|
|
1 |
Summary |
|
|
1.1 |
The objective RE1c contained within the IRMP for 2007/10 referred to the `Introduction of a first response Vehicle (FRV) at Redbridge Fire Station'. |
|
|
1.2 |
This evaluation report focuses on the above corporate objective as well as the original objectives outlined within the SMT Paper (submitted on the 10th October 2005) in conjunction with the 2007 IRMP Corporate Briefing Document which identifies specific project outputs and outcomes. |
|
|
1.3 |
This report concludes that the outcomes previously identified have successfully been implemented and that a number of further development opportunities have been identified as a result of the evaluation process. |
|
|
2 |
Recommendations |
|
|
2.1 |
That the Performance Review and Scrutiny Committee note the content of this evaluation report and acknowledge that the objective RE1C of the IRMP for 2007/10 has been achieved. |
|
|
3 |
Introduction and Background |
|
|
3.1 |
Throughout 2005 work commenced to determine alternative ways of responding to the smaller, but more frequent incident types regularly attended by HFRS Crews. The concept of an FRV had already been successfully trialled within other Fire and Rescue Authorities and therefore the Service Management Team undertook the decision to conduct a similar scoping exercise within HFRS. |
|
|
3.2 |
To this end, in April 2006 Redbridge Fire Station conducted a formal trial aimed at ascertaining the feasibility of operating such a vehicle from within a busy urban fireground with a prevalence of secondary fires. The results of the trial provided sufficient evidence to support the subsequent design and build of Hampshire's inaugural dedicated FRV (First Response Vehicle). It also provided evidence for us to consider organisational development via the corporate objectives within Our Fire and Rescue Service Plan 2009-2012 in terms of: o "Developing risk-based response standards for specific incident types" o "Developing response vehicles to better meet our needs".
|
|
|
3.3 |
On 30th November 2007, (in line with the Services Integrated Risk Management Plan 2007/10) the FRV was introduced into the HFRS operational fleet with the express purpose of attending smaller incident types. The vehicle was subsequently stationed at Redbridge and is currently staffed by 2 Firefighters (one of which is always a competent Level 1 Commander). The same 2 individuals will simultaneously dual-crew the Aerial Ladder Platform. |
|
|
4 |
Environmental Impact |
|
|
4.1 |
It is considered that the environmental impact has been reduced as a result of the FRV replacing the Water Tender at Redbridge. The FRV is a smaller vehicle with less emissions, it also uses a small self contained engine to power the fire extinguishing equipment rather than the vehicles larger road engine. |
|
|
4.2 |
The introduction of an FRV at Redbridge is considered as providing a faster response to incidents which should result in the incident being brought under control or extinguished more rapidly resulting in less emissions from the fire. |
|
|
4.3 |
The method of extinguishing fires uses a pump supplying water at a very high pressure, this leads to an efficient knockdown of the fire reducing the amount of water used and the amount that runs off as a result of firefighting. |
|
|
5 |
Contribution to Corporate Aims and Objectives |
|
|
5.1 |
The original 2005 paper submitted to SMT, in conjunction with the 2007 IRMP Corporate Briefing Document identified the following specific project outputs and outcomes: |
|
|
5.2 |
Output - "Introduce a First Response Vehicle into Station 53 prior to the end of December 2007". Outcome - As previously mentioned, 53FRV was introduced into the operational fleet on the 30th November 2007. |
|
|
5.3 |
Output - "Establish an additional Water Tender at Station 54 in order to maintain the appropriate number of Pumping Appliances within the Southampton Group." Outcome - On the afternoon of 30th November 2007 the Water Tender was removed from Redbridge and redeployed to St Mary's. This subsequently created a spare capacity of 20 additional Firefighters (5 per Watch) and therefore these personnel were transferred to Winchester and St Mary's fire stations. These moves supported the corporate objectives to change the duty system at Winchester to Continuous Crewing and establish a Retained Duty System appliance at St Mary's. |
|
|
5.4 |
Output - "Identify and build a vehicle suitably equipped to provide the following key specifications: Seating for 2 Persons 4 x 4 Capabilities On-Board fire fighting equipment (c/w Water Tank) Respiratory Protection Ancillary Equipment On-Board Vehicle Safety Measures Chosen vehicle must remain within the specified weight limitations"
