National Register of Fire Risk Assessors

[wee brian]

The guy that designs the building doesnt have to be registered but you think the guy who spends five minutes looking at it does?

The risk assesor doesnt have the final say so there is no real argument for them to have a mandatory registration scheme.

We all think we know best, most of us don't (except me, I'm perfect)

[Bobbins]

The guy that designs the building doesnt have to be registered but you think the guy who spends five minutes looking at it does?

The risk assesor doesnt have the final say so there is no real argument for them to have a mandatory registration scheme.

We all think we know best, most of us don't (except me, I'm perfect)

All building designs go through a fairly rigorous planning and approval stage, plus you don’t get many ex builders claiming to be fully competent architects.

The bottom line is that there are too many fire risk assessors out there who either tackle jobs they can’t handle or do a job that is far from satisfactory.

All buildings are checked at the planning stage, during building and after completion.

Not many risk assessments are checked at the moment; so unless the EO population is massively increased then the likelihood of all risk assessments being checked is very slim.

A national competence scheme could work for the industry but from the posts on this thread I can see a real split; those for it and those against it.

There are always going to be good and bad people in all jobs, but with an introduction of a quality/competence register it will force up standards all round.

I can see why people don’t want it……….but I can also see why it is needed.

[kurnal]

I still disagree with your MOT analogy Bobbins. The MOT inspector is measuring a vehicle against prescriptive standards- more akin to an audit than an assessment. Wheres the subjectivity?

All the certification schemes have one thing in common - they are based on peer review of presented documents- some do it much more rigorously than others but NONE of them measure the report against the building and the way it is used and managed. There could have been a firework factory on the ground floor of a nursing home- unless the report under review  volunteers this information it will never come to the attention of  the panel.

When I apply for one or more of the schemes in the very near future I expect not to be found wanting in terms of technical competence or currency, but knowing some of the peers  I could well face a good argument over the issue of ALARP. Its always subjective, usually qualitative and never black and white unlike your MOT.

[Bobbins]

I still disagree with your MOT analogy Bobbins. The MOT inspector is measuring a vehicle against prescriptive standards- more akin to an audit than an assessment. Wheres the subjectivity?

Kurnal I didn’t say the analogy was perfect but it has some merit

1 There is a list of all 1900 approved MOT centres on the web (so I can visit any of them and get a safety check)
2 Each has a minimum standard it must reach before being granted approval
3 They are checked on a regular basis to maintain approval
4 They will tell you exactly where your car fails
5 They issue a certificate that is valid for 12 months or until I alter my car.
6 I can’t just go to any old mechanic to get my certificate

I fully accept that it a prescriptive test and not the same as proper risk based report.

The Warrington scheme has changed to include an accompanied visit with a review of the report that is written for that property. It is not part of the initial assessment but it is the only scheme to have it as part of the surveillance. The info is not on their web site yet so you have to give them a call for details.

Just for your info the car passed it’s MOT and it is now suitable and sufficient for the next 12 months……. unlike it’s driver!

[nearlythere]

I still disagree with your MOT analogy Bobbins. The MOT inspector is measuring a vehicle against prescriptive standards- more akin to an audit than an assessment. Wheres the subjectivity?

6 I can’t just go to any old mechanic to get my certificate

No but you can go to any old mechanic to get it prepared for the inspection. Old mechanics are usually pretty good because they have a wealth of experience and can diagnose a certain knock, thump or dink in a short period. Knocks, thumps and dinks aren't covered in the books.

[Galeon]

Just for your info the car passed it’s MOT and it is now suitable and sufficient for the next 12 months……. unlike it’s driver!

The MOT is an indication that when the vehicle was on the ramp it was compliant or not at that present time. You could be stopped at anytime by the police and the vehicle checked , and fail on an item , you are still required to keep your vehicle in the best possible order , no different from a fire system.

[Davo]

Bobbins old chap

Building Inspectors imo don't check fire precautions when inspecting, signing off etc. Too much other stuff to think about. ei will it fall down
They can even ignore FRA advice during planning approval


Prof
IMO the FRA is in parts like an audit. There are areas you apply subjectivity/common sense to once you have gathered your info.
I do agree though some stuff you can apply a bit of common to on the spot, so in reality I'm on the fence with this one

davo

[Bobbins]

Just for your info the car passed it’s MOT and it is now suitable and sufficient for the next 12 months……. unlike it’s driver!

The MOT is an indication that when the vehicle was on the ramp it was compliant or not at that present time. You could be stopped at anytime by the police and the vehicle checked , and fail on an item , you are still required to keep your vehicle in the best possible order , no different from a fire system.

