Headquarters, Pirehill Please ask for Kay Johnson DDI (01785) … · 2018. 2. 2. · Fire and...

Fire and Rescue Service Headquarters, Pirehill

Please ask for Kay Johnson DDI (01785) 898670

SCRUTINY AND PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE Wednesday 19 October 2016 2.15 pm Fire and Rescue Service Headquarters, Pirehill A Chair and Vice-Chair’s Preview (for Mrs K M Banks and Mr R J Clarke) has been arranged

for 1.45 pm)

Howard Norris Secretary to the Authority

10 October 2016 __________________________________________________________________________

A G E N D A

1. Apologies 2. Declarations of Interest 3. Minutes of the meeting held on 13 July 2016 4. Explanation of the Statistical Process Control Charts Presentation by Kath Bourne, Business Intelligence Team Corporate Manager 5. Performance Report Report of Kath Bourne, Business Intelligence Team Corporate Manager 6. Fatal Fire Matrix Presentation Presentation by Jim Bywater, Head of Central Prevent and Protect 7. Corporate Safety Plan – Scrutiny of the Consultation Process Report of Bob Preston, Safety Plan Manager

8. Items for Future Meetings

To be reviewed by Members

7 December 2016

Slitting Mill Fire Rugeley

Improving Community Cohesion Update

On-going over the Next 12 Months

Response Standards

Future Items date not yet specified

Previous Working Group updates

Scrutiny of the Innovations and Transformation Process

Retained Update report (including retained pay policy)

Working with H M Prison Service Update

False Alarms Policy Update

Impact of the 2015 Community Safety Options changes.

Outcomes of the EXIT Programme

9. Date of Next Meeting – The next meeting of this Committee will be held on Wednesday 7 December 2016 at 2.15 pm

10. Exclusion of the Public

The Chairman to move:- “That the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business which involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the paragraphs of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 indicated below”.

_______________________________________________________________________

PART TWO

11. Improving Community Cohesion (exemption paragraph 3)

Verbal overview by Donna Broadhead, Prevention Manager, Northern Service Delivery Group

of 9

Item No 3 on Agenda

MINUTES OF THE SCRUTINY AND PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE HELD ON 13 JULY 2016

Present: Mrs K M Banks (Chairman)

Chapman, F A Irving, R A Clarke, R J Marshall, R J Davies, M W Winnington, M J Day, W D Wood, Miss C B

Also in Attendance: Mr T Hyde, Director of Response, Mr H Norris, Secretary and Ms K Bourne, Business Intelligence Team Corporate Manager.

PART ONE

Documents referred to in these minutes as schedules are not appended but will be attached to the signed copy of the minutes. Copies, or specific information in them, may be available on request.

Minutes of the Meeting held on 21 April 2016 1. RESOLVED – That the Minutes of the Scrutiny and Performance Committee held on 21 April 2016 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

Membership of the Committee

2. The Membership of the Committee was outlined for Members information.

Terms of Reference of the Committee

3. The Terms of Reference of this Committee were provided for Members information. They had been amended at the Fire and Rescue Authority on 6 June and now included that the Quorum of 5 Members would include at least one representative from each constituent Authority. 4. RESOLVED – That the revised Terms of Reference of the Committee be noted.

Performance Report

5. There had been an upward trend in accidental dwelling fires over the last couple of years which was largely driven by low severity fires. In the past some smaller low severity fire went unreported and the Service was now seeing an increase these types of fires reported. This could not be evidenced but those households that had previously had HFRCs had been advised to get out and stay out, which may have led to an increase in smaller fires reported. Mr Hyde advised that one phenomenon from HFRC targeting of the 30,000 high risk homes had made a lot of people aware of the risks. Fires were detected earlier, intervention happened earlier and this may be a reason for the increase in low severity fires. Ms Bourne advised that a high proportion of these fires were cooking fires. The high severity fires were normally electrical and these were in homes with no smoke alarms. A Member asked, as an approximate percentage, how many were due to human error and

of 9

how many were electrical. Ms Bourne advised that some fires may be due to overloaded sockets or the miss use of tumble dryers – these fires were classed as electrical but it was a judgement call as to whether you could say that these were caused by behaviour. A Member commented that the overloaded plug socket would be partly down to human behaviours. Ms Bourne undertook to look at the figures to see if anything behavioural sprung out from the data. If there was an issue then it might be something that the Service could do something about. A Member commented upon fires caused by chip pans overflowing etc. Mr Hyde commented upon a recent safety campaign launched by the Service entitled “Stand by your pan”. Members discussed the use of thermostatically controlled deep fat fryers which would not overheat the oil and commented that there was a good case for the Service to promote these. Mr Hyde advised that three quarters of cooking fires were linked to alcohol. Some of the fires happened on return from a night out and food was left cooking, unattended whilst the occupants fell asleep. Mr Clarke asked if the Service could identify human error and flag up the other types of electrical fires to the industry. Mrs Banks asked if the Service could in some way scrutinise human error fires. Mr Irving commented that it would be helpful to know the cause of fires and cause of fire deaths. Mr Hyde advised that after each fire death there was a fatal fire conference, which included partners, to look at whether and how the fire death could have been prevented. Some of the issues that arise may be around lifestyle issues. Mr Hyde advised that it was useful to talk about stratifying gold, silver and bronze households. Any future fire deaths or injuries will further inform the risk stratification – if the casualty was outside of these three categories then this would show why. It would be useful for the Service to revisit how it stratifies the risk in the future. Members discussed various spikes in the accidental dwelling fires and these normally related to particular period of cold weather. Members discussed assistive technology that could be used in households, particularly in households where there were dementia sufferers. They discussed a light system which lit up when the person walked near to it which could prevent trips and falls. Members asked if officers could find out more information about these lights. Mr Hyde undertook to do this. Members also discussed the pressure pads (part of assisted technology) that could detect when a person got out of bed or out of the house etc. Members discussed the trend for RTCs over the previous three years. The trend showed a decrease although Members indicated that the graph was not clear and did not portray this clearly. The number of KSI (killed and seriously injured) was down but the Service was being asked to attend more often than before, rather than WM Ambulance Service. This was something that they needed to be aware of as RTCs impact was declining. The question that needed to be asked was “is the Service attending RTCs that the ambulance service cannot fulfil?”. Members commented that this had financial implications for the Service and for future negotiation with the ambulance service they needed to have evidence that this was happening. Mr Hyde advised that the Service was actively undertaking co-responding and would genuinely attend instead of an ambulance. In the future they needed to draw a line in the sand and ask that question. Mr Hyde advised that the data was 12 months behind. It may be that those involved in a collision may succumb to their injuries after twelve months and so issuing data on a month

of 9

by month basis would not be accurate. A Member asked whether the 20% increase should be referred to the Road Safety Partnership and was advised that the spikes in the RTCs did not mean that the roads were increasingly unsafe as the overall trend was down. Mr Clarke raised the issue of the high number of accidents on the A38. The impact of these on the Police was substantial, although the fire and ambulance service were not always asked to attend. A Member commented that the fire service may be requested on occasions when they were not directly needed but used as a back up. Members were interested to know the percentage of motorway RTCs and this information would be provided for a future meeting. Members discussed the motorway being policed from West Midlands and whether this had an impact on the Service. Mr Hyde commented upon the matter of “all lane running” on the motorway. The Service was finding that when there was an RTC there was previously space for the Service to get to the crash scene and now there was not. There was also the potential for secondary crashes. The Service was working with West Midlands Fire Service on this. There would be a review by the Central Motorway Policing Group as the current fend off for the fire appliances would not be appropriate. In response to a question Members were advised that with the permission of the police the fire service could run down the opposite carriageway, but this would mean closing off the other carriageway. Mr Norris commented that this would increase the possible frequency of a whole road closure.. The impact of the RTC would be far greater if they had to shut the whole motorway and this was a major concern. Members commented upon the previous hard shoulder safety element. In response to a question on the causes of RTCs Mr Hyde advised that the Exit Project data, which had been compiled by academics over a three year period would be available in the autumn. This information would have information such as contributory factors and longer term health. Once the papers had been received and an action plan produced then the Committee may want to have a presentation on the outcomes of the Exit Programme. In response to a question Ms Bourne advised that the MAST software did give the Service causation information. Members discussed the RTCs attended by the Service. Mr Hyde advised that there were very few fires that the Service did not attend but with RTCs it would mostly be police and ambulance attending unless there was an extrication needed. The graph showed an increase in Fire Service attendance at RTCs since 2015 and the spike in those classed as seriously injured may be due to the Service attending instead of or before the ambulance service. Firefighters were trained to “first person on scene” level and were comfortable with being first in attendance. Members asked for information when the Fire Service attended the scene before the ambulance service and Mr Hyde indicated that he would check if this information was available. Members held a discussion on the presentation of data and asked whether the figures could be presented in an easier format and be comparable in terms of scales as it was important for Members to have confidence with the statistics given. Ms Bourne advised that the graphs were intentionally on a different scale to show the statistics without losing impact. She advised that she was more than happy to look at alternative forms of reporting. A Member commented that he needed to see the numbers involved in the performance information rather than in graphical format. Mr Norris advised that a report

