Fire Safety Issues in Schools
A recent report by Steve Solomon of the Fire Protection Association has revealed a catalogue of issues in UK schools.
National Audit Office report.
In the FPA article, Solomon writes: "A recently released report from the National Audit Office has brought to the fore the condition of the UK’s school buildings, with growing concerns over the declining state of the fabric of buildings and the “significant safety concerns” that this raises. When it comes to fire safety, official statistics released by the Home Office show that approximately 30% of the schools inspected up to the year ending March 2022 had an unsatisfactory rating during fire safety audits."
Escape Routes
The ADB Volume 2 and DCLG guidelines concerning educational buildings establish that travel in one direction should not exceed 18 meters, while for situations involving two directions of travel, the limit is set at 45 meters. This measurement is taken to reach a final exit, a safeguarded staircase, or a separate compartment that ensures continued safe evacuation.
The responsibility falls on the fire risk assessor to validate the current travel distances and suggest necessary actions where discrepancies exist. These recommendations might encompass the inclusion of extra exit paths or the creation of additional compartments. Frequently, deviations from the recommended travel distance standards arise due to interior layout modifications.
Alarm Systems
Instances have been observed in which automatic fire detection systems were concealed, primarily as a response to frequent unwarranted alarm triggers. This occurrence is often attributed to secretive smoking or suboptimal procedures in spaces like the kitchen, design technology area, or science laboratories.
The duty of the fire risk assessor extends beyond merely advising the removal of these covers. They should also collaborate with the school to proactively address the issue's reoccurrence by proposing effective measures. This might encompass options like using alternative detector heads, promoting improved work protocols, and instituting regular assessments of problematic zones.
Extinguishers
The likelihood of tampering with fire extinguishers is generally higher in educational premises compared to most other building types. It is advisable to conduct regular visual inspections more frequently than the monthly checks outlined in BS 5306-3. In cases where keeping extinguishers in areas accessible to students leads to persistent misuse, potential solutions include the use of locked boxes or relocating extinguishers to staff-only zones. However, it's important to ensure that these alternatives still adhere to the recommended travel distances stipulated in BS 5306-8. Alternatively, the installation of loud audible alarms that activate when extinguishers are removed from their designated positions can be considered. For dry powder extinguishers, their placement should be limited to areas solely accessible to trained staff. Moreover, retaining dry powder extinguishers inside a building should be accompanied by documented health and safety assessments.
Handsam can now provide an FRA service for clients. Please contact us if you would like a quotation.
Emergency Planning
Regular evaluation of evacuation procedures should involve conducting unannounced fire drills in order to gauge their effectiveness. These drills should be carried out at least once per term. Monitoring of fire drills is essential to not only assess the speed of the entire evacuation process but also to track the routes taken – a detail often overlooked – and to identify any causes of delays.
The designated fire assembly points frequently have unsuitable locations, such as enclosed playgrounds or fields with limited alternative evacuation options apart from returning via the building's exterior, potentially hazardous if ablaze and emitting high temperatures. Instances have been observed where assembly points are situated precisely where the fire and rescue service would approach from, posing an evident risk to those assembling and possibly impeding the firefighting efforts of the rescue service.
Significantly, there's often a lack of planning for individuals – staff, students, or regular visitors – with impairments that could hinder their ability to evacuate during a fire emergency. Although lifts might provide access to upper floors during routine activities, they're often unusable in fire scenarios. Numerous educational establishments examined the lack of Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) to address these vulnerabilities.
Staff Training
Ensuring the highest quality of staff training in fire safety is of paramount importance, serving not only to aid building evacuation during fire incidents but also in terms of fire prevention.
In-depth fire safety training should be administered to key personnel, encompassing all aspects of fire prevention. Employees engaged in high-risk activities, such as science teachers, catering staff, and design technology instructors, should receive training tailored to their specific roles and responsibilities.
Taking the building's age into consideration, routine planned and unplanned maintenance work is likely to be necessary. A designated on-site individual should be trained to oversee such works and issue Hot Work Permits if needed, following the guidelines in RC7 Risk control for hot work. If any site works are expected to breach structural elements.
Fires in educational institutions can have devastating effects not only on the physical structure but also on the broader community. Parents may face difficulties in arranging alternatives for children if the school no longer remains viable.
Read the full article on the FPA website here: SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS
Read more about the FPA here: FPA WEBSITE