Archived decisions

cehC/H/IntegratedRiskManagement

14 May 2003

Sir Graham Meldrum CBE OStJ QFSM

Duniv FIFireE CCMI

HM Chief Inspector of Fire Services

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

Zone 18/B

Portland House

Stag Place

London SW1E 5LP

Tel: 020 7944 5610

Fax: 020 7944 5577

Email: [email protected]

Web Site: www.odpm.gov.uk

3 April 2003

Dear Sir / Madam

FIRE AUTHORITY INTEGRATED RISK MANAGEMENT PLANS

CONSULTATION ON GUIDANCE NOTES 1 AND 2

Introduction

On 16 December 2002, the Deputy Prime Minister made clear that there should be a programme of reform and modernisation of the framework within which the fire service operates. A key element of that programme is the need to produce Fire Authority Integrated Risk Management Plans (IRMPs).

Fire Service Circular 7/2003, dated 2 April 2003, explained:

· the reasons for introducing IRMPs

· what fire authorities would need to do to produce them

· the help that Government would provide to assist fire authorities and brigades

· the Government's plans for producing guidance

A copy of the circular is at Annex A.

Purpose of consultation

I am now writing to consult you on the first two guidance notes:

a. a copy of Guidance Note 1 is at Annex B. This provides advice on the process of developing IRMPs. It explains what fire authorities will need to do to produce an IRMP and what it might contain. The guidance is intended to be neither prescriptive nor exhaustive; and

b. a copy of Guidance Note 2 is at Annex C. This provides advice on the consultation arrangements that the Government will expect fire authorities to undertake when developing and implementing an IRMP.

This letter is being sent to a wide range of bodies. A list of those being consulted is at
Annex D.

Period of consultation

Ministers have decided to reduce the consultation period from the minimum period of twelve weeks recommended in the Cabinet Office Code of Practice on Consultation to eight weeks. The reasons for this decision are as follows:

· key stakeholder consultees have been aware of the proposal to introduce IRMPs for some time, and

· it is in the public interest to progress the introduction of IRMPs as quickly as possible to enable early improvements in community safety to be delivered.

Consultees who have had prior sight of the guidance notes should note that various changes have been made to their content over the passage of time and the versions attached to this letter may differ from those seen previously.

Responding to the consultation

All comments on the draft guidance notes should be submitted in writing to arrive at the following address by Friday 30 May 2003.

David Steer

HM Fire Service Inspectorate

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

Zone 18/B

Portland House

Stag Place

London SW1E 5LP

Tel: 020 7944 5672

Fax: 020 7944 5558

Email: [email protected]

If you have any questions about this consultation, please contact David Steer at the above address, on 020 7944 5672, or by e-mail to [email protected] and an appropriate person will contact you.

Publishing the responses

In due course, the ODPM will publish on its website (www.odpm.gov.uk) a summary of the responses to this consultation along with its response to the points raised. Respondents should note that the ODPM may also wish to publish their individual responses. Therefore, unless a respondent specifically asks that their response be treated as confidential, it may be published, or otherwise made public. Confidential responses will be included in any statistical summary of the numbers of comments received and views expressed.

Yours faithfully

Sir Graham Meldrum

Sir Graham Meldrum CBE OStJ QFSM

Duniv FIFireE CCMI

HM Chief Inspector of Fire Services

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

Zone 18/B

Portland House

Stag Place

London SW1E 5LP

Tel: 020 7944 5610

Fax: 020 7944 5577

Email: [email protected]

Web Site: www.odpm.gov.uk

2 April 2003

The Chief Executive to the County Council

The Clerk to the Fire and Civil Defence Authority

The Clerk to the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority

The Clerk to the Combined Fire Authority

The Chief Fire Officer

Dear Sir or Madam

FIRE SERVICE CIRCULAR 7/2003

FIRE AUTHORITY INTEGRATED RISK MANAGEMENT PLANNING

Introduction

1. On 16 December 2002, the Deputy Prime Minister made clear that there should be a programme of reform and modernisation of the framework within which the fire service operates. This circular provides early information about one of the key elements of this reform programme: the need to produce Fire Authority Integrated Risk Management Plans (IRMPs) that lead to improved community safety and more productive use of fire service resources by:

a. reducing the number of fires and other emergency incidents occurring;

b. reducing loss of life in fires and other emergency incidents;

c. reducing the number and severity of injuries occurring in fires and other emergencies;

d. reduce the commercial, economic and social impact of fires and other emergency incidents;

e. safeguarding the environment and heritage (both built and natural); and

f. providing communities with value for money.

2. This circular explains:

a. the reasons for introducing IRMPs;

b. what fire authorities will need to do to produce them;

c. the help that Government will provide to assist fire authorities and brigades; and

d. the Government's plans for producing guidance (on which you will be consulted). This further guidance will outline work which can begin at once and which will provide a sound basis for local judgements about risk management.

3. The primary objective of this initiative is to make the service more responsive to locally identified needs and better able to deliver community safety. It should not be seen as a simple revision of fire cover standards and operational response, but as a holistic and corporate approach to improving community safety generally. If the full potential of IRMPs is to be realised, they will need to complement the risk management plans of other agencies to ensure a cohesive response to local service delivery. Risk management planning is integral to the modernisation of the fire service and forms part of the Government's broader agenda to reform, modernise and invest in Britain's public services. The initiative is fully supported by the Local Government Association and the Chief and Assistant Chief Fire Officers Association.

4. The starting point in integrated risk management planning must be the preventative measures that will reduce the incidence of fires and other emergency incidents, save lives, and reduce injuries and loss (personal, societal, commercial, economic, environmental, and heritage). This will require a move from the traditional reliance on the `formulaic approach' using recommended standards set centrally, to locally assessed and determined standards that will more effectively meet the needs of local communities.

5. Introducing this more flexible, locally determined risk-based approach will lead to:

a. more effective targeting of resources that will improve community safety, and protective and prevention measures; and

b. more dynamic, flexible, and appropriate levels of emergency response to incidents, effectively targeted to save lives and reduce injuries.