of 9

on the options on the presentation of future data could be presented at a future meeting so that Members could determine how they wanted the information tabled and what they wanted to see. Note by Secretary – Following further discussions with the Service regarding the future presentation of data it was determined that the information provided needed to be consistent with the Statistical Process Control format. Members discussed data confidence which was a 99.35%. The chart referred to 52 records with missing data and 5 errors. Ms Bourne advised this referred to the accuracy of the raw base data. It may be that there was an inputting error or the like. The quality of the data contained in the report was at an appropriately high level. Ms Bourne advised that she could go in to this in more detail in a future performance report. Members discussed attacked on firefighters in 2015 in the Northern Service Delivery Group area. A task and finish group was set up to look to improve community cohesion following these attacks. Mr Hyde would ask Mr Moss if he would come to the Committee to talk about the group’s progress. Mrs Banks and Mr Irving agreed that this matter was something that they needed to take back to their authority. There had been a slight increase of operational injuries (21) and a decrease in routine injuries (44) at work compared to 2014/15. These mainly comprised of slips, trips, falls and muscle strain. These were not attributable to the systems of work that the Service used. There were no serious injuries. Response standards had increased for the 1st appliance in attendance from 87.91% in 2015/16 to 88.72% in 2016/17. A Member asked about the use of retained firefighters to cover for wholetime post and whether this impacted on retained availability. Mr Hyde advised that it did sometimes impact on retained availability. The Service had taken a stance not to recruit for wholetime personnel for a number of years as they were actively reducing the number of posts. When vacancies arose these wholetime posts were backfilled by retained staff but officers did try to manage the effect of these posts being back filled. In response to a question Mr Hyde advised that in the region three fire services allowed retained to supplement the wholetime service, West Midlands had no retained firefighters. Retained firefighters were now far more integrated into the Service than they were 10 years ago and completed the same training as wholetime firefighters. Mr Hyde advised that the “incident response team” meant the use of a smaller team of three riders “as on a TRV”. Kidsgrove and Burslem had operated as an IRT and Mercia were now operating an IRT system for retained. Miss Wood advised that some firefighters undertook wholetime duties and then remained on duty for retained duties. She asked whether firefighters were limited on the number of hours that they could work. Mr Hyde advised that as a guide that firefighters can work for 4 hours if active and 6 hours if not. The work time directives specify 6 hours uninterrupted work. Those that work nights shifts could cover during the days whilst they were in bed asleep. Members commented upon the proposed new pay structure for retained which may incentivise retained firefighters.

of 9

Mr Hyde advised that for 4 and 6 hour they were paid an hourly rate. If Tactical Advisors knew that firefighters had been in place 6 hours then they would make them leave, but there was nothing to stop them responding again. Mr Winnington commented upon the insufficient crew at Gnosall with 15 – 20 % availability. Mr Hyde advised that they were looking at recruiting a watch manager for Gnosall and Rising Brook. He advised that CFO Ann Millington’s analysis of retained was that they joined the retained service as a gateway to a full time appointment, but this was not now a possibility. There were many things working against the Service in terms of recruitment and retention. The Service was looking to Staffordshire, Keele and Wolverhampton University for assistance on this. Members discussed the possibility of part time contracts which had been previously muted. Mr Hyde advised that part time personnel would need to be paid each hour, rather than the cover provided. The Service was looking at other options, to may be to bring people in from other areas or increasing the response times to 10 minutes in Gnosall or 6/7 minutes at Rising Brook. Mr Hyde advised that the retained pay consultation would finish this week. There would then need to be negotiation with the FBU. They aimed to conclude by 1 October so that they could advise retained personnel and give then three months notice of any change in the retained payment scheme should the Service want to implement the changes by 1 January 2017. In theory if all were happy with the new scheme then theoretically they could begin the notice period as to the changes, as soon as possible. There had been a decrease in sickness absence for the year with 3765 shifts lost in 2015/16 compared to 3980 in 2014/15. 6. RESOLVED – (a) That the Performance Report be noted. (b) That the various points raised by Members in the minutes be bought forward to future meetings.

Road Safety Partnership Update

7. The report update the Committee on work being carried out by the Road Safety Partnership. A review of the Partnership was carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of the work in relation to road safety. Following this review a new way of working was proposed and agreed based on a commissioning model. Specific members of the Operations Board would lead on work streams such as education, communications, data and enforcement. SFRS had the lead for education and communication. There were two Boards that govern this collaborative, integrated approach. The Strategic Board worked on behalf of all the partners to influence central government, and other significant decision makers, in relation to national and regional projects that impact on Stoke and Staffordshire’s road safety. The Strategic Board would set the strategic direction of the collaboration and working with recommendations from the operational board take ultimate responsibility for the financial decision making. The Operational Board would review current local issues across the whole spectrum of road safety which would then inform recommendations submitted to the Strategic Board that supports the strategic intentions of the partnership. Where necessary small working

of 9

groups would be convened for short periods of time to investigate and author recommendations to support the Strategic Board’s decision making process. All collaborators had agreed, supported and taken responsibility for this robust governance structure. It was the duty of both boards to ensure that these principles and collaborative approach are adhered to and supported. It was the responsibility of members of both Boards to report any strategic or operational items of relevance to supporting safer roads in Stoke and Staffordshire to their specific board for discussion and action in a timely fashion. The Chairs of each board would be the conduit for these items. The Boards would be known as:-

The Stoke and Staffordshire Safer Roads Joint Strategic Board (JSB)

The Stoke and Staffordshire Safer Roads Joint Operations Board (JOB)

The Boards encompass the City of Stoke and County of Staffordshire. The report outlined the Strategic Vision, Strategic Objectives, the Operating Principles and Values, Performance and Measures and Governance. Mr Hyde gave an example of how the Road Safety Partners worked together following a double fatality on the A38. The partnership lobbied the County Council highways and the central barriers were blocked. Since the improvements the number of accidents had not gone down but the number of killed and seriously injured had. A Member asked whether the Service was kept informed of road closures etc. Mr Hyde advised that front line services were very well informed. Mr Chapman referred to the B5026 and the potential closure of other roads surrounding it. These surrounding road closures were challenged and were subsequently changed. This problem had happened as the various agencies were not talking to one another. Mr Irving commented that in his experience having rotating Chairs did not work as no one seemed to have ownership. Mr Chapman commented that there was a sensitive issue of primacy with regard to the Chairmanship of the partnership. Mr Hyde advised that the secretariat did not change and neither did the members. He would feed Members comments back to Mr Bywater. The report listed the Membership of the Road Safety Strategic Board The Membership of the Staffordshire Safer Roads Joint Operational Board was still to be finalised. A Member asked if the names of those on the Joint Operations Board could be circulated to Members once they were available. 8. RESOLVED – That the Road Safety Partnership update be noted.

