This is despite Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) recently rating Surrey Fire & Rescue Service as inadequate. Their report included criticism of inadequate staffing in Surrey's control room.
Now when I read the report of the recent Select Committee meeting
by Karen Dunn (local democracy reporter), I had expected to see which councillors
asked probing questions and who responded to those questions. All vital
elements of democratic reporting I would have thought. However, there was none of that, and what I read looked more like a County Council press release. With only the Cabinet Member, Chief and Deputy Chief Fire Officers
named in the report, I was concerned that Councillors on the committee had failed to question the plans.
Fortunately, I was able to view a recording of the meeting
and was reassured that some very intelligent and pertinent questions had been
asked by Councillors, in particular by Michael Jones and Simon Oakley. Sadly,
the answers were less reassuring, especially about staffing and poor performance
in Surrey’s control. It was frustrating that there were not many follow up questions, but I appreciate that Councillors are not subject matter experts, so are limited in how deep they can probe.
Whilst I don’t doubt the sincerity of the officer responses, I was left feeling that they did not fully understand the
complex issues involved. It has always concerned me that many people, including
senior fire service officers, often lack a detailed knowledge of the operation of
a control room and consequently underestimate the requirements.
An emergency service control room is not just a call centre where staff simply follow a script on the screen in front of
them, type a few details in to a database and then declare ‘computer says yes’,
or ‘computer says no’. Control room staff have to quickly assess information,
make critical decisions, communicate effectively internally and externally, and
manage ever changing resources. Technology can assist them, but the final
decision and many interactions depend on well trained control room staff.
Only those who have worked in, or spent considerable time in
control rooms, and studied the processes, interactions and decisions required
in an emergency service control room can properly make decisions about change.
In the past, West Sussex control room staff provided vital input to such
decisions, but West Sussex no longer employs control room staff, so has no pool
of expertise.
During my time in both the fire service and emergency
planning I gained a very good insight in to control room operation and I have seen and experienced first-hand the effects of good and bad control room operation. I
have also studied good practice and serious failures elsewhere, and worked
locally, regionally and nationally on resilient communications. That is why, after
reading the reports and listening to the discussion at the Select Committee
meeting, I still have serious concerns.
Staffing
The report and the discussion concentrated on technology, but
failed to properly consider the most important component of any emergency
service control room – adequate numbers of well trained and capable staff.
Emergencies, by their nature, are random events that can dramatically increase demand on control room staff without warning. That can result in delays in answering ‘999’ calls, delays deploying resources, delays responding to requests from crews at incidents, and delays liaising with other emergency services and organisations necessary to ensure that incidents are dealt with quickly and effectively.
Emergencies, by their nature, are random events that can dramatically increase demand on control room staff without warning. That can result in delays in answering ‘999’ calls, delays deploying resources, delays responding to requests from crews at incidents, and delays liaising with other emergency services and organisations necessary to ensure that incidents are dealt with quickly and effectively.
In properly staffed control rooms those delays are rare and
have minimal effect on the response. In understaffed control rooms those delays
occur much more frequently and have a significant effect on the service given
to the public. In the worst cases it can cost lives.
The Councillors were told about other fire & rescue services taking calls when Surrey is busy, but were not told, as reported by HMICFRS, that those services cannot mobilise fire crews. They still have to pass the call to Surrey's Control, when they eventually manage to get through, and only then will Surrey Control staff mobilise crews to the emergency.
The Councillors were told about other fire & rescue services taking calls when Surrey is busy, but were not told, as reported by HMICFRS, that those services cannot mobilise fire crews. They still have to pass the call to Surrey's Control, when they eventually manage to get through, and only then will Surrey Control staff mobilise crews to the emergency.
Government figures
indicate that Surrey’s control room is currently understaffed by over a third. Adjusting for the number of calls received, compared to
Hampshire and Sussex, Surrey should have at least 34 control room staff, but
they only have about 25.
To effectively deal with West Sussex and Surrey calls to an acceptable standard, Surrey would need to more than double the current number of control room staff. Yet reports suggest they only intend to increase staffing by one per shift, which would seriously undermine effective response in both Surrey and West Sussex.
To effectively deal with West Sussex and Surrey calls to an acceptable standard, Surrey would need to more than double the current number of control room staff. Yet reports suggest they only intend to increase staffing by one per shift, which would seriously undermine effective response in both Surrey and West Sussex.