6. The Government is committed to early completion of IRMPs, and commencement of action to implement the outcomes and deliver the `safer community' objectives. Fire authorities will need to set local standards to take the place of existing centrally recommended standards of fire cover, which will be withdrawn in due course. The Government has instructed HM Chief Inspector of Fire Services to produce guidance to assist fire authorities in producing IRMPs, and expects each fire authority to take the following actions:

a. produce a draft IRMP for consultation by the end of September 2003. This will identify how each authority intends to meet the objectives set out in paragraph 1 (a) to (f) above and should cover at least the topics listed in paragraph 9 below;

b. consult local communities and key stakeholders on their IRMP before implementation;

c. prepare an action plan with timescales for specific proposals for change, which will act as a management tool to assist them in the delivery of risk-assessed and measurable change to create safer communities;

d. develop arrangements to monitor the outcome and effectiveness of each phase of the IRMP as it is introduced, and to identify any necessary additional action to ensure objectives are delivered.

7. IRMPs are intended to provide the strategic overview that will be used to determine immediate and future policy decisions. They will, of course, be dynamic and evolving documents, and the monitoring, audit and review process referred to in paragraph 9 below will contribute to this. It is expected that fire authorities will wish to produce annual action plans as part of their business planning process to assist prioritisation of effort and resources based on the situation pertaining at the time.

8. The Government will assist fire authorities to deliver this initiative by:

a. providing a series of Guidance Notes that authorities will wish to take into account in the development of their IRMP;

b. establishing a specialist team within HM Fire Service Inspectorate (HMFSI) to provide advice, training and support to fire authorities and their brigades, which will assist in the development and implementation of a consistent approach without inhibiting local flexibility and decision making;

c. establishing a statutory framework consistent with the emphasis on community safety, giving fire authorities responsibility for the deployment of resources and the ability to do this dynamically, in particular by seeking Parliamentary approval to the repeal of S19(4) of the Fire Services Act 1947; and

d. withdrawing the existing inflexible recommended standards of fire cover.

9. An effective IRMP should:

a. identify existing and potential risks to the community within the authority area;

b. evaluate the effectiveness of current preventative, protective, and response arrangements;

c. identify opportunities for improvement and determine policies and standards for prevention and intervention;

d. determine resource requirements to meet these policies and standards

e. include arrangements for implementation, monitoring, audit and review

10. Guidance Notes will be issued to assist fire authorities in the initial development of IRMPs, with further guidance following as the project evolves. The first two covering the preparation of an IRMP and consultation are now being issued for consultation, with publication expected by June 2003. A series of regional seminars will be arranged in April and May to explain the guidance to chief fire officers and Members of fire authorities, to receive initial feedback as part of the consultation process, and offer further information on how authorities might start the process of producing an IRMP. In the interim, chief fire officers will no doubt wish to review and ensure the availability and readiness of all empirical and other risk-related evidence that will help them to evaluate the risks within their brigade area.

11. The production and implementation of IRMPs will have staffing and resource implications for fire authorities. This work is fundamental to the delivery of modernisation in the fire service and will be an indispensable element of a flexible, locally determined and risk-based approach. It will be at the heart of each fire authority's process for setting objectives and standards and deploying resources accordingly. Fire authorities are likely to be able to deliver the objectives more efficiently and minimise the resource implications if their fire brigades collaborate with others. Experience in New Dimension work over the past year has demonstrated the benefits of such an approach.

12. In order to provide ready management and liaison contacts to enable members of the HMFSI to assist brigades in the development of these initiatives, chief fire officers are requested to nominate a principal officer who will have management responsibility for the work, and a liaison officer at practitioner level who will be involved in development of the IRMP. It would be helpful if nominations could be forwarded to David Steer on 020 7944 5672 or by email to [email protected] by 11 April 2003.

13. The Government wishes to continue to monitor the performance of fire authorities and their fire brigades in reducing incidents, fire-related deaths and injuries, and other aspects of service delivery related to community safety. The fire suite of BVPIs (notably BV 145 - percentage of calls to fire at which national standards for attendance were met) will need to be revised as a result of the introduction of local emergency response standards. It will be the outcomes in community safety that will be the key measures of good performance and success, rather than the means by which these are achieved, although fire authorities will be expected to measure their performance against the standards and targets they have set for their communities. HMFSI will examine and disseminate examples of innovation and good practice which lead to high performance, with a view to improving consistency whilst maintaining flexibility.

14. Adopting this integrated risk management approach to the services provided by fire authorities will allow their brigades to respond to the needs of their communities more flexibly, and thereby more effectively. It is recognised that fire authorities will be taking on new responsibilities for making judgements about the risks prevailing within their area, the balance between prevention and intervention, and determining response standards and resource allocation. It is expected that in doing this, they will move forward in an evolutionary way towards achieving safer communities. Change will take time, but it needs to begin now.

15. This Circular is not intended to be a definitive exposition of the many issues that will need to be addressed as part of this initiative. More detailed aspects will be dealt with in the first Guidance Note, which is being issued for consultation.

16. If you have any questions about Integrated Risk Management Planning, please contact David Steer on 020 7944 5672 or by email to [email protected].

Yours faithfully

Sir Graham Meldrum

FIRE AUTHORITY INTEGRATED RISK MANAGEMENT PLANNING

GUIDANCE NOTE 1

1 Introduction

1.1 This is the first of a series of Guidance Notes designed to provide advice and assistance to fire authorities and those who are asked to develop Integrated Risk Management Plans (IRMPs). It explains what you need to do to produce an IRMP and what it might contain. The guidance is intended to be neither prescriptive nor exhaustive, and you may wish to develop your own arrangements based around the content of this document.

1.2 The Government thinks that a modern and effective fire and rescue service should:

a. reduce the number of fires and other emergency incidents occurring;

b. reduce loss of life in fires and accidents;

c. reduce the number and severity of injuries in fires and other emergency incidents;

d. reduce the commercial, economic and social impact of fires and other emergency incidents;

e. safeguard the environment and heritage (both built and natural), and

f. provide value for money.

1.3 It does not believe this can be done on the basis of the present prescriptive and formulaic national approach to providing fire cover. Instead, the fire service needs a more modern, flexible, and risk-based approach that can deliver improvements in community safety based on locally identified needs. This is the purpose of asking each fire authority to develop an IRMP.

