Agenda item
Minutes:
The Assistant Chief Fire Officer advised Members that this was the 2nd quarterly report for 2016/17 as detailed in the Risk Management Plan 2013-2017.
The report showed there were 4 negative KPI Exception Reports. An exception report was provided which detailed the reasons for the exception, analysis of the issue and actions being taken to improve performance.
Members focussed on the indicators where an exception report was presented and examined each indicator in turn as follows:-
2.2.1 Critical Special Service Response – 1st Fire Engine Attendance
This indicator measured how long it took the first fire engine to respond to critical non-fire incidents such as road traffic collisions. The response standard for the first fire engine attending a critical special call (including call handling time KPI 2.2.2) is 13 minutes. We have achieved our standard when the time between the TOC and TIA of the first fire engine arriving at the incident is less than13 minutes.
Standard: To be met on 91.5% of occasions
Quarter 2 results 86.54% achieved against a target of 91.5%, previous year quarter 2, 91.65%, an worsening of 5.11%.
This is a negative exception report due to critical Special Service 1st pump response being below the standard. Overall quarter 2 pass rate was 86.54%, with a cumulative pass rate of 86.73% which is outside of the 91.5% standard.
Exception report provided.
The Assistant Chief Officer advised during this reporting period each month of quarter 2 recorded a below standard pass rate, through there was an improvement towards the end of quarter 2. However, this could be attributed to a very low activity count for the month of September. The increasing call handling time was one factor that could affect the worsening performance with quarter 2 recording a longer median call handling time than any quarter of the previous 12 months (KPI 2.2.2).
The Officer in Charge was now required to provide a narrative for the failure to respond to the incident within standard. Analysis of 22 narratives implied that the travel distance involved, along with incidents which occurred outside of their own station area, were the main reasons for longer travel times.
Failure to book in attendance or the Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) failing to acknowledge an attendance, still accounted for a small number of failure reasons. This had been the subject of continued focus by the Heads of Service Delivery who were implementing and monitoring performance measures to remedy deficiencies and drive improvement.
It was hoped that on-going initiatives to address these issues would bring the cumulative standard back to within the 2% tolerance.
2.2.2 Critical Special Service Response – Call Handling
This indicator measured the time from the ‘Time of Call’ to the ‘Time of Send’ of the first appliance mobilised. A median was used to calculate the average time for the month. This excluded duplicate calls for the same incident.
The median call handling time for quarter 2 was 129 seconds, previous year quarter 2 was 107 seconds; a worsening of 22 seconds. The previous quarter (April to June 2016) recorded 126 seconds.
Standard: Within 90 seconds
This was a negative exception report due to performance being below standard, with the improvement in call handling recorded during the previous year showing a worsening during quarter 1 and quarter 2 of 2016/17.
Exception report provided.
The Assistant Chief Fire Officer advised Members that the long term trend of improved performance had not continued in the 2016/17 year, with quarter 1 and 2 of this year showing a worsening performance similar to the initial transition to North West Fire Control (NWFC). This average was for all emergency calls, however, this KPI looked at a subset of calls which tended to be more challenging in terms of identifying an addressable location. This naturally occurred when either the caller was in an unfamiliar location or when the incident occurred away from a landmark or road junction.
It was hoped that further analysis of call handling data, in conjunction with NWFC, would help highlight where the issues were and would aid targeting of areas of improvement.
Members were concerned that this indicator continued to be below standard without a detailed explanation or the assurance of an action plan from North West Fire Control (NWFC).
The Assistant Chief Fire Officer confirmed that the Chief Fire Officer was taking a report to the next NWFC Lead Principal Officers meeting on 13 December 2016 which included consideration of how the governance arrangements could be improved.
The Chairman, County Councillor Holgate proposed and it was unanimously agreed that NWFC would be invited to attend the next meeting of the Committee to provide detailed information in relation to this indicator. Members also wished the Assistant Chief Fire Officer to provide comparative data from Fire and Rescue Services across the country.
County Councillor Frank De Molfetta advised that the next meeting of the NWFC Directors was scheduled for 14 December 2016 where he agreed to also raise this item for discussion.
2.4 Fire Engine Availability – Retained Duty System
This indicator measured the availability of fire engines that are crewed by the retained duty system. It is measured as the percentage of time a fire engine is available to respond compared to the total time in the period.
The percentage of time that RDS crewed engines were available for quarter 2 was 88.28%, previous year quarter 2 was 88.40%, a worsening of 0.12%.
The previous quarter 2 (April to June 2016) recorded 91.90%.
Annual Standard: Above 95%
This is a negative exception report due to the cumulative RDS availability for the three months of quarter 2 being below the standard and outside of the 2 per cent tolerance.
Exception report provided.
