| Article:
A Proposal for a Centralized Certification System for Fire Training
Proposal for Change
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The desire by the fire service to achieve recognition for all training taken along with the benefit of training to National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards is driving the need to develop a system that will allow and encourage the recognition of all quality training that contributes toward compliance with fire service standards.
The need to develop a recognition or certification process occurs at a time when support for local government fire departments from the Province is in a state of flux. The need for change is exacerbated by the Province announcing a Minister’s Order in December 2002, mandating that training for the fire service meet the NFPA standards. This creates a dilemma based on the continued high expectancy placed on the local governments versus the ability of the provincial government to develop or oversee the delivery of a program that will ensure the equitable recognition of training that meets the NFPA standards
This proposal looks at current training initiatives and the difficulty that many fire departments experience in achieving certification to the NFPA standards. Alternative options for recognition of training are discussed, based on the knowledge that training is currently available to the fire service from provincial institutions, private training companies, contractors, and out-of-province institutions and trainers, while the majority of training is delivered using in-house training resources.
It is an enviable goal to have all aspects of learning and life experience contribute towards a certificate, diploma or other form of recognition that establishes credentials and protects against perceptions of inadequate training. What is not optional is the need to recognize training that contributes toward compliance with the National Fire Protection Association standards.
A prime opportunity exists for the Office of the Fire Commissioner to take a leadership role to form, or at the very least, to direct the formation of a oversight body to undertake this important initiative.
INTRODUCTION
The genesis of this project originated at the Fire Safety Advisory Council (FSAC) meeting of November 5, 1997. The minutes of that meeting[1] reflect that the Fire Commissioner would meet with the staff of the Justice Institute of BC, Fire and Safety Division and other interested parties to consider a process whereby all bona fide fire service training, including in-house training programs, could be recognized as being contributory toward provincial certification of fire fighters to meet the British Columbia Fire Service standards.
A follow-up meeting was held on February 16, 1998 to initiate the development of a proposal which would be presented to the FSAC at the March 18, 1998 meeting in Victoria. Present at this meeting were Bob Brett, then President of the BC Professional Fire Fighters Association, also chair of the FSAC, Rick Dumala, Fire Commissioner, now retired, and John Vokes, then Director of the Fire & Safety Division.
During this meeting a number of interests and impacts toward developing a recognition process were brought forward including:
- The intended scope of the project
* Impact on current fire training agencies as well as community colleges, private training agencies, and individuals who provide fire service training
* The criteria for recognizing the validity of in-house training programs
* Positive and negative impacts of an all-encompassing recognition process
* The impact on existing guidelines for certification to the provincial standards
* Alternatives to this proposal.
Despite several genuine attempts to bring about sensible change, this issue remains largely unaddressed and continues to cause frustration in areas including cost of training, exclusivity of curriculum, and access to reasonably priced training in outlying regions of the province.
Based on this brief introduction, it can be seen that the purpose of this report is to provide the history and to update several occurrences with the hope that a workable resolution can be found that will benefit the fire service of British Columbia.
The question that remains is the same as before and is, “How can all bona-fide training, regardless of source, be recognized as contributing toward compliance with fire service (NFPA) standards?”
BACKGROUND
To understand the issue of certification to provincial fire service standards, it is necessary to reflect on the significant changes which have impacted training of the British Columbia fire service since 1978.
For many years [2] the Office of the Fire Marshal maintained a traveling training unit that traveled throughout the province to train fire departments in basic firefighting skills. This initiative was primarily driven by the Civil Defense Fire Services Dispersal Plan that was to ensure the preparedness of fire departments and ability of emergency response personnel to aid communities in the event of a nuclear attack or natural disaster.
The fire service held a considerably more relaxed attitude toward training and preparing themselves in that era as litigation against fire departments was virtually non-existent.
In 1979 and into the early 1980s under the leadership of Fire Commissioner Gordon Anderson, significant changes occurred. The Fire Marshal’s Act was replaced with the Fire Services Act and the position of Fire Marshal was replaced with the position of Fire Commissioner.
The Fire Services Act strengthened the power of the Fire Commissioner and also imposed specific duties. One of these duties was that the Fire Commissioner “shall establish standards for the selection and training of fire suppression personnel.”
