SP205- BAFE announces Draft Scheme for Fire Risk Assessment organisations

[Speyside]

The long awaited BAFE draft is now available for comment it is on www.bafe.org.uk  

At first glance it looks more robust than I anticipated however it does seem to be set at a lower system level than the FRACS Company scheme; the competence assessment being subjective in part. It obviously depends on which CBs operate it and how well they do it. I am pleased it includes onsite visits/audits of live jobs, but I am not so thrilled with the CV check for competence, it becomes too subjective and relies too heavily on the acceptance of non audited training courses and registers of competence.

[kurnal]

Just amended the header Speyside as some readers  may not understand the significance of the SP205 title.

I think the scheme is a move in the right direction and whilst I agree with you that whilst it appears to be set at a lower level than the FRACS scheme there is an argument that the goal posts should be set high but not so high as to discourage companies from applying for what is always going to be a voluntary scheme. I think the posts are set high enough to achieve a really useful scheme which could be benficial for both Responsible Persons and member companies.

[Speyside]

Kurnal if you wanted some new blood in your company would you just look at the CV and appoint on that or would you get the shortlisted candidates in for a technical interview?

On paper we can all look good, my CV says I am a competent fire risk assessor, but if you sat me down and asked me some basic technical questions I wouldn’t pass. You are absolutely correct they have set the level to allow access for most companies. Is it me or is there a flaw in that concept?

Standards set for the profession by the profession don’t always help the end user. We now have 4 individual registers all set at different levels and two company schemes set at different levels, how is that helpful for the RP? We will have a standard soon for competence of fire risk assessors yet there will be no standard for those who assess competence and that concern me. The sad reality is that the trade bodies know they have paying members who are not up to the job but can’t risk setting standards at a level that will really improve the industry for fear of losing membership income.

When I checked the FIA register last, they had lost 80% of there fire risk assessment companies since imposing new requirements and several of those that were still on were not fully compliant ie they had only applied for registration with one of the individual registers. Therefore the FIA are still promoting companies with employees of unproven competence. Even when they are accepted on a register of competence one of those register keepers; the one that will pick up most applicants (because it’s the cheapest) have publicly announced a recommendation to all those on their register to move to an accredited 17024 scheme within the next couple of years.

Something needs to change, something more needs to be done to get standards at a level that will protect the end user, if it doesn’t third party in all its forms won’t be the answer and we will just maintain the status quo. I think most people who visit this site will know that there are many, many so called fire risk assessors out there stealing work from the good practitioner and providing a very poor service to the RP.

[Tom W]

Speyside how many people are on the warrington scheme? How many have failed the scheme?

[Speyside]

Speyside how many people are on the warrington scheme? How many have failed the scheme?

 I never know where you are going with your questions and the answer is on the web listing for numbers as is the IFSM and IFE and FIA. Actually not the FIA as it lists companies and they could have 100 assessors or 1 (and as long as their assessors are in the process of applying for any register they are ok) but if you are looking for the IFPO one you are out of luck it still isn't available to view. The % pass rate has actually gone up recently despite the assessment being added to and made more comprehensive. 70 - 75% up from 55 – 60 % I think that is due in part to the caliber of applicants being higher and those applying preparing for assessment better.

If however we looked at it another way; if the new competence standard was adopted by an accredited CB operating an examination type 17024 system to assess applicants against the competences identified, and all the estimated 2000 – 3000 ‘professional’ fire risk assessors in the UK applied. I estimate that the pass rate would be around 40 - 45%; possibly much lower. 

I think that may shock some people, but it is a figure that others in the industry think is reasonably accurate.

I know that the enforcers are concerned about their officers being able to demonstrate competence against the standard too. 

[Tom W]

Thanks, Its an open question, just wanted to know what your pass rate was.

[colin todd]

Piglet,  There are lies damned lies and statistics.  100% of the occupants of my study agree with this, though they will be departing soon, as I am going for dinner.  Only 25% of the occupants of my house can read this , as the three cats dont read English as they are Burmese.