Shared Fire Control Update

9. The report updated Members on the progress made with the Shared Fire Control. At previous Scrutiny and Performance Committees Members had asked for specific issues to be included and these were included within the report:-

1. The cost against budget for the fire control provision. 2. The cost of over border mobilisations between Staffordshire and West Midlands. 3. Interaction between Firewatch and Vision within the fire control function.

of 9

The shared fire control facility went live on 31 March 2014 and is provided from premises within West Midlands Fire and Rescue Service Headquarters in Vauxhall Road Birmingham. Since the go live date considerable progress had been made regarding alignment of processes, learning to work together and problem solving. Two years into the partnership the first independent judgement regarding the performance had been provided by the recent Peer assessment led by CFO Dave Curry of Hampshire F&RS. The Peer Review Team noted the scope for further progress in building working relationships and problem solving. The CFO’s of both services were holding a series of meetings along with Tim Hyde (SFRS) and Simon Barry (Area Manager, WMFS). The aim of these meetings was to establish a shared vision for fire control and establish how even greater progress could be made. Cost against budget for fire control – Detail of the budget for fire control was outlined in the report. The 2016/17 budget for Fire Control is £3.708 million compared to £3.934 million in 2015/2016, an overall reduction of approximately £226k. The most significant reduction related to employee related costs which had reduced and would reduce further following the completion of the staffing review. The budget was apportioned on a 70:30 basis, WMFS:SFRS, so the budget for the SFRS portion of the cost of fire control would be £1.112M for the current financial year. Cost of over border mobilisations between SFRS and WMFS – The report outlined the cost of over the border mobilisations which amounted to £113,707.12, although Q3 and Q4 were subject to verification. This may reduce the total annual cost to Staffordshire by between £620 and £6200. Mr Hyde advised that the Service was looking to significantly reduce or eradicate the over the border charge in the future. Factors affecting the charges include availability of Staffordshire retained appliances, incident demand in terms of both number of calls attended and increased numbers of appliances to larger incidents. Further work was being undertaken to reduce over the border mobilisations and the associated cost including recruitment at retained stations in Staffordshire and continuing robust scrutiny of over border mobilisations The two Chief Officers were working to create a new vision for fire control which would include over the border mobilisation policy. Crucially this vision would include the full implementation of dynamic intelligence led mobilising which would ensure the right resources were sent to an incident based on all the information available to the fire control operator. Interaction between Firewatch and Vision - Firewatch and Vision were not interfaced at the time of the meeting but it was something that The Firewatch Integration Team and Fire Control were working on. The report outlined in detail the progress that was being made in this area. 10. RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

Items for Future meetings 11. Members held a discussion on possible future items for scrutiny. Mr Norris advised that the recent Peer Review majored on Members taking charge on scrutiny matters and advising officers of the items that they wanted to look at rather than merely receiving Reports from the Service but accepting that officers would also continue bring items forward. Members from other Committees could also refer items for consideration.

of 9

Following discussions Members decided that the following items be brought to future meetings of the Scrutiny and Performance Committee.

6 September 2016

Effective Scrutiny and the Scrutiny Framework

False Alarms Update

Improving Community Cohesion (in addition Mr Hyde would ask Mr Brian Moss to brief local Members)

19 October 2016 Performance Report

On-going over the Next 12 Months

Response Standards

Future Items date not yet specified

Previous Working Group updates

Scrutiny of the Innovations and Transformation Process

Retained Update report

Working with HM Prison Service Update

Impact of the 2015 Community Safety Option Changes

Outcome of the EXIT Programme

Explanation of Statistical Process Control Charts

Fatal Fire Matrix

In addition Mr Irving advised that he thought that a visit to the training facility at Swynnerton would be useful. Mr Hyde advised that the Service used Swynnerton for their incident command courses instead of the fire service college. The fire service college charged up to £17,000 compared to £200 locally. He advised that the proximity was beneficial as it assisted retained personnel in being able to attend. Mr Hyde would advise Members Support when the incident command courses were being run. Mr Chapman advised that, although it was not for this Committee, he was concerned about the strategic direction of the Service with regard to health and wellbeing. The Authority had adopted a strategy introduced by the previous Chief Fire Officer. They had secured funding for two life skills centres and he indicated that there was a question of viability. He indicated that he would like to see a business case and to see how much the Service was intending to get from the health service. He advised that the County Council would be getting no money from the Care Commissioning Group. The NHS had withdrawn funding and the County Council paid for care for the elderly out of their budgets. He indicated that down the line the fire service, if they follow a particular route, may also be expected to cover the costs of their health agenda. This was a key consideration to the strategic direction of the Service. Mrs Banks agreed and commented upon the cuts to the budgets of the County which would mean that funding would be lost to drugs and alcohol services which would in turn lead to other issues. Mr Irving commented that he did not want the Service to go down a

of 9

route which would mean that the full cost would fall on the Service. Mrs Banks commented that that Service was very good at getting into vulnerable people’s houses and that the public would miss out if they stopped making these visits. Mr Chapman commented that he was not suggesting that the Service stopped carrying out HFRCs. Mr Day commented upon the cost to the Service which could impact on other HFRCs and suggested that they should look into the business case. Miss Wood commented that the Service needed to gather evidence to support what they wanted to do. Mr Norris advised that this discussion in relation to the health agenda could form part of the general discussions on the Efficiency Plan. It was anticipated that the discussion on the efficiency plan would be held during the first week in September but the date was still to be finalised. This would ensure that the Efficiency Plan could be submitted to the Strategy and Resources Committee later that month.

Date of next Meeting

12. Members were advised that the next meeting of the Committee would be held on Tuesday 6 September 2016 at 2.15 pm.

Exclusion of the Public

Upon the motion of the Chairman it was: 13. RESOLVED - “That the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business which involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the paragraphs of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 indicated below”. PART TWO

Exempt Minutes of the Meeting held on 21 April 2016

(exemption paragraph 3)

14. RESOLVED - That the Exempt Minutes of the Meeting held on 21 April 2016 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

CHAIRMAN

1

Item No. 5 on Agenda

Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Authority

Scrutiny and Performance Committee

19 October 2016

Performance Report

Report of Ms K Bourne, Business Intelligence Team Corporate Manager

SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide the Scrutiny and Performance Committee with information regarding Service performance to the end of August 2016. The report presents key performance measures for the organisation in Statistical Process Control (SPC) format and some additional statistical information as required. RECOMMENDATIONS That the contents of the report are noted and that performance issues are discussed. Financial Implications There are no financial implications. Legal Implications The Service has a statutory obligation to improve performance. Equality and Diversity There are no equality and diversity implications. Risk Implications Failure to perform to expected standards has serious implications for the Service and therefore all underperformance should be discussed and actions to address agreed and understood.

2

Consultation and Engagement undertaken Not applicable Other implications There are no other implications. Background

The report shows performance on a range of indicators in Statistical Process Control chart format. Supplementary data is provided where appropriate to provide context for some of the indicators. Most of the indicators are within control limits, with many showing performance which is better than mean expected performance. Attention should be particularly focused on any areas where performance breaks through either of the control limits, shows a high degree of variability or is significantly moving toward either control limit. Report Author: - Kath Bourne Telephone: - 01785 898606 Email:- [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Report Run 01/09/2016 Page 1

Scrutiny Performance Report August 2016

SPC Key Points:

Performance is within Upper and Lower Control Limits, showing that no unexpected levels of

performance have been experienced over the timeframe shown

During 2016/17 there has been less variability in performance demonstrating that performance is

more in control than in previous months, and therefore more easily predicted, resourced and

managed

SPC Key Points:

Performance is within Upper and Lower Control Limits, although performance in March 2016 came

close to breaching the Upper Control Limit (almost above what could ordinarily be explained based

on usual influencers)

There is a relatively high degree of variability on either side of the mean average line, indicating

that performance is not as well controlled or predictable as it could be


SPC Key Points:

In December 2015 the Upper Control Limit was breached showing that an unexpectedly high level

of performance was reached

During 2016/17 performance has consistently been below or at expected mean average levels, and

there is visibly less variability in the levels of performance, indicating performance which is more

predictable and controlled

SPC Key Points:

Performance has not breached Control Limits, although performance since December 2015 has

consistently been above expected mean average levels

During 2016/17 there has been more consistent performance with levels being close to

anticipated mean average performance each month, showing a more controlled and predictable

process


SPC Key Points:

Performance this year has not breached control limits

There was a spike in performance in June, however performance variability is decreasing

SPC Key Points:

There has been some variability in performance with the Upper Control Limit breached in March

2016 indicating special causation has impacted the process

Performance is being subject to factors which are causing it to be unpredictable


Comments:

The upward trend in All Attended Incidents continues (since December 2015), with August

2016 showing the highest number since July 2014. The most prevalent type of incident for

this year to date is Secondary Fires followed by False Alarms Good Intent.