Simultaneous to the changes to the Office of the Fire Marshal, the Civil Defense Plan was abandoned and by default the responsibility for fire training again fell to the Office of the Fire Marshal. Under the guidance of Acting Fire Marshal Ken Collier, an agreement with the newly formed Justice Institute of BC[3] (JIBC), Fire Academy was struck under which training was to be delivered to the fire service throughout BC.
To fulfill the new training mandate, the Fire Commissioner established Curriculum Committees whose members represented all facets of the fire service. One Curriculum Committee was established to address training needs for the volunteer and composite fire departments. Eventually, this led to the development of the Volunteer Fire Fighter Training Standard.
Another Curriculum Committee was formed to address the training needs of fire departments that employed career fire fighters. This group chose not to consider training for firefighters, but rather focused on the training needs at officer levels. This led to the development of programs for Company Officers, Command Officers, and Administrative Officers.
As each committee met separately and focused on individual needs, further agreements were made that career fire fighters were not to access volunteer fire fighter training and volunteer fire fighters could not access the officer level training programs.
Both programs were given to the JIBC Fire Academy to develop and deliver.
In 1990, the Honorable Lyle Hanson, Minister of Municipal Affairs, directed the Fire Commissioner to form a Fire Safety Advisory Council (FSAC) in order to bring all factions of the provinces’ fire service together in order that consensus could be reached on key fire safety related concerns that impacted provincial agencies and local governments.
One of the first issues to be addressed was the development of standards for training of the fire service. For several reasons, including an increase in litigation involving fire departments, there had been an increase in the awareness of the need for standardized training programs. These included uniform procedures of operation (operational guidelines), and generally an awareness of the need to practice duty of care in how business in the fire service was done.
To deal specifically with the development of standards and the identification of curriculum, a Standards & Curriculum Committee pursuant to the FSAC was formed. This committee quickly became a cohesive working group, driven by the common goal of overcoming earlier ‘career’ versus ‘volunteer’ differences and moved toward fulfilling its mandate of developing fire service training standards using the NFPA standards as the base document. These standards were seen as being necessary and were intended to meet the specific training needs of the British Columbia fire service.
In due course, a Certification Task Force was formed by the FSAC. The mandate of this committee was to develop a process whereby training from a variety of sources, along with a ‘service-time’ factor, could be combined and upon meeting the terms of the guidelines, a provincial certificate would be issued for achievement of both factors.
The introduction of this concept highlighted several issues that included:
- Most fire departments favored the opportunity to receive recognition for complying with British Columbia Fire Service Standards,
- That many fire departments did not use training from the JIBC Fire Academy,
- That many fire departments did not use training programs beyond what they had developed and delivered to their staff using in-house training resources,
- That many fire departments did not maintain individual[4] records of training that was conducted in-house,
- Cast doubt on the validity of much of the training that was being conducted,
- Revealed that non-compliance with Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) regulations (Part 4 and Part 31) was widespread.
Unfortunately, the initiative to provide certification to BC Fire Service standards was short-lived as legal advisors to the Fire Commissioner determined that the mandate within the Fire Services Act did not allow the Fire Commissioner to provide certification to fire fighters and other positions within the fire service. The certification of fire fighters at the OFC level was abandoned.
In December of 2002, the Minister of Community, Aboriginal, and Women’s Services introduced a Minister’s Order, mandating that training for the fire service was to meet the NFPA standards. This fulfilled the statutory requirement of the Fire Services Act requiring that the Fire Commissioner establish standards for the selection and training of fire suppression personnel.
On the heels of this came the Filmon Report of 2003 that identified the need for consistent training that would prepare local government emergency responders to work together in the event of major emergencies. This report also identified that many fire departments were unfamiliar with combating interface fires as well as a myriad of deficiencies in training, communications, equipment, protective clothing, and apparatus.
THE NEED TO COMPLY WITH INDUSTRY/SERVICE STANDARDS
Many factors support compliance with standards that are established for a specific discipline – in this instance the BC Fire Service.
Among these factors is the need to:
· Form the basis for a strong risk management defense in the event of potential liability claims/litigation,
· Provide for a high degree of safe work practices for firefighters and emergency responders,
· Comply with legislation/regulations/requirements imposed by other agencies, i.e., WCB (now Worksafe BC), OFC, insurance underwriters,
· Provide the basis by which training can be provided/measured/evaluated for purposes of certification,
· Provide the basis for customer service and quality assurance statements – say what you do – do what you say.