1.4 We think that effective IRMPs will do the following fundamental things:

· identify existing and potential risks to the community within the authority area

· evaluate the effectiveness of current preventative and response arrangements

· identify opportunities for improvement and determine policies and standards for prevention and intervention

· determine resource requirements to meet these policies and standards

1.5 IRMPs are not only about replacing national fire-cover standards with local ones. They involve shifting the focus in planning to put people first, looking at the risks arising from the full range of fires and other emergency incidents, and at the options for their reduction and management. To be effective, IRMPs will need to provide a fully integrated, risk-based approach to community safety, fire safety inspection and enforcement, and emergency response arrangements that will contribute to a safer environment. Local authorities already have a duty to prepare strategies and plans for a number of other purposes, including a community strategy. IRMPs will need to be co-ordinated with these and the plans of other relevant agencies if they are to have maximum effect.

1.6 IRMPs should be dynamic documents, reviewed and revised regularly as circumstances change and new information becomes available. It may take a number of years to achieve some of the changes identified in them and to meet the targets and objectives. At the same time, they are also likely to identify a number of early actions that can be taken to improve community safety and service delivery.

2 What fire authorities need to do

2.1 Responsibility for preparing an IRMP rests with the fire authority. Although it may delegate this task to its chief fire officer and his staff (or other appropriate persons), it is strongly recommended that elected Members are fully involved throughout all stages of the process.

2.2 In formulating policies and standards, you will need to think about what information will help you assess whether your objectives and targets are being delivered, whether that information is readily available and who will collect it. HMFSI will examine and disseminate examples of innovation and good practice which lead to high performance, with a view to improving consistency whilst maintaining flexibility.

2.3 IRMPs will be strategic documents, which although reviewed and revised regularly, will essentially remain valid for a number of years. They will need to be accompanied by an annual action plan, linked to your authority's business and financial planning process, which sets out what will be delivered over the coming year and especially what changes are planned. As a number of the possible changes identified in the IRMP will need to be phased over a period of years, Action Plans will need to take this into account. The standards, targets and outcomes should be published in your annual Best Value Performance Plan.

2.4 Consultation with the community you serve and your staff will be an essential element in the preparation of an IRMP. Guidance Note 2 will provide advice on the consultation arrangements the Government expects fire authorities to undertake. This will be the first time local people have been consulted about managing risk in this way. Consultation provides an opportunity to explain how the service has been performing, what opportunities exist for improving community safety, and how any changes will deliver those improvements.

2.5 As some people become aware that fire authorities will be setting locally determined response standards to replace the nationally prescribed fire cover standards, it may initially cause some concern. You will need to explain that this process provides for the first time an opportunity for fire authorities to achieve a real step-change in the provision of community safety activities to meet locally determined needs. You will need to be able to show that the intention of the policies and standards you propose to introduce will have a net effect of improving community safety.

2.6 In order to be ready for the withdrawal of the national recommended standards of fire cover, you will need to start consultation on the draft IRMP by the beginning of October 2003. If you can do so earlier this will be better. Sufficient time will need to be allowed for considered responses from all groups with an interest. Cabinet Office guidelines and good practice suggest a minimum period of twelve weeks should be allowed for written consultation, which is therefore likely to be completed before the end of December 2003. In any event, you should agree a plan for the consultation well ahead of starting. Advice on the consultation process will be issued in Guidance Note 2.

2.7 HMFSI, on behalf of Government, should also be consulted on the draft IRMP. As it will be making specialist teams available to offer training, advice, assistance and guidance to authorities and their fire brigades during the preparation of the IRMP, this will provide opportunities for comment throughout the development phase.

2.8 You will need to set up arrangements for monitoring and auditing your performance to help you review the effectiveness of your policies and procedures. This will enable you to consider remedial action during the year to ensure delivery of objectives, and it will help you when it comes to reviewing the IRMP and preparing your Action Plan for the following year. You will need to ensure your monitoring and audit arrangements are robust, transparent and able to stand scrutiny.

2.9 As the Government wishes to continue to monitor the performance of fire authorities and their fire brigades in reducing incidents, fire-related deaths and injuries, and other aspects of service delivery related to community safety, national performance measures are to be developed to reflect the change in approach. Improvements in community safety outcomes will be the key measures of good performance and success. Guidance on this will be given at a later date.

2.10 The Secretary of State has appointed Inspectors (HMFSI) to advise on the manner in which fire authorities meet their statutory duties. In order to satisfy this duty, HMFSI need to be fully aware of each authority's aims, objectives, standards and targets in order that performance can be assessed. You will be asked to send a copy of your final agreed IRMP and annual Action Plan to HMFSI.

2.11 The following table summarises the steps you will need to take and suggests some milestones that will allow you to meet the target to produce an IRMP by the end of the year. Agreeing your own specific timetable is one of the first things you will need to do:

Agree an overall timetable and milestones, and commission work on a draft IRMP.	by beginning of June, although preliminary planning should commence earlier
Produce agreed draft IRMP and Action Plan for consultation	by end of September, but earlier if possible
Consultation with the community, staff and HMFSI	October to December, but earlier if possible
Consider what reporting, monitoring and auditing arrangements will be needed	October and November
Fire authority to formally consider the outcome of consultation, commission any revisions, and formally adopt the IRMP and Action Plan	by end of December

3 What should be in an Integrated Risk Management Plan

3.1 Each fire authority will have to decide what to put in its IRMP. This section of the guidance sets out what we consider to be the essential elements. In deciding what should be in your IRMP, you need to bear in mind that:

· all the elements described below are important and inter-related, and the IRMP needs to cover all of them. It will probably help your decision-making to have a broad overview rather than a lot of detail about a few aspects. Try not to get bogged down in data or detail at first

· the IRMP must contain enough material to back up the proposed policies and standards so that when you go out to consultation, it makes sense to those who read it, and it is convincing

· although these will be the first IRMPs, you are not starting from a blank sheet of paper. In fact, much of the IRMP will be drafted around the current arrangements and ways of making improvements

3.2 The rest of this section and the more detailed material in the Appendix to this document explains the purpose of each element of the IRMP, what inputs might be needed, and what outcomes you should be looking for from each part of the process. The chart on the next page summarises the process. Further guidance will be issued as the project develops, and regional seminars/training will be offered to assist authorities and brigades.

3.3 Identify existing and potential risks to the community within the authority area

3.3.1 The first task in preparing an IRMP is to identify, characterise and prioritise the existing and potential risks within your fire authority's area. You will need to look in some detail at what has happened in recent years, and what might reasonably be expected to happen. This will include examining the number, type, geographical location and time of day of all incidents attended in recent years (fires, RTAs, other special services e.g. flooding, co-responder, etc). While risk to property, the environment and heritage will continue to be of importance, risk to life will in future be given the highest priority.

