Rank: New forum user 
|
My company is a care company with 9 residential homes and an office building. We are discussing the frequency of Fire Risk Assessment and have been given different opinions. Our external Fire Risk Assessor says 3 yearly is adequate provided the layout of the building hasn't changed, but our general stance is to review most (non-fire related) risk assessments annually. Is it necessary to create a whole new Risk Assessment annually or is that excessive? Assuming no changes have been made, can we just review the last prepared RA and sign that off if we are happy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
We review the assessment every year but do nt right a new one just a review to ensure nothing has changed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
FRAs should be risk based. For example, care homes (sleeping accommodation) are a higher risk than say an office building. Therefore I would argue that whilst it is acceptable to review a FRA every 3 years for an office, that does not apply to a care home which would require an annual FRA review.
As a rule there is no need to re-write the FRA when carrying out a review. My only concern is that things can get overlooked if it is simply a 'tick in the box' exercise. Hence with higher risk FRAs I would prefer a new FRA is conducted, which may pick up anything which had been missed previously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
I agree with RayRapp.
Where there is a "sleeping risk" we do annual FRA visits
A library would get a visit every 3 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Thanks for your replies so far. I agree that 3 yearly is not frequent enough, especially in a sleeping-environment with some very vulnerable people who don't necesarily have the capacity to understand what is happening around them. I'm surprised our Fire Risk Assessor suggested 3 yearly to be honest and I'm not happy with it. Previously we were told yearly (by a previous Assessor) and I would be much happier with that. I am going to suggest a full FRA every two years (unless significant changes take place) with a complete review of that FRA in the interim year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Might I suggest a different approach? 1 yr or 3 yr, you will only have changes to deal with when changes happen, but significant changes are easy to deal with (and know about). It is how the building is managed and supervised that can have a significant impact on a real-world situation. If the management know the FRA is due they will perform a 'Queen Mum' and prepare for the royal visit. Noticing changes and/or lack of management and supervision are IMO just as important than how often the FRA is reviewed. Does the FRA or policy specify a duty for regular safety inspections, perhaps by a suitably trained Chief Fire Warden? I'm sure you are already doing this but if not a simple safety walk once a month will ensure standards of building management have not slipped, and pick up any maintenance issues (fire doors and equipment for example) and enable a record of these to be kept and corrective actions completed. If that is done properly and reviews done when significant changes drive them, like a change in best practice, legislation or building works and as a whole, it would demonstrate how seriously the organisation takes fire safety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
OK, so review quite simply means 'look at again', so an annual review, to my way of thinking, would be a recorded inspection by a suitable trained person. You do not have to start from scratch. At one of my previous places (7 residential homes, 6 hospices) this is what we used to do. We were however working with NHS people, and the NHS mangles the English language like no other organisation; so in NHS speak a 'review' is a thorough and wholesale revisiting of something, often from first principles. This led to colleagues using the very excellent term 're-look-at' where a mere mortal would have said review. Fortunately my current employer has a better understanding of English, John
|
 1 user thanked jwk for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I would suggest an annual review is adequate - to echo other people a review is not a "re-do" if nothing has changed then nothing has changed. If things have changed then a "re-do" may be necessary depending on what has changed difficult to put timescales on these things but if it feels right it probably is right.
|
1 user thanked Hsquared14 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.