure of the IT element of the  costs of an emergency call, (which  includes radio and telephone links and the costs of the Command Control system)

	OFS	National
average	Lowest (family)	Highest
(family)	
Overall costs / call of Comms Equip.	£8.4	£13.2	£5	£43	

Nationally, Oxfordshire has the 16th lowest costs (at the top of the second quartile). This figure is influenced by a one-off, high value purchase during the sample year. 

8.	Average call handling time

This is calculated from the time Fire Control receive an inward ‘999’ call to the moment a resource is dispatched to the incident.  The table below indicates Oxfordshire Fire Services performance against its Best Value Family Group and the UK average:

Brigade	Time in Seconds	
Durham	43	
Oxfordshire	46	
Northamptonshire	50	
Cambridgeshire	51	
Norfolk	52	
Suffolk	71	
Berkshire	72	
East Sussex	83	
Dorset	85	
Bedford and Luton	N/A	
Buckingham and Milton Keynes	N/A	
West Sussex	N/A	
Wiltshire	N/A	
Peer group average	59	
UK BRIGADE AVERAGE	60	

These results show Oxfordshire achieves times well below the national average, but there is no information to place its relative position. 

9.	Call Answering Time

For the purposes of comparison the table below compares Oxfordshire’s fire controls ability to answer ‘999’ calls within three seconds compared to its peer group and the national average and it can be seen that Oxfordshire has the highest rate of call answered within 3 seconds.

Control Facility	% Answered in 3 seconds	
Oxfordshire Fire             (Ave)	94%	
Peer Group                     (Ave)	68%	
UK Group                      (Ave)	92%	

Conclusions reached

•	Within these measures, in 1999-2000, Oxfordshire compared well nationally and within its peer or family group.  It has been shown to have low overall costs and a high speed of response to calls.

•	The benchmarking information highlights the possibility that the service is understaffed compared to peer and national figures since Oxfordshire employs less staff/ shift, requires staff to work more shifts/ year.  In addition to this, this data shows that on average, control room staff handle significantly more calls per person per shift than the Audit Commission recommendation for optimum efficiency. Although currently there is no evidence that performance is being adversely affected, the transfer of some non-core work to administrative staff may relieve these pressures. 

Area of work 5

Other investigations, including consultation with service users and staff and analysis of non core work

Summary of work undertaken and evidence gathered

1.	Consultation with users and staff

Consultation was undertaken with two groups:
•	the public who had recently used the Fire Service (Service User Questionnaires)
•	those who worked with the service on a regular basis (fire station staff, other emergency services, utility companies, fire alarm companies and other Fire Service support staff eg finance, personnel, supplies (Control User questionnaires)

a.	Service Users

In 2000, 151 questionnaires were sent to the public, and there was a 53% return.

	Agree strongly
%	Agree
%	Neither agree nor disagree
%	Disagree
%	Disagree strongly
%	Total	
BT Operator was efficient and answered quickly	
59.3	
37.3	
1.7	
1.7	
0	
100	
BT Operator was reassuring	29.1	47.3	21.8	1.8	0	100	
Fire Control operator  was efficient	57.9	35.1	5.3	1.8	0	100	
Fire control officer was reassuring	48.2	28.6	21.4	1.8	0	100	

Key findings

•	There was a high level of satisfaction in the efficiency and speed of response by the BT and Fire Control room staff  

•	The level of satisfaction with the reassurance given was not as high.  This is not surprising as a number of callers are greatly concerned or traumatized, whilst the priority for Fire Control staff is to extract sufficient relevant information to enable an effective response to be made, without delay. The need to balance the requirement of obtaining relevant information, which sometimes requires assertiveness, with the need for compassion and reassurance is highlighted during training.

b. Control Users

A total of 175 User questionnaires were distributed to all main groups having regular contact with Fire Control. A high return was received ( approx 90 % ) with the large majority indicating that communication with Fire Control was usually welcoming, professional and courteous.