3.3.2 The Appendix suggests a wide range of data types and sources you might look at. Fire authorities and their brigades already hold a lot of this information. You will need to consider the extent to which you can rely on existing information gathered for 1(i)(d), fire safety, and other purposes, and whether you need to visit any individual premises to gather additional or more specific information. The Community Fire Safety Toolbox `Foundation Stones' offers detailed advice on the collection and analysis of information (see section on `fire facts and statistics' in the Toolbox). The Toolbox website can be found at www.firesafetytoolbox.org.uk

3.3.3 Fire brigades that have taken part in the `Pathfinder' trials in recent years will have more detailed information available for part or all of their areas than many others. However, we believe that every fire authority could make a sound start on its local risk identification by:

· assembling the data they have as simply as possible;

· consulting other local authority and public service departments about relevant data they hold, e.g. on the characteristics of housing or commercial areas, on population movements during the day or at weekends, etc; and

· consulting their staff about the information they have on the nature and causes of incidents.

3.3.4 You should be aiming to produce plans, maps, summaries or tables that show actual incidents and identifies areas, time periods and people in terms of their relative risks. This may include risks that have not previously been considered. You may also identify in this part of the process data that it would be helpful to collect or improve, or research you would like to do into correlation between incidents and possible causal factors. These needs could feed into the first Action Plan so that work is undertaken over the year to fill the gaps.

3.4 Evaluate the effectiveness of current preventative and response arrangements

3.4.1 Before the fire authority can determine the policies and standards it wishes to apply, it is necessary to examine what it currently does, what it achieves, and how its performance compares with that of others in the light of the `risk map' identified above.

3.4.2 The Appendix suggests a range of specific questions to consider to help you evaluate:

· the authority's performance in preventing emergency incidents and deaths and injuries; and

· how effective its emergency response was in saving life and property.

3.4.3 This will identify strengths and weaknesses in current prevention, response, and resource allocation. The first key consideration is how well the present distribution of resources match the pattern of risks already identified. This will allow opportunities for improvement to be identified by comparing performance with what might be judged to be achievable given the circumstances in the area. Trends and comparisons, both nationally and with other brigades having similar characteristics, will provide an effective means of doing this.

3.4.4 Given the way the current risk assessment categories are defined and the way the national recommended standards of fire cover work, you may find that some aspects of current response arrangements are not the optimum for the risks identified. In evaluating risk to life, you will take into account where the priorities lie. For example the risk to life from fires is highest in residential premises, especially higher density, lower quality housing, while there is a lower risk of injury or death from fire in commercial premises, reflecting the massive investment in in-built detection, suppression and public protection measures.

3.4.5 Essential questions to answer, and which are addressed in the Appendix, are:

a. what might we have done differently;

b. did we get the balance right between prevention and intervention; and

c. has more time and resource been spent in non-productive activities (people shut in lifts, false alarms, etc) than on those that might have greater benefits?

3.4.6 At the end of this part of the process, you should have an idea of where and how effective work is currently being done (lives saved, properties protected), and what is less effective (attendance at incidents where nothing was achieved, and where lives could not be saved by intervention). You need to identify what might have been done differently.

3.5 Identify opportunities for improvement and determine policies and standards for prevention and intervention

3.5.1 The first step is to identify the opportunities for improvement in community safety (whether fire or other risks) using preventative measures, and considering how they could be delivered. The primary focus in the fire service has historically been on intervention, although many authorities and brigades have now realised the importance of changing their priority from intervention to prevention.

3.5.2 The principal aim is, of course, to reduce the number of fires and other emergency incidents that occur, and thereby the resultant deaths and injuries, and to protect the built and natural environment. You should set challenging, but realistically achievable goals for each of these aspects, and achievable timescales. As a minimum, these should be consistent with national guidelines, and where possible will aspire to even greater improvements. Your policies will be expected to reflect this aim, and to contain objectives and standards for achievement.

3.5.3 The National Community Fire Safety Centre already provides advice, guidance and support to fire authorities in the development of their own policies and practices to promote community fire safety. Each authority has already produced a CFS Strategy to give focus to this work, and these can form a useful basis for identifying opportunities for improvement in prevention activities.

3.5.4 As indicated in earlier paragraphs, IRMPs should relate to all incidents to which fire brigades may respond, and preventative activities should do likewise. While fire authorities have responsibilities for reducing the incidence of fires, other non-fire incidents may fall within the remit of other agencies. This does not mean that you do not have a significant part to play in prevention, and your IRMP will need to identify the ways in which you can work in collaboration with the relevant agencies to deliver the wider aspects of improved public safety.

3.5.5 Reaching final decisions about potential for change is likely to be an iterative process. If the fire authority wishes to make an improvement in any one area, it may require a shift of resources. There will usually be a number of ways of achieving this, each with its own implications. That is why we suggest separating options for improvement, policies and standards, so that authorities can take decisions one step at a time.

3.5.6 The policies needed to deliver some improvements could relate to the terms and conditions on which staff are employed as well as to operational matters. How those could be brought into effect is outside the ambit of this guidance. Even if it is currently unclear how or when these could be effected, it is still important to identify them where they are an essential component of delivering improvements to the community.

3.5.7 Fire authorities will be required to set their own standards for both prevention and intervention purposes, following consultation with the communities they serve. You will need to express these standards in terms that are easily understood and will allow performance against them to be measured. The current national guidance on recommended standards of fire cover will be withdrawn at an appropriate time when authorities have completed their IRMPs and are ready for implementation.

3.5.8 Before deciding on the emergency response standards to be set, you will first need to consider whether there are any categories of calls, or circumstances, in which an attendance would be deemed to be inappropriate. Examples are given in the Appendix.

3.5.9 In setting response standards for those incidents the authority has decided to attend, you will need to identify the attendance times to be met, and the resources to be deployed, the net effect of any change being improved community safety. You may wish to set different standards for fires and for other emergency incidents. Because of the geographical variation in risks, it is expected that emergency response standards will vary throughout the authority area and be proportionate to the risks. They should not be constrained by artificial boundaries (such as existing fire station areas).

3.5.10 You will also need to compare the resource implications that will flow from the prevention and intervention standards you are considering setting, with the potential benefits that might be achieved by improved community safety. This will be a matter of some consequence to consultees when the draft IRMP is published for comment.

