NFPA 1250-2015 Recommended Practice in Fire and Emergency Services Organization Risk Management (Effective Date 12 01 2014).pdf

1、Copyright 2014 National Fire ProtectionAssociation.All Rights Reserved.NFPA1250Recommended Practice inFire and Emergency Service Organization Risk Management2015 EditionThis edition of NFPA 1250, Recommended Practice in Fire and Emergency Service OrganizationRisk Management, was prepared by the Tech

2、nical Committee on Emergency Service Organiza-tionRiskManagement.ItwasissuedbytheStandardsCouncilonNovember11,2014,withaneffective date of December 1, 2014, and supersedes all previous editions.This edition of NFPA1250 was approved as anAmerican National Standard on December1, 2014.Origin and Develo

3、pment of NFPA 1250In 1994, a request was sent to NFPAs Standards Council to consider establishing a projectregarding fire service risk management. At that time, the Technical Committee on Fire Ser-vice Occupational Safety was including language regarding risk management in the revisionsto NFPA 1500,

4、 Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program. The councilalsohadanadditionalrequestfromtheTechnicalCommitteeonFireServiceTraining,whichhad a proposal to address risk management from a training perspective.At the 1995 NFPAAnnual Meeting, a task group meeting was held with membe

5、rs of bothtechnical committee projects, the proponents of this project, and members of the StandardsCouncil. A report was then prepared and sent to the Standards Council for its July 1995meeting, at which it approved the development of a new project on fire services administra-tive risk management.A

6、startup committee was appointed, with Dr. William Jenaway as chair.The committee worked for three years to develop a recommended practice that expandedon the requirements contained in Chapter 2 of the 1992 edition of NFPA 1500. During thedevelopment, the technical committee decided to request of the

7、 Standards Council a titleand scope change that would reflect all emergency services, not just the fire department.Thecouncil granted this request for changes in July 1997.The first edition of NFPA 1250 outlined an entire risk management program that anemergencyservicedepartmentcoulduseasamodel.Ital

8、soprovidedguidanceastohowsucha plan can also be a component of the jurisdictions risk management plan.Appendixes wereadded to assist the user with specific references, flow charts, and sample agreements. Thecommittee felt that NFPA 1250 would assist users and enforcers alike in reducing the risk toi

9、ndividuals, the emergency services, and the jurisdiction.For the 2004 edition, the document was revised to comply with the NFPA Manual of Styleand to update some references.The title of the 2010 edition was changed to include fire, to eliminate confusion regardingto whom the document applies.For the

10、 2015 edition, the committee has updated definitions and included the develop-ment of a risk management plan to protect the assets and minimize the potential liability ofthe fire and emergency service organization. The committee also has added to the risk assess-ment plan presumptive exposure and fi

11、nancial, disability, and medical considerations. Thisedition includes a new annex, Risk Management Plan Factors (Annex D).12501NFPAand National Fire ProtectionAssociation are registered trademarks of the National Fire ProtectionAssociation, Quincy, Massachusetts 02169.Technical Committee on Emergenc

12、y Service Organization Risk ManagementAdam K. Thiel, ChairCommonwealth of Virginia, VAEScott J. Blaser, Florida League of Cities, FL UPaul H. Boecker, III, Illinois Public Risk Fund, IL IJohn L. Cochran, Municipal Fire Services Consulting,Inc.,AR SELisa M. Cockerill, Region of Peel, Canada UGerard A

13、. Dio, City of Worcester Fire Department,MAEKeith S. Frangiamore, Fire Safety Consultants, Inc.,IL SEDaniel B. C. Gardiner, International Society of FireService Instructors, CT SERep. International Society of Fire Service InstructorsHugh H. Gibson, IV, Insurance Services Office, Inc.,NJ ITerry-Dawn

14、Hewitt, McKenna Hewitt, CO SEWilliam F. Jenaway, Volunteer Firemens InsuranceServices, Inc., PAIDean R. Larson, Larson Performance Consulting,IN SEBrian R. McNevin, Commerce Fire Department, TX EBridget OHara, United States Steel Corporation, PAURonald P. OKeefe, New Hampshire Local GovernmentCenter

15、, NH UKenneth A. Pravetz, City of Virginia Beach FireDepartment, VAELyle Quan, Waterloo Fire Rescue, Canada ERonald W. Richards, Task Force 1, Inc., PASEMark A. Sanders, OhioAssociation of ProfessionalFirefighters, OH LRep. InternationalAssociation of Fire FightersKelli J. Scarlett, Borough of Doyle

