PERSONNEL ACCOUNTABILITY
VOLUNTEERS CORNER
A persistent myth regarding the volunteer fire service is that most departments are too small or don’t have enough runs each year to keep pace with the many innovations in the fire service. I hear this a lot lately when fireground accountability systems are being discussed. Such systems, however, need not be expensive. NFPA 1500, Tire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program, for example, mandates only that we have an effective plan for tracking our people. It does not stipulate that the system be an expensive or complicated one.
Accountability is not only for large departments. Fires burning in New York or Phoenix are not any hotter or more dangerous than fires burning in smaller jurisdictions. The fire department that takes a reasoned, thinking approach to firefighting is the one that stands a better chance of walking away with all of its people at the end of the incident-regardless of the size of its budget or fleet of apparatus. Inherent in this reasoned, thinking approach is an accountability system.
Hie Roseville (MN) Fire Department has 81 active members and has had an accountability system for about a year and a half. Loosely based on the Phoenix (AZ) Fire Department’s Personnel Accountability Report (PAR) system, it has worked well for us because it is easy to use and is practiced on every run. Backed up by a strong incident command system and quality training, we have found that the system has dramatically decreased freelancing at fire scenes, has made the incident commander’s job easier, and has generally promoted safer fireground practices.
THE ADAPTED SYSTEM
We implemented our version of the PAR system because we knew we had no effective way to track our peopleon the fireground. As is common in the volunteer and paid on-call fire service, firefighters sometimes respond directly to the scene in their personal vehicles instead of on apparatus. We had no way of knowing who had arrived on the scene.
We chose a system in which the names of firefighters are matched with the vehicles in which they arrive at the scene. At a minimum, it allows us to determine who is missing from a crew if something goes wrong on the fireground.
We also wanted to be able to incorporate PAR into our existing incident command system. Roseville has a high concentration of multistory buildings and large industrial complexes, and our department has made good use of “sectoring” companies for work in these buildings. We wanted to be able to dovetail the sectoring system with the new PAR system so we could match names with companies in the various sectors. Finally, we wanted a system that was easy to use and reliable regardless of the number of names an accountability officer had to track. We devised a system that met all three needs and produced some interesting spinoff benefits as well.
The system at work. Two cloth nametags for each department member were made up by a military supply company at a cost of SI.50 per tag. The tags, which carry the firefighters’ last names, are kept on the firefighters’ turnout coats. They are attached to Velcro™ patches sewn on the coats specifically for this purpose. When a firefighter gets on a rig, both tags are taken off the coat and placed on a Lexan board, called a crew board, with the number of the rig. The board then is passed forward to the apparatus officer, who takes one of each pair of names on the board and places them on a Velcro™ strip on the officer-side dashboard, providing a record of which personnel are on the truck. The apparatus engineer places his name only on the dashboard-not on the crew board-since he will not leave the rig.
When the rig arrives on the scene and the crew is assigned, the crewboard is left on the front seat to be collected by the accountability officer later in the incident. The rig’first on the scene takes command and also serves as the accountability rig, meaning that all incoming companies can drop their crew boards at that rig if they have to pass it on the way to their assignment. This arrangement gathers many crew boards in a single area (the accountability rig) without requiring crews staged on the opposite side of a large building to walk all the way around to deposit their crew boards (the accountability officer will pick them up) and does not prevent companies from completing their assignments in a timely fashion.
The accountability sector. When the incident is underway, an officer (usually a safety officer) is assigned to establish an accountability sector. Firefighters responding to the scene in personal vehicles or later to established scenes first stop at the accountability sector, where their names are taken. Only then are they given assignments. The chief (in our case, the incident commander most times) carries an “accountability board” along with a standard tactical command board in his squad. This board, designed by one of our safety officers, helps the accountability officer run the system more efficiently. It resembles a tactical board and has a slotted wooden track at the top to hold the crew boards. It cost about S200 to design and build, but one easily could be made for much less.
The accountability board features plastic tags representing every rig, mutual-aid company, and medic rig; the command post; the accountability sector; rehab; and so on. The accountability sector officer makes a diagram of the scene and arranges the tags around the building to show placement of apparatus and command. By referring to the crew boards, accountability and command are able to determine the location of each member on the fireground.
When companies complete an assignment, they report to accountability, who works closely with command, so they can be reassigned or sent to rehab. In either case, the tag representing the crew is moved to the appropriate area of the board, similar to a game board in that pieces are moved to chart the movement of personnel. When crews are sent to rehab or split up or recombined, they are assigned to a sector, and the members’ names are placed together on a board. Because of the use of sectoring, the recombination of personnel does not affect accountability; inside sector will remain inside sector no matter who is on that crew.
Reports. FARs are called for every 20 minutes. This time period was chosen because a standard air bottle holds about 20 minutes of air (and that’s if you’re only watching TV) and because strategy should be reevaluated after 20 minutes on the fire scene, to see if any significant headway has been made or whether a change in strategy is needed.
