Risk Assessments

[Dave Harris]

I would be grateful for your comments regarding Fire Risk Assessments carried out under the Workplace regs. Whilst I see some (in my opinion) very good assessments, a lot just consist of a tick box type form where, for instance a question asks: Is the means of giving warning in case of fire adequate? or: Is the means of escape adequate? Whilst a tick in the "Yes" box, if entered by a competent person could mean a perfectly good standard, it could also be the opposite.

The Workplace regs requires the preventive and the protective measures to be recorded if over five employed, would this include a  fire alarm system or protected staircase for instance? I may be naive but I like to see what I call "control measures" to be identified in the assessment, i.e., means of giving warning, protected routes, exits etc, as well as identifying the safety measures in place it also helps for any employer who hasn't actually carried out the assessment to know which walls are required to fire resisting, which doors are required for means of escape, etc.

Thanks in anticipation

[wee brian]

One of the things that Glyn Evans was advocating in parliament the other day was that there should be a specific requirement for a "plan". I think he had in mind the kind of drawing that comes with a fire certificate.

He may have a point, its difficult to record preventive and protective measures with a tick sheet.

[afterburner]

Couldn't agree more Wee Brian. I have used fire defence plans on all my FRA's to show the advised outcomes (thankfully I have access to a CAD facility which does the plans for me!). The plans relay the protection measures and all fire defence features on a couple of A3 sheets instead of scads of tick box explanations. I'm not sure how I would achieve this without a CAD system and expert operators to generate the plans!

[Ian Currie]

Dave
I use a questionnaire system covering the normal fire risk assessment areas. Each question has a reference number and a is worded for yes/no answers. Any 'no' answer has to have a corresponding remedial action. This is backed up by a set of plans based on the FPA certificate style. I use the the 'yellow route' to identify principle escape routes rather than structural protected areas as in a certificate. My strategy being to bring these routes up to that standard anyway.

The questionnaire is, perhaps, rather lengthy and in different premises some question groups are redundant; but I believe it is necessary to show that you have considered these aspects. Many RA's I see only list the deficiencies so you can't tell if all aspects have been considered.

Additionally, this format allows someone with limited training to conduct a meaningfull review using the plans and questionnaire for guidance. There are specific review questions included in the questionnaire.  

Yes, I know this sounds like a cut-down fire certificate, but for this purpose I thought FPA certificates worked very well, whatever the shortcomings of the actual FPA.

Hope this helps.

[AnthonyB]

Sadly most tickbox and similar FRAs that we see are completed by people with little idea.

E.g. When they tick yes to Is the means of giving warning in case of fire adequate? all they've done is note that the building has a fire alarm fitted that goes off every week. At a basic level this is OK, but they take no account of whether that system has adequate AFD, whether it's audible everywhere or if it has a battery back up etc

Extinguishers usually means that they've got some, not whether they suit the risk or not

MoE usually means they've got another door (regardless of fastening)

A common classic is the office manager who filled in the tick sheet FRA & didn't even know they have emergency lighting! (Damn these aesthetic sustained units - the old bricks were easy to spot)

When you are dealing with the corner shop example (as per the NW Brigades leaflet) this is fine, but large complex multi occ's are different.

We all may moan about brigade FPO's from time to time, but at least they have extensive training and experience whereas most FRAs I see are by untrained HR or Office Managers or by H&S people with no fire specific training other than what extinguisher to use

[Chris Houston]

Sadly most tickbox and similar FRAs that we see are completed by people with little idea.

E.g. When they tick yes to Is the means of giving warning in case of fire adequate? all they've done is note that the building has a fire alarm fitted that goes off every week. At a basic level this is OK, but they take no account of whether that system has adequate AFD, whether it's audible everywhere or if it has a battery back up etc

Extinguishers usually means that they've got some, not whether they suit the risk or not

MoE usually means they've got another door (regardless of fastening)

A common classic is the office manager who filled in the tick sheet FRA & didn't even know they have emergency lighting! (Damn these aesthetic sustained units - the old bricks were easy to spot)

I agree 100%  Many of them are filled in by people who don't have a clue about what they are assessing.