16、stown Fire Marshal,PAEAllen M. Smolen, Michigan Municipal Risk ManagementAuthority, MI IDavid G. N. Stonhill, Battelle EnergyAlliance (BEA),ID UBrad W. Tadlock, Hilton Head Island Fire nor does it approve or evalu-ate testing laboratories. In determining the acceptability ofinstallations,procedures,

17、equipment,ormaterials,theauthor-ity having jurisdiction may base acceptance on compliancewith NFPA or other appropriate standards. In the absence ofsuch standards, said authority may require evidence of properinstallation, procedure, or use. The authority having jurisdic-tion may also refer to the l

18、istings or labeling practices of anorganizationthatisconcernedwithproductevaluationsandisthus in a position to determine compliance with appropriatestandards for the current production of listed items.A.3.2.2 Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). The phrase “au-thority having jurisdiction,” or its ac

19、ronym AHJ, is used inNFPA documents in a broad manner, since jurisdictions andapprovalagenciesvary,asdotheirresponsibilities.Wherepub-lic safety is primary, the authority having jurisdiction may be afederal, state, local, or other regional department or indi-vidual such as a fire chief; fire marshal

20、; chief of a fire preven-tion bureau, labor department, or health department; build-ing official; electrical inspector; or others having statutoryauthority.Forinsurancepurposes,aninsuranceinspectionde-partment, rating bureau, or other insurance company repre-sentative may be the authority having jur

21、isdiction. In manycircumstances, the property owner or his or her designatedagent assumes the role of the authority having jurisdiction; atgovernment installations, the commanding officer or depart-mental official may be the authority having jurisdiction.A.3.3.6 Emergency Services System. Figure A.3

22、.3.6 is a repre-sentation of the components of a public emergency services pro-gramandwasusedasatemplateforthisrecommendedpractice.A.3.3.9 Fire and Emergency Service Organization (FESO). AFESO can be a department within a larger entity, such as a mu-nicipal fire department that services a municipali

23、ty, or an indus-trialfiredepartmenttrainedandequippedforspecializedopera-tions at a specific site owned by a private corporation.Alternatively, a FESO can be a separately incorporated entitysuch as a private-sector emergency medical services provider or afire department incorporated as a nonprofit o

24、rganization.A.4.1 Risk is a characteristic of an entire probability distribu-tion, with a separate probability for each outcome.Risk is of two types, pure and speculative. Pure risk existswhen there is a chance of loss but no chance of gain. Specula-tive risk exists when there is a chance of gain as

25、 well as loss.The value of managing risk has several features, includingthe following:(1) Survival(2) Peace of mind(3) Lowering the costs of risk and improving either profit oroperating fund availability(4) Stabilizing earning or cash flow(5) Little or no interruption of operations(6) Continued stab

26、ility or growth(7) Satisfaction of the organizations sense of social responsi-bility or desire for a good imageA.4.2.2 In many cases, the emergency services entity is not to-tally independent, but is a department within a larger public orprivate sector organization. Consequently, the risk management

27、policy and program should be developed in conjunction withthose of the parent organization so as to avoid conflict, duplica-tion, or excessive costs. In many cases, medium to large public orprivate organizations have specialized risk management person-nelwhocanbeofassistanceindevelopingtheemergencys

28、erviceentitys risk management policy and program.A.4.3 Risk management is a specialized field of managementand, as such, shares many of the characteristics of the prin-ciples of general management of organizations. As a manage-ment function, risk management is directed toward the goalsoftheorganizat

29、ion;requiresthemakingandimplementingofdecisions; and is performed through the planning, organiz-ing, directing, and controlling of others.A.4.4 Therearetwoprimarytypesofdecisionsthathavetobemade in the implementation of risk management solutions.The first type is technical decisions. These are the d

30、ecisionsthat determine the action that needs to be taken. For ex-ample, a solution to be implemented could be the purchase/replacement of personal alert safety systems (PASS) devices(to decrease the risk of members not being located if theybecome incapacitated). Some of the technical decisions canin

31、clude the features to be included in the new devices, therecommended brand, and the policy to be established fortheir use. The FESOs Health and Safety Officer is frequentlycalled upon to make technical decisions. However, this indi-vidual need not operate in a vacuum. Other members of theFESO should

32、 be consulted to ensure that all information isacquired and evaluated prior to a decisions being finalized.The second type of decision for implementation of risk man-agement solutions is managerial decisions. These are the deci-sions that determine how and by the whom actions will be taken.Using the