The highest percentage of negative responses came from Control room staff in other emergency services and this will be evaluated to see how improvements can be made. The overall performance of Fire Control was regarded as “good” or “very good” in approximately 97 % of all responses. 

2.	Non emergency activities

In addition to their core duties control staff undertake:-

•	Act as an information centre for brigade enquiries
•	Produce reports on staffing and availability of appliances 
•	Update action and information records
•	Undertake first-line maintenance for the  Command and Control system
•	Process fire reports, insurance and interview enquiries
•	The preparation and production of statistics.

In 1999 –2000, the control room handled 4657 false alarms generated by fire alarm systems. Compared to the other Brigades, this figure was the highest in country.  The reduction of these unwanted calls, which are treated as emergencies on receipt, will improve staff availability and reduce administrative, non-core work, which results from these calls. 

In Area 4 of this report, there is evidence that the staffing levels are low and workload is high.  In order to reduce this pressure, the service aims to reduce the amount of non- core work undertaken by control room staff, in addition to reducing unwanted calls, which result in False Alarms.

Oxfordshire Fire Service is currently participating in a Home Office driven exercise that identifies staffing workload and advises on optimal staffing levels for each service.  Within this, staff are recording in detail the core and non core work they undertake over a sample of busy periods. This leads to a recommended staffing level that accommodates, if not the highest peak ever seen, at least a very realistic value in order to maintain a good operational standard. 
 
Overall conclusions

This review has highlighted that the Oxfordshire Fire Service deliver a high quality service at relatively low cost.  Investigation into alternative ways to run the Control Centre concluded that merging with other emergency services or using alternative call handling agencies were not viable.  The possibility of merging control functions with other brigades remains an option that is now being considered outside this review.  

The areas for improvement include reference to staffing levels and workload, and decisions taken in respect to these will be contingent upon the outcome of the review of control centre configuration. Other opportunities for continuous improvement are outlined in the implementation plan.
Recommendations

1.	The Oxfordshire Fire Service should not merge with other Emergency Services for the reasons outlined in Area of work 1

2.	The Oxfordshire Fire Service should not use a call centre from the independent sector to manage its calls for reasons outlined in Area of work 2

3.	The Oxfordshire Fire Service must consider merging control centres with other counties.  A working party made up of elected members from Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire are currently considering this option.

4.	Oxfordshire has less staff, who work more shifts than most other brigades, and the number of calls taken is higher than the Audit Commission recommendation for optimal working.  This does not appear to have an adverse impact on the standard of service.
It is recommended: 
•	that the staffing pressures are further investigated using the Home Office Staffing Model
•	there are advantages in transferring some non-core activities , currently performed in control, into support services, where the information can be utilized for a number of additional purposes. i.e. To inform Community safety initiatives, for Operational intelligence and planning, development of Geographical Information systems ( GIS ), etc. 

Action Plan to ensure Continuous Improvement

	Action
	timescale	
1	Evaluate the advantages of a combined Fire Control Centre for more than one authority. ( Elected members working group )
	by 31.3.02	
2	Ensure consistency in the way benchmarking statistics are provided and compared
	by Feb 2002	
3	To undertake a cost benefit analysis of service improvements that can be achieved to place Oxfordshire Fire Service within the top quartile in each comparative area.
	by April 2002	
4	Introduction of a training program for Control Room Staff based on the national framework for training and development  within the Fire service known as the Integrated Personal Development System
	by Nov 2002	
5.	To establish an operational development group for all three Thames Valley Brigades to ensure consistency of future protocols
	by April 2002	
6.	Complete the Home Office Staffing Model and consider the recommendations in relation to non core activities in the Control Room
	by May 2002	
7.	Reduce the number of unwanted fire alarm calls by 20% over 5 years with a reduction of 7% by March 2002
	by March 2002
	
8	Review results of User Survey, in particular for other emergency services and utilities to see how communication can be improved.
	by Feb 2002