Secondary Fires have been on a downward trend since the beginning of 2013/14 which

continues to date. For the last two years False Alarms Good Intent has been the most

predominant category for All Attended Incidents. However at mid year the number of

Secondary Fires in this category are more numerous due to the seasonal nature of these

incidents, with the highest numbers experienced during April, August and September (during

Spring and Summer school holidays). In recent previous years, the number of Secondary Fires

has been overtaken by the number of False Alarms Good Intent by the end of the year, and

given the trend this would be the expectation for 2016/17.

Accidental Dwelling Fires are trending downwards this year to date. High severity Accidental

Dwelling Fires show a downward trend over this timeframe, whilst low severity fires are

static.

The main overall cause of Accidental Dwelling Fires is Cooking. Low severity fires have

Cooking cited as the most predominant cause, with high severity fires having Fault in

Equipment or Appliance as the most common cause. However the main source of ignition for

high severity Accidental Dwelling Fires is Cooker with Cooking being the second highest cause

for these types of fire. Therefore the risk associated with cooking and cookers is considerable

for high and low severity Accidental Dwelling Fires.

Human Factors are cited as a contributory issue in 51% of low severity and 33% of high

severity Accidental Dwelling Fires, with distraction being the most common factor in both

cases.

Fires caused by cooking have 73% with a Human Factor involved, predominantly distraction.

The presence of Human Factors diminish for those fires caused by Fault in Equipment or

Appliance, with only 7% of these fires having a Human Factor cited as a contributory factor.

For the year to date HFRCs delivered is trending downwards, however a significant

proportion of HFRCs continue to be delivered to the priority Gold, Silver and Bronze

households (around 20% each month). Within the priority category most HFRCs have been

delivered to Gold category households for this year to date.

Business Fires are showing a downward trend for 2016/17 to date, with the most prevalent

business type being Other Buildings/Use not Known, followed by Barns, Single Ships and

Manufacturing Factory (in equal numbers). This has changed since last year when most fires

occurred in Single Shops followed by Manufacturing Factory business types. Business Fires

occurring in Other Buildings/Use not Known is on the increase relative to previous years with

more than half being due to deliberate fire setting.


Prison Fires overall are on a static trend for the year to date. Low severity prison fires are on a

downward trend, however high severity prison fires are trending upwards.

RTCs attended are showing a slight upward trend in year, which is being driven by low severity RTCs

where no extrication is required.

30% of RTCs attended this year had no victims involved and high severity RTCs (where an extrication is

required) are on a downward trend for the year to date.

Staffordshire Safer Roads Partnership is investing in improvements to the data available relating to KSI’s

across the county.

False Alarms show an upward trend, although 64% of incidents year to date were not attended

Of those False Alarm incidents which are attended, the majority are domestic properties, although in year

attendances to Policy Exempt and Commercial Properties are on an upward trend.


Year 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

RTC KSI (Staffordshire Police) 238 220 216

0

10

20

30

40

50

20

11

-03

20

11

-05

20

11

-07

20

11

-09

20

11

-11

20

12

-01

20

12

-03

20

12

-05

20

12

-07

20

12

-09

20

12

-11

20

13

-01

20

13

-03

20

13

-05

20

13

-07

20

13

-09

20

13

-11

20

14

-01

20

14

-03

20

14

-05

20

14

-07

20

14

-09

20

14

-11

20

15

-01

20

15

-03

20

15

-05

20

15

-07

20

15

-09

20

15

-11

20

16

-01

20

16

-03

RTC Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) Information

Total Upper Control Limit Average Lower Control Limit

SPC Key Points:

Performance has not breached Control Limits and is therefore seen to be within the expected range

However, since December 2015 performance has been consistently above expected mean

performance suggesting that, whilst there are no specific unusual impacts on performance, there

may be issues which are exerting upward pressure on the levels of performance seen

SPC Key Points:

Performance breached the Upper Control Limit in June 2015 and trended towards the Upper

Control Limit for the second half of last year, suggesting that causal factors pushed performance

upwards during this time


‘Incident Data Mart’ Data Confidence

Comments:

It is not possible to produce a level of data confidence for August 2016 due to an upgrade to

the database server which means that it is not possible to access all the information to produce

a full analysis of records which contain errors in the data.

Analysis of data has uncovered a number of missing records for this year to date as follows:

88 False Alarm Incidents

36 Primary Fire Incidents

34 RTC Incidents

65 Secondary Fire Incidents

73 Special Service Call Incidents

Records are being updated and processes put in place to ensure that completion of data is

maintained at an acceptably high level going forward.

SPC Key Points:

Levels of performance have not recently breached Control Limits, however performance has been

consistently above the expected mean average since June 2015

This would suggest that there are issues which are leading performance to be greater than the

expected mean on a consistent basis, whilst not going beyond what could reasonably be expected


Attacks on Staff

2015-16 2016-17

Month Verbal Physical Verbal Physical

April 1 0 1 0

May 0 0 0 0

June 1 0 0 1

TOTAL 2 0 1 1

Number of Attacks by SDG 2015/16 Number of Attacks by Quarter/Year

0

1

2

3

4

5

ESDG NSDG WSDG HQ

Verbal

Physical

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

15-16 16-17

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Comments:

This quarter there were two instances of abuse. One was a report of verbal abuse directed the Officer

in Charge at an incident, and there was one report of missiles thrown at an appliance causing minor

vehicle damage on the way to an incident.


Injuries at Work

2014-15 2015-16

Month Operational Routine Operational Routine

April 1 3 1 2

May 2 6 0 5

June 1 3 1 3

TOTAL 4 12 2 10

Number of Injuries by SDG 2015/16 Number of Injuries by Quarter/Year

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

ESDG NSDG WSDG HQ

Operational

Routine

0

5

10

15

20

15-16 16-17

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Comments:

There was one reportable Operational Injury during the first quarter. The RIDDOR injury involved the

injured person reporting that they had hurt their shoulder at an incident on the previous day. No

mention of this was made to the Officer in Charge or colleagues on the day of the incident.


Response Standards

First Appliance Response Standard

2015 - 16 2016 - 17

1st Appliance in attendance 85.88% 90.1%

Percentage of life risk incidents attended within target at month of reporting (high risk areas = 8min, medium risk areas = 10min, low risk areas = 18 mins)

Retained Availability

Sum of Aug-16 Vehicle

Available Available TotalUnavailable Unavailable Total

Status No BA Pump TRV Defective Insufficient Crew No Driver No TTR Off the Run Other

11P1 0% 93% 5% 98% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2%

11P2 0% 42% 20% 63% 0% 35% 0% 0% 2% 37%

Longnor 12P1 0% 46% 24% 71% 0% 28% 0% 0% 1% 29%

Biddulph 13P1 0% 93% 3% 96% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 4%

Ipstones 14P1 0% 79% 12% 91% 0% 8% 0% 0% 1% 9%

Cheadle 15P1 0% 55% 16% 72% 0% 28% 0% 0% 0% 28%

Newcastle 21P2 0% 52% 8% 60% 0% 36% 0% 0% 4% 40%

Kidsgrove 22P3 8% 59% 67% 33% 0% 33%

Loggerheads 24P1 0% 92% 3% 95% 0% 4% 0% 0% 4%

Hanley 31P2 0% 76% 11% 87% 0% 12% 0% 0% 1% 13%

Burslem 32P3 46% 17% 63% 0% 37% 0% 37%

Longton 33P2 0% 62% 17% 78% 0% 20% 0% 0% 1% 22%

Stone 42P1 0% 90% 6% 96% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 4%

Eccleshall 43P1 0% 52% 8% 60% 0% 35% 0% 0% 5% 40%

Gnosall 44P1 0% 12% 18% 30% 0% 65% 0% 0% 5% 70%

Rising Brook 45P1 0% 8% 14% 22% 0% 78% 0% 0% 0% 78%

Burton on Trent 51P2 0% 58% 20% 78% 0% 18% 0% 0% 4% 22%

Uttoxeter 52P1 0% 54% 16% 70% 0% 28% 0% 0% 2% 30%

Tutbury 53P1 0% 44% 17% 61% 0% 37% 0% 0% 2% 39%

Abbots Bromley 54P1 0% 62% 19% 82% 0% 16% 0% 0% 2% 18%

Barton Under Needwood 55P1 0% 95% 1% 96% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 4%

Cannock 61P2 0% 45% 17% 62% 0% 32% 0% 0% 6% 38%

Rugeley 62P1 1% 92% 7% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Lichfield 71P1 85% 10% 96% 0% 4% 0% 0% 1% 4%

Chase Terrace 72P1 0% 42% 23% 64% 0% 33% 0% 0% 2% 36%

Tamworth Mercia 82P3 3% 47% 50% 0% 48% 2% 50%

Codsall 91P1 0% 68% 12% 79% 0% 21% 0% 0% 0% 21%

Penkridge 92P1 95% 2% 97% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 3%

Brewood 93P1 0% 39% 19% 59% 0% 38% 0% 0% 4% 41%

Wombourne 94P1 0% 69% 13% 83% 0% 17% 0% 0% 1% 17%

Kinver 95P1 0% 57% 4% 61% 0% 37% 0% 0% 3% 39%

Leek


Finance Assets and Resources Indicator Actual Target Invoices Paid Within 30 Days 99% 90%

Invoices Paid Within 5 Days 80% 50%

Resource Control report issued within 10 working days of the month

13 Days 10 Days

Comments:

There are no comments in relation to current performance

Comments

Recruitment drives are progressing well and this is having a positive effect on the take up of places on

recruits’ courses.