Although there was little debate on the need to comply with standards, many arguments were forthcoming on the means of attaining compliance with those standards and the costs associated with this compliance.
The method of achievement became a great debate, however there was little doubt that the principle objective is “To establish a system through which to review and recognize quality training and educational initiatives that contribute to the compliance with fire service (NFPA) standards.”
BASIS FOR EVALUATION
In considering the introduction of a new dimension of service to reach the above noted objective, consideration was given to a number of areas to be evaluated.
The primary areas for review to gain recognition of quality training are:
· Criteria for acceptance of private training agencies,
· Criteria for acceptance of individuals who provide specialized training,
· Criteria for acceptance of (fire department) in-house training programs,
· Criteria for integration of courses from institutes that currently provide accredited programming and other sources not specifically referenced,
· Establishment of common credentials for instructors and advisors,
· Criteria for review of training formats, i.e. face-to-face classroom, distance learning,
· Criteria for acceptance of on-line learning, CD ROM interactive, and other hi-tech training medium, including electronic forms of testing for knowledge of theory,
· Criteria to determine compliance with relevant (NFPA) standards,
· Criteria used to consider credibility/ethics of an institution/contractor/training deliverer,
· Establishment of a fee-for-service structure to review training program and maintain a student record system
- Simple review/comprehensive review
- Appeal/dispute resolution process,
- Criteria for consideration of further equivalencies.
REVIEW OF OPTIONS
It was originally suggested that the Justice Institute of BC (JIBC) should be the agency that would establish this system, although it quickly became apparent that the JIBC was seen by the fire service as a biased organization that would be unable to provide an objective review of other sources of training.
Upon further research it was learned that the another provincial government agency existed that provided a similar service of recognizing or accrediting training and is the Private Career Training Institutions Agency (PCTIA), formerly the Private Post-Secondary Education Commission of BC.
The mandate of this agency is to:
- ensure consumer protection to students registered with institutions that are registered as their members, and,
- to establish standards of quality that must be met by the accredited institution.
A review of the accreditation process revealed that there are nine (9) areas of review for accreditation under the Private Career Training Institutions Agency that include:
· Institutional mission, goals, and objectives statement
· Institutional administration
· Educational programs
· Established qualification for instructors
· Instructional resources and equipment to support training
· Student support services
· Dispute resolution and compliance formula
· Valid and reliable system to maintain student records
· Physical plant and non-instructional equipment.
Although the review of educational programs is intended to ensure compliance with course objectives and course outcomes, the objective of determining the areas of learning that meet BC fire service standards would not be achieved as the accreditation review does not consider curriculum and how or if it meets, are identified.
An assessment of the role of the PCTIA determined that this may be suitable for conventional training institutions and schools in order to provide quality and consumer related assurances, however are beyond the ability of individual instructors, sole proprietor training companies, and fire department in-house training programs to achieve reasonable compliance. It is, however felt that should an agency choose to become accredited using this method it would place it in good standing for being accepted under a more focused program that would review curriculum compliance with NFPA and other BC Fire Service requirements.
Of further interest, is that there are fees assigned to cover costs incurred by the PCTIA during the review and acceptance of each private school or organization that applies for a review.
Delegation of Accreditation by Accredited Entities
There is no question that programs delivered by agencies currently accredited in areas of standard-based fire training would be accepted under any system without further review. There are currently four agencies that are accredited entities in British Columbia by one or both accreditation bodies those being, International Fire Service Accreditation Congress (IFSAC) and National Board on Fire Service Professional Qualification (ProBoard). These entities are the College of the Rockies, located in Cranbrook; the District of North Vancouver Fire Department; the Justice Institute of British Columbia; and Vancouver Island Emergency Response Academy, a consortium of Nanaimo Fire Department and Malaspina College in Nanaimo.
A clause within the IFSAC Accreditation Policy states that the entity, “ may under certain conditions, delegate parts of its accreditation powers to local jurisdictions providing the same level of program delivery and quality assurance is conducted at the fire department level.” Similar wording exists in the ProBoard documents. ProBoard allows for delegation of accreditation authority, although references this as being available to “community colleges, technical schools, fire training academies etc.”