The Assistant Chief Fire Officer advised Members quarter 2 had seen a worsening in RDS appliance availability. The number of RDS personnel who had been successful in obtaining a wholetime position had had an impact on available RDS hours. This was due to leaving the RDS service, being able to commit fewer hours due to W/T commitment or being unavailable due to development (W/T recruit course). An ageing workforce, the loss of staff due to retirement had also had an impact on the ability to fully crew an appliance and a number of retirements had occurred over the last quarter. The Service had also seen a number of resignations.
Members discussed the advantages and disadvantages of the impact on the RDS appliance availability from the number of RDS personnel who had become wholetime firefighters; with 2 opposing views expressed. The Assistant Chief Fire Officer reassured Members that there were 3 RDS recruitment campaigns per year; the last campaign was oversubscribed and provided 72 new entrants. It was also noted that continued work by the Retained Duty System Recruitment and Improvement Group would be responsible for progressing areas for improvement in order to strengthen and support the Retained Duty System. It was hoped that ongoing initiatives to address these issues would bring the standard back to within the 2% tolerance.
The Chairman, CC Holgate reminded Members that whilst there were issues and challenges to run the RDS; LFRS still had very high attendance percentages than other Fire and Rescue Services across the country.
4.2.1 Staff Absence – Excluding Retained Duty System
This indicator measured the cumulative number of shifts (days) lost due to sickness for all wholetime, day crewing plus, day crewing and support staff divided by the total number of staff.
Annual Standard: Not more than 5 shifts lost
Cumulative total number of monthly shifts lost 2.9
Quarter 2 results indicate the number of shifts lost through absence per employee being above the Service target for 3 months during quarter 2.
Exception report provided.
The Assistant Chief Fire Officer advised Members during that quarter 2 there was a number of long term absences cases which had span over 3 months. The new Absence Management Policy was introduced on 1 September 2016 and had been rolled out to managers with training provided by the Human Resources Department.
Members then examined each indicator in turn as follows:-
KPI 1 – Preventing and Protecting
1.1 Risk Map Score
This indicator measured the risk level in each neighbourhood (Super Output Area) determined using fire activity over the previous three fiscal years along with a range of demographic data.
The County risk map score is updated annually, before the end of the first quarter. An improvement is shown by a year on year decreasing ‘score’ value.
Score for 2013-2016 – 32,990, previous year score 33,268.
No exception report required.
1.2 Overall Activity
This indicator measured the number of incidents that the Service attended with one or more pumping appliances.
Quarter 2 activity 4,020, previous year quarter 2 activity 3,976, an increase of 1.11%.
Total number of incidents 2016/17 – Year to Date, 7,900
The Assistant Chief Fire Officer advised that the graph showed activities were starting to increase. Included within this KPI was a new incident type of ‘Gaining Entry’. This was where LFRS had attended on behalf of the North West Ambulance Service. During quarter 2 we attended on 126 occasions. However, it was noted there had been a significant increase in automatic fire alarms with 600 in the first 6 months of the year. Reasons for this were being pursued. The Assistant Chief Fire Officer confirmed that the calls were not for University premises but for other types of building. The Authority had a robust policy of call challenge which required Alarm Receiving Centres to undertake a number of actions before calling the Service; work would be done to remind the Centres of this protocol.
County Councillor O’Toole queried whether the Alarm Receiving Centres, who did charge for their services should be charged by the Authority when they did not challenge the calls they received in line with the policy. The Assistant Chief Fire Officer agreed to bring a detailed report to a further meeting
No exception report required.
1.3 Accidental Dwelling Fires
This indicator reported the number of primary fires where a dwelling had been affected and the cause of the fire had been recorded as 'Accidental' or 'Not known'.
Quarter 2 activity 182, previous year quarter 2 activity 232, a decrease of 22%.
Total number of Accidental Dwelling Fires – Year to Date, 383
The Assistant Chief Fire Officer advised that over the last 6 months there had been the lowest numbers of accidental dwelling fires reported in the last decade. Members recognised the efforts of firefighters and staff who work in prevention in reducing the number of fires in people’s homes to this level.
No exception report required.
1.3.1 Accidental Dwelling Fires – Extent of Damage
This indicator reported the number of primary fires where a dwelling had been affected and the cause of the fire had been recorded as 'Accidental' or 'Not known' presented as a percentage extent of fire and heat damage.
This indicator shows the total number of Accidental Dwelling Fires where damage is limited to the item first ignited and limited to the room of origin (it excludes incidents that are limited to heat/smoke damage only).
Cumulative Accidental Dwelling Fires activity, 130: -
28% limited to item 1st ignited
56% limited to room of origin
12% limited to floor of origin
4% spread beyond floor of origin
No exception report required.
