Having moved in to new premises 2 years ago, we outsourced a fire risk assessment which detailed a number of issues within an 80 page report, but still classified our activities as low risk. Personally, I found an 80 page report to be excessive and full of 'padding' and I'm of a mind to undertake the next assessment myself, with the assistance of 2 of our safety reps/ fire wardens, using the old report as a basis. Has anybody undertaken this task themselves and if so, any guidance would be helpful, also, if anybody has one, a template would be nice ;-)

Obviously none of us can comment on the specifics of your report received, but what may appear to be 'padding' could well be just good technical writing. The writer may be trying to reach a whole range of readers, from the already knowledgeable to the totally unaware reader. If a reader is totally unaware of the requirements of an FRA, then he may well want the further background information to help him understand the context, contents and requirements of an FRA. Including the info in your FRA means the reader doen't have to go and find out for himself and probably loose interest in the topic. Maybe harsh, but as #2 says using a template provided by others doesn't help your own development and can be misleading. You can learn much by developing you own templates because it forces you to read the available guidance, and to hopefully understand the guidance and the information provided - and hence what you need to include in your own FRA. I rarely provide templates to others, as I strongly believe you learn and develop by doing it yourself, with appropriate peer review afterwards.

Bearing in mind what JJ says, we do our own FSRAs, which so far have stood up to repeated scrutiny from various F&R Services across the UK. We risk assess high risk buildings, in that they have sleeping accommodation for disabled, ill and otherwise vulnerable people. Our buildings are not purpose built, some of them are over 500 years old. Our FSRAs run to seventeen pages including contents, introduction and front page, and we now think some of that is padding. I can't see 80 pages being useful, and it puts me in mind of the thread lower down about plain english, John

I recently completed a FRA on one of my own business's after a local Fire Officer Inspection and used the padding out to help and assist the management to better understand the report. You may be better helped by going on to the Gov website and downloading the 5 step guide to risk assessments which is a very good tool to start with. However the FRA is a different animal to the general risk assessment as its now technically a Fire Plan, that requires you to issue information to the local Fire & Rescue service which they use in the event of an emergency. Just be a bit carefull and go back to the initial FRA adviser and basically ask him the questions. Ther is also a FRA guide on the Gov site but thats a document more for the specialists but if you want to spend time reading it,(and its quite a big text) then it will maybe answer some of your questions.

how big is the font and how wide are the margins? ;-)

Thanks for your input guys, informative as always. Bit more meat on the bones about what we do. We're a small company, 14 in the office and 14 in a workshop, all at ground level, undertaking low risk activities, no hot works, very limited flammable chemical use, no obvious elements of combustion or ignition. I did the fire plan myself based on the FRA, we have a waste management plan in place also which takes in to account fire control. All employee's have undertaken a basic fire awareness course and 7 have done fire marshal training also.

Judging by your last post the fra should be very basic and no way require an 80 odd page report. I can only imagine of course but I would think half a day for the practical side of the fra and another half day for the written report but it would not be long winded, simple to read and understand including all requirements. I wonder how much you paid for the previous fra? Dare you mention the fee on here ?

yes based on local fire and rescue advice send your e mail Colin Rhodes ahspm@btinternet.com

As with any risk assessment, it must be suitable and sufficient for purpose. Like COSHH, Manual handling, Disability Access, any FRA requires a wee bit more of the specialist approach to ensuring the safety of colleagues and buildings. Not forgetting any circumstances where there are multiple occupants or others affected by the acts or omissions of your organisation. I do the fire risk assessments for our organisation (Local Authority) and these encompass a wide range of processes and establishments. Therefore one size cannot fit all. I have an electro-mechanical engineering background and have worked in petrochemicals and rail. I’ve also been involved in enforcement and hold the NEBOSH FRM Cert. so I've got some knowledge, but I still have someone else check it with me. I always found that the local community Fire and Rescue Officers were a good source of help when undertaking a FRA. They have a more technical/sterile approach to ensuring fire safety and can do so without the emotional baggage that comes with the “we don’t do that here’ mindset of disinterested colleagues. There are a range of documents available to assist in the technical indexes on the FIRELAW website (Scotland) and I have no doubt that the documents referred to in an earlier response will give similar advice. It is important to remember that a FRA is a living document and needs to have regular reviews depending on the nature of the undertaking. It is also important to empower colleagues to act responsibly by emphasising that it is not only the role of the ‘responsible person’ to make good the FRA contents/action plan, but also each in turn may be a duty holder depending on the circumstances. Therefore to my mind the most important part is the action plan. Give your local guys a call, I’m sure they would be only to glad to help.

