Overall summary

Our judgments

Our inspection assessed how well Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service has performed in 11 areas. We have made the following graded judgments:

In the rest of the report, we set out our detailed findings about the areas in which the service has performed well and where it should improve.

Changes to this round of inspection

We last inspected Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service in October 2021. And in July 2022, we published our inspection report with our findings on the service’s effectiveness and efficiency and how well it looks after its people.

This inspection contains our third assessment of the service’s effectiveness and efficiency, and how well it looks after its people. We have measured the service against the same 11 areas and given a grade for each.

We haven’t given separate grades for effectiveness, efficiency and people as we did previously. This is to encourage the service to consider our inspection findings as a whole and not focus on just one area.

We now assess services against the characteristics of good performance, and we more clearly link our judgments to causes of concern and areas for improvement. We have also expanded our previous four-tier system of graded judgments to five. As a result, we can state more precisely where we consider improvement is needed and highlight good performance more effectively. However, these changes mean it isn’t possible to make direct comparisons between grades awarded in this round of fire and rescue service inspections with those from previous years.

A reduction in grade, particularly from good to adequate, doesn’t necessarily mean there has been a reduction in performance, unless we say so in the report.

This report sets out our inspection findings for Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service.

Read more information on how we assess fire and rescue services and our graded judgments.

HMI summary

It was a pleasure to visit Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service, and I am grateful for the positive and constructive way in which the service worked with our inspection staff.

I am satisfied with some aspects of the performance of Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service in keeping people safe and secure from fire and other risks. But the service needs to improve in some areas. In particular, it needs to do more to prevent fires and other risks.

We found that the service hasn’t made enough progress since our 2021 inspection to make prevention a sufficiently high priority. We have therefore highlighted a cause of concern. The executive board knows it needs to do more and there are plans in place to improve this.

In our previous inspection, we highlighted a cause of concern relating to the organisation’s culture. We recognise the considerable work that the service has done to make the necessary improvements. Although we are pleased to close this cause of concern, there is still more work to do. The service still needs to make sure that all staff are trained and supported to identify and challenge inappropriate behaviour.

We recognise that the service has experienced some changes in senior leadership roles. And I don’t underestimate the challenges in changing the culture, performance and efficiency of a fire and rescue service. But we were disappointed to find that the service hasn’t made the progress we expected since our 2021 inspection. For example, five areas for improvement that we highlighted in our 2019 and 2021 inspections haven’t been addressed. These remain open.

My principal findings from our assessments of the service over the past year are as follows:

• The service is good at responding to emergencies, including major incidents, and we are pleased with the consistently high on-call availability; it has sound financial plans and understands its future financial challenges.
• The service is making good progress to improve the culture, but needs to do more to address the previous recommendations.
• The service needs to implement a robust and consistent method of prioritising its home safety visits to those most at risk and make sure there are clear timescales in place for the different risk levels.
• The service hasn’t made enough progress in equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI), and there are insufficient staff resources in this team; in addition, staff don’t have confidence in the grievance or promotions processes.

Overall, there is a clear commitment from staff and senior leaders to improve. The service is aware of the many issues we found, and had plans in place to make improvements. I will keep in close contact with the service to monitor its progress in addressing the remaining cause of concern and associated recommendations.

Roy Wilsher

HM Inspector of Fire & Rescue Services

Service in numbers

Percentage of firefighters, workforce and population who identified as a woman as at 31 March 2024

Percentage of firefighters, workforce and population who were from ethnic minority backgrounds as at 31 March 2024

References to ethnic minorities in this report include people from White minority backgrounds but exclude people from Irish minority backgrounds. This is due to current data collection practices for national data. For more information on data and analysis in this report, please view the ‘About the data’ section.

Understanding the risk of fire and other emergencies

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service is good at understanding risk.

