Questions around data analysis
Is 5 years worth of data sufficient enough to provide accurate analysis of on-call availability?
The analysis process utilised a range of data sets to ensure accuracy. Further data sets continue to be added as they become available e.g. response data for 2023. Analysis over a 5 year period is considered common practice to ensure relevance. The impact of COVID has been included in the analysis, by comparing the differences between looking at the whole five year period and looking at the two years before and after the larger COVID impacts. The decline in on-call availability is a trend nationally and our analysis within Warwickshire mirrors this.
Why have data sets been presented over different time periods e.g. daily activity only been presented over a 12 month period?
Further data sets continue to be added as they become available e.g. response data for 2023. Daily activity was presented over a 12 month period but is indicative of a 5 year trend which is reflected nationally.
Why isn't wholetime availability 100%?
There are numerous reasons why wholetime availability isn't 100%. This includes wholetime staff absence and the degradation model (dispersing wholetime staff around the county to cover deficiencies elsewhere).
Historic data has been used, what profiling has been carried out moving forward?
Historic data has been used to evidence trend analysis. All FRS's have a duty to identify and assess foreseeable risk (CRMP) and this is included within our risk profile of Warwickshire. It is common practice for fire and rescue services to use data from a 3-5 year period to predict future risk and demand.
Has climate change been taken into account for the years ahead i.e. flooding and field fires?
The impact of climate change is considered in developing our risk analysis and flood zone coverage is included as a specific hazard data set. The proposed implementation of surge teams will help to address these seasonal risks and spikes in demand.
If the risk analysis confirms station locations are generally well located why are you proposing to move fire appliances from stations?
Appliances are not being removed from fire stations. The proposed model is placing resources where they are most needed based on the risk analysis. This provides 20 guaranteed appliances during the day and evening and 16 at night. Our existing model provides 11 guaranteed appliances during day and night.
What weighting has been put on activity types in relation to aligning emergency to activity levels?
Whilst the analysis focuses on life and property (P1 & P2) incidents, this data has been considered alongside all activity, simultaneous activity, and the delivery of prevention and protection interventions.
Can we have a map of where incident times are not being met?
This information is available on the Consultation page within the "Data and information about the current and proposed arrangements".
What mechanism are you basing attendance times and is this really efficient?
The analysis has identified the risk within Warwickshire (impact X likelihood) and fire appliance locations are geographically placed to provide the best attendance times to the most high risk areas.
How have individual fire stations been prioritised over others?
The independent analysis has confirmed that although fire station locations are generally in the right places, the current availability of appliances at the stations throughout a 24 hour period do not align to the risk. The R2R programme seeks to address this.
If a station currently has 2 appliances and the proposed models includes only 1 appliance, does this increase risk in those areas?
The proposed model includes 2 appliances at both Rugby and Leamington, 1 at Nuneaton and 1 at Bedworth. This geographical configuration provides the best distribution of appliances relative to the risk identified within the analysis.
Is there currently a response standard for motorway attendances? If so, how will this fit with the attendance times for P1/P2 in both Models?
Motorway incidents are classified the same as P1 & P2 incidents and are subject to the same response standards.