1.3.2 Accidental Dwelling Fires – Number of Incidents where occupants have received a Home Fire Safety Check
This indicator reported the number of primary fires where a dwelling had been affected and the cause of fire had been recorded as 'Accidental' or 'Not known' by the extent of the fire and heat damage. The Home Fire Safety Check must be completed within 12 months of the fire occurring.
|
|
2016/17 |
2015/16 |
||
|
|
ADF’s with previous HFSC |
% of ADF’s with previous HFSC |
ADF’s with previous HFSC |
% of ADF’s with previous HFSC |
|
Q1 |
13 |
7% |
7 |
3% |
|
Q2 |
13 |
7% |
7 |
3% |
No exception report required.
1.4 Accidental Dwelling Fire Casualties
This indicator reported the number of fatalities, slight and serious injuries occurring at primary fires where a dwelling had been affected and the cause of fire had been recorded as 'Accidental' or 'Not known'.
|
Casualty Status |
2016/17 Quarter 2 |
2015/16 Quarter 2 |
|
Fatal |
0 |
2 |
|
Victim went to hospital visit, injuries appeared Serious |
2 |
1 |
|
Victim went to hospital visit, injuries appeared Slight |
7 |
8 |
|
TOTAL |
9 |
11 |
No exception report required.
1.5 Accidental Building Fires (Non-Dwellings)
This indicator reported the number of primary fires where the property type is a building and the property sub-type is not a dwelling and the cause of fire has been recorded as 'Accidental' or 'Not known'.
|
Total number of incidents |
2016/17 Quarter 2 |
2015/16 Quarter 2 |
|
80 |
83 |
No exception report required.
1.5.1 Accidental Building Fires (Non-Dwellings) – Extent of Damage
This indicator reported the number of primary fires where the property type is a building and the property sub-type is not a dwelling and the cause of fire has been recorded as 'Accidental' or 'Not known' presented as a percentage extent of fire and heat damage.
This indicator shows the total number of Accidental Building Fires where damage is limited to the item first ignited and limited to the room of origin (it excludes incidents that are limited to heat/smoke damage only).
Quarter 2 Accidental Building Fires activity, 63: -
|
|
2016/17 |
2015/16 |
|||||||
|
ADF activity |
Item 1st ignited |
Room of origin |
Floor of origin |
Spread beyond floor of origin |
Item 1st ignited |
Room of origin |
Floor of origin |
Spread beyond floor of origin |
|
|
Q1 |
75 |
12% |
40% |
17% |
31% |
29% |
26% |
13% |
32% |
|
Q2 |
63 |
13% |
46% |
21% |
21% |
26% |
28% |
11% |
34% |
No exception report required.
1.6 Deliberate Fires
This indicator reported the number of primary and secondary fires where the cause of fire had been recorded as 'Deliberate'. Secondary fires are the majority of outdoor fires including grassland and refuse fires unless they involve casualties or rescues, property loss or more appliances attend. They include fires in single derelict buildings.
|
Deliberate Fire Type |
2016/17 Quarter 2 |
2015/16 Quarter 2 |
|
1.6.1 Deliberate Fires – Anti-Social Behaviour |
416 |
615 |
|
1.6.2 Deliberate Fires – Dwellings |
34 |
32 |
|
1.6.3 Deliberate Fires – Non-Dwellings |
42 |
43 |
No exception report required.
1.7 High / Very High Risk Home Fire Safety Checks
This indicator reported the percentage of completed Home Fire Safety Checks (HFSC), excluding refusals, carried out where the risk score had been determined to be either high or very high.
|
|
2016/17 |
2015/16 |
|
% of High and Very High HFSC outcomes |
% of High and Very High HFSC outcomes |
|
|
Q1 |
79% |
67% |
|
Q2 |
75% |
68% |
No exception report required.
1.8 Road Safety Education Evaluation
This indicator reported the percentage of participants of the Wasted Lives and Childsafe Plus education packages that show a positive change to less risky behaviour following the programme; based on comparing the overall responses to an evaluation question before and after the course.
|
|
2016/17 (cumulative) |
2015/16 (cumulative) |
||
|
Total participants |
% positive influence on participants’ behaviour |
Total participants |
% positive influence on participants’ behaviour |
|
|
Q1 |
1832 |
87% |
4811 |
82% |
|
Q2 |
2847 |
85% |
6630 |
84% |
No exception report required.
1.9.1 Fire Safety Enforcement – Known Risk
This indicator reported on the percentage of premises that have had a Fire Safety Audit as a percentage of the number of all known premises in Lancashire to which The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 applies.
|
Number of premises |
Number of premises audited to date |
% of all premises audited Year end: 2016/17 |
% of all premises audited Year end: 2015/16 |
|
33,243 |
18,463 |
56% |
55% |
No exception report required.