Each fire and rescue service should identify and assess all foreseeable fire and rescue-related risks that could affect its communities. It should use its protection and response capabilities to prevent or mitigate these risks for the public.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service identifies risk well

The service has assessed a suitable range of risks and threats using a thorough community risk management planning process. In November 2021, it completed a strategic risk analysis. In its assessment of risk, the service uses information it has collected from a broad range of internal and external sources and datasets. This includes data from the Office for National Statistics, English Heritage listed building data, and annual reports and data from the National Water Safety Forum. The service also uses internal sources, such as historical incident data.

A range of datasets is available. But we found that the service didn’t effectively use this data to support its prevention activities.

At the time of our inspection, the service was carrying out a fire cover review using several additional datasets. This will help the service identify efficiencies and effective ways of working, and better match resources to risk.

When appropriate, the service has consulted and held constructive dialogue with its communities and other relevant parties to understand risk and explain how it intends to mitigate it. For example, it created an online survey to allow staff, residents and businesses to respond to the draft plan. The survey was completed during the pandemic, which meant there was limited face-to-face consultation with communities.

The service now has an effective community risk management plan

Once it has assessed risks, the service records its findings in an easily understood community risk management plan (CRMP). The CRMP sets out the service’s four strategic priorities, including the following:

• It will target prevention and protection activities to reduce the risks in its communities.
• Its operational resources provide an effective emergency response service to meet its risks.
• The service is recognised as a great place to work and its staff feel valued.
• The service is open and accountable and uses its resources efficiently.

In our last inspection, we raised an area for improvement that the service should make sure its CRMP includes clear outcomes that show the public how it is mitigating risk.

We were pleased to find that the plan now describes how the service intends to use its prevention, protection and response activities to mitigate or reduce the risks and threats the community faces both now and in the future. The service has identified the increased use of e-cigarettes, electric vehicles, domestic and commercial battery energy storage systems and biomass fuel plants as emerging and future risks. The plan details the risks and how the service intends to mitigate them. Therefore, we have closed this area for improvement.

The service publishes an annual strategic review statement. In this statement, the service highlights the work it has completed in the previous year and provides an update on its CRMP performance.

The service manages risk well

The service routinely collects and updates the information it has about the highest-risk people, places and threats it has identified. This includes a nuclear power station.

We sampled a broad range of the risk information the service collects, including high‑rise residential buildings with cladding, and short-term risks. These records contained good information, such as the evacuation procedures in high-rise residential buildings.

The service has almost 800 site-specific risk information (SSRI) records. We were pleased to find that these records were mostly up to date. A central team completes most of the SSRI records, and wholetime firefighters carry out reviews.

Some firefighters told us that they weren’t routinely updated about significant findings or changes to SSRI records. The service expects firefighters to carry out familiarisation visits in high-risk premises. But some firefighters told us that this didn’t happen. And IT system constraints mean the service can’t assure itself that this happens. The service should review whether it can improve this process.

The service has developed a management of risk information (MORI) system to improve how it gathers, assesses and uses information to support its operational staff at incidents. The system records and provides key operational risk information centrally.

Any risk information collected during prevention and protection activities is saved directly onto the MORI system. This information is readily available for the service’s prevention, protection and response staff. This means these teams can identify, reduce and mitigate risk effectively. For example, prohibition notices are shared with the appropriate response teams. Where appropriate, the service also shares risk information with other partner organisations, via the local resilience forums (LRFs).

Senior managers attend a daily meeting to share information. Staff at the locations we visited, including firefighters and emergency control room staff, were able to show us that they could access, use and share risk information quickly to help them resolve incidents safely.

The service effectively builds its understanding of risk from operational activity

The service records and communicates risk information effectively. It also routinely updates risk assessments and uses feedback from local and national operational activities to inform its planning assumptions. For example, it uses information from the national and local community risk registers to develop its CRMP. As a result, it has listed flooding and wildfires as some of the highest risks it plans for. The service also uses its operational assurance system to record and share learning from operational activities.

The service has a vast coastal area. It carries out activities to raise awareness about drowning. It has provided life-saving water safety equipment at locations with a high number of drownings. Firefighters told us about water fatalities in Exeter Quay. As a result, the service provided throwlines to local businesses and provided training on how to use these.

