Deploying and Managing Fire Services - Assignment Example

Deploying and Managing Fire Services Thesis Statement The selection of an evaluation system must be done only after there has been a careful analysis of the options at hand, since each option has its own strengths and weaknesses that come with its implementation. 1. Introduction In any event of fire and disaster, the pace at which emergency workers are able to get to the site and the length of coverage they are able to have in their rescue goes a long way to affect the degree to which lives and property will be saved (quote). But for the emergency workers to be very effective in their approach to work, it is important for them to have a form of guide or system that regulates their operations and actions (quote). It is in such spirit that the fire suppression rating schedule and standards of coverage have been created and utilized as part of the collective human resource, fiscal, and capital management of fire stations. This outline seeks to draw a distinction between the two systems by focusing on their strengths and weaknesses, as well as the premise in which the usage of any of the two can be said to be relevant. 2. Overview of the two systems A. Fire Suppression Rating Schedule I. Context: This evaluation system is used by the Insurance Service Office (ISO). It focuses on evaluating fire prevention and fire suppression capabilities that various communities and fire protection areas have as part of systems available to the community (ISO, 2014). II. Difference from Standards of Coverage: Unlike the standards of coverage, this manual focuses fire communities rather than fire agencies or organization. Again, this manual makes use of quantitative grading system but the standard of coverage is largely based on a qualitative evaluation system. B. Standards of Coverage I. Context: This evaluation system is used by the utilized by the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) and the commission on fire accreditation. It functions based on a data collection process which focuses on identifying expected levels of performance that should be produced by agencies, based on achievable emergency events outcomes (Spokane Fire Department, 2010). II. Similarity with the Fire Suppression Rating Schedule: All these two systems function as an assessment or evaluation manual. By this, their usefulness is based on the decision making process that is conducted out of the outcomes they produce. This is different from other forms of guidelines that spell out processes and actions that must be taken in the actual event of a fire or emergency. 3. The strength of the systems A. Fire Suppression Rating Schedule I. A major strength of the fire suppression rating schedule is the fact that it is preventive in nature. This means that by use of this evaluation system, implementers are admonished to focus on how to stop fire and emergency all together (quote). II. This system can also be said to be highly involving, given the fact that it is community based. This way, it is always easier for stakeholders to be identified and given specific roles to play in ensuring that there is higher scoring for the numerical grading that is done for the community involved. B. Standards of Coverage I. The major strength of this system has been identified to be the fact that it allows for a focused implementation system. What this means is that there are a few people who are identified and given the role of evaluation. Once this happens, it is easier to identify people within the agency to hold them accountable. II. Then also, the standards of coverage emphasizes on future community growth, which is a way of ensuring that it is not only the current generation that benefits from the outcomes of the evaluation process but that plans are also made to put structures in place for the safety of unborn generations (quote). 4. Weaknesses associated with the systems A. Fire Suppression Rating Schedule I. The fact that the fire suppression rating schedule is community based has been seen by many as paving way for mediocrity. This is so because there is virtually no focus in determining who should be held responsible when things go wrong. II. Again, implementation has always been a major problem, based on the fact the community based program require much funding and other forms of resources, including human resource, capital resource, and fiscal resources. Meanwhile, a very crucial component for having the whole evaluation system in place is to ensure that decisions can be made out of the outcomes of the grading. B. Standards of Coverage I. There are many who believe that standards of coverage suffer the problem of implementation of outcomes, especially because the whole evaluation system is qualitative rather than quantitative. Indeed where a numerical grading system exists, it is always easier to undertake ratings to know outfits that are in need of restructuring most. This is however absent in this case. II. Also, the standards of coverage have been criticized for taking a curative approach rather than a preventive approach. Meanwhile, it always costs agencies more to manage fire and emergency than to put in place preventive measures that ensure that such incidents do not happen at all (quote). 5. Conclusion From the outline above, it would be noted that both the fire suppression rating schedule and the standards of coverage are used as a means of controlling the risk and harm associated with fire and emergency incidents (quote). Even though this may not be very direct, the two systems come in hand as administrative guidelines that ought to be implemented in order to ensure that the resources available to any fire station can be well utilized. Once there is effective utilization, the control of fire and emergencies, as well as their prevention can be done in a more proactive and pragmatic manner that aims to save live and property (quote). However, the most important conclusion that can be made is that the selection of any of these two must be guided with a lot of thought. It is important that a lot of thoughtful considerations go on to identify the exact outcome that a fire and emergency unit wants to achieve ahead of the implementation of any of these guidelines. References ISO (2014). Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS) Overview. Retrieved July 10, 2014 from http://www.isomitigation.com/ppc/2000/ppc2001.html Spokane Fire Department (2010). Standards of Coverage and Deployment Plan – 2010 Update. Retrieved July 9, 2014 from http://www.spokanefire.org/documents/Spokane_SOC_and_Deployment_Plan_2010_Final.pdf Read More