FireNet Community
THE REGULATORY REFORM (FIRE SAFETY) ORDER 2005 => Q & A => Topic started by: Sunny on January 22, 2008, 10:43:41 AM
-
Hi All,
I've recently took up a new post within a Primary School as Admin Assistant but one of my task role involves me carrying out a thorough Fire Risk Assessment of the whole school.
The thing is there is no procedure/assessment in place which i can follow and review as i go along - i have been advised to do the FRA from scratch using some guidance notes from the West Midlands Fire Service about keeping your school in business.
I've put together few notes and have looked around/inspected the school - all i wanted to know is that should i have underatken some sort of training for this part of my role? Its just that i have worked within the admin/customer service sector for good 10yrs now and have never been involved in carrying out a Fire Risk Assessment so i wanted to ensure that i dont miss anything off.
Plz let me kno wat u lot think - many thanx in advance.
Sunny
-
Your first stop should be the www.communities.gov.uk website- follow the links for fire and resilience and then fire safety law and guidance for business.
There is a simple guidance document and more detailed guidance documents for a range of different types of premises- the educatiuonal premises is your first choice but the one for small assembly buildings may also be relevant if the building is also used outside hours for community use.
The West Midlands fire document- from its title may be more about arson prevention and ccontingency planning rather than life safety?
How big is the school?- how many floors, how many staff, how many pupils, any use outside school hours, what type of building- bricks and mortar or prefabricated? How old?
Thats enough for starters I guess.
-
Congratulations on realising your limitations - that's something many people asked to do the fire risk assessment at their workplace can signally fail to do. The Fire Protection Association www.thefpa.co.uk and others do one-day courses on fire risk assessment (FRA) which should assist you; the FPA also do a DVD-based guide to FRAs and a complete package of DVD and three related books.
You should also download the official guide on Educational Premises from www.firesafetyguides.communities.gov.uk - this gives substantial detail on what is required to comply with the law and should help you to carry out your task.
I assume that your school has appointed a 'Responsible Person' as the law requires; you need to closely liaise with them on the fire risk assessment as eventually they are the one legally responsible for having it done and acting on its findings.
Best of luck!
-
Thank you both for such swift responses - u've pointed me in the right direction...
John> I assume dat i am d responsible person as there is no one else lookin over this task - i jus hav to put my findings together and produce a FRA report format for head to look over - i was wondering already whether there should be another person as a back-up who looks over findings in details, etc. im' confused?
-
Sunny, sounds like you need to attend a one day course. It will become a bit clearer then. What you have been asked to do carries a huge responsibility, so do not be afraid to say 'stop-I am not qualified to do this'. Your employer must provide you with training to carry out this task as they would any task they may ask you to do. This is not just another 'tick sheet' exercise. Lives are at stake and your employer needs to act responsibly and not just act to placate the law.
-
The West Midlands fire document- from its title may be more about arson prevention and ccontingency planning rather than life safety?
The whole of the West Mids region is pushing this they do include fire risk assessments available from the link below or free hard copy from participating Fire & Rescue services. Two documents are available Keep your Business in Business and Keep your School in Business
http://www.wmarsontaskforce.gov.uk
The feedback I have received from the public is that they are difficult to understand and fill in.
-
As Kurnal said " from its title may be more about arson prevention and contingency planning rather than life safety?" and the the source of the document "West Midlands Arson Task Force" says it all.
You first need to identify who the Responsible Person is, all the links you require should be found at http://www.firesafe.org.uk/html/legislation/rrfsord.htm
-
Thank you both for such swift responses - u've pointed me in the right direction...
John> I assume dat i am d responsible person as there is no one else lookin over this task ....
The RR(FS)O (it's a lot shorter to say than the full title!) requires every workplace to appoint a 'Responsible Person' (RP) who is legally 'responsible' for seeing that the requirements of the law are carried out. This is a formal appointment and should be made by the headmaster and school govenors. The person needs to be given a budget and any necessary training so that they can carry out their task properly. Carry on with sorting out the FRA, but if there is no appointed RP this needs to be highlighted at the start of the FRA report.
-
John
Sorry to pick you up mate but the RRFSO doesn't require a Responsible person to be appointed.
But thats not important. The key issue is that Sunny has been given the job to do the FRA. It would be reasonable ask the employer for at least a basic training course. Sunny can then decide to do it alone or take advice from a consultant.