The accountability officer announces that there is going to be a PAR and starts naming off rig numbers. The officer of the rig responds to the call by indicating that he has or does not have PAR. Accountability acknowledges every response. If a company is short a person, the officer of the crew pages the individual by name and requests that he report to command. This policy alerts everyone that a person is missing and gives that person a place to go. This accountability system has dramatically decreased freelancing; it makes everyone more conscious of the importance of staying with the crew.
To assist the IC with tactical considerations and PARs, our dispatchers give us an elapsed time report on every run. Dispatch provides the elapsed time when we arrive at the scene, which reflects our response time, at 20 minutes after the alarm, and even’ 10 minutes thereafter. This gives the IC a reference point with regard to the fire’s progress and also helps to jog his memory about PAR The dispatchers also tell all responding companies to “remember accountability” when they put out a call.
Our rule of thumb with regard to PAR is that the crew be within sight, touch, or hearing distance or that personnel not present at the time of the report are out on an assignment. In the latter case, accountability would be told that the firefighter is on an assignment away from the crew and that all other crew members are accounted for. Other companies usually will report that they have seen the firefighter, confirming the officer’s report.
PROBATIONARY PERSONNEL
Like many other departments, we have rules governing the extent to which probationary firefighters may participate on the fireground. While it is good for them to acquire experience, we don’t want to put new firefighters in situations for which they are not prepared. Special accountability tags are made up for each new firefighter. These tags look totally different from the other firefighters’ tags; the name is printed on laminated tag board that has Velcro™ on one side. For the first several months, the tag is red, signifying that the rookie has not passed Firefighter I, is not certified in SCBA, and must stay with the engineer at fire scenes even though he can ride the apparatus. The red tag tells the apparatus officer that the firefighter is not allowed to engage in interior firefighting operations.
After the probationary members pass specified training requirements, most notably SCBA certification, the red tags are replaced with yellow tags, which will stay with them until their probationary period is completed. Postings in the stations indicate which activities probationary members can and cannot do. Yellow tags are issued to firefighters who have previous experience or training comparable to that provided in our department. The tags are issued on the day they are appointed. We are taking on many new people who are at different stages in their training. We believe this color-coded tag system has prevented some people from getting in over their heads.
MUTUAL AID
This program also meshes with the “red-dot” program used in our mutual-aid organization. All probationary firefighters in our mutual-aid organization wear fluorescent orange dots about three inches in diameter on both sides of their helmets. This way, all departments can identify probationary members and prevent them from being assigned to tasks for which they are untrained or with which they are unprepared to deal.
The PAR system has proven effective for us, and we use it on all calls, including “nuisance” calls. It has helped us to use our people more effectively at working fires, since we now have a way to make sure they are sent to rehab and replaced with fresh people.
PAR IN ACTION
While we accepted the basic idea of PAR as a tool for dealing with sudden emergencies (the unexpected), we did not think we would be facing such an incident so soon after adopting the program.
At a recent structure fire, things turned bad for us when an explosion occurred in a building while firefighters were inside and on the roof. Incident command ordered immediate evacuation of the building and roof and called for a FAR. Within a minute we were able to determine that we had accounted for all personnel and that we had not lost a single firefighter. While we were incredibly fortunate, our constant training with the accountability system and ICS made the difference between a tense /Situation and a loss of fireground control. This situation was no different from other calls made by other departments. Training was the key to our success, however. Our people stuck together on this call as they had on all previous routine calls and false alarms. When conditions deteriorated, they knew whom to look for so that no one was lost or missing.
One of the most important lessons we learned from this incident was that the accountability system works even in the most tense situations. We are fortunate we can point to the experience and say it turned out well for us because we had a system in place. One of the mutual-aid companies on the scene that did not have an accountability system at the time has inquired about our system since witnessing that incident.
Another lesson worth repeating is that the accountability system is a good strategic tool. Incident command had a record of who was on scene and available after the explosion so that a rescue could be initiated if necessary.
Our accountability system has cost less than S 1,000 over the past 18 months-much less expensive than commercial alternatives. We had some material (such as the Lexan for the crew boards) donated. The other materials, such as the Velcro,u and the rig numbers for the crew boards, are inexpensive and easy to find.
Information on how to create a new or modify an existing accountabilitysystem is out there and usually is free for the asking. Involve the people in your department in the tasks of creating an accountability system and getting the hardware to make it work. One of the strengths of the volunteer fire service is the huge network of skills and connections contributed by its members.
One thing we all should have learned in Firefighter I is that fire is an unthinking enemy and extremely indifferent to carelessness, neglect, or lack of preparation. When the fire takes control of the situation, even for a brief time, incident commanders and safety officers must be able to account for all personnel on the fireground. A lack of accountability procedures only wastes time and produces some very tense moments when we tryto account for firefighters.
An effective accountability system needs only a few things: It has to be simple to use, it has to be practiced on ereiy run, and it must be backed up by a strong incident command system. The fireground is the worst place to discover the need for something this important.
