Home Fire Safety Survey Tested with CETA Funds
FEATURES
Because most fire deaths occur in private dwellings, and most of them between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. a need to reach the public in an attempt to reduce this problem became apparent to me. Therefore, I implemented a home fire safety survey program as a pilot study to promote life safety by educating the general public.
With the aid of a $35,630 CETA grant, we hired and trained three people to make fire safety surveys of homes. The grant money was spent as follows: $26,375 for wages, $600 for training materials and brochures for distribution, $450 for staff uniforms, and $8,205 for miscellaneous expenses and fringe benefits.
I prepared a training manual for a three-week training session that included a broad range of materials dealing with all types of fire hazards found in homes, early warning devices, and local codes and ordinances. This information was supplemented with some materials from a similar program developed in Edmonds, Wash. Films demonstrated the many fire causes along with prevention methods.
Electrician tells of hazards
An electrician was asked to explain the basic concepts of electricity, including how fuses and circuit breakers function, the various sizes of wiring, and the common electrical hazards in homes. Together, these materials gave the new staff the ability to answer a wide range of questions by the public. The safety team and I also attended a smoke detector conference in Seattle to learn more about the technical and fire safety aspects of detectors.
The home safety survey team began visiting homes in late October 1977 with a four-block area of the Sunnyland District chosen as a starting point. Portions of the Roosevelt, South Hill, Sehome, Columbia, Happy Valley, Cornwall Park, and Birchwood areas were later covered.
The areas chosen for surveys by the fire safety team had to meet certain criteria. Neighborhoods with older homes were preferred to those with new homes because of the problems often found with old wiring systems. They were also targeted because of the increased amount of time needed to escape from a two-story home. The team also surveyed several mobile home courts. We saw the need to reach people living in mobile homes without smoke detectors since older models lack proper exit facilities and are much more compact than regular homes.
Slide programs developed
Although there were three members of the team, only two made surveys. The third remained in the office to make appointments, answer questions and work on related projects. Included in these projects were the preparation of two slide presentations later used for our fire watch and the high-rise escape plan program. One of our team members had extensive multi-media experience, and therefore was able to create short, interesting, and informative programs tailored to our specific needs.
She also introduced a program new to Bellingham that is similar to the tot finder concept—invalid stickers. The Bellingham Fire Department now has invalid stickers for anyone who would be unable to escape from a home unaided.
We also developed a checklist containing many of the common hazards found in homes. The checklist served both as a guideline for our questioning and as a reference sheet for the homeowner. It was left with them at the end of the interview along with written recommendations to correct any hazards found during the survey.
Included on the checklist were questions concerning the basic structural safety of the home, such as the condition of the chimney or the wiring system, as well as questions dealing with individual bad habits. An example of this is leaving thermostatically controlled appliances plugged in when not in use.
When canvassing an area, the two safety surveyors would first explain the program to a resident, who then decided whether to accept the offer of assistance. If invited in, the surveyors proceeded down the checklist, explaining why each item was important to fire safety or prevention. If no one was home, they left a tag on the door knob that explained our program and urged the resident to call for an appointment.
Escape plans and detectors
In our estimation, the two most important subjects on the checklist dealt with escape planning and smoke detectors. We talked with homeowners about the layout of their homes and the various means of escape. We then strongly urged the entire family to discuss the escape plan and practice it. We especially encouraged families with small children to practice their escape plan because they would need some additional time to rescue the children.
We discussed the importance of installing smoke detectors, explaining that they increased the escape time, which could save lives. We showed each resident where to place a detector and described the various types available. We strongly urged everyone to buy at least one detector and we added some incentive by asking them if we could call back in two months to see if they had installed one since our visit.
These callbacks were used to amass statistics measuring our effectiveness. About 30 percent of the people contacted bought detectors after the fire safety visit. Another 25 percent of the people interviewed already had detectors. During the nine-month survey, 801 inspections were recorded. Approximately 1500 tags were left where people were not home. About 460 people did not wish to participate in the program.
Fire watch program
Fire watches, which follow the same basic principle as the police department block watch, were introduced and well received. A homeowner was asked to invite a few neighbors and friends to his home for the program, which included a short slide presentation on fire prevention, detection, control, and escape planning. Emphasis was placed on planning an emergency escape route and practicing it with the entire family. Smoke detectors and fire extinguishers were explained and demonstrated. A question and answer session followed the program and the guests were encouraged to have the fire safety survey team visit their homes.
This program was also presented to various clubs and business groups. Letters were sent and calls were made to community leaders to announce the availability of this program to the public. About 115 fire watches were conducted during the 10 months of the project.
Seventy-Five percent of the fire death victims are small children or the elderly. These statistics outline a great need for the early warning devices in the homes of both groups. Within the first month of the survey, the fire safety surveyors became aware of a significant number of elderly people on fixed incomes who could not afford smoke detectors. The team decided to approach service clubs and other organizations to sponsor a smoke detector for older Americans drive. The goal would be 500 smoke detectors donated to people over 60 who had an income of less than $350 a month. At this time, the Firemen’s Union in Bellingham is considering adopting this project.
High-rise program
The Bellingham Housing Authority asked for the fire safety survey team to assist the residents of three low-income high-rises with fire escape planning. Because most of the residents were senior citizens and could not escape easily, we recognized a real need for such a program. A member of the team created a slide program demonstrating escape routes and general rules to follow during a fire.
The program was shown at Chuckanut, Lincoln, and Washington Squares. A question and answer session followed the slide presentation, in which the residents were encouraged to ask any questions they might have concerning their own escape plan. The slide presentation was followed by a fire drill at each square, consisting of an all-out fire evacuation attempt.
At two of the squares, a pre-drill meeting was held with the residents to familiarize them with what would take place at the drill. Again, questions were encouraged. A battalion chief was present to answer questions the safety team could not. Because he would be in charge of a fire in the building, he was able to assure the residents that they would get high quality care and advice.
Floor marshals selected
A “fire marshal” was chosen for each floor to give instructions before the drill and oversee the activity on that floor during the drill. An instruction sheet was prepared and given to each resident to post on the inside of his apartment door. On the sheet in large type was the fire department phone number followed by easy directions to follow in case of a fire.
The feedback from the high-rise fire drills has been positive. It seems that many of the fears the residents had about fire were alleviated by dealing with the problem of fire head on. We hope to maintain the effectiveness of the program by having fire drills at the high-rises at least once a year.
The effectiveness of these programs cannot realistically be measured because our success depends upon that which did not occur. If we prevented one house fire or one unnecessary death, we are, in our estimation, successful.