-
I agree Wee Brian. The responsible person is defined in the order..you cannot appoint one. What the responsible must do is carry out a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment. They can of course appoint someone to do that on their behalf and that appeas to be you Sunny.
Well done for recognising your limitations and in my opinion you should ask for training and/or further assistance to carry out the task.
-
Now my way of thinking in all this is that Article 3(a) of the RR(FSO) would apply to the school.
And it states that a responsible person means in relation to a workplace, the "employer" and this is clearly not Sunny.
Article 18 states that the responsible person (which to me is clearly not Sunny) must appoint one or more
"competent persons" to assist him in undertaking the preventive and protective measures.
Again, at this time this surely cannot be Sunny.
As I always thought that a competent person should have the necessary training, experience, and knowledge in current fire safety legislation and good practices and realise heir own limitations, to come within that category?
And surely that means more than a 1 day fire risk assessment course, (yes it may give an understanding, but surely not adeqaute to be let loose next day.
Of course no offence to Sunny, but I am sure I am not deemed competent to stand in for Sunny this term( no comments please)
I have recently carried out an audit at a local primary school, really never entered such places in the past, except maybe certain areas for licensing.
And it initially appeared to me that the poor headteacher was given a copy of a FRA, that had been carried out by the council fire advisor, with a load of "significant findings" which were all in the negative, and basically told its now down to you to sort this all out
This included matters relating to means of escape, producing an emeregency plan and fire safety policy, all of which was to me well out of the headteachers remit and control.
The head told me that he and all other heads in our city get an annual budget, each school varying, but his was under £2000, and purely for repair and maintenance, I aksed for what he said things like, decorating the rooms, a new carpet if necessary, repairs in toliets which he said was very common, he even said repairs to the gutters was a sore point, but his budget had nothing to do with fire safety at all, so just to clarify, I asked if an emergency light, or a fire alarm sounder or call point was damaged or it was identified that several fire exit signs were out of date, would any of that come out his budget , and he replied no.
So it was clear that the headteacher was clearly not the "responsible person under your Article 3(a) it was clearly the employer, yes the headteacher was a responsible person in this case, but only to the extent that was under his control.
So I think it is all wrong for Sunny to be tasked with such an important role especially as the admin assistant.
I believe the schoolshould be taking their responsibilities a lot more seriously than that.
Sunny the above is in no way meant to be a slur on your good self, it is of course only my opinion.
And food for thought
-
John
Sorry to pick you up mate but the RRFSO doesn't require a Responsible person to be appointed....
Fair comment - just that the area I'm active in is dealing with 'body corporates' (I think that's the term) in charge of buildings and it makes much sense if one person is appointed to act on their behalf. You can guess who it is at my local church....
-
John
Sorry to pick you up mate but the RRFSO doesn't require a Responsible person to be appointed....
Fair comment - just that the area I'm active in is dealing with 'body corporates' (I think that's the term) in charge of buildings and it makes much sense if one person is appointed to act on their behalf. You can guess who it is at my local church....
This is a interesting point, bodys and comittees that is. Would I be right in suggesting that, say in the case of a church, the RP was actually the church committee. The committee is the body of good men (or women) and true who have been elected by the congregation to look after the interests of the church.
Who would the law actually prosecute in the case of a church or club or association etc? The congregation? The committee?
-
My apologies to Sunny for the deviation away from schools, but that is what happens on these forums!
Nearlythere: In the Church of England the Vicar or Rector or priest in charge, the Churchwardens and the PCC have a joint responsibility for the building and for complying with any legislation that applies to it. Many Non-Conformist churches are run by a body of Trustees or similar, who also have similar responsibilities. The problem with the RR(FS)O and its Guides is that the Responsible Person is clearly meant to be an individual who can keep an eye on the day to day operations of the building - something that's not easy for a body corporate to do.
The Churches Main Committee has a free downloadable "Fire Risk Assessment Principles for Church Premises" compiled by Colin Domville - he does for the whole Methodist Church what I do for my Diocese - and this recommends that trustees should appoint one person as the RP for their premises, although they remain the legally responsible people for implementing the RR(FS)O.
So it is the 'body corporate' who would get hauled off to court for a failure to implement the requirements of the law.