Outcome - The chosen vehicle was a Nissan Nivara (2 Seater). The vehicle is spacious and capable of housing the required ancillary equipment including two breathing apparatus sets. However, throughout the implementation period, the following factors have provided areas for further development: - Vehicle Weight - Although within the legal axle weight limits some drivers reported the vehicles tendencies to "Wallow" when driven at speeds in excess of 40 mph, whilst others identified that the increased rear-axle weight resulted in "light and playful steering". - Scene Lighting - This issue was raised at an early stage of implementation and despite the inclusion of "Take-Down Lights" (within the Roof Bar) personnel have repeatedly expressed concerns in relation Crew Safety when working at night - Single BA Wearer Safety - Despite the inclusion of the BA Comfort Wear Board, several Supervisory Managers reported specific safety considerations associated with an attendance at Car Fires. (Reports stated that wearers were disappearing from the "line of sight") - Safety Camera - On occasions crews have been subjected to verbal attacks and varying degrees of antisocial behaviour. The lack of any Safety Camera equipment have resulted in the operating crews feeling both isolated and vulnerable.
|
|
|
5.5 |
Output - "Identify and Build a vehicle suitably equipped to effectively deal with smaller, more frequent incidents including: Car Fires (Primary and Secondary) Grass Fires Refuse Fires Outdoor Structures (Street Furniture)"
Outcome - Since the introduction of the FRV on the 30th November 2007, 53FRV has attended a total of 765 Secondary Incidents. The majority of incidents attended received excellent reviews from the attending Supervisory Managers. However, 2 specific incident types have repeatedly highlighted areas for further consideration: - Water Supplies at car fires - Despite the rapid knock-down effect of the Fire Express unit, its limited supply of water has resulted in a reduced capacity to effectively cool a deep seated vehicle fire. It is for this reason that the majority of well involved car fires have reignited therefore requiring the attendance of an additional pumping appliance (20% of occasions). This clearly shows, however, that on 80% of occasions a pump with a full crew has not been needed to extinguish car fires. - Refuse Container Fires - The Fire Express Spray cannot penetrate deep into the materials contained inside. The more traditional, but extremely effective extinguishing method is to utilise the "open-end" of a 70mm hose line - a facility not available on the FRV
|
|
|
5.6 |
Output - "First Response Vehicles will make the most effective use of our Human and Physical Resources when responding to small fires in the open air" Outcome - Given the high volume of calls attended by the FRV since its introduction in November 2007 (765) it can be justifiably proven that efficiency savings will have been realised: Reduction in the Redbridge establishment of 5 FF Per Watch = 20 Posts FF Annual Salary (+ 30% oncosts) = 33,000 Therefore 20 x 33,000 = £660,000 efficiency savings that have been re-deployed (Source: HFRS Finance Dept) |
|
|
5.7 |
Output - "Reduction in the impact on both Training and Community Safety caused by crews of 4/5/6 attending minor incidents." Outcome - No baseline data was established in 2007 and as such there is insufficient evidence to either support or refute the suggestion that the inclusion of an FRV a station 53 has reduced the impact currently placed upon both Training and Community Safety activities. Despite an increased productivity and performance level within both of these key areas, it would be difficult to prove that this was a direct result of the FRV's implementation as opposed to the recent introduction of "Beacon Status" Performance Indicators and the success of the arson reduction initiatives across the Southampton Group. |
|
|
6 |
Conclusions |
|
|
6.1 |
In conclusion it can be considered that the introduction of the First Response Vehicle has achieved the objectives outlined in section 5. Since its' introduction the FRV has provided an average attendance time of 6'02". The average attendance time target for HFRS (LPI 20b) is 6'81". The performance of the FRV is comparable to the attendance performance of the water tender prior to its' introduction. Across the Southampton Group there has been an overall improvement in attendance times since the implementation of the FRV (7% Improvement). It is considered that this will be as a combined result of improved performance as a result of the Beacon Station initiative, the introduction of the FRV and the move of the RDS appliance to St Mary's. |
