Standardization of In America

1. Safe Command Systems Standardization ofIn America

2. I. DAVID DANIELS Assistant Chief Safety and Employee Services Seattle Fire Department

3. In This Presentation: • Is There Really a Problem? • Signs of “Command System Dysfunction” • Moving Towards “Best Practice”

4. Is There A Problem?

5. “The significant problems we face cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that created them” Albert Einstein

6. The U. S. Fire Problem • One of the highest fire death rates in the industrialized world (14.9 deaths per million population). • Annually, fire kills more Americans than all natural disasters combined. • Fire is the 3rd leading cause of accidental death in the home • 80 % of all fire deaths occur in residences.

7. The U. S. Fire Problem • About 2 million fires are reported each year. • It is estimated that over 40 percent of residential fires and three-fifths of residential fatalities occur in homes with no smoke alarms • Direct property loss due to fires is estimated at $8.6 billion annually • Americans accept fire as an inevitability.

8. “Two hundred years of tradition, uninhibited by progress” Ancient American Fire Service Proverb

9. American Fire Service • To often, accepts FF serious injury or deaths as “hazard of the profession”. • Wear “most dangerous profession” as a “badge of honor”. • Being scrutinized more than ever by communities, employees and government. • To often wait until we are forced to change.

10. American Fire Service • Averaged over 90,000 injuries per year in the 1990’s and was over 95,000 for the first four years of the decade. • On average, 45% of these injuries occurred on the fire ground. • Over the period of the 90’s there were an average of 96 firefighter fatalities on the job.

11. Duty Firefighter Fatalities

12. Compared to Canada... • Or the years 1993 - 1997, the Canadian Center for Occupational Safety and Health reports only 18 fatalities total in all of public safety employees (police fire and EMS). • The absence of information on firefighter deaths suggests that the problem is not as wide spread, if it exists at all.

13. Explanations for the Problem • “Most of the firefighter fatalities are volunteers” (Does it matter?) • “Firefighters aren’t as tough as the once were” (Neither are the structures they enter) • “Over half of the fatalities are heart attacks” (Another example has tough we are not?) • “There are too many inexperienced chiefs” (Welcome to the 21st century!)

14. Signs of Command System Dysfunction

15. Command Dysfunction • Is a systemic failure in the incident management system of an organization or jurisdiction. • Has six major symptoms. • Contributes every instance of multi-firefighter emergency scene fatality and a significant majority of single instances.

16. Dysfunction's Impact • The American fire service averaged 96 fatalities a year in the decade of the 90’s. • from 1995- 99, averaged 17 instances a year when more than one firefighter died at the same incident. • 71% of the multiple firefighter deaths during this period can be traced directly to command dysfucntion.

17. Single vs. Multiple FF Fatality

18. Six Symptoms • Lack of Risk Assessment • Lack of Responder Discipline • Lack or Misuse of the Incident Management System • Ineffective Incident Commanders • Lack of Accountability • Poor Communications

19. Risk Assessment • Service level expectation and system capacity often don’t match. • “Heart” vs. “Head” response • Recognition and acceptance of levels of risk at the scene. • Resource allocation inconsistent with level of risk and potential benefits.

20. Responder Discipline • Predetermined tactical operations despite the situation presented. • “Self deployment” of responding units without direction or coordination. • Tactical insubordination. • Responders are not “self limiting”.

21. Lack or Misuse of IMS • System design or implementation. • Recognition of span of control issues. • Practice and “real world” conflicts • “Tactical addiction”

22. Ineffective On-Scene Commanders • Inadequate training • Little or no strategic focus • Incident “Micro”-Management • “Urgency addiction”

23. Accountability • Lack of a system. • Unwillingness to use the system. • Realism of system expectations • Coordination with incident activities

24. Communications • Incident organizational structure • Scene communications plan • Technological challenges • Information overload

25. Moving Towards “Best Practice”

26. “If you don’t know where you’re going, any road will get you there” Unknown

27. Incident Management Fallacies • Command personnel will learn through experience. • If an individual does an exceptional job as a firefighter or company officer, they will make a an exceptional incident commander. • IMS slows the progress of “putting the fire out”.

28. Incident Management Facts • Fire prevention advances in the 20th century have minimized the opportunities for experience in the 21st century. • The “command” skill set is different from the “task orientation” of a firefighter. • IMS makes emergencies more efficient and effective.

29. Safe Command Systems • Begin prior to the incident with physical and emotional fitness as well as quality training for all members. • Increase level of safety for responders by increasing the functionality of command. • Increase survivability for fire occupants through more efficient use of resources.

30. Where Do We Lack? • Enough actual emergencies to hone the skills of command personnel. • There is no widely accepted “standard of care” for IMS. • Specific training for Command Officers to increase their command skill. • Verifiable methods of ensuring that command personnel are competent.

31. Best Practice Models • Common frames of reference for the development of organizational policy. • Common foundations for performance standards. • A template for training standards. • A tool for evaluation of performance in the field.

32. Who Must Lead the Move? • National Fire Service Incident Management Consortium • National Fire Protection Association • Firescope/National Wildfire Coordinating Group • IAFC/IAFF • Int’l Fire Service Accreditation Congress • Int’l Incident Management Foundation

33. Nat’l Fire Service IMS Consortium • Continued development of IMS model procedures guides. • Continued research and development into IMS improvements such as the upgrade of the Safety Section. • Continued leadership in the coordination the efforts between other important IMS organizations.

34. NFPA • Development of a professional qualification standard for the American fire service can best be implemented through the NFPA consensus process. • The decision on how to address this issue will be made at the Fall 2000 meeting of the NFPA.

35. Firescope / NWCG • Should cooperate with the Consortium and the NFPA to ensure that necessary upgrades to the IMS are instituted. • Must be willing to assist the American structural fire service as it moves through the development process.

36. IAFC and IAFF • It is important that the leaders of both management and labor recognize the connection between safe command systems and firefighter safety. • Cooperation between the two is paramount to any successes that might be achieved in the IMS arena.

37. IFSAC • Is the entity best suitable to formalize the certification process once an NFPA consensus standard exists.

38. International Command Foundation • World wide efforts to collect and identify IMS best practice will be critical factors in addressing IMS issues in America. • It is possible that the American fire service is not able conquer the many years of tradition through a single, internal approach, thus an opportunity to affect that change may exist.

39. Other Needs • IMS specific training opportunities • IMS specific conferences and information exchanges • IMS training curriculum • IMS research and development efforts