The service has community plans for each of its fire stations. These provide information about the local community, fire engine availability, and incident data. The plans are live documents that the service updates to support staff.

Preventing fires and other risks

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service requires improvement at preventing fires and other risks.

Fire and rescue services must promote fire safety, including giving fire safety advice. To identify people at greatest risk from fire, services should work closely with other organisations in the public and voluntary sectors, and with the police and ambulance services. They should share intelligence and risk information with these other organisations when they identify vulnerability or exploitation.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service’s prevention plan aligns with its CRMP

The service’s prevention plan 2023–26 is clearly linked to the risks it has identified in its CRMP. The prevention plan has three strategic priorities. The service will:

• work with partners, such as care agencies and local authorities, to target its prevention activities where they have the greatest impact;
• evaluate its prevention activity to ensure the ongoing safety of its community, considering efficiency and effectiveness; and
• instil a positive culture of health, safety and well-being throughout its prevention area.

But we found the service wasn’t achieving its strategic priorities. There isn’t enough activity targeting those people most at risk, and it isn’t routinely evaluating its prevention work.

The service’s teams work well together and with other relevant organisations on prevention, and they share relevant information when needed. The service uses information to adjust its planning assumptions and direct activity between its prevention, protection and response functions. For example, during the Glastonbury Festival, it worked with local groups, in particular people from the local Romany community, to provide prevention information which resulted in the service fitting smoke and carbon monoxide detectors.

The service doesn’t always prioritise those people most at risk

We found that at the time of our last inspection the service had a backlog of approximately 1,400 home safety visits. At the time, the service provided a clear action plan detailing how it would address the backlog and prioritise home safety visits.

We were disappointed to find in this inspection that the service couldn’t meet the volume of referrals and clear the backlog. This is due to factors including high staff turnover and an ineffective system. The service told us that as the referrals built up, there were over 7,000 outstanding home safety visits. In addition, the service identified thousands more incomplete records on the system. In January 2024, the service paused all home safety visit referrals except for very high-risk referrals made by emergency service partners.

We found that the service’s processes hadn’t been followed, leading to tragic consequences. A fatal fire review revealed that despite historic engagement, the service hadn’t made a home safety visit to an individual who was on the backlog list. Months later, before a visit was made, the occupant died in a fire.

Although the service told us that the backlog had now been mostly cleared, it wasn’t prioritised based on risk.

The service uses a risk matrix, and occupants are categorised with a level of risk of very high, high, medium or low. Specialist prevention staff complete all very high and high-risk home safety visits. Wholetime firefighters complete medium- and low‑risk visits. Although the service has a risk-based approach that assesses prevention activity, this information isn’t always used to prioritise those most at risk. We found those occupants who might be at greater risk from fire weren’t always prioritised.

The service has approximately 350 partners who make home safety visit referrals, including charities, the NHS and other healthcare providers. It has provided awareness sessions to help partners identify risk. All partner referrals are automatically categorised as very high or high risk. Service analysis shows 75 percent of partner referrals meet the criteria of very high or high risk. All other referrals, such as self-referrals, are subject to eligibility checks.

The service isn’t making the most of its existing resources. It should consider whether wholetime firefighters could complete home safety visits for more vulnerable people, instead of only completing visits to low or medium-risk occupants.

We also found that there was a limited structure and approach for how it uses firefighters. Firefighters told us they often made cold calls or they were given a list of addresses to target which wasn’t prioritised by risk. Some firefighters told us that the home safety visits were based on a numerical target which crews were concentrating on achieving rather than making sure activity was targeted to those people who needed it most. We were also told that firefighters frequently visited addresses where the data was inaccurate. Crews told us about examples when they had visited occupants who had passed away several years ago.

The service uses broad timescales for all its home safety visits, regardless of risk:

• 7 days to contact the occupant;
• 30 days to arrange the visit; and
• 42 days to complete the visit.

Most staff that we spoke to had limited knowledge of these timescales. The prevention policy and guidance don’t have any set timescales or standard for when to make or resolve home safety visits. The service has some performance measures for prevention, but specific performance measures for the different risk categories need to improve.