33、 preceding PASS example, some of the managerial de-cisionscouldincludehowandwhenthebudgetwillallowforthepurchase, the bidding process for obtaining them, and who willrepresent the FESO throughout the purchase process.These de-cisions will typically be the responsibility of a department admin-istrato

34、r such as the fire chief. Some FESOs could also have some-one such as a municipal risk manager who will be charged withthis responsibility or who is available for consultation.12508 FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICE ORGANIZATION RISK MANAGEMENT2015 EditionA.4.5.1 Documentation is important so that the deci

35、sionsthataremadecanbereconstructedandreviewed,ifnecessary.For example, an FESO could be facing an issue that has beenpreviously addressed, but for multiple reasons members areunable to recollect why a particular decision was made. An-other reason for maintaining clear documentation, althoughless lik

36、ely to occur, is that there could be occasions when aparticular risk management decision becomes part of a legalcase. In such cases, attorneys need to follow the paper trailthat leads to a particular decision that the FESO made.A.4.5.2 In addition to interfacing with others within the par-ent organi

37、zation, it will be necessary to work with those exter-nal to the organization, such as insurance brokers, agents, orconsultants.A.4.5.5 A risk management program is the end result of therisk management process, wherein exposures have been iden-tified, risks evaluated, and a control plan implemented

38、andmonitored. The risk management plan is the written docu-mentation of the risk management program.A.4.8 FigureA.4.8describesthestepsintheriskmanagementprocess.A.5.2 The first step in risk identification is for the FESO toascertainallofitsactualorpotentialactivities.Theword activi-ties is used here

39、 in the broadest sense and includes a consider-ation of the FESOs territory and jurisdiction; the entity orsegment of the public it serves; and its plans, policies, services,operations, premises, apparatus, and equipment.The next step in risk identification is for the FESO to iden-tify those aspects

40、 of its activities that could produce undesir-able consequences.Undesirable consequences generally fall within the follow-ing three broad categories:(1) Actual or threatened injury or damage to persons(2) Actual or threatened loss of or damage to property(3) Actual or threatened injury or damage to

41、theenvironmentThese undesirable consequences are sometimes referredto in the insurance industry and in risk management circles asloss exposures.The three categories of undesirable consequences addressthe immediate effect of a detrimental event. Incidental or in-direct effects are also possible for e

42、ach category. These inci-dentaleffectscanbeclassifiedaseconomic,legal,andpoliticalimpacts.After the FESO has listed the activities with which it is in-volved, it should identify the undesirable consequences thatcould potentially occur with respect to each activity. This activitycan be accomplished b

43、y a methodical analysis that addresses, inturn, each category of injury, loss, or damage and then assessesthe legal, economic, and political impacts likely to follow.A.5.2.2(11) The concept of risk includes the level of serviceprovided. The degree of risk accepted by the jurisdictionshould be subjec

44、t to local determination. This strategic plan-ningprocessshouldbedesignedtoevaluatethekindandlevelof fire risk in a community and to establish future objectivesfor minimizing or reducing that risk.In addition, strategic planning should be utilized to de-velop a series of criteria to determine the le

45、vels of fire risk thatwill prevail in the community relative to the fire suppressionresources to be maintained.The fire department should maintain a periodically up-dated community fire risk analysis to identify the size andscope of the potential fire problem in order to determine therequired number

46、 and deployment of fire companies. Everyfire department should have a program under which its per-sonnelregularlyexamineeverypartofthecommunitywhereasignificant fire problem might develop. Personnel should in-spect real property in the community with an emphasis onthose occupancies identified by a r

47、isk schedule as subject to ahigh level of hazard to life and property.GovernmentAdministrationSystem RelationshipPersonnel trainingEmergency managementRisk managementManagement information systemsFinanceEmergency OperationsFire suppressionSpecial operationsCustomer serviceEducationLife safetyEnginee

48、ringCode managementRisk assessmentWater supplyPlanningInvestigationCommunicationEmergencymedical servicesProviding Emergency Services to the PublicFIGURE A.3.3.6 Components of a Public Emergency Services Program.12509ANNEXA2015 EditionThe number and type of units assigned to respond to areported fir

49、e incident should be determined by risk analysisand pre-fire planning based on specific location or neighbor-hood.As an integral part of the risk process, the fire departmentshould develop and implement a public fire life safety educa-tion program to achieve or develop a level of fire safety aware-ness and attitude that assists the fire department in the man-agement and reduction of the fire risk in the community.There is a fundamental concept of fire risk associated withmodern society. Public fire service organizations are expectedt