In FRA's that I've conducted recently my template is based on the methodology of PAS79. Might sound daunting when I say it recommends NINE STEPS of fire risk assessment, but I'm going with it for now as some of those steps do make you 'stop and think' and to check if you may have missed something. As well as the nine steps I do also compile the usual three lists: flammables sources of ignition sources of oxygen and forced or fresh air those lists help you think through the first 2 steps of PAS79 If you google PAS79 you'll easily find out all about it. This forum doesn't allow cut'n'paste from sources, so the nine steps, briefly, are something like a) obtain information on the premises, the processes carried out and the people present, or likely to be present b) identify the fire hazards and how they are controlled c) assess the likelihood of fire d) what are the fire protection measures in the premises? e) how is fire safety managed? f) make an assessment of the likely consequences to people in the event of fire g) make an assessment of the fire risk h) recommend prioritised action plan i) the date by which the fire risk assessment should be reviewed JohnW

When padding is mentioned surely this is good information and can be used to complete a fire safety manual - see ADB 9999. This helps with the management of the building and the fire risk and in my view a basic addition to a fire risk assessment. SBH

Firesafety101, you appear to be trotting out the tired old line of "only ex fire service personnel can do a FRA" Surely you cannot be serious?

Are animals specifically covered under RRFSO? Not sure they are

From page 5 of the guidance Note: The Fire Safety Order does not include or require the safety of animals from fire to be a mandatory part of your statutory fire risk assessment. However, generally the ‘welfare of horses’ as discussed in the Government’s Horse Strategy Document for England and Wales does include the safety of animals from fire. The guidance is concerned with the protection of human life. I wouldn't risk my life or expect anybody else to do so for an old horse.

I don't really go for the arguement that ex or serving fire officers are best placed to carry out fire R/A's, it gets a bit old hat. I am someone who has been on a few courses and had serving and ex fire officers on the course and probably very good at what they do but when carrying out exercises they weren't really sure. The fire R/A is about the preservation on life and in my opinion it has to be understood by the person it is for or aimed at and not by the person writing it. If you make the assessment to long then it won't get read and the difference that it should make will never be realised.

Walker posted In the cold light of day, you are quite correct. But I could see this soft old sod risking his life for the family moggy should our house be on fire. I guess may people working with animals would be the same. Well some people have no common sense. No matter how cute and fond of Tiddles you might be, my life is worth more, and that of any other fire fighter etc. As for the an earlier comment 'I have never seen a poor fra written by an ex fire service officer' - I have. As with all types of people - there is good and bad in all (in terms of knowledge and competence) Going back to the original discussion point about the content of fra and 'padding' - it very much depends on the complexity of the fra and as I said previously the intended readers of the fra. The format of the report should be agreed / judged when tendering for the work/agreeing the scope etc

[expletive deleted]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Where did 25p/page come from!!................... i took me shoes and socks off to do the calculation too. The total cost of the report was £199, and i'm assured no animals were harmed in its preparation. Seriously though, taking everyones advice to mind, i'm of a mind to have a go at it.

To illustrate: suppose Rosepark had had a proper FRA, what might the findings have been? 1) Don't store linen and aerosols adjacent to electrical supplies 2) Ensure electrical supply cupbards have detection and fire and smoke protection 3) Close all fire doors opening onto escape corridors 4) Fit hold-open devices onto residents' bedroom doors either wired in or Dorgards 5) Train your workers 6) Have effective fire response procedures etc etc The thing is, only point 1) above is actually needed, if that cupboard had not had linen and aerosols in it there would have been no fire, and nobody would have died. RA is about elminating risk (OK, reducing it ALARP), and a fire-officers focus is usually on what to do in the event of a fire. If we have an effective RA and have redusced risk ALARP then we don;t need to respond. Other people can be as effective at reducing fires as fire-officers. How good is your RA now, irrespective of what your previous job was, John

Thanks for the clarification Firesafety, and I have to say I'm not knocking fire officers or fire fighters as such; to me as to previous posters the individual matters more than their previous job title. Yes, somebody with extensive training and experience in fire prevention and response will probably do a good FSRA, but the prevention bit is what has to be emphasised. I interview people occasionally, just did one a couple of weeks ago with good results, and we always ask fire questions, and it's a constant surprise to me just how many people, from all backgrounds, jump straight to detection and response. I don't care about detection and response, or at least I plan to never have to rely on them. Of course we have properly maintained systems, and we train workers to respond etc, but the emphasis has to be on making sure those systems and that training is never needed, John

Jwk, I agree that prevention should be a priority but when I do my FRA's they are based on the assumption that there will be a fire.