Fire Risk Assessment - School

[kurnal]

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!

[Mike Buckley]

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.

[nearlythere]

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?

[kurnal]

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]

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.

[John Webb]

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!

[Sunny]

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

[AnthonyB]

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.

[saddlers]

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?

[Tom Sutton]

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.

[Chris Houston]

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!

[Chris Houston]

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.

[AnthonyB]

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!

[nearlythere]

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.

[Ashley Wood]

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.