Agenda item

Report of the Chief Fire (CSCPC/17/6) attached.

Minutes:

The Committee received for information a report of the Chief Fire Officer (CSCPC/17/6) that set out the performance of the Devon & Somerset Fire & Rescue Authority for the period April 2016 to March 2017 (with a focus on Quarter 4 of 2016/17) as measured against the indicators in the current Strategic Plan “Our Plan: 2015 to 2020).

 

The Assistant Chief Fire Officer (Service Improvement) advised the Committee that this report would normally have been considered by the Audit & Performance review Committee but due to timescales and the additional workload for the Data Hub emanating from the Grenfell Towers fire, this had not been possible.

 

The key measures set out within the report were given a green, amber or red rating according to whether performance was normal, needed monitoring or required investigation. A more rounded analysis of data was carried out to assess performance which included looking at the latest 3 months of the reporting period, the latest 12 months of the reporting period, trend analysis and performance against calculated thresholds.

 

The performance against the measures was:

 

Measure 1 – fire related deaths where people lived - there had been 6 fire related deaths where people live in 2016/17 which was a reduction on the number in 2015/16 when there had been 8 fire deaths.  The Service was not complacent, however, and a lot of work was being undertaken to mitigate against the risks, particularly with the age 85 plus group where there was a lot of work being carried out with partners to address this vulnerable group of people;

 

Measure 2 – injuries as a result of fires where people lived – there had been 64 injuries in 2016/17 as compared with 83 in 2015/16, although the figure had risen slightly in the last quarter pushing the figure up.  This was on amber rating presently and was being monitored. It was noted that most of the fires were kitchen and/or cooking related so more work was being undertaken on education;

 

Measure 3 – fire where people lived – there had been 1004 fires in the 12 months from April 2016 to March 2017 as compared with 966 in the previous year.  The long term trend was downwards, however;

 

Measure 4 – fire related deaths where people worked, visited and in vehicles – there had been 5 deaths in 2016/17 as compared with 4 in 2015/16.  3 of these were as a result of road traffic collisions, 1 due to a suicide and 1 at a hospice;

 

Measure 5 – injuries as a result of fires where people worked, visited and in vehicles – there had been an improvement in this measure with 21 fire related injuries in 2016/17 as opposed to 36 in 2015/16;

 

Measure 6 – fires where people worked, visited or in vehicles – there had been a total of 1321 fires in 2016/17 as compared to 1251 in 2015/16;

 

Measures 7 & 8 – Emergency Response Standards (ERS) for attendance at fires where people lived and at road traffic collisions – there had been a slight decrease in performance against the ERS for both attendance at fires and road traffic collisions.  It was proposed to change this measure in future to the expected travel time and did the Service meet this following research undertaken in respect of the new Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP);

 

Sickness absence – there had been 8.66 days lost due to sickness absence in 2016/17 as compared to 9.23 days in 2015/16.  The position was monitored by the Human Resources Management & Development Committee.

The Head of Central Operations elaborated upon the work that was being undertaken within the Community Safety department in respect of prevention activities and in particular, the new approach to Home Fire Safety Visits.  The Committee noted that this new approach involved a smaller, dedicated team of staff which was targeting visits towards the most vulnerable groups in the community.

 

The question was asked as to whether the Service would routinely visit a block of flats to check issues such as blocked escape routes as part of its home fire safety visits and were calls other than 999 calls recorded.  The Head of Central Operations replied that the Service did not routinely visit blocks of flats as it did not have the legislative power to do this which was a matter for the local authorities who had the appropriate powers under the Housing Act.  The Service did encourage its staff to engage with the public and advised that a community safety communication could be issued in terms of people ensuring that escape routes were not blocked, particularly in flats.  In terms of the recording of calls other than 999 calls, it was noted that these were not recorded routinely although there were calls coming in to the switchboard at Service Headquarters and in Groups.  The Area Manager (Strategy & Business Change) indicated that the Service did not report on this presently but could look at doing this in the future.

 

The Committee suggested that it may be useful for the Service to have a whistleblowing telephone number that could be called when the public spotted issues of concern that they could report to rather than calling 999.  Attention was drawn to the “see & sort” number in place at Paddington Station now.

 

The Chairman enquired as to whether it was possible to report on existing issues and work that had already been instigated and new matters that were under consideration and officers undertook to adapt the report in this way.  The Area Manager (Strategy & Business Change) made reference to the impending change in the way that performance was measured and this would be reported to the Audit & Performance Review Committee shortly.  He added that the changes suggested during this meeting would be reflected in the new reporting style.

 

 

Supporting documents: