ABSTRACT
Fire Department Administrators face unique challenges in pursuit
of their goal of providing the highest levels of service, as demanded
by city managers and members of the public. The range of services
provided by Fire Departments continues to grow, expanding to include
emergency medical services and special hazards, all while having
to meet increased federal training requirements (N.I.M.S. in particular)
with ever-diminishing resources.
 As
administrators, Chief Officers recognize that fiscal responsibility
is a key component of successful department management. Fiscal
responsibility means spending budget dollars wisely, evaluating
needs and prioritizing  them
based on how each assists the department in accomplishing its
mission. The department exists to provide the highest level of
professional emergency services possible to the public, but the
Chief must understand that meeting this goal also requires a strong
commitment to the safety of his or her firefighters. The chief
has both a moral and legal obligation to provide every member
of the team with the training and equipment they need to do their
jobs safely and effectively.
A crucial, but often overlooked building block in the foundation
of fire ground safety is personnel
accountability, defined as “a system that readily
identifies both the location and function of all members operating
at an incident scene” (NFPA
1500, NFPA
1561; Definitions). Note that the definition does not state
that the chief should attempt or try to identify personnel and
assignments, yet that’s how it is often approached: many
departments rely on variations of ID tag and radio procedures
(one, two or three tag systems), whiteboards, or even memory,
in an attempt to manage personnel accountability, usually with
very limited results.
Unfortunately, research and anecdotal evidence has shown that
although Chief Officers acknowledge that current accountability
systems are burdensome or ineffective, and while they understand
the benefits that an effective personnel accountability solution
delivers (most importantly, increased firefighter safety and operational
efficiency), these same professionals have been slow to adopt,
or even demand, potential solutions. Fortunately, the influx of
technological solutions in the areas of SCBAs, Thermal Imaging
Cameras, GIS Mapping, Fire Pre-Planning, Automated Dispatch, and
so on, has increased the understanding and acceptance of technological
solutions in fire response. We believe it is time to employ similar
existing and proven technologies as a viable solution to the crucial,
yet often marginalized, issue of on-scene accountability.
THE CURRENT STATE OF ACCOUNTABILITY
ERT
Systems’ founding mission is very simple: deliver an effective,
easy-to-use solution to the professional Fire Chief who recognizes
that personnel accountability has a direct and immediate effect
on the safety and efficiency of their responders.
To
accomplish this goal, we began by examining the current state of
personnel accountability systems in use by fire departments across
the United States and Canada. Our objective was to determine whether
a problem really exists, and if so, to gather reliable, real-world
data “from the trenches” that we could use to design
a truly useable solution.
Right
away, we came across a startling statistic: when asked “Do
you use a formal personnel accountability system on scene?”
the respondents answered:
- Never
18%
- Sometimes
23%
- Usually
49%
- Always
10%
As unexpected
as it was to find that nearly 1 in 5 Chiefs say they use no “formal”
accountability system at all, further questioning showed that of
the 80% who do employ a formal system, virtually all use ID tags
which they further stated are “frequently or almost always”
ineffective.
When
questioned as to why they consider their accountability system to
be ineffective, the following issues were cited:
- Tags
are not handled properly:
- Firefighters
lose their tags off scene, or simply forget to bring them
- They
do not always follow procedure to turn in and retrieve tags
- Tags
can be lost or misplaced (dropped) while on scene
- Tag
boards are not managed effectively:
- Early
in an incident, everyone is committed to operations
- The
board is not set up properly, and tags are just dumped
in a pile
- The
“pile” only shows who is on scene, not Locations
or Functions
- Once
a Safety Officer is available:
- It
is nearly impossible to “catch-up”, so the board
remains in a state of chaos for a long period
- Firefighters
still do not reliably report changes in Location or Assignment,
keeping the information unreliable
(Note that these issues scale dramatically with larger
scenes.)
-
Tag
systems still rely on radio communication
- Radio
“dead spots” and periods of heavy traffic may
keep firefighters from reporting changes in Location or Assignment
-
Tag
boards offer no historical tracking or timekeeping
- SOs must
still rely on manual counts to monitor time in Hot Zone, what
firefighters have been through Rehab (NFPA
1584), etc.
- Post-incident
analysis and after-action reports are limited to memory or
notes written down on-scene “when there is time”
While
it is commendable that many of these same Fire Departments have
written S.O.G.s (Standard Operating Guidelines or Procedures) for
personnel accountability, the Chiefs note that actually putting
an S.O.G. into practice on the fire ground is a continual and ongoing
challenge. The ultimate goal of any accountability S.O.G. is to
provide for the systematic tracking of every firefighter on scene,
in real-time, for the duration of the event. Unfortunately, the
combination of limited tools and the chaotic nature of any emergency
scene conspire to make those S.O.G.s difficult to follow (or enforce),
often rendering them ineffective.
The
consensus was for a personnel accountability system to be more effective,
it would have to address and eliminate most of the issues that plague
tag-based systems, but that remained extremely easy to use and did
not interfere with their departments’ emergency operations
and standard procedures.
|