1.9.2 Fire Safety Enforcement – Risk Reduction
This indicator reported the percentage of Fire Safety Audits carried out within the period resulting in enforcement action. Enforcement action is defined as one or more of the following: notification of deficiencies, action plan, enforcement notice, alterations notice or prohibition notice.
|
Period |
Satisfactory audits 2016/17 |
Requiring formal activity – 2016/17 |
Requiring informal activity – 2016/17 |
|
Q1 |
28% |
8% |
59% |
|
Q2 |
34% |
10% |
57% |
No exception report required.
KPI 2 – Responding to Emergencies
2.1.1 Critical Fire Response – 1st Fire Engine Attendance
This indicator reported the ‘Time of Call’ (TOC) and ‘Time in Attendance’ (TIA) of the first fire engine arriving at the incident in less than the relevant response standard.
The response standards for the first fire engine attending a critical fire (including call handling time KPI 2.1.3) are as follows:-
· Very high risk area = 6 minutes
· High risk area = 8 minutes
· Medium risk area = 10 minutes
· Low risk area = 12 minutes
The response standards are determined by the risk map score and subsequent risk grade for the location of the fire.
Standard: to be in attendance within response standard target on 88% of occasions.
Quarter 2 – 1st pump response 88.89%, previous year quarter 2 was 80.58%
No exception report required.
2.1.2 Critical Fire Response – 2nd Fire Engine Attendance
This indicator reported the time taken for the second fire engine to attend a critical fire incident measured from the time between the second fire engine arriving and the time it was sent to the incident. The target is determined by the risk map score and subsequent risk grade for the location of the fire.
Standard: to be in attendance within response standard target on 85% of occasions.
Quarter 2 – 2nd pump response 88.19%, previous year quarter 2 was 84.16%
No exception report required.
2.1.3 Critical Fire Response – Call Handling
Critical fire criteria as 2.1.1 Call handling time is calculated from the ‘Time of Call’ to the ‘Time of Send’ of the first fire engine. The measure used is taken from the Performance Framework used by North West Fire Control. A median is used to calculate the average time for the quarter. Excluding duplicate calls for the same incident.
Standard: within 90 seconds
Updated figures were tabled at the meeting.
The median call handling time for quarter 2 was 85 seconds, previous year quarter 2 was 76 seconds, a worsening of 9 seconds.
No exception report required.
2.3 Fire Engine Availability – Wholetime, Day Crewing and Day Crewing Plus
This indicator measured the availability of fire engines that are crewed by wholetime, day crewing and day crewing plus shifts. It is measured as the percentage of time a fire engine is available to respond compared to the total time in the period.
Fire engines are designated as unavailable for the following reasons:
· Mechanical
· Crew deficient
· Engineer working on station
Annual Standard: Above 99.5%
The Assistant Chief Fire Officer reported to Members that since the transition to North West Fire Control KPI data was held by North West Fire Control. Due to an update of recording practices recently adopted by NWFC, it was hoped that this data would be available for quarter 3.
No exception report required.
2.5 Staff Accidents
This indicator measured the number of staff accidents.
Total number of staff accidents 2016/17 – Year to Date, 31
Quarter 2 results indicate percentage pass within standard
No exception report required.
KPI 3 – Delivering Value for Money
3.1 Progress Against Savings Programme
Annual budget for 2016/17 - £55.7m
Budget to end of quarter 2 - £27.0m
Spend for the period to date was £25.8m
Underspend for the period £1.2m
Variance -2.15%
No exception report required.
3.2 Overall User Satisfaction
Total responses 1394; number satisfied 1382
% satisfied 99.1% against a standard of 97.5%
Variance 1.68%
No exception report required.
KPI 4 – Engaging With Our Staff
4.1 Overall Staff Engagement
This indicator measured overall staff engagement. The engagement index score was derived from the answers given by staff that related to how engaged they feel with the Service.
Three times a year all staff were asked the same questions in on online survey to gauge engagement. Staff engagement index for the first survey was reported at the last meeting; the index was 62%, based on 220 replies This is 4% higher when compared against the same period last year.
|
Period |
2016/17 |
2015/16 |
||
|
Number of Replies |
Engagement Index |
Number of Replies |
Engagement Index |
|
|
1 |
220 |
62% |
199 |
58% |
4.2.2 Staff Absence – Retained Duty System
This indicator measured the percentage of contracted hours lost due to sickness for all retained duty staff.
Annual Standard: Not more than 2.5% lost as % of available hours of cover
Quarter 2 results indicate percentage pass within standard
Cumulative retained absence (as % of available hours cover) 0.68%
No exception report required.
RESOLVED:- That the Committee endorse the report and note the contents of the 4 negative KPI exception reports.
Supporting documents:
PDF 762 KB