Devon and Somerset 2018/19

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Workforce wellbeing

The service has a range of schemes to support staff health and wellbeing. These include counselling, occupational health and a staff support network. It also provides a critical incident diffusing process to support staff after traumatic incidents. The service holds the diffusing session very soon after the incident is over. Staff have to attend the diffusing session, and have the choice to contribute if they feel able.

Staff were positive about the process and described examples of when it had been used.

Health and safety

The service’s health and safety policy outlines its commitment to staff, the training it will provide, and managers’ responsibilities. Despite this, in some areas the service can’t assure itself staff are working to service policies and procedures.

The service publishes information widely. Staff need to read and sign some documents, like health and safety bulletins. We found no process where the service could assure itself that staff had read and understood safety-critical information.

Some staff work extra hours on prevention, protection or response activities. This can be either in their main role, or on a casual contract, working only when needed. The service doesn’t oversee arrangements to make sure these staff meet working time regulations, or that staff are well rested and safe to work.

Members of staff are required to work alone, sometimes in very rural areas. The service has a lone working policy. However, we found staff had a very limited awareness of it. The service currently has no effective process to monitor staff working alone.

We found some inconsistencies in how often local health and safety station audits were taking place. Inspectors were told conflicting information about health and safety audits. Some said they had stopped. Others told us they still completed them, although they were unclear whether they needed to.

The service has not done fitness tests for operational staff for over three years. In 2017, the service committed to trial a new national fitness test. The service conducted a diversity impact assessment on the trial and as a result decided not to introduce it. The service recognises the need to reintroduce fitness testing for staff and has plans to do this.

At first, the service couldn’t give any data on the number of staff that have had a fitness test. Since then, the service has provided data that shows 47 percent of its workforce have not had a fitness test in the last three years. We are concerned that the service cannot assure itself that all members of operational staff can meet the minimum fitness levels required to perform the role of a firefighter.

Culture and values

The service has a clear set of values:

• we are proud to help
• we are honest
• we are respectful
• we are working together.

We found these were well communicated, displayed around service workplaces and accessible from the service’s intranet site. 

Some managers were described by staff as approachable and supportive. Others felt they didn’t want to be challenged or listen to alternative viewpoints. Staff described times when operational managers would only talk to operational staff and not corporate staff. Or when they only listened to uniformed staff of a certain rank.

Of the 363 respondents to our staff survey, 27.3 percent reported feeling bullied or harassed. Also, 27 percent felt discriminated against at work in the last 12 months. Of those staff that responded, most said they felt bullied or harassed by someone more senior than them.

Inspectors were given examples where managers had told staff not to submit a grievance as it may impact on their career. This contradicts the service’s values. It also means some staff aren’t confident about the grievance process.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Workforce planning

The service has a workforce plan, so understands its current workforce’s skills and capabilities. The workforce plan outlines the potential establishment numbers (the number of staff required) for operational staff. It also captures potential retirements, transferees across from the on-call duty system to the wholetime duty system, and how the service will recruit apprentices.

The service carries out exit interviews to better understand why staff leave. As at 31 March 2018, the service had a large workforce of 1,780 (FTE) staff: 85.4 percent were firefighters (31.2 percent wholetime and 54.2 percent on call), 1.7 percent fire control staff and 12.8 percent support staff. Due to the large area it covers, the service has the highest number (965 FTE) of on-call firefighters of all fire and rescue services in England.

Despite its workforce plan, the service has a number of staff in temporary positions. As at 31 December 2018, the service had 41 group and station managers and 113 crew and watch managers in temporary posts. More recent data available after our inspection shows that as of 31 March 2019, the number of group and station managers on temporary promotion had fallen to 21. But the number of crew and watch managers rose to 119.

The service has recently restructured. It is consulting on changes to how it staffs its fire engines and where they will be located according to the risks in the community. We look forward to seeing how the service will manage these staff members as part of the Safer Together programme. 

As at 31 March 2018, Devon & Somerset FRS has 83 fire stations. A significant majority are on-call stations (71). Its problems recruiting and retaining on-call firefighters are like those faced by other fire services. The human resources department has a dedicated staff member who administers on-call recruitment. They tell the local station that there are potential applicants in the area. Other human resources staff work closely with on-call stations and provide support for assessment days.

The service has a system to identify staffing issues that may impact on the availability of fire engines. The ORC is responsible for identifying future staff shortages. It can effectively cover staff shortages at short notice. It will make the necessary arrangements for staff to attend these locations to keep an appliance available so that if needed, the service will be able to respond with a full staff.

Learning and improvement

The service has designed a new electronic competence recording system, Training for Competence. It is used to record and monitor operational competence. All managers and staff have access to the system. They can see at a glance on a skills dashboard levels of competence against the core risk-critical skills the service has identified. These records were up to date.

The service has recently introduced associate trainers to support the training of on-call firefighters and make sure it is consistent. Associate trainers travel to stations and provide input on breathing apparatus and incident command in preparation for an assessment. The incident command assessment is now done in each station.

A mobile incident command vehicle equipped with computer simulation software is used to assess the incident commander. On-call staff were very positive about this approach as it was a much more efficient use of their time.

