Predicting and Preventing Harm Event Emma Dean, Research & Evaluation Officer Clare Nolan, Strategic Data Analyst Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service

Introduction: Base Risk Model Safe and Well Targeting Protection Risk Model Post Incident Research Under 5s Equipment Fitting Scheme

Base Risk Model Risk model introduced five years ago and is based upon previous work done by Lancashire FRS. Based at Lower Super Output Area (LSOA)

Base Risk Model The risk model is used as a base to inform response and targeting for prevention activities. A similar methodology is also followed to create the protection risk mode.

Safe and Well Targeting GMFRS provide ~ 30,000 Safe and Well visits per year. The following methodology is used to try and target those most at risk Stage 1 Calculate Risk Index Mosaic Risk Index Over 65s Risk Index Tenure Risk Index Stage 2 Assign Geographical Risk Risk Model Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 Stage 3 Calculate Total Risk Combine Risk Indices & Geographical Risk Stage 4 Previous Visits Households Offered S&W Visits Within Two Years Identified - but NOT EXCLUDED Stage 5 Extract Lists Extract Sufficient High Risk Households by NWFC Station Area

Safe and Well Targeting – Stage 1 Using the Mosaic dataset, we compare the types of people who have had a fire to the types of people in GM’s overall population. Do this for each borough This is repeated for age (Exeter data) and tenure (Mosaic)

Total Risk Score = Mosaic Risk * LSOA Risk from Risk Model Safe and Well Targeting – Stages 2-5 We assign a geographical risk from the base risk model Total Risk Score = Mosaic Risk * LSOA Risk from Risk Model Indicate households which have had a S&W in the past two years – some areas want to do re-visits, some areas not. Extracted correct number of households as per station area capacity Extra data can be incorporated by the individual stations if required.

Protection Risk Model – Regulated Premises Implemented on the 1st April 2017 was the new Protection Risk Model to begin to make the protection/enforcement work in regulated premises become more proactive rather than reactive. The model is based upon the Fire and Rescue National Framework which concentrates on just the building itself, and incorporates new elements. It is in two parts – inherent harm and likelihood

Harm/Severity This is the main part of the risk model and incorporates six elements of harm This data has been collected from previous visits to these premises, the Fire Framework and external datasets (i.e. Grade 2 listed buildings) The different elements of harm have been given different weightings with Public Life and Emergency Responder (i.e. our firefighters and other responders) being weighted the highest. Creates a total score for all 130,000 regulated premises in GM. Harm Strategic Weighting Public Life 0.45 Emergency Responder 0.2 Economic 0.15 Environment 0.1 Heritage 0.05 Social & Community

Likelihood To further prioritise the regulated premises, a factor of likelihood was incorporated. Comprised two parts: Geographical likelihood Premises likelihood Data used for both likelihood factors was: Number of fires standardised by number of buildings Number of enforcements by number of inspection visits Combined into one factor and applied to the severity score.

Post Incident Programme Overarching ambition to further reduce the number of Accidental Dwelling Fires and associated casualties within Greater Manchester This requires greater understanding of: The social and behavioural factors influencing risk How people perceive the risk of fire The impact that experiencing a fire-related incident has on behaviours and perceptions Semi-structured interviews with people that have experienced an Accidental Dwelling Fire

Post Incident Programme People construct particular ‘stories’ about their fires based on direct experiences and actions during the event. People feel ashamed and embarrassment about having had a fire-related incident, in part due to a sense that fires result from a break down in common sense or perceived ‘foolishness’. There is a belief that fires ‘just happen’ and are an inevitability of life, perhaps because the actions and behaviours that led up to the incident were unavoidable, or ‘ordinary’, everyday activities. Few people are told about the fire-related incident. Usually, these are close family and neighbours. Advice - if given at all - is tied to the specific and ‘unique’ context of the incident.

Post Incident Programme The lessons learnt relate to the particular circumstances of the incident and not fire risk generally. It is difficult for fire safety and prevention advice to transfer across different contexts and situations. The fire and rescue service is held in high regard and is trusted to provide the best fire prevention advice.

Post Incident Programme Recommendations Realising the power of stories The importance of talking about fires and near misses Supporting those who have had a fire / near miss Home Safety Checks as a two-way process Thinking beyond rational actions (and actors) in fire situations Re-think ‘Get Out, Stay Out’?

Source: http://www.who.int/ceh/capacity/injuries.pdf Under 5s Equipment Scheme Who is at risk? The burden of injury on children is unequal. Children in poorer communities and those from poorer families in better-off areas are the most vulnerable. More than 95% of all child injury deaths occur in low-income and middle-income communities. Although the child injury death rate is much lower in high-income areas, injuries still account for about 40% of all child deaths in these communities. Source: http://www.who.int/ceh/capacity/injuries.pdf

Prioritisation of Target Addresses Under 5s Equipment Scheme – National Data

Prioritisation of Target Addresses Under 5s Equipment Scheme – Local Data

Under 5s Equipment Scheme Pilot of an Equipment Scheme for 0-5 year olds: Delivered by GMFRS, Installation of equipment is tailored to need and includes the provision of information and advice. Pilot in four LSOAs: Stalybridge North, Denton South, Ashton St Peters and Ashton St Michaels where higher attendance of A&E has been identified for 0-5 year olds and are also in the top six for most deprived areas. Referral made by Health Visitors (and other partners) - make a professional judgment based on the needs of that family. GMFRS Community Safety staff then complete a visit, where they will make an assessment as to what safety equipment is required and install it accordingly.

Under 5s Equipment Scheme Questionnaire with partners found: Partners were positive about the process, saying it was easy to follow Partners felt it was important to offer this service to higher risk families Focus group with GMFRS staff found: Staff were supportive of the initiative, but were wary about installing some equipment Staff felt additional training was needed to help them install equipment Opportunity to provide other advice (e.g. fire safety) during the visit Telephone interview with families found: Families were satisfied with the service they received and equipment provided Families has an expectation that they would receive baby gates, but it wasn’t appropriate in every case

Thank you Questions? Contact Details: Emma Dean, Research & Evaluation Officer Greater Manchester Fire & Rescue Service Email: deane@manchesterfire.gov.uk