I was vaguely wondering when first responding to Sunny's enquiry if the headteacher and Govenors formed a 'body corporate' in the same sense as committees/trustees did, and I think this influenced my terminology.
-
My apologies to Sunny for the deviation away from schools, but that is what happens on these forums!
Nearlythere: In the Church of England the Vicar or Rector or priest in charge, the Churchwardens and the PCC have a joint responsibility for the building and for complying with any legislation that applies to it. Many Non-Conformist churches are run by a body of Trustees or similar, who also have similar responsibilities. The problem with the RR(FS)O and its Guides is that the Responsible Person is clearly meant to be an individual who can keep an eye on the day to day operations of the building - something that's not easy for a body corporate to do.
The Churches Main Committee has a free downloadable "Fire Risk Assessment Principles for Church Premises" compiled by Colin Domville - he does for the whole Methodist Church what I do for my Diocese - and this recommends that trustees should appoint one person as the RP for their premises, although they remain the legally responsible people for implementing the RR(FS)O.
So it is the 'body corporate' who would get hauled off to court for a failure to implement the requirements of the law.
I was vaguely wondering when first responding to Sunny's enquiry if the headteacher and Govenors formed a 'body corporate' in the same sense as committees/trustees did, and I think this influenced my terminology.
Thanks John
I afraid that the Presbyterian churchs in Ireland do not have trustees. Additionally, the minister is technically employed by the congregation and is really answerable to the Elders. The Elders or Vestry who as the senior body, are responsible for the church's pastoral issues and still report to the committee on all matters outside of this area. The committee makes all decisions on the general runing of the church which includes property services.
Your comment about the headteacher reminds me that in N. Ireland, they are employed by the Education Board to run a school so I would think that he/she would be the RP.
What do you think?
-
Sunny
In summary of all the above posts, you are not the responsible person as defined by the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. The "responsible person" is a legal term- it is the employer and may include the education authority, the governors and the headmaster - some as a corporate body, others individually accountable so far as they have control. For example in a recent prosecution following a release of asbestos in a Derby school, both the Education Authority and the Headteacher were prosecuted and were found guilty of an offence.
You have been asked to do something for which you obviously feel unprepared and perhaps not competent to do properly. Your must make these concerns clear to your employer but then having done this must follow his instructions. By making your concerns clear - and recording this - it will not be you who is in breach of the Order. The responsible person, if seeking assistance, must ensure that the person giving assistance is competent to do so.
The fact that they have given you documents issued by the arson prevention bureau to work from, rather than the proper DCLG guidance probably indicates that they too are not competent or aware of their duties.
But I finish with the following observation- if the building is small and is of a simple design that complies with the current desgn codes for schools and the building regulations, and has been well maintained and its systems kept up to date then there is no reason why an intelligent person with a grasp of general Health and Safety law and risk assessment techniques should not be able to make a suitable and sufficient assessment of fire risk, This was the Government's stated objective in producing the guidance I referred you to earlier.
I do hope all this helps!
-
Ricardo
The RRO clearly states in article 18 para 5 'Aperson is to be regarded as competent for the purposes of this article where he has sufficient training and experience or knowledge and other qualities to enable him to properly assist in undertaking the preventative and protective measures.'
The guidance note no.1 also states (again article 18) 'The level of necessary competence will vary according to the nature and complexity of the premises. Basic training or use of recognised guidance together with reasonable knowledge of the premises may well be sufficient for many micro, small and medium sized premises'.
I do remember from some part of legislation there is a qualifying statement that a person cannot be appointed as a competent person if they themselves do not feel they are competent. So it is not enough to throw some books at someone and then tell them they are competent.
-
Sunny
In summary of all the above posts, you are not the responsible person as defined by the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. The "responsible person" is a legal term- it is the employer and may include the education authority, the governors and the headmaster - some as a corporate body, others individually accountable so far as they have control. For example in a recent prosecution following a release of asbestos in a Derby school, both the Education Authority and the Headteacher were prosecuted and were found guilty of an offence.
You have been asked to do something for which you obviously feel unprepared and perhaps not competent to do properly. Your must make these concerns clear to your employer but then having done this must follow his instructions. By making your concerns clear - and recording this - it will not be you who is in breach of the Order. The responsible person, if seeking assistance, must ensure that the person giving assistance is competent to do so.
