Removal of wardens from sheltered housing schemes

[Wils]

Dear fire safety gurus,
With their budgets being tightly squeezed, local authorities are again under pressure to drastically reduce spending. Many have already removed wardens from sheltered housing schemes and others are proposing to do the same. Obviously, sheltered housing schemes may hold a variety of risk groups from persons who are 'with it' and can self-evacuate, (if necessary) to high-risk, vulnerable persons who are unable to self-evacuate in the event of fire in their flat. Some guidance documents make an asumption that a warden will be present (e.g. ADB) or that persons are able to self-evac (PBBF).
Difficult question but what do you consider the options for maintaining adequate levels of fire safety if wardens are removed for the higher risk schemes? I have my own views but would appreciate some comment please.

[wee brian]

This is very much the issue that many of us are struggling with. There's a CFOA group looking at this, I'm sure they'll sort it out.

[colin todd]

I dont think ADB says that it is assumed that wardens will be present.  I doubt that CFOA alone will resolve the problem.  It is a societal problem, but people who cannot self evacuate can be found in independent bungalows, houses and general needs blocks of flats.

All sheltered housing should be fully sprinklered and many of the problems go away.  This has been required under building regs in Scotland for 11 years.

[Wils]

Colin, I'm glad you've replied. I hope you're well. Para 1.7 on page 17 of ADB talks about detection equipment in sheltered housing schemes with a warden or supervisor and the connection to central monitoring or ARC but doesn't suggest an alternative solution for sheltered without warden.
You're right, of course, sprinklers would be a boon but we're limited in the amount of match-funding with which we can help LAs. We are pushing that route where we can.
Scotland is often ahead of the game with their legislation in more than one area!
As an I.O., I don't think there's much I can do to enforce and I have encountered the additional problem of the LA taking out the link from the Grade D alarm in the flat to the social alarm centre and offering a new system to those who 'express an interest' in having it re-installed. In my view there is a high risk of those most vulnerable being left out so, as a service, we are trying to visit those flats to gather info. I pointed out to the LA the various guidance documents, BS5839 pt6, ADB and (the excellent) PBBF and stated that I would be pointing out the advice on links in these documents to the coroner....
I'm fully aware that the flat occupants could just as well be imagined in a single private dwelling in the high street but I think that people may get to the point of frailty/vulnerability where they need to be in a care home where they can be evacuated in the event of fire by staff. Opinion?
What's your opinion of them taking out the link and offering it back on a request basis?

[kurnal]

If the premises have adequate compartmentation and support a stay put policy then I dont see an issue for concern in respect of fire safety. The vulnerable persons involved are no different to those in an individual stand alone dwelling and society has not chosen to make special provision  to cover the risk to life from fire in domestic premises, other than through the building regulations.

Where the fire compartmentation does not support a stay put policy its a different matter. Either the compartmentation should be addressed or the fire alarm and intercom systems should be upgraded to ensure that the alarm can be investigated and that an early call is made to the fire service. I believe in such situations the social housing provider should also provide an on call response team to investigate, support the vulnerable residents, assist the fire service andreset any alarms.

[Mike Buckley]

I have had some experience of areas of social housing where the housing provider does have an on call response team, typically I was finding a response time measured in hours.

The problem is if you want anything like an immediate response you need to have a team fairly close to the site, which in turn means you need quite a lot of people to do it and negates the money saving aspect.

There is only one organisation that is set up to provide this type of response and they ride about in red lorries!

[kurnal]

i have done it three times albeit in urban areas. We did this using the scheme managers who would operate on call in a team, alerted by the call centre. I set them a 15 minute attendance time and this has been generally  met so far. It has so far proved invaluable.

[GB]

Colin I would love to agree with you that we in Scotland have it all sorted however we just rename Sheltered Housing as Assisted Living or Extra Care etc etc and hey presto we suddenly don't need sprinklers anymore!

[colin todd]

Wils, I think it is a matter for CFS or Housing Act, rather than FSO enforcement.

Taking out the social alarm system is outrageous and might be a material alteration under the Building Regs.  Given that the purpose of the link is not to save the occupant of a flat of fire origin but everyone else, it could make the general fire precautions inadequate.

[colin todd]

GB, I bet those that try to get round the regs are English-based.

[mikemo]

I would like to strongly agree that Scotland do not have it sorted over sheltered housing, the flats themselves being deemed non relevant under the 2005 act.
I was so concerned that I brought the matter up with my local SNP member, a certain Alex Salmond (who was first minister at the time) and his reply to the lack of fire safety legislative protection for the residents in sheltered housing in Scotland was dismal, woeful, concerning yet predictable ..........................
I suppose on the plus side he did reply, in writing

[idlefire]

I'm fully aware that the flat occupants could just as well be imagined in a single private dwelling in the high street but I think that people may get to the point of frailty/vulnerability where they need to be in a care home where they can be evacuated in the event of fire by staff. Opinion?

With all due respect Wils, my advise to any Article 26(1) inspector would be not to get involved in matters outside the scope of the Fire Safety Order and their enforcement powers.  Been there, done that, got the tee shirt and; in my experience, it usually ends in tears no matter how well intentioned.

[Clevelandfire 3]

Taking out the social alarm system is outrageous and might be a material alteration under the Building Regs. 

Social alarm? or do you mean communal fire alarm?

[Dinnertime Dave]

Taking out the social alarm system is outrageous and might be a material alteration under the Building Regs. 

Social alarm? or do you mean communal fire alarm?

Social alarm, lots a housing associations are doing it. The funding has been removed, provided now only on a needs based approach.

Changing definitions have always been a problem extra care, sheltered, supported and floating support. At least BS9991 recognises this and now terms it specialized.

[colin todd]

Clevey Suppers has it right. Social alarm.  Suppers, it worries me how often you agree with me. Memo to self: stop spending time with inspecting officers, it is making me cynical, bitter and twisted by infection.