Agenda item

To consider a report

17.1     DCFO Hopkinson submitted the Quarter 1 2018/19 project and performance report. The format of the report had been amended so that the exceptions were reported with the relevant section of the report rather than having both the project and performance exception reports together. 

17.2     In relation to the project exceptions, DCFO Hopkinson reported that the Co-responding Project was RAG rated Red as the co-responding trials remained on hold subject to the ongoing national negotiations around pay and terms and conditions.

17.3     The Emergency Services Mobile Communications Programme project was RAG rated Amber awaiting the outcome of a national review of the project.

17.4     DCFO Hopkinson advised that the Policy and Challenge Group would be receiving a separate report on the Replacement Mobilising System later on in the meeting. 

17.5     The Asset Management and Fleet Management System had been updated to Green as a report was being submitted to the Fire and Rescue Authority at its next meeting to request that a reduced budget for the project be brought forward into the current financial year to allow the project to progress.

17.6     The Collaborative Working project was RAG rated as Green with a number of initiatives continuing to be progressed. The initial options appraisal for a joint Headquarters undertaken would be submitted to the next meeting of the Fire and Rescue Authority. A drone had now been purchased and joint training with the Police had commenced. The Red Routes trial in Luton and would commence on 1 October 2018.

17.7     The Blue Light Collaboration Event held on 1 August 2018 had been very successful and was well received by staff and others who attended, such as the Chair of the Authority and the Police and Crime Commissioner.  Another workshop would be held in the New Year focussing on community safety.

17.8     The PPE project was RAG rated Green as the call-off contract had been signed and a contacts set-up meeting with the new supplier had taken place.

17.9     The Retained Duty System Improvement Project was RAG rated Green. The supplier of the availability module for the Retained Duty System had also been selected to provide a system for the Whole-time Duty Management System Improvement Project.

17.10    Members who had attended the station visit the previous evening reported that some firefighters had expressed concern about collaboration, and that there was some misinformation about what this included. DCFO Hopkinson advised that the Corporate Management Team was seeking to address this in a number of ways, including the extension of management briefing days, more internal communications and visits of senior Officers to stations.

17.11   SOC Jeffrey introduced the performance report for the first quarter of 2018/19 and referred to the exception reports.

17.12   PI08 (the average response time to primary fire incidents) had missed its target by 13%. The indicator measuring average response times to dwellings (PI09) had performed at 9% above target levels, indicating that the average response time had been missed for incidents that were in more remote parts of the County and were not the most high-risk. There were also incidents that had been identified where the arrival of the second appliance had overwritten the arrival of first appliance and these had had to be manually overwritten.

17.13   DCFO Hopkinson reported on a large piece of work that was being undertaken as part of the development of a new Community Risk Management Plan that sought to identify risks and requirements for the Service at both the present time and 10-15 years in the future, taking into account the extensive growth planned for in the County. This would also evaluate if the Service’s resources were in the right locations to mitigate against the risks identified. He confirmed that this would also take into account growth at both London Luton Airport and Cranfield Airport.

17.14   In relation to Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy funding, SOC Evans reported that all three constituent local authorities had agreed that developers would be required to provide fire hydrants by condition in planning permission for large developments. It was understood that very large developments, such as Cambourne in Cambridgeshire, could release funding for the provision of a new fire station, although this had not yet been the case in Bedfordshire. 

17.15   The target for PI11 (the average call-handling time to mobilise to primary fires) had been missed by 40%. This related to 9 calls which had call-handling times ranging from 61 seconds to 440 seconds. The top five in terms of length had been analysed and the reasons for the length of time had been identified as wrong information given by the caller, the caller not knowing the location of the incident and over the border incidents which required coordination with other Fire and Rescue Services. It was recognised that this only related to a small number of incidents, which would be fully investigated, and that performance would continue to be monitored.

17.16   Members asked for information on the 440 second call.

17.17   PI12, (number of “false alarm malicious”/”hoax calls” mobilised to) 13 (number of “false alarm malicious”/”hoax calls” not attended) and 14 (number of “false alarm good intent” mobilised to) had all missed their targets.

17.18   In relation to PI12, there had been 58 calls during the reporting period and 33 were mobilised to. The calls would need to be monitored to ensure that there was enough call challenge.

17.19   There did not appear to be any identifiable trends, although there were repeat offenders.

17.20   Over half of the mobilisations to false alarm good intent calls were to controlled burning or fires on open ground.

17.21   It was noted that there was a process by which landowners could advise the Service that they were undertaking controlled burns and this could then be entered onto the mobilising system to prevent mobilisations to those fires. Councillor Franks suggested that this should be publicised more widely to raise awareness of this facility.

17.22   PI17 (the percentage of fire safety audits carried out on high and very high risk premises) was an annual target and the audit scheduling throughout the year was not evenly distributed. SOC Evans reassured Members that the target would be met by the end of the year.

17.23   PI18 (the rate and number of fires in non-domestic buildings) had missed its target by 18%. There were a small number of fires of this type and therefore performance was subject to fluctuation. Of the 37 fires during the quarter, 9 were classified as deliberate, including 3 separate incidents at HMP Bedford. 20 were minor fires contained to the first item ignited and 7 were confined to the room of origin. The fire at Bedfordshire Growers was one of the incidents reported under this indicator.

17.24   SOC Evans advised that HMP Bedford had experienced a high number of fires people had to be rescued or led to safety. This was of a significant concern and the decision had been made to write to the authority responsible for the Prison as previous concerns had been raised with the Deputy Governor.

17.25   Members requested that a report on the Service’s liaison with HMP Prison be submitted to a future meeting of the Policy and Challenge Group.

17.26   It was noted that HMP Bedford was currently in special measures, as well as being the subject of an official warning letter submitted to the Justice Secretary.

17.27   Of the 37 non-domestic premises, 29 had previously received a fire safety audit. After fire inspections had been undertaken by a Fire Safety Inspection Officer at 28 of the premises. No specific issues had been identified as part of that process.

17.28   The Policy and Challenge Group was advised that the Service worked closely with local authorities and registered social landlords on fire safety issues.

17.29   SOC Jeffrey referred to the appendix of the report setting out the information measures. There had been 116 road traffic collisions during the quarter and 2 water deaths, both in Bedford Borough.

17.30   SOC Evans reported that the Service had recently been involved in a pilot project to develop an innovative new water rescue device being used as an alternative to the traditional lifebuoys that are placed alongside the banks of rivers and water ways, including the River Ouse in Bedford. Designed in partnership, the Portsafe rescue system uses an extendable ‘reach and rescue’ pole that is contained in a lockable box and stands on the water’s edge similar to the traditional lifebuoy. But unlike the lifebuoy, it is secure and tamper proof. To get the pole they’ll need to call the Fire Service on 999 for a code to unlock it, which means we’ll also be on our way to assist.

17.31   DCFO Hopkinson reported that this product had been developed by the supplier in conjunction with the Service’s technical support team. The Community Safety team had been recognised at the Service Awards evening for their efforts to deploy these devices along the River Ouse in Bedford.  An article had been published in a fire publication explaining how the device worked and this could be circulated to Members for information.

RESOLVED:

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

2.         That a report on the Service’s liaison with HMP Bedford be submitted to a future meeting of the Policy and Challenge Group.

(Note: at the end of the meeting, SOC G Jeffrey reported that the 440 second call had been received from a caller driving down the M1 reporting a fire on the opposite side of the carriageway. The driver did not know his/her location and was unable to provide information on landmarks that would allow the location of the fire to be identified.)