3.5.11 Some policies and standards will be dependent on the contribution of other agencies. IRMPs should set out clearly what will be needed from joint working arrangements with other statutory and non-statutory partners (police and ambulance services, local authorities, utilities, Environment Agency, transport services, etc) in the prevention of both fire and non-fire incidents, and in emergency response.

3.5.12 The outcomes from this phase in the production of an IRMP should be a clear statement of the authority's goals for improved community safety, the areas identified for improvement, the policies designed to deliver those goals and improvements; and the standards set for prevention and intervention. Anyone reading the IRMP should be able to see how the policies and standards will contribute to the goals.

3.6 Determine resource requirements to meet these policies and standards

3.6.1 The last step is to consider the resources you will need to deliver your goals, policies and standards. For example, the properties currently used to house appliances and crews, i.e. the fire stations, do not in themselves contribute to the emergency response provision, and generally only provide domestic and administrative bases. Fire authorities may wish to consider using other opportunities to meet these needs, particularly in view of the greater flexibility likely to be adopted in some areas where the level of risk changes at different times of the day and night and a more dynamic response is required. The provision of fire stations in every locality to accommodate appliances that may only be in the area for a few hours would clearly be wasteful.

3.6.2 You should only make changes where it is clear that the overall net effect will be to improve community safety. It must be recognised that where it is found to be necessary to redeploy resources to areas of greater identified need, it may not be possible to justify the current level of service for some communities, and you may need to consider whether any additional prevention activities might be desirable. Of course, you are starting from the existing position and not a blank sheet of paper. So initial discussions may revolve around which resources should be redeployed and how, rather than considering a wholly new disposition. You may also wish to consider whether some special services might be provided on a re-chargeable basis.

3.6.3 When considering resource requirements, you will need to take into account the potential workload of appliances in each area, and the arrangements for inter-brigade operational support to deal with the changing levels of demand, major incidents, New Dimension preparation, and the provision of special appliances and equipment, etc.

3.6.4 An important consideration throughout all stages of producing an IRMP is the maintenance of safe systems of work for firefighter safety. All existing statute, regulation, and guidance relating to health and safety matters remain extant, and should be complied with. This will include, e.g. central guidance issued on operational matters, training/competence, provision of protective clothing and equipment, etc.

3.6.5 The outcome of this process will be an IRMP for all the authority's resources - staff, buildings, equipment - showing how they are allocated between different types of work, different working hours (given that much preventive work needs to take place during other people's working hours), and different locations.

FIRE AUTHORITY INTEGRATED RISK MANAGEMENT PLANNING

This appendix provides some more detailed suggestions about questions to ask and issues to consider at each stage of developing IRMPs. It is organised in sections to correspond to the main guidance. The list is not intended to be exhaustive, but is indicative in order to promote consideration of local issues based upon what has happened in the recent past, and what might possibly occur in the future.

A.1. Identify existing and potential risks to the community within the fire authority area

A.1.1 Evaluating risks to local communities will mean bringing together various data sets in a user-friendly way. This could be as simple as maps with overlays or as sophisticated as GIS systems. Detailed guidance to assist in this analysis can be found in the Community Fire Safety Toolbox `Foundation Stones'. Fire brigades already hold a great deal of this information, but reference can also be made to many local and national sources. Obvious questions to consider are the following:

How many incidents have we attended, and of what type?

· number, type, time and geographical location of all incidents reported (fire and non-fire) · fires, non-fire incidents and false alarms attended, as a proportion of all calls · types of incidents attended (urban/rural/land fires, coastal incidents/RTAs/ chemical spillage/persons shut in lifts, etc) · specialist responses made, e.g. co-responder, (cross referenced to fatalities and injuries)

How serious were they?

· numbers of appliances, equipment and people mobilised to, and used at, incidents · number of incidents to which aerial and other special appliances were mobilised, the number at which they were used, and for what purposes · number, type and location of incidents attended where no action was taken · number of `supporting movements' made, where from/to, and whether there is a pattern · number of incidents each flexible-duty officer attended, and the time of day/day of week

What do we know about causes?

· patterns in the causes of fires and other incidents attended · factors contributing to the cause of incidents, e.g. drugs, drink

What do we know about fatalities and casualties?

· number, time and geographic location of fatal and non-fatal casualties · rate of fatal and non-fatal casualties, per 1,000 population · number, time and geographic location of brigade rescues from (a) fires, (b) non-fires · number, time and geographic location of self-rescues

A.1.2 There is clear evidence nationally to link the occurrence of fires and other emergency incidents with socio-economic patterns. Local patterns will become clear when the activity data referred to above is compared with the local demographic picture. This should provide clear evidence of those sectors of the community most at risk, and inform the process to achieve improvement.

What do we know about community related factors that might affect risk?

· the age range of the population in the area under consideration, e.g. preponderance of elderly or very young people, etc · the nature of the community, e.g. family units, single parent families, students, etc · the nature, type and tenure of housing, e.g. houses/apartments/bedsits, rented or owned, etc · employment patterns, e.g. unemployment levels, population movement patterns by time of day/day of week, etc · social mix, including ethnicity · health issues, e.g. sickness levels in the community and care arrangements · socio-economic factors and deprivation · occupancy of commercial and industrial premises, · transport infrastructure

What do national trends tell us about what we might expect?

· rates of fires and other incidents per head of population · rates of fires and other incidents for more vulnerable groups · deaths and injuries per head of population · deaths and injuries for more vulnerable groups

Note: Relevant supporting data at both local authority and ward level (including indices of deprivation) is available through National Statistics Online at www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk

A.2. Evaluate the effectiveness of current prevention measures and response arrangements

A.2.1 Having produced the picture of existing risks/vulnerable communities, you now need to consider how well the current arrangements work in protecting the community and making it safer. Fire brigades already undertake some monitoring of the effectiveness of the services they provide although this process now needs to become more robust. In particular, you need to consider your effectiveness against what could be achieved in the circumstances. Given the limitations of the current approach to risk categorisation and the national recommended standards of fire cover, you may conclude that in some areas the current response arrangements could be bettered. Moving from nationally prescribed standards to locally set standards provides a unique opportunity for tackling local priorities but it also requires more judgement to be used to review whether a better outcome could have been achieved if things had been done differently. In particular, you will need to take a view about whether a better outcome could have been achieved through a different balance between prevention and intervention.