The service has a project to update its prevention system. However, there have been significant delays. The service is unable to effectively manage the risk using its prevention system. This means the service is ineffective at providing prevention data.

Staff told us there wasn’t a clear process for post-incident prevention activity and the approach was inconsistent. We reviewed a case of a domestic dwelling that had two fires in a short timeframe and there was no record of any post-fire activity being completed or recorded.

The service should consider whether it should revisit those people most at risk. A previous fatal fire review found that although the deceased person had received a home safety visit in the past, their circumstances had changed due to age and mobility.

The service is aware that it needs to improve its prevention work. And it has already made some improvements. Prevention is on the service’s corporate risk register, and the department has implemented its business continuity measures. But due to the issues we found, we have highlighted this area as a cause of concern with associated recommendations.

The service carries out limited evaluation of prevention activity

We found limited evidence that the service evaluates how effective its activity is or makes sure all its communities get appropriate access to prevention activity that meets their needs.

This was an area for improvement in our 2021 and 2019 inspections. We still haven’t seen evidence of effective evaluation. Therefore, this has been escalated as part of the cause of concern recommendations.

The lack of evaluation and assurance that activity is appropriate is potentially resulting in the service missing opportunities to improve its prevention work for the public.

Not all staff have received home safety visit training

We found that specialist prevention staff received appropriate prevention training. At the time of our inspection, the service issued its e-learning package in prevention, and all wholetime firefighters were required to complete this training.

But some staff told us they didn’t have the right skills or confidence to make home safety visits. These visits don’t cover an appropriate range of hazards that can put vulnerable people at greater risk from fire and other emergencies. The service should evaluate its e-learning package to make sure it is effective.

On-call firefighters are expected to complete post-fire prevention activity, where this is required. But they have received limited training and support. The service should make sure it provides these.

There is a quality assurance process in place for specialist prevention staff, but we found this was inconsistent. The service needs to do better, including making sure it quality assures firefighters’ work. Therefore, we have included this in the cause of concern recommendations.

Staff have a good understanding of safeguarding

In our last inspection, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should make sure that safeguarding training was provided to all staff. We were pleased to find the service now provides training in identifying safeguarding concerns on its e‑learning platform.

Staff we interviewed told us about occasions when they had identified safeguarding problems. They said they feel confident and trained to act appropriately and promptly. The service has made sufficient progress and therefore we have closed this area for improvement.

The service works well with its partners

The service works with a wide range of other organisations to prevent fires and other emergencies. These include South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust and local authorities. The service receives home safety visit referrals from its partner agencies.

At the time of our inspection, the service’s road safety team had joined its partners to support national Road Safety Week. As part of a crash awareness event, the service delivered its road safety presentation to more than 1,600 students and spent a day with Devon Air Ambulance at Exeter University.

As a result of IT constraints, we found limited evidence of the service referring vulnerable people to other organisations when appropriate. But there are arrangements in place to receive referrals and to make referrals to others. The service has improved its website to allow partners – such as local authorities and other emergency services – to make automatic referrals. And it acts appropriately on the referrals it receives. For example, we found good evidence of joint visits being carried out with partner agencies.

The service routinely exchanges information with other public sector organisations about people and groups at greatest risk. It uses this information to challenge planning assumptions and target prevention activity. It provides feedback to partners on referrals made.

The service is good at tackling fire-setting behaviour

The service has a range of suitable and effective interventions to target and educate people with different needs who show signs of fire-setting behaviour. This includes a fire safety intervention that educates young people with fire-setting behaviours. Where there are concerns that a property may be a target for arson, specialist prevention staff can fit a range of equipment, such as arson-proof letterboxes.

When appropriate, the service routinely shares information with relevant organisations to support the prosecution of arsonists. We were encouraged to find that the level of deliberate fires in the service area was much lower than the rate across the whole of England. In the year ending 30 June 2024, the service attended 55.6 deliberate fires per 100,000 population compared to the England rate of 94.0 fires.