[Dave Harris]

Thanks for the interest shown so far, although I  agree entirely that in my opinion tick box type forms do not tell you anything about the hazards and risks in the premise and the control measures in place, but do they fulfil the requirements of the Workplace Regs?

[AnthonyB]

I would doubt it, but until a few brigades actually start enforcing and prosecuting we won't have any case law to refer to. The flexibility of the guidance doesn't give any clues hence the wide variation in assessments - my guess is until either there are a few test cases or there is a more prescriptive framework (both unlikely) we'll not know.

Some brigades are starting to enforce FRAs under FP(W) but so far this extends to them requiring them to be done, not bothering to actually check the finished document.

If an FRA actually goes through the 5 stages in the guidance then it's on the right lines, but many just look at the fire precautions rather than a good look at ignition sources and combustibles.

It's not a new situation in safety - most supposed COSHH assessments carried out by workplaces are just a straight copy of the CHIP Hazard Data Sheet with no mention of the processes the substances are used for or the heirarchy of controls, etc

[wee brian]

At least with FRA's the employer will give some thought to fire safety. If you consider every business in the land doing this it must have some impact.

Fire Brigades can then pick out those places that need a bit more and put them on the inspection list (when they get round to it)

Given that this is the best we can hope for would it be a better idea if we said that FRA's must me reviewed (signed?) at least once a year?

I know the idea that Risk assesments should be constantly updated but in the real world if there is no clear minimum then it may not have the effect we may want.

[marty]

Its not at all easy auditing/validating something that can be as subjective as a tick in the box.  

Guidence documents that are available will direct and give best practice. Man regs ACOP gives definition of 'suitable and sufficient' and states that signifcant findings should include :- preventative and protective measures in place to control risks. In my opinion a plan or narrated description would suffice.

ACOP will also direct to HSE guide to H & S management (HSG 65). This requires policy,organising, planning, measuring performance and audit review performance to be included in risk assessments.  A tick box FRA will not cover these points fully.

With no template or definitive RA style, referalls to these documents and a demonstration of compliance with these illustrate good practice.

Brigades will have to develop policies to enable officers to challenge/develop/assisst/audit/validate RA, quickly.  

Consultants, employers etc will have to show compliance with WP regs to ensure they are fufilling there duties ensuring suitable and sufficient RA.

[colin todd]

Plans do not mean that the standard of fire safety is any better, Its just another charter for consultants and doubles the cost of a FRA at the same time. The requirement is to record the significant findings. The fact that there is an extinguisher at position A on plan is not a significant finding. A health and safety risk assesssment does not show the location of all the first aid boxes on a plan. Do the HSE need plans showing the guards on machines in order to inspect premises and confirmn that the employer's risk assessment is OK.

[Dave Harris]

Colin,

From the paragraph copied below from the management regs, do not the protective and preventive measures include the means of escape, means of giving warning etc?

Health and safety arrangements
     5.  - (1) Every employer shall make and give effect to such arrangements as are appropriate, having regard to the nature of his activities and the size of his undertaking, for the effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring and review of the preventive and protective measures.

    (2) Where the employer employs five or more employees, he shall record the arrangements referred to in paragraph (1).

[colin todd]

Of course they do. They mean, by definition, anything called for in part ll of the FP(W) Regs. That does not mean you need to write out a description of them if they are all satisfactory.

[Guest]

I believe that the Fire service college have developed a performance based Fire Risk Assessment method based on a Risk Assessment that originated in the USA, they term it the "Method" it takes account of not only life safety aspects but also property protection and business continuity. Has anyone adopted this method and if so, I would appreciate any feedback on the approach to carrying out this assessment and the actual format.

Many Thanks

[Ken Taylor]

Perhaps a further annex to 'Fire Safety: An Employer's Guide' providing a comprehensive list of suggested subjects to be covered/ questions to be answered within fire risk assessments would assist employers and others in producing more useful assessment forms?