|
|
6.2 |
However, it is important to note that four key considerations remain outstanding: · Vehicle weight · Scene Lighting · BA Operations · Safety camera
(See Para 5.1) These issues will be resolved prior to the implementation of any subsequent First Response Vehicles by the Response Vehicle Project group. |
|
|
6.3 |
Notwithstanding the areas for further consultation/development, the FRV has undoubtedly proven to be a valuable asset within HFRS operational fleet. Its ability to extinguish secondary fires more economically and efficiently has now demonstrated the potential to review the current crewing levels on our fire stations. |
|
|
6.4 |
Identified opportunities for potential organisational development |
|
|
|
As a result of the evaluation process the following potential organisational improvements have been identified for consideration: |
|
|
6.4.1 |
Explore the potential for the FRV to become a Group resource - as previously identified, the Southampton Group (SG) are subjected to a large number of secondary fires throughout the year which impacts negatively upon resources. However, the FRV (ideal for such a response) could be more effectively utilised in order to attend any of these incidents therefore reducing the individual impact placed upon the city stations. The FRV could attend the majority of these incidents throughout Southampton City within the current 8/80 timeframes (nearer 100% of calls if the FRV was repositioned to St Mary's during busy periods of the day) and furthermore, could achieve these objectives in a far greater efficient and economic manner. This element would support the corporate objective to "Develop response vehicles to better meet our risks" within Our Fire and Rescue Service Plan 2009-2012. |
|
|
6.4.2 |
Increase the response area- If relocating the FRV (either temporary or permanently) is not an option then the current response area could be increased to 10 minutes (expanding outwards from Redbridge). This would effectively provide additional cover to areas including Totton, Romsey and the city centre. Such additional coverage would ultimately reduce the impact upon all local stations. This element should be directly linked to the corporate objective to "Develop risk-based response standards for specific incident types" within Our Fire and Rescue Service Plan 2009-2012. |
|
|
6.4.3 |
Trial the vehicle as a first responder appliance - As highlighted within recent reports, HFRS attends an increasingly large number of Preventable Incidents every year and as such the most recent Fire and Rescue Services Plan 2009/11 highlights this issue as one of its primary objectives. Both Automatic Fire Alarms and Lift Rescues (non-emergency) currently impact upon the Service's resources considerably due to the level of attendance that they currently attract. However, the FRV could be utilised as a "First Responder Appliance" to such incident types therefore removing the requirement for the full PDA. Should the requirement for additional resources prove necessary then the OIC could make-up accordingly. |
|
|
7 |
Resource Implications. |
|
|
7.1 |
None applicable |
|
|
8 |
People Impact Assessment |
|
|
8.1 |
An Equality Impact Assessment was completed at the time of the IRMP. This will be reviewed to produce a People Impact Assessment (PIA) by the Response Vehicle Project group. |
|
|
9 |
Consultation |
|
|
9.1 |
Consultation was conducted for the 2007/10 IRMP for the public and all other internal and external stakeholders. |
|
|
10 |
Risk Analysis |
|
|
10.1 |
The greatest risk identified within the evaluation process are safety considerations raised within paragraph 5.4. |
|
|
10.2 |
Naturally there will be risks associated with each of the additional opportunities highlighted in section 2 and a full risk assessment will be conducted as appropriate.. |
|
|
Background Information (Section 100D of Local Government Act 1972) |
|
|
The following documents disclose the facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of the report: SMT FRV Discussion Paper - October 2005 HFRS Integrated Risk Management Plan 2006/09 FRV Standard Operating Procedures - November 2007 FRV 1 Month Review/Report - January 2008 FRV 3 Month Review/Report - April 2008 FRV 6 Month Final Handover Report - July 2008 Our Fire and Rescue Service Plan 2008/11 Our Fire and Rescue Service Plan 2009/12 Southampton Group Community Risk Reduction Plan 2009/11 Note: The list excludes: (1) published works; and (2) documents that disclose exempt or confidential information defined in the Act. |