Nearlythere and Galoen you’re both correct but missing they key points, one minimum standard for all and a national listing that gives the public confidence that the test centre is capable of providing an accurate assessment of the cars condition in order to provide a legal document that says so.

Lets drop the MOT and address the real issue; how about this as a proposal for a national register.

One standard for all schemes, written to EN ISO 17024
UKAS approval so the accrediting bodies are checked
Include an accompanied visit on a live job with assessment of the resulting report (suggested by Kurnal)

Once the assessor has been approved by the body of his or her choice (IFE BRE Warrington IFSM or whoever has the UKAS approval) they go on to a shared data base listing all the approved assessors no matter who did the accreditation.

Ta Da simple! A level playing field; the public know where to go and that any assessor on the list has the basics to be able to complete a risk assessment for the purpose of life safety.

This would not be a compulsory scheme but it would soon become a must have as the public used it as a reference point.

It won’t solve every situation and it won’t mean that all the registered risk assessors are good but it will give confidence and drive up quality in a short period of time. It might eliminate altogether those that see FRAs as an opportunity to make money without providing the proper service people are paying for.

Could it be any easier? 

[JC100]

Building Inspectors imo don't check fire precautions when inspecting, signing off etc. Too much other stuff to think about. ei will it fall down
They can even ignore FRA advice during planning approval

I think you have it spot on there Davo, i've seen many new build residential buildings where fire stopping is inadequate, doors missing smoke seals etc. Has this always happened or has it just been the case since the RR(FS)O has been out and all the responsibility is on the owner/landlord etc?

[Midland Retty]

We are talking about the competency of an assessor.

So would it not be better to create a Nationally recognised, third party accredited, qualification in Fire Risk Assessment rather than a "register"

Most Health and Safety Officers / Consultants are NEBOSH certified - (MOst employers when recruitng H&S Officers specify they must hold a NEBOSH cert)

Im all for third party acreditation or a Nationally recognised qualification that RPs can look for when searching for a competent FRA

But accreditation schemes which only require the risk assessor to submit several risk assessments for scrutiny is a bad idea.

How would the accreditation panel know that that the  risk assessor hasn't missed something major when assessing the premises?

How would the panel be aware of any mistakes made unless they actually went around the premises with the assessor and monitored them?

[jokar]

CT grills them like mad for the IFE one.

[Clevelandfire 3]

CT grills them like mad for the IFE one.

Oh well thats ok then. Problem solved

[Tom W]

FYI Warrington now has UKAS stamp

If you are any good at your job why wouldn't you want to look better than the next bloke, get a third party stamp and the chance of an hour in the company of Sir Todd?!

What's there to hold back from? If you fail perhaps you need to admit you need some more training/updating.

If you get something wrong it can be potentially devasting and or costly so you need to be sure you are doing a proper job. There is no shame in someone telling you that perhaps you need some more training before you can go on a register. Its something to aim for and it stands you out from people who have no training in FRA and all they have done is ride on a big red truck and squirt water (no offence!)

[Bobbins]

We are talking about the competency of an assessor.

So would it not be better to create a Nationally recognised, third party accredited, qualification in Fire Risk Assessment rather than a "register"

Most Health and Safety Officers / Consultants are NEBOSH certified - (MOst employers when recruitng H&S Officers specify they must hold a NEBOSH cert)

Im all for third party acreditation or a Nationally recognised qualification that RPs can look for when searching for a competent FRA

“The ABBE Level 3 Certificate in Fire Risk Assessment is the first nationally recognised qualification designed specifically to ensure that people conducting fire risk assessments are operating to a government-recognised standard.”
The Awarding Body for the Built Environment ABBE

The qualification they run is approved by Ofqual and looks very good at the initial level.

Only BRE seem to run it at the moment but I know they are looking for other people to run courses.

Could this be the way forward? A nationally recognized qualification that anyone can go in for and once qualified individuals could go straight on to a national register.

My question is why isn’t this course approved by the IFE?

I don’t really need an answer to this question as sadly I think I know. 

[Midland Retty]

Many accreditation schemes operated by other "trade associations" involve an assessor physically checking the work of the person wanting to be accredited, they do not simply "grill" someone with technical questions.

Some assessors may have the theoretical knowledge, and be able to field technical questions with ease, but in reality they may have little practical experience and could miss certain issues.

As I mentioned earlier how can you tell just by looking at an Assessment that the assessor hasn't mised something - surely you need to see the premises which were assessed to ensure the assessor picked up on failings / significant findings etc

Of course my best chum Mr Todd would be spell bound at my talents, and would be wondering why he hasn't offered me a job yet.