The retained liaison team are working on a positive action campaign and we are looking to make this

business as usual Service wide. The aim of this is to increase the diversity of our workforce over the

coming months.


HR

Brigade Sickness Breakdown 2015-16

Uniformed

SM and Above

Uniformed up to WM

Support

Jul-15 2 197 146

Aug-15 0 192 139

Sep-15 20 195 174

Oct-15 9 215 97

Nov-15 12 184 116

Dec-15 0 147 123

Jan-16 0 224 103

Feb-16 12 238 171

Mar-16 2 257 163

Apr-16 13 169 138

May-16 17 228 136

Jun-16 12 138 144

Jul-16 12 101 127

SPC Key Points:

Performance in recent months is within Control Limits and within the expected range

The Contol Limits have widened over the last two years, showing that there has been increasing

variability in performance in recent years


Please note data in this report may be subject to change and figures may differ in later reports

Comment:

There has been some variance in the sickness absence data over the last twelve months, with seasonal trends

above average in September (which may be expected due to the beginning of the school year) and in February

and March (traditionally cold season). There was an increase in short term shift absence from January – this has

been attributed to a change to the Wholetime Crewing Policy and is being monitored by the Service.

Musculoskeletal and mental health related absence remain the two most prominent contributors to absence.

Reduction in staff means that long terms sickness has a more marked effect.

Work is also underway to review the Occupational Health function and practices. A review programme is being

led by our HR Manager following her taking over responsibility for this function. A paper relating to this is

proposed for March 2017.

1

Item No. 7 on Agenda

Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Authority

Scrutiny and Performance Committee

19 October 2016

Review of the Public Consultation Exercise Processes and Procedures in producing the Corporate Safety Plan 2017-2020 (CSP)

Report of the Corporate Safety Manager

SUMMARY In order to deliver the Corporate Safety Plan 2017-2020 Plan in a timely and effective way, a project group was established lead by the Corporate Safety Plan Manager, reporting through the Prevent and Protect directorate and Service Delivery Board under a project guideline and timetable. The project will aim to develop and implement the CSP 2017-20 which will remain within a 3 year planning cycle paying due regard to the requirements of the National Framework and other legislative acts. The attached report is by Mr B Preston and provides information to enable the Committee to consider the Corporate Safety Plan 2017-2020 consultation process. The report contains the following sections:-

• Overview • Our Consultation Duties • Consultation Objectives • Stakeholder Audience • Consultation Methodology • Promotion and Publicity • Equality and Diversity Considerations.

A formal consultation process has been carried out over a twelve week period from 25th July to 16th October 2016 in line with Government consultation guidelines and best practice. Responses and feedback will continue to be accepted after the close of the formal consultation. The paper is a report to detail the consultation process. The actual findings of the consultation will be made available to the Fire Authority in due course. Recommendations That the Committee considers the report and endorses:- (i) that the consultation process was wide reaching and covered a cross section of the demographics of the community.

2

(ii) that the degree of stakeholder consultation also provides a substantial level of assurance. (iii) that the initial objectives of the consultation process were achieved. Financial Implications The stakeholder consultation was one part of the development of the Corporate Safety Plan 2017-2020. The majority of consultation activity was conducted in-house by the Safety Plan Manager and project team – media coverage, website, social media, and community room focus groups, and partner liaison. The Hall Test Surveys, which involved face to face interviews with the public, were conducted by Staffordshire-based research company Step Beyond at a cost of £16000. Legal Implications The Authority has clear legal duties to consult with external stakeholders which are detailed in the report. Equality and Diversity The equality and diversity duties in relation to consultation are detailed in the report along with the approach taken during the external stakeholder consultation. Risk Implications The risk of not conducting adequate external consultation are outlined in our legal duties and covered in the report. Consultation and Engagement All aspects of the CSP are widely consulted on. The detail of the consultation and engagement is covered in the report. Background The objectives of the CSP stakeholder consultation were:-

To engage with the local community and other stakeholders to raise awareness of

SFRS’s proposed future activities and changes to service delivery.

To gather feedback from stakeholders that can be used to support the direction and

drafting of the Corporate Safety Plan.

To ensure that the consultation is as inclusive as possible The detail and supporting information is contained in the attached report and appendices Report Author: - Bob Preston – CSP manager/Head of Business Intelligence Team Telephone: - 01785 898984 Email: - [email protected]


1

Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service

Corporate Safety Plan 2017-2020

Report on the external stakeholder consultation process

Contents

Section Page

1 Overview 2

2 Our Consultation Duties 2

3 Consultation Objectives 3

4 Stakeholder Audience 3

5 Consultation Methodology 4

6 Promotion and Publicity 4

7 Results of the Consultation 5

8 Equality and Diversity Considerations 6

9 Appendices 6

2

1. Overview

The purpose of this report is to provide detail about the consultation undertaken in developing the

scope and context of the Corporate Safety Plan 2017-2020.

Reference will be made to some of the outcomes and responses, but these will be covered in more

depth in a subsequent report.

The current Corporate Safety Plan (CSP) was launched in April 2014 and will run through to the end

of March 2017. The plan sets out the Service’s Priorities and guiding principles along with a broad

outline of the activities we aim to undertake in order to achieve our ultimate vision of making

Staffordshire the safest place to be.

In order to deliver the 2017-2020 CSP in a timely and effective way, it was established as a project,

reporting through the Prevent and Protect Directorate and Service Management board under a

project guideline and timetable.

The content and detail of our new priority areas are being developed and progressed through a

process of on going consultation focus groups with Stakeholders who are detailed later in this

report.

We have taken an inclusive approach to consult with stakeholders in the development of our

priorities rather than the methodology of consulting on a set of finalised proposals.

2. Our Consultation Duties

As a public sector organisation we have duties derived from a number of frameworks and legislation

to ensure that we engage with our stakeholders on key decisions and developments or changes to

the Service. Under the current Government the most relevant of these is the Best Value Statutory

Guidance. This Guidance re-enforces the duty to consult set out in Section 3 of the Local

Government Act 1999. The Guidance states that consultation with ‘representatives of a wide range

of local persons’ is ‘not optional’.

Published in July 2012, the National Framework for Fire and Rescue Services sets out clear

expectations that:-

“Fire and rescue authorities are accountable to their communities for their actions and decision

making. They need to have transparent processes in place to deliver this and engage with their

communities to provide them with the opportunity to influence their local service. Local

accountability is a vital check on the services provided by fire and rescue authorities”.

Alongside our statutory requirements is our own priority is to:-

To understand our communities, businesses and partners to improve quality of life by delivering the

highest quality, fit for purpose public service.

3

We have clearly recognised through this commitment that it makes good business sense to involve

our stakeholders, staff and ‘customers’ – the people of Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire – in shaping

the future direction of the Service. Therefore we have invested in and enhanced our consultation,

engagement and involvement with local communities, partners and business with the aim of clearly

establishing customer expectations.

A great deal is being achieved through the provision of our community facilities at our PFI funded

and re-furbished Community Fire Stations.