The fact that they have given you documents issued by the arson prevention bureau to work from, rather than the proper DCLG guidance probably indicates that they too are not competent or aware of their duties.
But I finish with the following observation- if the building is small and is of a simple design that complies with the current desgn codes for schools and the building regulations, and has been well maintained and its systems kept up to date then there is no reason why an intelligent person with a grasp of general Health and Safety law and risk assessment techniques should not be able to make a suitable and sufficient assessment of fire risk, This was the Government's stated objective in producing the guidance I referred you to earlier.
I do hope all this helps!
Great help Kurnal.
What would be you considered opinion of the RP of an institution which does not have a specific head person such as the church situation I described earlier?
-
I would guess that we start down the following hierarchy to identify the RP of a church or similar organisation:
Whoever employs the preacher or if preacher is a volunteer
Whoever employs gardeners or contractors or
Whoever holds the licence for weddings ( difficult for Cof E as John once pointed out).
For C of E the parocial church council and church wardens
If a registered charity the Trustees
If its a voluntary organisation the trustees or managing committee. .
-
Ricardo
The Basic training or use of recognised guidance together with reasonable knowledge of the premises may well be sufficient for many micro, small and medium sized premises'.
I do remember from some part of legislation there is a qualifying statement that a person cannot be appointed as a competent person if they themselves do not feel they are competent. So it is not enough to throw some books at someone and then tell them they are competent.
Mike, I dont disagree with that statement at all "may well be suffficient" is a key phrase I think.
That doesnt mean to me that someone in Sunnys position should automatically have to take on such an important role,and be that RP, there may be every chance that the school in question comes under a medium or large type premises, I dont know.
Also your final sentence is also spot on in my view.
-
Your comment about the headteacher reminds me that in N. Ireland, they are employed by the Education Board to run a school so I would think that he/she would be the RP.
What do you think?
I'll have to say that this is outside my area of competence to comment on!
-
ThanQ all once again for ur response and feedback... i'm now looking into training and have spoken to the Head about this - shes said it should be ok for me to attend a course but ive got to come up with a range of quotes before i can go ahead and book up. Does anyone know of any fire risk assessment training courses taking place in Birmingham? I'd be grateful if anyone knows of any good sites or organisations i can contact directly.
Cheers,
Sunny
-
Depending on the cost of courses of a long enough duration to become competent it might be just as cost effective to employ outside competent help to do your FRA.
-
Sunny,
What size is the school, is it a mainstream primary/secondary or is it a smaller school. Undertaking a fire risk assessment on a mainstream school is no simple task, even with a days training, I agree with Anthony B that it is unlikely that you would be comfortable undertaking an FRA. Is this a standard approach that all the schools in the borough are taking, or is down to each individual school to formulate their own approach?
-
The thing is there is no procedure/assessment in place which i can follow and review as I go along
Considering its over 15 months since the introduction of the RR(FS)O you would have thought a FRA would be in place. Mind you I bet there are many thousands of schools and other non domestic premises in the same position. Because there is little chance of being inspected, unless they have a serious fire, I suppose it is not surprising.
-
There has been a legal requirement for a specific fire safety risk assessment to have been in place since 1997 and arguably for health and safety risks including fire to have been assessed since 1974!
-
It's a strange world we live in. One would assume that schools, of all places, would be the places most likely to take the safety of their occupants seriously, but actually many are run in a manner that is nothing short of criminal.
-
My school still had conical Soda Acid Extinguishers until 1989 & a engineers nightmare of a fire alarm, padlocked exits, etc & the 1960's screw down valve CO2s (well out of hydro test date) were only replaced in 1991 after a lab fire when the valve on one was seized in place & couldn't be used!
-
My school still had conical Soda Acid Extinguishers until 1989 & a engineers nightmare of a fire alarm, padlocked exits, etc & the 1960's screw down valve CO2s (well out of hydro test date) were only replaced in 1991 after a lab fire when the valve on one was seized in place & couldn't be used!
I think that illustrates the situation when you had various organisations under the control of the State. They abused, my words, this to the full and thought they were beyond the control of the level of enforcement the private sector was expected to endure. As such little was done in the area of fire safety. There are still many schools around for example where the designers discharged practically every stairway into a large common foyer. They are now paying the cost of this negligence.
