1. The Proposed Assessment Regime for the Fire and Rescue Service
Nick Collins
CFOA Director of Corporate Services

2. Timetable 1100hrs 1445hrs Debate 1515hrs Wrap Up & Finish
Introduction and scene setting
John Bonney – The citizen’s agenda
Susan Johnson – The tips and traps of local working
1300hrs Lunch
1445hrs Debate
Nick Collins – The key questions
1515hrs Wrap Up & Finish

3. Objectives
Information Sharing
Confirmation of direction

4. The Government Agenda Services for citizens, not organisations
The ‘place’ is the focus

5. …but

6. Does this fit the Fire & Rescue Service Context?
National/Regional resilience
Fire Authority
Integrated Risk Management Plan
Local
Local Area Agreements & other local interaction

7. Assessment as a tool

8. John Bonney
The Citizen’s Agenda

9. Our role in shaping “place”
Susan Johnson
Our role in shaping “place”

10. CAA/LAA Timetable LAA Development CAA Introduced
Negotiations to be concluded by June ‘08
198 indicators
CAA Introduced
First set of results – October 2009
Direction of Travel
Use of Resources
Comprehensive Area Assessment

11. The Audit Commission Concept

12. Area Risk Assessment Performance tool
Improvement notices/ intervention
Hierarchy of Improvement Support
Continually updated
Area Risk Assessment
All non-county council and unitary FRA's will contribute to two or more Area Risk Assessments
Annual
Use of Resources assessment
CLG promoted improvement
Referral to SoS
Self/Peer assessment
Self assessment
Operational assessment of service delivery
Performance tool
Risk based inspection
Peer review/ challenge
Annual
Direction of Travel assessment
Sector self support
Local improvement activity
Draft proposed model of assessing FRA's within CAA (copyright Audit Commission 2007)

13. The Opportunities to Engage
Steering Group
Reference Group
Authority consultation

14. What is Assessment For?

15. What should the Service want?
Thorough scrutiny
Comparison
Effective and efficient use of resources

16. Operational Assessment of Service Delivery
KLOEs
Prioritisation
Cyclical

17. Issues Year on year differences
Different KLOEs in different authorities

18. Peer/Self Assessment Service maturity Independence
Quality of Assessors
Quality Control
Are we up for constructive criticism?

19. Performance Indicators
2 specifically related to fire
Over 50 that the FRS can assist partners to benefit the local community

20. Arson Incidents - NI 33
Forms part of the Assessments of Policing and Community Safety (APACS)
The indicator is similar to BV indicator 206 which was in four parts (primary and secondary deliberate fires, in and out of vehicles) which would total to NI 33

21. Primary fires & related fatal/non-fatal casualties - NI 49
Indicator in three parts:
Total number of primary fires
Total number of fatalities due to primary fires
Total number of non-fatal casualties
(all per 100,000 population)
Part 1 is similar to existing BV 142ii
Part 2 of the indicator is for all fire deaths regardless of building type & includes both accidental & deliberate

22. Performance Indicators
Comparison
Benchmarking
Status

23. Use of Resources
The Audit Commission will improve the assessment through the better incorporation of contributory work from all inspectorates and other bodies such as the Standards Board for England, and by putting more emphasis on how bodies work in partnership. This will reduce duplication; improve the quality and relevance of the assessment; promote a common understanding of the issues; and so make a significant contribution to the risk assessment

24. Use of Resources General Approach to continue
Broaden to reflect current concerns and priorities
Procurement
Resources Sustainability

25. Direction of Travel
The direction of travel assessment will reflect the effectiveness of each…fire and rescue authority in driving continuous improvement…[and its]…rate of improvement and the likelihood that improvement will continue. This assessment will make a significant contribution to the area risk assessment

26. Direction of Travel
Focus on progress on the modernisation programme set out in the FRS National Framework
Current methodology broadly appropriate
Changes include providing FRA’s with scored judgement

27. The CAA element Locally based Different Indicators in LAA's
How do you quantify performance internally?
How do we compare FRS performance

28. Area Risk Assessment Performance tool
Improvement notices/ intervention
Hierarchy of Improvement Support
Continually updated
Area Risk Assessment
All non-county council and unitary FRA's will contribute to two or more Area Risk Assessments
Annual
Use of Resources assessment
CLG promoted improvement
Referral to SoS
Self/Peer assessment
Self assessment
Operational assessment of service delivery
Performance tool
Risk based inspection
Peer review/ challenge
Annual
Direction of Travel assessment
Sector self support
Local improvement activity
Draft proposed model of assessing FRA's within CAA (copyright Audit Commission 2007)

29. Lunch

30. Debating Questions
Service maturity – how far are we up for criticism?

31. Debating Questions
Is there a conflict between assessment being meaningful and rigorous and the resources that it consumes?

32. Debating Questions
With the removal of best value indicators and reduction to 2 indicators for the service, should we develop a “best practice” suite of indicators?
If so, how should these be developed/promoted/used?

33. Debating Questions
How could local performance (including within LAA's) be meaningfully played into assessment?

34. Debating Questions
Can smaller Authorities deal with the assessment burden (DOT expansion)?
If not, should assessment be tailored?

35. Debating Questions
How far should (and can) CFOA push its role to be involved in the assessment process.

36. Debating Questions
How do we see the role of Members changing in the context of the new regime?
How should officers support this role?

37. The CFOA Position We need to be mature – self critical
We need to engage at every level
We need to compare with each other & outside the service

38. The CFOA Position We need to include independent external scrutiny
We need to invest in assessment to get the benefits…but not excessively or wastefully

39. Thank you…and go home! If you require the presentation: Julian Pinhey
(W) ext