3. Consultation Objectives

The objectives of the CSP consultation were:-

o To engage with the local community and other stakeholders to raise awareness of SFRS’s

proposed future activities and changes to service delivery.

o To gather feedback from stakeholders that can be used to support the direction and drafting

of the Corporate Safety Plan.

o To ensure that the consultation is as inclusive as possible

o The method adopted was to consolidate best practice and previous learning to design and

deliver a stakeholder and staff consultation programme that would involve a broad and

diverse cross section of the demographics of the community of Staffordshire.

o The targeting of participation at the initial stages of the formulation of the CSP was to allow

external and internal stakeholders to have an influence in the shaping of the future direction

of the Service. A wide range of awareness and engagement methods were used to target

different stakeholder groups.

4. Stakeholder Audience

The following were identified as the main stakeholder groups to be targeted through the

consultation;

o Fire Authority Members

o Local MPs

o Neighbouring Fire and Rescue Services

o Local Authorities (City, County, Borough/District, Town/Parish)

o Partner organisations

o Businesses/Business organisations

o Residents

o Community Groups

o Media – Trade, National, Local

o Representative. Bodies

o Staff

4

o Youth Groups

5. Consultation Methodology

In order to reach all of the identified stakeholder groups, a range of consultation techniques were

employed. From an initial consultation plan and stakeholder list, more activities were generated as

new opportunities arose.

Consultation Channel Stakeholder Audience

Online Survey - Residents, partners, staff, businesses, community groups,

Hall Test Surveys - Residents

Letters and Discussions - Local MPs, partners, local businesses, representative bodies, community

groups, Protective Characteristics groups, Neighbouring Fire and Rescue Services

Focus Groups - Fire Authority Members, staff, partners, and community groups, Princes trust,

Community Room Users, Young Person Groups.

Communications - I news, Intranet questionnaire, Team briefings and meetings, media releases and

updates.

Qualitative data has been captured in detail from each of the focus groups and will form the basis of

our new priorities. Each event has been really positive and well attended, providing us with

invaluable feedback, examples of which:

o Co-location of services for better working / understanding and communications, information

sharing

o Working together as a system

o Communication – better public messages

o Make every contact count – collaboration

o Broadcast the work we do more, the positive outcomes, not just response.

o Use a more effective social media outreach programme

o A key requirement is partnership working and data sharing – going into homes, where

different agencies can support each other in relation to prevent activity

o Work more with partners to promote road safety for a joined up approach

An in depth report on this data will be provided in a future report

6. Promotion and Publicity

These are the main promotional activities carried out to support the consultation;

5

External Method Description

Consultation Summary document, brief overview of current CSP progress, background information

and outline of main proposals for consultation (Appendix 1)

Questionnaire Packs, Consultation summary along with questionnaire – handed out at events and

available at all Fire service locations and community rooms. (Appendix 2)

Web site Dedicated page(s) on the SFRS site with links to the online survey, consultation summary

document and outline of the proposals.

Twitter Updates and reminders to SFRS followers, Facebook Updates and reminders to SFRS

followers and to post questions/themes online to raise discussion topics

Letters (Appendix 3)

Fire Station display material, Posters displayed in community facilities on PFI stations.

Media releases/activity Release of information about the consultation and events to raise awareness

and encourage participation (Appendix 4/5)

Leaflets/Posters/ Distributed to prevention teams and response crews for use at local events.

Internal Method Description

Intranet Updates and reminders on a regular basis.

Posters were circulated to all departments and displayed on notice boards (appendix 6)

Focus groups were undertaken within each delivery group, Fire Service Headquarters and Transport

and engineering.

SDG performance Meetings, were briefed by CSP project team and promoted participation of staff

on focus groups and online survey.

Inews Release of information about the consultation and events to raise awareness and encourage

participation.

Burning Issues Brief description about the Safety Plan with focus on the consultation process

7. Results of the Consultation

This section outlines the outcomes available to date:

We commissioned local marketing consultants, Step Beyond, to conduct a series of Hall Tests around

the county, to gain public responses to the CSP proposals. Hall Tests were carried out in seven

locations, whereby interviewers engaged with local residents.

6

576 interviews were completed with a demographically representative sample of Staffordshire’s

residents. Information was provided by the use of display boards to allow the conversation to have

context. Interviews took on average 30 mins.

The consultation result will be delivered in a future report but the overall response was positive in

supporting the proposals.

Online Survey:

At the time of this report, we had received a total of 257 Reponses to the questionnaire, examples of

which are as follows:

o Visually, the response concerning PCC governance appears somewhat divided. The lead

response is that of a negative one; however ‘Reasonably Positive’ and ‘Reasonably Negative’

rest at the same percentage.

o The response relating to the life skills centre in Stafford is very positive, with only 2% feeling

very negative.

Talking directly to partners has been integral to building up a picture on their views on the Service’s

future proposals. Throughout the consultation the prevention teams locally and centrally have taken

every opportunity to promote involvement in the consultation with partners. It has also given the

Service the opportunity to consider how the Corporate Safety Plan compliments the planning of

partner agencies in order to progress closer ways of working.

8. Equality and Diversity considerations

The Hall Test surveys were conducted using quota controls to ensure a representative cross section

of the population in the 7 targeted areas.

The Equality and Diversity manager has been an integral part of the consultation process and Project

Team throughout.

It was decided to contact a number of different groups with interests aligned to the protected

characteristics set out in the Equalities Act to investigate whether the proposals had the potential to

adversely impact on groups or individuals referenced by the protect characteristics. Identified

groups will be consulted further during October and November with regard to the finalised Priorities.

9. Appendices

1. Consultation proposal Document

2. Online survey questions

3. Partners Letter

4. Media Release

5. Media release, re Hall tests.

6. Station posters

2017-2020Consultation

Corporate

PlanSafety

What have we achieved since 2014• The year 2015/16 saw the lowest number of

Accidental Dwelling Fire Deaths and Injuries on record and a continuing downward trend for these incidents.

• 82,000 Home Fire Risk Checks (HFRC’s) were delivered during the three years to the end of 2015/16, with an increasingly greater emphasis on delivering to the most vulnerable households in the Staffordshire community.

• The Service has developed a multi-agency approach to delivering HFRC’s to incorporate a wider ‘Safe and Well’ visit to promote public health and preventative health care.

• We have enhanced the use of risk data to identify the most vulnerable households in the Staffordshire community in order to prioritise prevention activity towards those most at risk.

• Partner data has been utilised to deliver prevent activities and reduce the risk of a range of issues for older residents, not only fire risk but also such things as slips, trips and falls and cold homes.

• We have worked in partnership with Age UK and the NHS to reduce winter deaths and hospital admissions amongst the elderly through the SAfER pilot (Sustained Action for Evidencing Risk), by lowering vulnerability and increasing independence amongst older people.

• We have also worked in partnership with Public Health England assisting NHS colleagues to deliver direct interventions in order to reduce winter pressure on the NHS.

• The Service has undertaken research and development of vehicles, equipment and crewing in order to ensure efficient and safe response arrangements in the face of changing demand.

• The Service has undertaken a comprehensive review, inclusive of full public consultation, to ensure that assets are deployed as efficiently and effectively as possible, whilst ensuring no compromises are made to community or fire fighter safety.

• The Service has undertaken a full review of its arrangements for prevention and protection to ensure that the activities it delivers are fit for purpose and meet the risks and challenges the community will face over the coming years.

• The Culture, Wellbeing and Equality and Inclusions Groups have been refined and consolidated to improve the way in which staff are supported and developed in line with the Service’s vision and values.

• The Service is actively developing collaborative working projects with blue light partner organisations including joint occupational health, shared fire control, shared transport facility and a shared supplies and logistics department.

• In 2014/15 we saved £1.8 million for the approval revenue budget and in 2015/16 we saved £1.2 million

• The Fire and Rescue Service Equality Framework was informally assessed by the Operational Assurance Peer Challenge in March 2016 and was adjudged to be at an excellent level. A further self-assessment will be undertaken within the period of the Corporate Safety Plan 2017-2020.

• The Service has taken the step to include Equality, Diversity and Inclusion as part of the Governance reporting structure of the Service Improvement and Equality Committee.

For more information visit:

Staffs Fire and Rescue @staffsfire

www.staffordshirefire.gov.uk

HAVEYOUR

on the future of your local Fire and Rescue Service

GET INVOLVED!

Visit our website and complete the online questionnaire at www.staffordshirefire.gov.uk

Write to our Corporate Safety Plan Manager with your comments;

Fire Service HeadquartersPirehillStoneStaffordshireST15 0BS

Email [email protected]

If you would like this document in another language or format, or if you require the services of an interpreter, please contact us on 08451 22 11 55

There are several ways that you can tell us what you think of our plans

We are in the process of pulling together the views and ideas that will shape our next strategic plan for 2017-2020. To help us do this we are gathering the feedback of individuals, businesses, partners and groups from across Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire.