Incident and staffing data from Home Office figures averaged over previous 3 years
CFO Gavin Watts said that staffing was still being discussed,
yet costs have been agreed, which suggests that Surrey Fire & Rescue has already
decided how many staff will be employed. The CFO stated that he would ensure
enough staff, but based on what standard, Surrey’s poor standard or Sussex and
Hampshire’s responsible standards?
Technology
I also have concerns about the reassurances given regarding
technology and communications. That Surrey’s technology works with their
infrastructure is no guarantee that it will work with that in West Sussex. Just
because suppliers say equipment and systems can handle the significant extra
demand is no guarantee that it will. If internet service providers, telecom
providers and major financial institutions, with their resources, can screw up
system upgrades, data transfers etc., then I cannot be reassured that two
councils, three fire & rescue services and Capita will get it right.
After all, similar assurances were given by Government about
Regional Fire Controls, but they failed to get the technology to work. Subsequently assurances were given by West
Sussex County Council about the Sussex Control Centre, but the new mobilising system took over five years to fix. When it eventually went live in East Sussex, further assurances were given by the Cabinet Member about using it for West Sussex calls, but she later decided to abandon the Sussex Control Centre.
A far more accurate statement would be ‘we hope it will work’.
A key requirement will be ensuring that links between the
Surrey control room and West Sussex fire stations and appliances will not be
vulnerable to any single points of failure. Michael Jones asked if there would
be two or three separate links, but was only given an answer about existing West
Sussex resilience. The vital Surrey/West Sussex links were not addressed.
Executive Director Nicola Bulbeck suggested that as the fire
& rescue service was part of the County Council’s IT set up, it was better
than if it was a standalone fire authority. There is no evidence to support
that claim. It is far more likely that an IT department in a standalone fire
authority will be fully focused on the special needs of the fire & rescue
service, rather than trying to balance that with needs across the entire County
Council.
My experience of working with WSCC and Capita IT departments
is that they cope with the core IT needs of the Council, but often struggled
with the specialist IT and communication requirements and extra resilience required
by both fire & rescue and emergency planning. IT policies, planning and
technology designed to meet the needs of the whole County Council often frustrated
efforts to meet specialist needs.
I gained the impression from the responses at the meeting
that officers had been seduced by possible technological benefits, whilst being less aware of the vulnerabilities and challenges that ever changing technology
creates.
Local knowledge
It was disappointing to hear Gavin Watts dismiss local
knowledge as a red herring. Carol Purnell made a valid point about local
unofficial names and terms, but the issue is much wider than that. The
information given to control room staff by the mobilising system depends on the
accuracy of information provided by a potentially panicking caller and the
accuracy of the data in the system. Both can be inaccurate and result in crews
being sent to the wrong location when the operator lacks local knowledge.
It was suggested that caller locations can be identified
with technology, but that is only true for conventional landlines. Although
even they can present challenges with modern phone divert and number transfer options.
Exact locations cannot be given for mobile phone callers, only the location of
the mobile phone mast the caller is connected to.
Even more challenging is increasing use of the internet
for voice calls. The location provided to control operators will not be the
location of the caller, but of the site where the call leaves the internet and
enters the telephone network, which may be many miles away.
The only safeguard is local knowledge. I have experience of
control operators with local knowledge ignoring the mobilising system recommendation
and sending us to the correct location, and also of control operators, who lacked local knowledge, sending us to the wrong location.
When it is right, technology
is a great boon, but when it is wrong you need staff with good local knowledge.
It is also vital when the technology fails, which can and does happen. Trained
operators with local knowledge and basic paper information can still get fire
crews to emergencies.
Who is in charge?
Michael Jones asked about Surrey’s crewing problems
impacting on West Sussex, but was told that was Surrey’s concern. It may be, but
if the Surrey control room starts plugging gaps in their fire cover with West Sussex
crews it will undermine effective fire cover in West Sussex. It is a fundamental matter that
must be addressed.
Similarly, it was indicated that it is up to Surrey if they
wish to deal with calls for other services. Unless staffing is increased that
could well see West Sussex calls suffering even worse delays. That did not seem
to concern the officers, which is worrying. West Sussex must have a say in staffing requirements, if Surrey want to increase the workload of control staff.
This is a very good deal for Surrey, as council taxpayers in West Sussex will be heavily subsidising their control room costs. Much was said
about best value, but best value is not just the cheapest option. For there to
be value there also has to be a reliable and effective service for West Sussex
residents.
The lack of detail, the secret reports, the unanswered questions, and Surrey’s history of cutting corners on staffing do nothing to reassure West Sussex residents and firefighters that they will be safe.