Prevention

· How does your performance in reducing deaths and injuries in all types of incidents compare with other authorities, and how well are you doing year-on-year? · To what extent could more lives have been saved by improved community safety initiatives? · Are resources currently targeted at those sections of the community judged to be most vulnerable? · How effective is prevention work, and what is being achieved? · Are your partnerships with other agencies delivering the objectives sought? · What is the level of smoke detector ownership in dwellings, what proportion of dwellings involved in fires had smoke detectors fitted, and how many had a smoke detector that failed to operate? · How many fires occurred in premises where fire precautionary measures were found to be unsatisfactory and/or contributed to the fire, why and where? · Is there any evidence that past improvement notices and enforcement action has reduced fires or deaths/injuries?

Responding to fires and other incidents

· Are resources currently deployed in the correct locations to meet the risks identified? · To what extent do you believe that improved response times could have saved more lives? · Is there a link between failures to meet existing response standards and the deaths and injuries occurring? · Which of your response policies are only in place because of the requirements of national guidance? · Which of your response policies are outside of national guidance, and what do these achieve?

Rescuing people (all types of incidents)

· What proportion of calls involved actual or possible risk to life? · At what proportion of incidents did people rescue themselves? · At what proportion of incidents were people rescued by (a) the brigade, and (b) other people? · Are there technical limitations to your ability to rescue people, e.g. availability of equipment or trained staff?

A.3. Identify opportunities for improvement and determine policies and standards for prevention and intervention

A.3.1 Once you have looked at the local risk and the effectiveness of current arrangements, you should consider what opportunities exist to improve community safety.

A.3.2 Guidance from the National Community Fire Safety Centre will help to inform the development of a strategy for moving from intervention to prevention. This includes the development of local partnership opportunities to build capacity and extend brigade outreach, especially in targeting particular risk groups. Local safety initiatives should be co-ordinated with national campaigns to maximise opportunities for increased public awareness and positive action. The Community Fire Safety Toolbox can be an integral part of training, personal and professional development, and the establishment of a permanent `knowledge network'. Comparable approaches will need to be developed with other agencies to help drive down the risks from non-fire emergencies. Relevant questions and considerations include:

What might we have done differently?

· Look at incidents involving injuries and fatalities and consider whether they could have been prevented by, e.g. better prevention measures in the premises, improved public awareness, better enforcement, earlier identification of the fire/accident, swifter response, different/better equipment, more advanced first aid, etc · Consider the same for incidents not involving risk to life but with large property losses, loss of heritage buildings, or damage to the environment · Is there anything we are doing purely because the current national guidance demands it? · Could we have achieved a better outcome if existing resources had been in different locations, or with different appliances, shift patterns and/or crewing arrangements to match demand? · If human resources had been redeployed in prevention or intervention functions, could more lives or property have been saved?

Is the balance between prevention and intervention right?

· How does your rate and trend of fires and other incidents, death and injuries, compare with national/regional figures, and what does this tell us about the scope for improvement? · Does examination of the evidence suggest a greater need to improve prevention or intervention, or both? · Can you identify any deaths or injuries that could not have been prevented by improved response? What prevention measures could you have taken? · What information do you have about non-fire incidents such as road traffic accidents that would assist in identifying the need for greater effort in prevention or improved responses?

Questions about prevention

· What current prevention activities might we do differently or better? · What areas can be immediately identified as offering greatest scope for early improvement? · Are existing resources appropriately allocated, targeted at identified risks, and available at the appropriate time of the day/day of the week necessary to achieve best effect? · Is collaboration with other agencies achieving the objectives and is information shared? Is full and effective use made of employees from other agencies, e.g. home helps, district nurses, community wardens, etc?

Questions about intervention

· What does the authority have to do, and what does it wish to do? · What changes in response policy might result in improvement? · Should the brigade attend all non-fire emergency calls it receives, or could some be rejected and/or referred to other agencies, e.g. persons shut (rather than trapped) in lifts that have malfunctioned · Do you have a `call challenge' policy in fire control to inform judgements about whether to make a response when apparently false calls are received? · Would prioritising emergency responses to incidents be appropriate, and what would it achieve? · Could some aspects of the service be provided in a different way, or by other providers? · Has consultation taken place with neighbouring authorities in respect of emergency response standards to incidents adjacent to authority borders, and to meet the requirements of New Dimension planning? · Have operational policies and practices been reviewed and revised to address the new local risk management approach?

A.3.3 Each fire authority is required to determine, in consultation with the communities it serves, the policies and standards to be adopted for intervention measures. The emergency response set should be proportionate to the risk.

Setting standards

· What level of attendance and what response times do you consider to be appropriate for each identified area of risk, and for each type of incident to be attended? In which areas are response times likely to be more critical? · What type of, and how many, vehicles and personnel are required to respond to incidents of differing types and in different locations, e.g.: - might a limited response of, say, two persons in a light vehicle be appropriate to investigate an incident in a premise where comprehensive fire protection measures are installed, or - where premises are known to have a poor safety record and to be poorly managed, is a higher level of response required until prevention measures manage this risk down? · Does a cost benefit analysis support the proposed response? · Will response standards/arrangements need to vary according to the changing patterns of risk at different times of day/days of the week?

A.4. Determine resource requirements to meet these policies and standards

A.4.1 In following this risk management process you will have recognised the need to adopt a flexible and proportionate approach to providing and deploying resources to meet the local standards you have set for preventative action and to provide a dynamic emergency response. In practice, of course, you are not starting with a blank sheet of paper, and you will need to consider carefully how existing policies and resource allocation can best deliver improvements in small stages rather than seeking to implement a `grand plan'. A `one size fits all' approach is unlikely to be appropriate.

A.4.2 Below is a list of questions that might be helpful when you are thinking about this step:

What resources do we need?