We are committed to the principle that prevention is more effective than cure but back this up with a modern emergency response service.

Whatever challenges face the Service now and in the future, the commitment we have made to the people of Staffordshire is that neither community safety or firefighter safety will ever be compromised.

Our achievements in recent years are set against the background of unprecedented change in the delivery of public services and reductions in government funding. We have worked hard to put ourselves in the best position to meet future challenges through an ongoing business transformation process.

* A recorded year runs from 1st April to 31st March

Our vision is to make Staffordshire the safest place to be

?

How can we develop the future of our Service

What are we consulting on?

Here are some facts and figures about Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service to help you get a flavour of the organisation

Here are some changes and developments that we would like your feedback on during the consultation period

• We cover all areas of Staffordshire and Stoke-on -Trent

• We employ:

- 353 Full time fire fighters

- 421 Retained (part time) firefighters

- 178 Support and other Staff

• We have 33 fire stations in our area

• Our annual budget in 2015/16 was £41.0 million

• In 2015/16 we made revenue savings of £1.2 million

• In 2015/16 Band D Council Tax was set at £68.96 per annum (Equivalent to £1.33 per week)

In 2015/16 we attended 8297 incidents. This included:

• 631 Road Traffic Collisions

• 603 Accidental Dwelling Fires

• 18 Accidental Dwelling Fire Deaths and Injuries

• 332 Business Fires

• 3049 False Alarms

Our Prevention and Protection work:

• We provided 30324 Home Fire Risk Checks in our area in the year 2015/16

• We continue to visit schools as part of our education programme

• We continue to support businesses to help prevent fires and get them back up and running as fast as possible if they have one

• Ensure that the right resources are sent to meet incident demand, by ensuring that we only send the appliances and resources we need to deal with the incident in question.

• Develop our knowledge and intelligence based on facts in order to understand how the community is changing over time so that we can deliver the best services to prevent incidents occurring in the first place. We will use this knowledge to prioritise appropriate support and intervention based on the different risks to the diverse needs of people in our communities. We will understand which prevent activities are most effective and base decisions on the information we have gathered.

• Develop the Home Fire Risk Check (HFRC) into a more in depth ‘Safe and Well’ visits. These visits will identify and assist people with a greater number of risks to their health, safety and wellbeing making them a safe as possible from fire and help to keep people healthy and independent.

• Where appropriate, we will help residents to become more resilient and better prepared to reduce their own risk from fire and other emergencies. We may enable some less ‘at risk’ households to access ‘self-help’ services in order to prioritise our resources on those who are most vulnerable to risk of fire.

• Develop our support to the business sector by working with businesses to ensure that they are safe, well informed of their legislative duties in regard to fire safety and engage with all opportunities to develop a built environment in communities in which buildings do not burn down.

• Continue to build upon our culture of openness and trust and develop our staff in problem solving, decision making and creating solutions. We will continue to seek to ensure that the makeup of the Service reflects the community that it serves.

• Continue to develop joined-up working with organisations who we can work closely with in order to work effectively and to maximise the public value of the organisation. This could include the police, health organisations, the local authorities and the voluntary sector. The focus of this integrated work will be on improved health, safety, wellbeing and economic outcomes for our communities, rather than looking to primarily cut costs.

• Our Medium Term Financial Plan has set out a roadmap to save an additional £4.0 million by 2019/20. Much of his will be achieved by implementing the proposals as above and by ensuring continued investment in prevent activity delivered to the right people. This is because it has been shown that prevention is cheaper (and better) than cure and it will help to reduce the demand on the response part of the Service and other areas of the public sector.

Corporate Safety Plan 2017-2020 Consultation

We are in the process of pulling together the views and ideas that will shape our next corporate safety plan for 2017-2020. To helpus do this we are gathering the feedback of individuals, businesses, partners and groups from across Stoke-on-Trent andStaffordshire.

Please can you provide us with your thoughts by completing this survey.

1. We propose to ensure that the right resources are sent to meet incident demand, by ensuring that weonly send the appliances and resources we need to deal with the incident in question. How do you feelabout this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative

Don't know/it depends

2. We propose to develop our knowledge and intelligence based on facts in order to understand how thecommunity is changing over time so that we can deliver the best services to prevent incidents occurringin the first place. We will use this knowledge to prioritise appropriate support and intervention based onthe different risks to the diverse needs of people in our communities. We will understand which preventactivities are most effective and base decisions on the information we have gathered. How do you feelabout this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative

Don't know/it depends


3. We visit 30,000 homes every year to deliver a Home Fire Risk Check (HFRC), which is a servicewhere we fit smoke alarms, assess risks and give safety advice. These will be developed into more indepth ‘Safe and Well’ visits. These visits will identify and assist people with a greater number of risks totheir health, safety and wellbeing making them as safe as possible from fire and help to keep peoplehealthy and independent. How do you feel about this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative

Don’t know/it depends

4. We propose that where appropriate, we will help residents to become more resilient and betterprepared to reduce their own risk from fire and other emergencies. We may enable some less ‘at risk’households to access ‘self-help’ services in order to prioritise our resources on those who are mostvulnerable to risk of fire. How do you feel about this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative



5. We propose to continue and develop our support to the business sector by working with businessesto ensure that they are safe, well informed of their legislative duties in regard to fire safety and engagewith all opportunities to develop a built environment in communities in which buildings do not burndown. How do you feel about this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative


6. We propose to continue to build upon our culture of openness and trust and develop our staff inproblem solving, decision making and creating solutions. We will continue to seek to ensure that themakeup of the Service reflects the community that it serves. How do you feel about this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative



7. We propose to continue to develop joined-up working with organisations who we can work closelywith in order to work effectively and to maximise the public value of the organisation. This could includethe police, health organisations, the local authorities and the voluntary sector. The focus of thisintegrated work will be on improved health, safety, wellbeing and economic outcomes for ourcommunities, rather than looking to primarily cut costs. How do you feel about this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative


8. The Service may be brought under the governance of the Office of the Police and CrimeCommissioner (OPCC) over the course of the next Safety Plan. The details have yet to be agreed, butmay involve OPCC and not the Fire and Rescue Authority as it is now governing the Service. How doyou feel about this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative



9. The Service is progressing ambitious plans to re-develop Stafford Fire Station into a new Stationwhich will have both the Fire and Ambulance Services operating together at this location. The stationwill also have a ‘Life Skills Centre’ which will provide a realistic environment that people can experiencesafety risks in order to enhance their perceptions and knowledge of safety in the home, on the roads, inleisure activities and other settings. The centre will operate an outreach facility and be flexible to covernew and emerging risks. At the heart of this work is the aim of improving the safety of residents,particularly children and young people, through innovation and experience. How do you feel about this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative


Very positiveReasonably

positive Pretty neutralReasonably

negative Very negativeDon’t know/it

depends

Increase Council Tax

Work with partners andcommercialorganisations to deliversome services

Charge for additionalservices e.g. training

Seek more grants tosupport project work

Use volunteerswherever practical andsafe to do so

10. The Service could potentially try to find some different solutions for funding their activities. A fewpossible ways of doing this are shown below. How do you feel about each one?*


11. Our Medium Term Financial Plan has set out a roadmap to save an additional £4.0 million by2019/20. Much of this will be achieved by implementing the proposals as above and by ensuringcontinued investment in prevent activity delivered to the right people. This is because it has been shownthat prevention is cheaper (and better) than cure and it will help to reduce the demand on the responsepart of the Service and other areas of the public sector. How do you feel about this?

*

Very positive

Reasonably positive

Pretty neutral

Reasonably negative

Very negative


12. If you have any thoughts, comments or concerns regarding our proposals please write these in thecomments box below


Thank you, the last few questions are purely to help us in our analysis, please remember that your responses are completelyconfidential and will never be released to anybody.