The service gives sufficient priority to risk-critical training. The central training team allocates staff to risk-critical courses in advance to ensure that they remain competent and available to respond. Other training is organised locally by supervisory managers who book crew members on to courses provided at the training centre. Of the 363 respondents to our staff survey, 74.1 percent agreed they had received enough training to enable them to do what is asked of them.

Training for staff working in the mobilising centre is planned with the networked fire services partnership. Control staff follow a two-year training plan and an annual workplace assessment.

Community safety technicians (CSTs) are responsible for conducting home fire safety checks. The CSTs are well trained and able to deal with the most complex cases. They have a quarterly training day where they are provided with any new or updated information.

Corporate staff felt that they were trained well and that the service would support them to attend any course relevant to their role. For example, a corporate staff member attended some training normally only available to operational staff.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Seeking and acting on staff feedback

Devon & Somerset FRS covers a large area. Most of the workforce are on-call firefighters. We understand this makes it challenging for senior managers to engage with the workforce, especially those in more rural areas. As at 31 March 2018, 63.4 percent of FTE firefighters were on call.

When we spoke to staff about how often they saw senior and middle leaders we were told their visibility around the service was limited. The CFO produces a weekly blog providing information and updating staff on current issues in the service. Staff felt that this was useful.

The Safer Together programme reviews the way the service staffs fire engines and stations based on the risk to the community. It has involved engagement and staff consultation. It has also been supported by the introduction of business change managers (BCMs). BCMs are responsible for travelling around the service and informing and updating staff about the Safer Together programme. This was seen as positive by staff who felt that in the past the service would change without necessarily involving them.

The service conducts staff surveys and results are shared with staff. The results of the survey are recorded in an action plan, which also shows the future plans to address any issues. However, there are no dates or targets for these plans.

A review of the service management structure took place and a new structure was implemented in April 2019. The new structure will bring a number of functions, like prevention and protection, back to headquarters to support a more consistent and efficient approach.

However, staff weren’t clear on who was now responsible for what role. Some staff have not been told where they are working or their job description. Staff felt that communications around the restructure were not very clear, with limited opportunity to feed back.

The service’s grievance policy has recently been reviewed and updated to harmonise different policies in place before both services were combined. Inspectors reviewed a sample of grievances given by staff. Staff who had registered a grievance were not automatically offered any kind of welfare support according to the record we looked at. We were told this was managed locally.

Diversity

The service’s workforce does not fully reflect the diversity of the communities it serves. As at 31 March 2018, 4.8 percent of firefighters were female, an increase from 3.1 percent as at 31 March 2013. The service is aware of this and is working to change it. It has run some engagement days called Have a Go aimed specifically at women. The service encourages and supports female staff to attend national network events.

The service has a number of staff forums. This includes the diversity and inclusion steering group, fire pride forum and menopause awareness forum. Senior managers attend these forums and staff told us they felt managers would address any issues raised in them.

As at 31 March 2018, 0.6 percent of firefighters were from a Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) background. This compares with a BAME residential population of 2.5 percent. The service understands it needs to do more for the workforce to better reflect the community it serves. The service has launched a people strategy providing information on what it intends to do to build a more inclusive workforce.

During our inspection we visited stations across Devon and Somerset. There were times when operational staff used gender-exclusive language, such as a fireman. Inspectors visited a location where access to female facilities was locked to prevent repeated use by male colleagues. Women were required to request a key. We hope management will change this.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Managing performance

At the time of the inspection, the service was introducing a new personal development process, linked more closely to corporate plans. This was because the previous process was considered ineffective for staff, particularly for on-call staff. It was also seen as a ‘tick box’ exercise. As a result, some staff have not had an appraisal or a review for over three years. We were given examples where staff have had one-to-one sessions with line managers, but not all staff had. This depends on whether line managers do them.

The service has a 90-second target for mobilising appliances to incidents. The fire control room produces weekly reports on whether this target has been met. Fire control operators listen to calls that did not meet the target to find out why. They also find out if there is a performance or development problem. This is an effective way to make sure the service consistently mobilises fire engines fast enough.

Developing leaders

The service provides development programmes as staff progress into management and leadership roles. Staff have a mixed view on the benefit of the development programme for middle managers. But they recognise programmes have recently improved, with more relevant courses. The service has given training and briefings for middle managers on support staff through the Safer Together programme.

The service has improved promotion processes. The service recently added an endorsement stage to the process in which a line manager is required to endorse and recommend the candidate for promotion. An endorsement panel considers successful candidates.

However, some staff continue to feel that there is a lack of fairness and transparency. Inspectors viewed a sample of records from recent promotion processes. They found appointments had been made that didn’t follow promotion guidance. Successful candidates are graded. This gives an order in which someone would be appointed to a post. However, we found examples where this was not the case. The service couldn’t clearly say why.

Despite asking for feedback on promotions, unsuccessful staff don’t usually receive it.

The service has no process for identifying or selecting high-potential staff to be senior leaders of the future. However, there is evidence that staff at all levels get access to coaching and mentoring. The service has a coaching pool of about 30 staff and access to external coaches as and when needed.