Agenda item

To consider a report

7.1       DCFO Hopkinson submitted the Quarter 4 and year-end project and performance report. He advised that a new project to replace the fleet management system had been added to the Service Delivery Programme Report. There may be opportunities to merge this with the asset tracking report and this was currently being considered.

7.2       The majority of projects were on track to deliver their outcomes within the targeted timescale with the exception of two projects.

7.3       The co-responding project which was reporting as red as the national trials had been suspended as part on the ongoing national pay and conditions negotiations.

7.4       The Emergency Services Mobile Communications Programme was reporting as amber due to changes in the national programme, which was currently being reviewed.

7.5       In relation to the co-location of the Ambulance Service at Dunstable Community Fire Station, SOC I Evans advised that the Ambulance Service had decided to locate their vehicles elsewhere and this opportunity for collaborative working was no longer being pursued.

7.6       In response to a question, SOC I Evans provided the background relating to the replacement mobilising system and the reasons why a procurement process had commenced for a new system. The primary reason was that Essex Fire and Rescue Service had decided to procure a new system that would be compliant with the new Emergency Services Network (ESN) with Essex Police, Kent Fire and Rescue Service and Kent Police. Therefore there was no option to extend the partnership agreement beyond the contractual end date of late 2019/early 2020. There was also a significant cost associated with upgrading the current system to ensure that it was ESN compliant and minor glitches relating to the data capture functionality with the system creating “ghost data”.

7.7       Members were assured that the data reporting glitches did not affect the mobilisation of appliances and resources and that the current system was more robust, effective and resilient than the Service’s previous mobilising system.

7.8       Members requested an update on the RMS project, including some background information, focusing on the option that had been selected as the way forward and the scope of the work to be undertaken in partnership with Cambridgeshire and Suffolk Fire and Rescue Services.

7.9       DCFO Hopkinson presented the performance information for Quarter 4 and year-end. The target for Pi01 (the rate and number of primary fires) had been exceeded by 7%. This was largely attributable to increases in dwelling and road vehicle fires and reflected a national increase in these types of fires. The Service was actively working with partners to identify targeted action that could be introduced to combat this increase.

7.10     Pi02 (the rate and number of primary fire fatalities) had missed its target as there had been four fire fatalities during the year. One incident related to a late call of fire, two had been non-accidental and the final incident the individual had passed away days after the actual fire. The findings of the Coroner’s inquests were awaited.

7.11     Pi03 (the rate and number of primary fire injuries) had exceeded its target by 6. There had also been 27 fire injuries during 2017/18. The majority of injuries resulted in outpatient treatment with injuries that were not designated as serious.

7.12     Pi04 (the number and rate of deliberate (arson) fires) had exceeded its target by 19%. This was attributable to an increase in criminal activity.

7.13     DCFO advised that he had discussed with the Deputy Chief Constable the undertaking of an arson case study, which would examine every step of the process, from the incident itself through to investigation and prosecution.

7.14     DCFO Hopkinson reported that publication of the national fire statistics for 2017/18 was anticipated shortly and the results of this would be submitted to a future meeting of the Group to benchmark performance of the Service against other services in the national league tables.

7.15     Pi05 (the rate and number of accidental dwelling fires) had missed its target by 2%. There had been a noticeable increase in “cooking accident” fires and Cooking Safety continued to be a focus of the Safe and Well visits.

7.16     In relation to the increase in deliberate fires, SOC I Evans confirmed that the Service worked closely with the Police. This included data sharing, the Arson Reduction Officers working closely with the Police Neighbourhood Policing Teams and joint fire investigations. Two prolific arsonists from the Leighton Buzzard area had been successfully prosecuted as a result of collaborative working between the Police and Fire Service.

7.17     Vehicle fires accounted for approximately 200 of the 874 fires which was an increase of 7% from the previous year. 569 of the fires were classified as outdoor fires.

7.18     DCFO Hopkinson reported that, due to data capture glitches mentioned earlier in the discussion, performance data for Pi11 (percentage of occasions when our response times for critical fire incidents were met), Pi16 (the percentage of 999 calls answered in 7 seconds) and Pi17 (the percentage of 999 calls mobilised to in 60 seconds or less) was not yet available.

7.19     In relation to Pi26 (the percentage of fire safety audits carried out on high and very high risk premises), DCFO Hopkinson advised that 100 of the 112 identified high and very high risk premises had been audited at year end. The remaining premises had not been inspected for a number of reasons including that some properties were being redeveloped, for some the Service was not the enforcing authority and the audits for two premises had been extended to a two-yearly interval following a desktop exercise on risk.

7.20     In response to a question, SOC I Evans advised that the Service was not the primary authority with responsibility for inspections of Luton Football Club. This was undertaken by Luton Borough Council as part of the licensing arrangements for sports stadia. He assured Members that the Service was fully involved in supporting fire safety measures at the premises.

7.21     DCFO Hopkinson reassured Members that, even when the Service was not the enforcing authority, such as for Crown properties, the Service still gathered intelligence on the premises as part of familiarisation visits to identify risks so that the Service could respond effectively in the event of an emergency.

7.22     Reports from national incidents, such as the fire at Grenfell Tower, were considered to ensure that the Service was adopting any learning arising from those incidents.

7.23     DCFO Hopkinson reported on the feasibility study that had been undertaken relating to a shared Police and Fire Headquarters. It was anticipated that an options paper would be submitted to a future meeting of the Authority.

7.24     The Group was also advised that a drone had been ordered in collaboration with Bedfordshire Police and that delivery of the drone was now awaited.

RESOLVED:

1.         That the progress made on the Service Delivery Programmes and Performance be acknowledged.

2.         That the Group receive a report on the Replacement Mobilising System at its next meeting.

3.         That the Group receive a report on the arson case study at its next meeting.