· What staffing levels will be needed for the level of prevention work proposed, how much of this work can be done by crews based at fire stations, what structure will you need for the teams doing this work, what proportion of them should be uniformed members of the fire service, and on what conditions should they be employed? If this is a significant change from the current situation, will you be able to redeploy staff or will you need people with different skills? · What pumping and special appliances will be necessary to meet the authority's standards and the likely requirements: · is a traditional, fully crewed multi-functional pumping appliance always necessary? · are aerial and other appliances necessary to meet the requirements of the risks? · can other fire brigades (private or public) meet any appliance requirements, or must the authority provide them? · What are the most effective locations for appliances to meet the risk requirements and response standards, taking account of the dynamic nature of the risk? How does this compare with current locations? What premises will you require? · What additional resource provision/support arrangements are necessary to meet the potential for periods of increased activity, major incidents and natural disasters? Have inter-service and multi-agency plans been established? · What crewing patterns will best meet the response standards, e.g. wholetime or retained, constant or variable crewing? · What shift patterns are necessary to meet operational needs and good employment practice? · What range and quantity of operational equipment is required to meet all reasonable operational needs? · Are there special training needs, and/or would the establishment of specialist teams be appropriate? · How many officers are necessary to provide effective management of operational incidents, and on what duty system should they be employed? · Has the authority and its brigade fully implemented the Incident Command Manual without variation? · Are arrangements in place to ensure operational efficiency, firefighter safety and consistency when working with other brigades at cross-border incidents?

A.4.3 Remember, the Implementation Support Team is available to provide training, advice and assistance. They can be contacted via David Steer on 020 7944 5672 or [email protected]

FIRE AUTHORITY INTEGRATED RISK MANAGEMENT PLANNING

GUIDANCE NOTE 2 - CONSULTATION

4 Introduction

4.1 The purpose of this Guidance Note is to provide advice to fire authorities on the consultation arrangements the Government expects to be undertaken when developing an Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP) for their area and in implementing the outcomes from that process.

4.2 Section 19 (4) of the Fire Services Act 1947, as amended, provides that a fire authority may not close a fire station or reduce the number of fire appliances or firefighting posts without the consent of the Secretary of State. Fire Service Circular 5/1992 offers guidance to fire authorities on the more detailed arrangements to be followed before an application is submitted to the Secretary of State for approval. The Government does not believe that in a modern fire service the Secretary of State should take these decisions. It believes that democratically accountable fire authorities should take them, acting on the professional advice of chief fire officers, and taking account of the views of the local communities.

4.3 The Local Government Bill currently before Parliament therefore seeks to repeal section 19 (4). The repeal will not alter the statutory responsibility of a fire authority under section 1 (1) of the 1947 Act to secure for their area a fire brigade and such equipment as may be necessary to meet efficiently all normal requirements. Nor does it change the requirement on fire authorities to consult under the Best Value provisions of the Local Government Act 1999.

4.4 This Note puts the requirement to consult into the context of the new Fire Authority Integrated Risk Management Planning process (see Guidance Note 1). It brings the earlier guidance up to date, and sets out the Secretary of State's expectation that consultation about each fire authority's arrangements for managing the risks from fire and other non-fire emergency incidents will continue to be undertaken after section 19 (4) is repealed. It also takes into account advice on the principles of managing risks to the public provided by the Government's own Strategy Unit.

4.5 The content of this Note is limited to the specific issues referred to in this section. In making arrangements for consultation, you should take into account the `best practice' advice issued under cover of Fire Service Circular 2/2001. For information on further guidance that is available on consultation, see paragraphs 4.5 and 4.6. Each fire authority should be open and transparent about its understanding of the risks to the public and about the process it is following in handling them.

5 Why should fire authorities consult?

5.1 Fire authorities have a statutory duty to consult the public in respect of the Best Value requirements embodied in the 1999 Local Government Act. Section 3 of this Act requires fire authorities to consult council tax and business ratepayers, service users and others with an interest, to help decide how to fulfil the duty of securing continuous improvement and to take a broader view of needs and priorities. This will be the means by which fire authorities will routinely inform and consult their communities about how they are meeting the targets and standards set.

5.2 The Fire Services Act 1947 contains no explicit statutory requirement to consult on any proposal to make any variation in the establishment that requires approval under section 19 (4). However, Secretaries of State have long considered it desirable that any such proposal should have been sufficiently widely publicised, in sufficient detail and with adequate time allowed to enable any interested party to make representations.

5.3 Applications to reduce fire cover, for example by closing a fire station, or by reducing the number of firefighting appliances and/or firefighters available, can frequently raise issues of genuine concern among communities and employees. Some people might be prepared to accept a substantive case for reducing fire cover locally in order that resources might be redeployed elsewhere. Others may regard any reduction in cover, even if the current use of the resource is limited, as a challenge to local safety that must be resisted as a matter of principle. Proposals to alter or even increase fire cover, for example by constructing a fire station in a new area, can also attract opposition for other reasons.

5.4 As with all Best Value authorities, fire authorities are expected to collaborate with other public and private sector agencies to improve their efficiency and effectiveness, and in particular, to promote and take part in community safety partnerships extending beyond the traditional `fire safety' role.

5.5 The Secretary of State considers, therefore, that fire authorities should consult widely as part of the process of preparing their IRMPs because this will help to ensure that Plans draw on the widest possible range of data and views and represent the best possible response to local needs and wishes. Effective consultation can act as a catalyst for greater community participation. If members of the public think they are being listened to they are more likely to make suggestions for improving services or ask for information. Where authorities maintain an ongoing dialogue with communities, local opinion about options for change can be canvassed at an early stage. Consultees presented with a fait accompli are more likely to react negatively to proposals for change.

6 Who should be consulted, and about what?

6.1 The guiding principle in deciding how extensively you consult is that any person or organisation that might have a legitimate interest in the proposals under consideration, or who may be affected by those proposals, should have the opportunity to express their views.

6.2 The scope of the consultation you undertake will be proportionate to the nature and extent of any changes proposed. The public is clearly most interested in those aspects that impinge directly on the service provided to them, and their perception of its impact upon their safety. This will include those instances when proposed changes will improve the service provided as well as when the reverse occurs, e.g. when resources are redeployed from one location to another to meet identified needs. Staffing and related issues are usually of lesser importance to the public, but of course are of great importance to employees and their representatives.

6.3 Section 19 (4) of the Fire Services Act, as amended by section 7 (1) of the Fire Services Act 1959, currently includes a requirement to obtain prior approval from the Secretary of State for closure of a fire station as well as any reduction in appliances and crews. For approval to be given, you have had to be able to demonstrate that adequate consultation has been undertaken and the responses considered.

6.4 Part of the new approach to integrated risk management planning is to improve the availability of appliances and crews in the right place at the right time to meet the identified risk requirements and the response standards set by the fire authority. This may require some appliances to change location at different times of the day and night to meet the dynamic nature of the risks. The use of premises to house appliances and crews providing this modern and more flexible approach to emergency response cover is a matter for determination by the fire authority, taking into account its employment and other obligations. There may be many ways in which it can meet the domestic, catering, and other requirements. For these reasons, you will be expected to continue to consult about any changes in the provision of appliances and crews following the repeal of section 19 (4).