-
Sunny, if you do go to an outside fire risk assessor, make sure that they are qualified and experienced in fire risk assessments and the legal aspects and fully understand the requirements for life safety in schools. Also, make sure they have professional indemnity insurance. Do not be tempted to take on a local firm that is not experienced. One thing the RR (FS) O has done is opened the flood gates of opportunism and there are a lot of people offering fire risk assessments who are not qualified and experienced. Do not fall for the old line 'well my mates a retired fireman, he could do it for beer money'. There are firemen and women that are at the sharp end and squirt water around, then there are firemen and women who are enforcers and involved in legislation and building control. So if you do choose to use an ex, make sure they come from that background.
-
Having carried out many fire safety inspections and fire risk assessments in schools I think it is totaly unresonable to expect a person with no previous background or experience in fire safety to undertake life safety assesments in schools.
The background to school building should be remembered, they were not previously subject to the building regulations and they were not designated under the Fire Precauitions Act therfore very little fire safety controls were exerted prior to the workplce regulations coming into force.
In my experience many schools, some of which may be a 100 years old have minimal or no adequate fire separation, old mains powerd fire alarms, very little fire detection and apart from the occasional fire drill, staff not provided with formal fire training.
To expect an untrained person to assess the fire risks where the occupancy can be in the hundreds, is not complying with the RRO, and no one day or even four day course with all the current documents in hand will provide the assessor with the knowledge to ensure that the fire risk assessment is adequate.
-
Well put Jayjay
-
The problem as I see it is that the buildings are usually in a state with often dodgy MOE. This needs sorting by somebody who knows what they are doing.
However, once this has been done we still need the Head Teacher/ caretaker etc. to take an interest in risk management and so on. I worry that a lot of them get an FRA done and then forget all about it.
-
Sunny,
What size is the school, is it a mainstream primary/secondary or is it a smaller school. Undertaking a fire risk assessment on a mainstream school is no simple task, even with a days training, I agree with Anthony B that it is unlikely that you would be comfortable undertaking an FRA. Is this a standard approach that all the schools in the borough are taking, or is down to each individual school to formulate their own approach?
Hi there,
The school is a Primary School and im not too sure how other local primary school's go about getting their FRA done.
-
Having carried out many fire safety inspections and fire risk assessments in schools I think it is totaly unresonable to expect a person with no previous background or experience in fire safety to undertake life safety assesments in schools.
The background to school building should be remembered, they were not previously subject to the building regulations and they were not designated under the Fire Precauitions Act therfore very little fire safety controls were exerted prior to the workplce regulations coming into force.
In my experience many schools, some of which may be a 100 years old have minimal or no adequate fire separation, old mains powerd fire alarms, very little fire detection and apart from the occasional fire drill, staff not provided with formal fire training.
To expect an untrained person to assess the fire risks where the occupancy can be in the hundreds, is not complying with the RRO, and no one day or even four day course with all the current documents in hand will provide the assessor with the knowledge to ensure that the fire risk assessment is adequate.
Thanks for that Jay Jay - but where does this leave me? i was considering taking a day's course in FRA but im not a 100% sure that it will make me competent enough to carry out the mammoth task - what can you suggest?
-
Sunny,
You have already shown a great deal of common-sense in seeking advice from this forum. Even a one-day course will clarify things further. Such a short course will not give you the competency to check all matters relating to a FRA, but it should give you the competency to say to your bosses "I am not competent in these certain areas, we need to call in outside help."
For example, you could probably sit down with a plan of the school, the relevent documents and check exit widths and travel distances and say "Yes, the means of escape are adequate" or "No, they are not." But you are unlikely to be able to say "The fire alarm system is adequate/inadequate." because you don't have the expertise (and possibly the equipment) to do so. Likewise aspects of the structural fire precautions; for example, are suspended ceilings (if you have any) correctly fire-stopped where they should be?
Hope this helps you.
-
Sunny,
I am interested to know what your role is at the school?
-
Sunny,
I am interested to know what your role is at the school?
I am an Admin Assistant with a varied job role including health and safety, fire risk assessments, aethetics, general admin, communication, etc.
-
Sunny
You would be very welcome to call us for a chat and free goodwill advice at any time. No hard sell- in all honesty we are plenty busy enough without needing to do that! But we will just do our best to help answer your questions.