13. Gender*

Male

Female

Prefer not to say

14. Age*

18-24 years

25-34 years

35-44 years

45-54 years

55-64 years

65-74 years

75+years

Prefer not to say

15. Which ethnic group do you consider you belong to?*

White British

White other

Mixed race

Black or Black British

Asian or Asian British

Chinese

Other

Prefer not to say


16. Religion/Belief*

No religion

Christian (including Church of England, Catholic, Protestant and all other Christian denominations)

Buddhist

Hindu

Jewish

Muslim

Sikh

Any other religion, please describe

17. Sexual orientation*

Bisexual

Gay man

Gay woman/lesbian

Heterosexual/straight

Other

Prefer not to say

18. Do you have any long standing illness, disability or infirmity?*

Prefer not to say

No

Yes (Please state)

19. What is your current employment status?*

Full-time paid employment

Part-time paid employment

Self employed

In full-time education/training scheme

Retired

Permanently sick/disable

Unemployed and available for work

Looking after the home

Prefer not to say


20. Are you an employee of Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service?*

Yes

No

21. If yes to question 20, please state whether you are Support Staff or Operational

Support staff

Operational

22. If answered no to question 20 please can you tell us if have you had any direct experience orcontact with Staffordshire fire and Rescue Service?

Yes – home fire

Yes – commercial fire

Yes – car accident

Yes – Home Fire Risk Check

Yes – open days/events at fire stations

Yes – community fire stations

Other (please specify)

23. What is your postcode? (Optional)

Please reply to: Bob Preston

Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service, Headquarters Pirehill Stone, Staffordshire ST15 0BS

Contact: Direct Line: 01785898984 E-mail: [email protected]

10 October 201607 July 2016

Dear RE: Corporate Safety Plan (Integrated Risk Management Plan)

Our Corporate Safety Plan aims to clearly set out the priorities facing Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service and what services we need to deliver to make everyone in our communities safe from fire and other emergencies. To make sure that we do this in the best way we see it as essential that our communities themselves are involved in shaping this plan. By working with you, you are helping us to understand what is important to you, what services you and the communities you represent need from us, how we can help you to support our communities to develop sustainable services and how together we can improve the quality of life for everyone. We are currently developing our next Corporate Safety Plan which will run from April 2017 through to March 2020 and would like to discuss our proposals with you and your teams to ensure that you are able to play a full and active part in shaping our Service. I have enclosed the proposals for our priority areas for your consideration. These areas will be used to evolve the plan in the coming months. If your are able to meet with us please could I ask you to contact my colleague Kath Bourne on telephone number 01785 898606 who will be able to discuss a suitable location, date and time with you. Alternatively should you have any comments regarding our proposals please could you find the time to forward these to me at the address above. Yours sincerely Bob Preston Corporate Safety Plan Manager/Head of Business Intelligence

of 2

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Date

People urged to have their say on Fire Service plans

People in Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire have been urged to have their say on

Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service’s plans for the next few years.

The Service kicked off a major 12-week consultation on Monday 25 July into its Corporate

Safety Plan 2017-2020. The Plan sets what the Service aims to accomplish in this

timeframe, along with outline plans for how these aims will be achieved.

The Service will be looking to build on its notable recent successes. An unswerving focus on

prevention is paying off – over the last three years, more than 80,000 Home Fire Risk

Checks have been carried out, with an increasing focus on targeting the most vulnerable

households. As a result, 2015/16 saw the lowest number of accidental home fire deaths and

injuries on record.

Achievements in recent years are set against the background of unprecedented change in

the delivery of public services and reductions in Government funding.

Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service has made £3 million of savings over the last two

years, but more are required. The Service’s medium-term financial plan has set out an

additional £5.7 million of savings by 2020.

Bob Preston, Corporate Safety Plan Manager, said: “Staffordshire Fire and Rescue

Service’s vision is simple: to make Staffordshire the safest place to be. And we’re committed

to the principle that prevention is far more effective than cure. That’s why we carry out so

many Home Fire Risk Checks, and why we’re working in collaboration with many other

organisations on a range of community safety initiatives.

AS

E N

EW

S R

ELE

AS

E N

EW

S R

ELE

AS

E N

EW

S R

ELE

AS

E

N

of 2

“Obviously, we also deliver a first-class emergency response service on the sad occasions

it’s required. But we’d rather do everything possible to stop those occasions happening in

the first place.

“We want to know what people across Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire think of our plans

for the next few years. It is vitally important that our Corporate Safety Plan is developed with

the contributions of the local communities we serve.”

Local people can give their views on the 2017-2020 Corporate Safety Plan in a number of

ways:

Visiting www.staffordshirefire.gov.uk

Emailing [email protected]

Writing to Bob Preston, Corporate Safety Plan Manager, at Staffordshire Fire and

Rescue Service HQ, Pirehill, Stone ST15 0BS

The consultation runs for 12 weeks and closes on 16 October 2016.

ENDS

Media Office - Staffordshire Fire & Rescue Service Pirehill, Stone ST15 0BS

01785 898578 or 01785 898581

e-mail: [email protected]

Web : http://www.staffordshirefire.gov.uk/ Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/StaffordshireFireandRescueService

Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/staffsfire

http://www.staffordshirefire.gov.uk/




http://www.facebook.com/StaffordshireFireandRescueService

http://www.twitter.com/staffsfire

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

August 18 2016

DROP-IN SESSIONS TO HELP SHAPE THE SERVICE’S FUTURE

Residents are being invited to help shape the future of the fire and rescue service

during a series of drop-in sessions across the county.

The Service is currently carrying out a 12-week consultation on its Corporate

Safety Plan 2017-2020. The plan sets out what the Service aims to accomplish in

this timeframe, along with outline details for how these aims will be achieved.

The Service will be looking to build on its notable recent successes. An unswerving

focus on prevention is paying off – over the last three years, more than 80,000

Home Fire Risk Checks have been carried out, with an increasing focus on

targeting the most vulnerable households. As a result, the number of emergency

incidents has continued to reduce and 2015/16 saw the lowest number of

accidental home fire deaths and injuries on record.

Achievements in recent years are set against the background of unprecedented

change in the delivery of public services and reductions in Government funding.

Residents can have their say on the plan during the drop-in sessions which will

take place between 10am-4pm at the following venues:

Prince of Wales Centre, Cannock, on September 13

Coopers Square Shopping Centre, Burton, on September 14

AS

E N

EW

S R

ELE

AS

E N

EW

S R

ELE

AS

E N

EW

S R

ELE

AS

E

N

Oddfellows Hall, Stafford, on September 16

Hanley Market, Potteries Centre, on September 17

Colin Brazier Hotel, Tamworth, on September 20

Guildhall, Lichfield, on September 22

Trinity Church Lounge, Leek, on September 24

Corporate Safety Plan Manager Bob Preston said: “We are really keen to gather as

many views and opinions from our communities as possible during this 12-week

consultation. Over recent years we have seen the number of incidents dramatically

decreasing thanks to the increase in our prevention activities. We strongly believe

that prevention is far better and far cheaper than cure. We have drawn up our

Corporate Safety Plan which very much airs on the side of stopping incidents

happening in the first place, making our communities safer.

“The input from local people is absolutely vital as we go forward and I would urge

residents who want to have a say on the future of their fire and rescue service to

attend one of the drop-in sessions and have their voice heard.”

Local people can give their views on the 2017-2020 Corporate Safety Plan in a

number of ways:

Visiting www.staffordshirefire.gov.uk

Emailing [email protected]

Writing to Bob Preston, Corporate Safety Plan Manager, at Staffordshire

Fire and Rescue Service HQ, Pirehill, Stone ST15 0BS

The consultation runs for 12 weeks and closes on 16 October 2016.

ENDS

Media Office - Staffordshire Fire & Rescue Service Pirehill, Stone ST15 0BS

01785 898578 or 01785 898581



e-mail: [email protected] Web : http://www.staffordshirefire.gov.uk/

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/StaffordshireFireandRescueService Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/staffsfire



http://www.facebook.com/StaffordshireFireandRescueService

http://www.twitter.com/staffsfire

Visit our website or ask a member of

staff for more information

For more information visit:

Staffs Fire and Rescue @staffsfire

www.staffordshirefire.gov.uk

We are consulting on our Corporate Safety Plan 2017-2020 and would like to know your thoughts

HAVEYOUR

?on the future of your local Fire and Rescue Service

Closing date: 16th October 2016

Headquarters, Pirehill Please ask for Kay Johnson DDI (01785) … · 2018. 2. 2. · Fire and...

Documents

Transcript of Headquarters, Pirehill Please ask for Kay Johnson DDI (01785) … · 2018. 2. 2. · Fire and...