As in the previous example, fees are charged and any costs incurred in auditing the program would be passed on to the requesting fire department or agency that has asked to be reviewed. In addition, delegation of accreditation by either of the two accreditation bodies whose interest is fire training, does not consider that private companies or individuals to be eligible to receive accreditation of their training programs.
Model Fashioned after the Ontario Professional Standards Sitting Body
A number of years ago the Ontario Fire Marshall’s Office along with the Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs undertook a project entitled “Paradigm for Progress”. The significant shift was to establish their own standards for the Ontario Fire Service, independent of National Fire Protection Associations Standards which are commonly referenced and often form the basis for fire service training and procedures. The final step of this initiative was to establish an Endorsement and Review process that would recognize quality education and training programs offered to the fire service in the Province of Ontario.
The mechanics of the Ontario program mirrors the accreditation process used by IFSAC, ProBoard, and the Private Career Training Institutions Agency (PCTIA); although it specifically expects that the training is based on the Ontario Fire Service Standards.
There are fees charged for the review of the material/programs with the total cost being dependent on the degree of assessment required by the board. The guidelines do not include a fee structure, therefore the total cost of this undertaking is unknown, and may influence the degree of acceptance by institutions/organizations who may participate in a review process of this nature.
Anticipated Outcomes of the Training Review Process
Having reviewed a number of models that are available or proposed, it would seem reasonable that one or a combination of several of the existing models would meet the needs of the British Columbia fire service.
In order to shift to a process of evaluating all quality-training initiatives, a number of factors must be present:
· The system must be available and inviting to the users that would include currently accredited institutions, private training agencies, consultants, and fire departments that conduct in-house training.
· The system must be responsive to the needs of the market and be able to react in a timely manner
· The system must be affordable as there is every expectation that any costs imposed on a training institution, company or consultant would be passed on to the client or fire departments using the programs
· The system must not only be fair to all concerned, but be seen as fair and unbiased in order to appeal to commercial ventures as well as reviews of in-house training programs.
Options
Based on the forgoing discussion, a number of options exist and would include, but not be limited to:
1. Maintain the status quo,
2. To establish a review process and record-keeping system within the Office of the Fire Commissioner (OFC),
3. To establish a review/audit process and record-keeping service chaired by the Fire Chiefs Association and representing the interest of the fire associations as the focal point for this process,
4. To establish a Training Program Review Task Force utilizing a combination of points 2 and 3 whereby several agencies including fire service associations and the OFC conduct specific functions with one agency designated the responsibility for administration and record-keeping,
5. Pursue other options as yet unidentified.
CONCLUSION
There is little doubt of the value that evaluation and recognition of quality training regardless of source would have on the fire service. This would encourage fire departments to participate in the achievement of certification to NFPA standards that in turn would improve fire fighter safety and provide a credible measuring tool in the event that performance is challenged, or litigation threatened.
To meet the needs of the fire service in having all sources of quality training that is conducted and meets NFPA standards evaluated, it is clear that an independent and unbiased review body should be established. Also of primary importance is the cost of development and functioning of this body.
It would seem reasonable that this function should remain at an independent level close to the legislation that rests with the Office of the Fire Commissioner. This would make the Office of the Fire Commissioner the likely body to oversee this process through an independent Fire Service Certification Oversight Council while utilizing the resources available through the fire service associations.
By drawing from a number of resources, a system can be developed that can be fair and unbiased as well as capable of accommodating the needs of several users and meet the needs of the fire service in British Columbia.
© John B. Vokes, updated November 2008.
[1] These minutes are part of the Fire Safety Advisory Council files.
[2] The Office of the Fire Marshal conducted basic fire fighter training throughout the province under a Civil Defense mandate from 1963 until 1978.
[3] In April of 1978, Order-in-Council 1023 signed by Patrick McGeer, Minister of Education and William R. Bennett, Premier of BC and presiding members of the Executive Council created the Justice Institute of BC as a Provincial Institute. The Justice Institute was mandated to provide areas of instruction for, but not limited to Police, Corrections, Courts and Sheriffs. It was also to identify education and specific training needs for all components of the BC justice system including the fire service.
[4] Individual in this context refers to individual topics, training sessions, and individual students.
|