6.5 There are three principal areas on which you will be expected to consult, although local circumstances may suggest consultation on other issues could be beneficial to the authority and/or the communities it serves. The principal areas for consultation are:

3.5.1 The draft IRMP and initial Action Plan

The IRMP will form the strategic `blue-print' on which the fire authority will base its decisions about future service provision and how it intends to improve community safety. As a matter of expediency, you will need to consult on the initial Action Plan concurrently with the IRMP. Before final decisions are made on either document, you will be expected to have consulted:

· The general public, council tax payers, households, etc,

· Community organisations, including specific community groups, such as ethnic minority and other often excluded groups,

· Public representatives, e.g. Members of Parliament,

· Business organisations,

· Local authorities, public agencies, and other emergency services,

· Employees (uniformed and non-uniformed) and their representatives,

· HM Fire Service Inspectorate,

· Any other interested parties.

3.5.2 The annual Action Plans

You will also be expected to consult on subsequent annual Action Plans if these include any changes in the fire authority's standards and/or provision of resources for intervention services. As the Action Plan is likely to form part of the authority's business planning process for its fire and rescue service, you may find it will achieve the best effect if consultation is co-ordinated. You will need to decide on the extent of consultation dependent upon the issues contained within the Action Plan. The principle set out in paragraph 3.1 above should form the basis for decisions about those who should be consulted. Examples of the sort of situations that might arise, and those you might be expected to consult, are given in Figure 1.

3.5.3 Changes in intervention standards and/or resources not included in an annual Action Plan

Circumstances may arise in which the fire authority might deem it appropriate to amend the policies/standards it has set for prevention and/or intervention activities, or the provision/location of resources, which have not been included in annual Action Plans. You will therefore need to make arrangements to consult those who may be affected by the changes. These issues are likely to be similar in nature to one or more of those listed in Figure 1, and the guidance given there should form the basis for your decisions about the extent of consultations.

Figure 1

4 What is the best way to consult?

4.1 All forms of consultation whether face to face or more remotely managed, require a degree of expertise if you are to obtain as many helpful comments as possible from consultees. Some methods require technical and analytical skills that may not be immediately available within fire authorities, particularly when dealing with more complex or wide ranging issues, e.g. large sample surveys may require an understanding of sampling techniques and quantitative analytical skills. You might also consider whether, for example, in seeking to prevent or minimise the effects of road traffic accidents, consultation would be more effective if done jointly with the police, ambulance service, and/or other relevant local agencies. Many of these other agencies have considerable experience of public consultation that you might find to be of benefit.

4.2 There are many ways in which you can draw your proposals to the attention of the community and other interested parties, and gather views and comments. Whichever methods are selected, it will be important to ensure that sufficient information is made available to consultees to allow them to make informed decisions. This might include:

· Details of the proposed changes in standards and/or resource allocation,

· Why these proposals are being made, including alternative options considered by the authority to achieve improved performance/community safety ,

· How the net effect will improve community safety, and what the local impact will be on consultees,

· Any additional actions planned to be taken to ensure the proposed changes will deliver the improvements expected,

· The timescales in which it is expected that the changes will be implemented and the benefits realised.

4.3 You will be able to select the most appropriate technique for consultation by considering the complexity of the subject matter and its relevance to the people being consulted, and putting this into the local context. The key measure is the effectiveness of the process in gathering views and opinions about the proposals for consideration by the fire authority.

4.4 You may wish to use some or all of the following techniques:

· Advertising/articles in local newspapers

· Leaflets delivered to households

· Letters to other agencies, public/business representatives, MPs, etc

· Fire authority/brigade website

· Public meetings and meetings of specific community groups

· Focus groups, citizens' juries, etc

· Displays in libraries, public buildings, etc

· Meetings with local authority representatives and other agencies

· Meetings with employees and/or representatives

4.5 Sufficient time should be allowed for considered responses from all groups with an interest. Cabinet Office guidelines (www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/servicefirst/index/ consultation) provide useful information on best practice in conducting consultation
exercises. This includes the Code of Practice on consultation documents issued by government which suggests that, other than in exceptional circumstances, a minimum period of twelve weeks should be allowed for written consultation. It is recommended that you adopt a similar timescale for consultation on the draft Integrated Risk Management Plan because of its potential scope and complexities. For consultation about subsequent changes in standards and/or provision, you will need to make a judgement about the time to be allowed for consultees to respond, taking account of all relevant factors.

4.6 If there is in any doubt as to the extent of consultation desirable in any case, or the time which should be allowed for consultations, fire authorities may wish to seek the advice of HM Fire Service Inspectorate.

5 What happens after consultation?

5.1 At the conclusion of the consultation exercise, all responses received must be evaluated and formally considered by the fire authority before it reaches a final decision about implementing any proposals. The process should be open and transparent with all relevant factors and views taken into account, including perceptions of risks faced and public concerns and values. In due course, you should make available a summary of the responses received, along with your response to the points raised.

FIRE AUTHORITY INTEGRATED RISK MANAGEMENT PLANS

LIST OF CONSULTEES (IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER)

Ambulance Service Association

Association of British Insurers

Association of Chief Ambulance Officers

Association of Chief Police Officers

Association of Principal Fire Officers

Audit Commission

Borough Councils

British Retail Consortium

Central Fire Brigades Advisory Council (England and Wales)

Chief and Assistant Chief Fire Officers' Association

Chief Police Officers

Confederation of British Industry

County Councils

District Councils

English Heritage

Environment Agency

Federation of Small Businesses

Fire Authorities in England, Wales and Northern Ireland

Fire Brigades in England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Jersey, Guernsey and Isle of Man

Fire Brigades Union

Fire Officers Association

Fire Protection Association

Fire Risk Management Advisory Board

Fire Safety Advisory Board

Fire Service College

Health and Safety Executive

HM Chief Inspector of Fire Services (Scotland)

Institution of Fire Engineers

Local Government Association

Members of Parliament

Metropolitan Councils

National Assembly for Wales

National Health Service Ambulance Trusts

National Joint Council for Local Authorities' Fire Brigades

National Trust

Northern Ireland Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety

Relevant Government Departments

Retained Firefighters Union

Scottish Executive

Unitary Councils

Welsh Local Government Association