Verbal Report.
Minutes:
The Chair welcomed Ged Basson, Senior Operations Manager, North West Fire Control (NWFC). Mr Basson, provided the Committee with a presentation detailing the performance of NWFC during quarter 2 (July – September 2023).
Emergency Calls in to NWFC
NWFC received 26,849 in quarter 2 compared to 37,462 for the same quarter of 2022/23. For the year to date, NWFC had received 135,455 emergency calls compared to 162,590 for the same period of the previous year. Emergency calls included 999 calls from members of the public and emergency calls from Lancashire Constabulary and North West Ambulance Service.
Emergency Calls for LFRS
A total of 7,752 emergency calls were received in quarter 2 for LFRS, compared to 9,299 for the same quarter of the previous year. For the year to date, NWFC had received 16,893 emergency calls for LFRS, compared to 19,835 for the same period of the previous year.
The call pattern was below average for the time of year which could be attributed to societal issues or the weather that had resulted in different types of emergency calls.
Admin Calls in to NWFC
NWFC had received a total of 27,740 admin calls in quarter 2, compared to 31,727 in quarter 2 of the previous year. The number of calls for the year to date was 59,607, compared to 61,452 for the same period of the previous year. Similar to emergency calls, there was missing data that was not retrievable for administrative calls for quarter 2.
Admin calls included crews and officers contacting NWFC for either guidance, or to offer advice such as notification of missing equipment, defective resources, liaising with NWFC regarding exercises or resources availability.
Admin Calls for LFRS
Within quarter 2, a total of 6,246 admin calls were received for Lancashire Fire and Rescue (LFRS), compared to 7,384 in quarter 2 of the previous year. For the year to date, NWFC had received 13,571 admin calls for LFRS compared to 14,405 calls for the same period of the previous year.
Calls for LFRS equated to 25% of the total calls for all 4 services (LFRS, Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service, Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service, and Cumbria Fire and Rescue Service).
Calls Challenged Resulting in No Mobilisation
In quarter 2, the percentage of calls challenged and not mobilised to was 48%, compared to 44% for the same quarter of 2022/23.
These were any calls where Control Room Operators asked additional questions provided by Fire and Rescue Services in order to determine if a response was required. Examples of these incident types were automatic fire alarms, animal rescues, bonfires and NWAS gaining entry.
NWFC continued to support Fire & Rescue Services with call challenge questions, which determined whether there were resources mobilised to incidents such as automatic fire alarms. In supporting these initiatives, 42% of calls challenged were not required to be mobilised to, and therefore these resources were available for other emergencies/duties.
Fires: Average Response to Mobilise First Resource
For NWFC, mobilising performance times for fires in quarter 2 was 80 seconds which was under the 90 second target. This compared to 84 for the same quarter in 2022/2023. NWFC had continued to mobilise resources to fires under the 90 second target for the last 3 years.
All FRSs – Fires: Average Response to Mobilise First Resource
The call handling times for fires continued to be relatively favourable compared to other fire and rescue services (Cumbria, Cheshire, and Manchester). During quarter 2, the average time to mobilise the first response to fire related incidents remained within the 90 second target.
Special Service Calls – Average Response to Mobilise First Resource
Mobilising performance times for LFRS in quarter 2 for special service calls was 120 seconds compared to 125 seconds for quarter 2 of the previous year. LFRS mobilising times for special service calls for the year to date was 120 seconds, compared to 127 seconds for the same period of the previous year.
Action plans were constantly refined, and LFRS worked closely with NWFC to ensure call operators were trained on the types of questions to ask which improved response times.
It was noted that several incidents were exempted from the data which included those incidents where there was not an automatic response from NWFC, but when Lancashire FRS had asked that further clarification was sought from a specialist officer, e.g., NILO, prior to mobilisation due to the type of incident, such as suspect packages, and missing persons. Other incidents excluded were, when crews had proceeded to fix a defective smoke alarm several hours after being notified or where incidents had to be queued due to a depletion of FRS resources in a location.
All FRS Response Times – Special Service Calls
The average response times for all FRS Special Service Calls was similar to the other Fire and Rescue Services (Cumbria, Cheshire, and Manchester).
In response to a question raised by the Chair in relation to how calls for the different counties were managed by NWFC, Mr Basson explained that call handlers for all 4 fire services were based in the Control room and generally, call handlers would deal with calls for all 4 fire and rescue services. The exception to this was when a team of people would take ownership of calls for a large and complex incident.
In response to a question raised by County Councillor Salter regarding calls for the 4 different fire and rescue services and their geographical areas, Mr Basson informed that all calls were answered within 5.7 seconds, however, call times for different areas could vary. Some areas were urban, meaning a quick identification of the location of the incident and subsequent mobilisation, and some areas were very rural which made locating the incident sometimes more difficult, however, NWFC had software that assisted with this. NWFC had new technology (999Eye) which also allowed operators to view live footage and facilitated them to pinpoint the caller’s location and instantly message them to obtain images from the incident. ‘What 3 Words’ was also a useful tool in locating callers. NWFC worked to improve the time for special service calls as there had been an increase in the number of call prompts that needed to be asked by call operators following guidance from the National Fire Chief’s Council (NFCC). This had increased call handling time by a few seconds but had ensured that the right information was given to firefighters and callers.
County Councillor Salter asked why the number of emergency calls had dropped substantially and Mr Basson advised that there had been fewer calls due to fewer emergencies which could be attributed to the prevention and protection work in Lancashire. Not all calls were for incidents and multiple calls could be received for the same incident.
In response to a question raised by County Councillor Salter in relation to calls for LFRS to support NWAS, Mr Basson explained that NWAS would call for help with access to a property although certain criteria had to be met for LFRS to attend. A tri-service agreement existed between LFRS, NWFC and NWAS, performance against which, was regularly reviewed by the DCFO and ACFO.
The Chair thanked Mr Basson for his interesting and informative presentation.
Resolved: - That Members noted the content of the report.