Protecting the public through fire regulation

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service is adequate at protecting the public through fire regulation.

All fire and rescue services should assess fire risks in certain buildings and, when necessary, require building owners to comply with fire safety legislation. Each service decides how many assessments it does each year. But it must have a locally determined, risk-based inspection programme for enforcing the legislation.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service’s protection plan aligns with its CRMP

The service’s protection plan 2023–26 is clearly linked to the risks it has identified in its CRMP.

Staff across the service are involved in this activity, effectively exchanging information as needed. For example, wholetime firefighters carry out fire safety checks in low-risk premises and work with inspecting officers. They also work with local businesses to share information and advise on how they can comply with fire safety regulations. The service then uses information to adjust planning assumptions and direct activity between its protection, prevention and response functions. There are fortnightly meetings to discuss risk further with appropriate leads. This means resources are properly aligned to risk.

The service is meeting its risk-based inspection programme

The service’s risk-based inspection programme is focused on the service’s highest‑risk buildings. At the time of our inspection, the service was on track to hit its target of 1,508 high-risk audits within the timescale it set itself, from January 2021 to December 2024. In 2023/24, the service carried out 609 high-risk audits.

The service was focusing on buildings that have the potential for significant loss of life in the event of fire, such as high-rise residential buildings and care homes. Encouragingly, it was also focusing on buildings that were medium rise. The audits we reviewed had been completed in the timeframes the service had set itself within its policies and procedures.

The service needs a better approach to follow up formal notices

We reviewed a range of audits that the service had carried out at different buildings across its area. These included audits carried out:

• as part of the service’s interim risk-based inspection programme;
• after fires at premises where fire safety legislation applies;
• after enforcement action had been taken; or
• at high-rise, high-risk buildings.

Not all the audits we reviewed were completed in a consistent, systematic way or in line with the service’s policies. For example, we reviewed three premises where there had been a fire, but no post-incident activity was recorded on the system.

We also examined a sample of formal notices, such as prohibition and enforcement notices. We were surprised to find that some hadn’t been followed up to check whether they were being complied with, and processes hadn’t been followed. For example, we saw an expired enforcement notice where there had been limited contact with the responsible person in the lead up to and after its expiry. This sends the wrong message to those who don’t take fire safety legislation seriously. Therefore, this is an area for improvement.

The service makes relevant information from its audits available to operational teams and control room operators via its MORI system. For example, we spoke to fire control operators who had access to evacuation information for high-rise residential buildings.

The service now has a good quality assurance process in place

In our last inspection, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should make sure it has an effective quality assurance process, so staff carry out audits and fire safety checks to an appropriate standard. We are pleased to find the service has made progress, and we have therefore closed this area for improvement.

The service has introduced a quality assurance role which carries out proportionate quality assurance of the protection activity completed by fire safety inspectors. A practical quality assurance assessment is completed at least annually. We were shown examples of this process and how feedback was provided to the inspector. We were pleased to find wholetime firefighters were also subject to a similar quality assurance process every quarter.

The service has good evaluation tools in place to measure how effective its activity is and to make sure all sections of its communities get appropriate access to the protection services that meet their needs.

The service uses its range of enforcement powers

The service consistently uses its full range of enforcement powers, and when appropriate, it prosecutes those who don’t comply with fire safety regulations.

In the year ending 31 March 2024, the service issued no alteration notices or informal notifications, 20 enforcement notices, 9 prohibition notices and carried out no prosecutions. The service has a dedicated enforcement support team, which has provided further training to fire safety inspectors about taking enforcement action if required. The service has access to specialist legal counsel should they require further advice.

At the time of our inspection, the service was carrying out a complex prosecution. It completed six prosecutions in the five years from 1 April 2019 to 31 March 2024.

It has the ability to respond to enforcement issues 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

The service has sufficient protection staff resources in place

We were pleased to find that the service has enough qualified protection staff to meet the requirements of its risk-based inspection programme. Most fire safety inspectors have achieved a qualification to inspect very high-risk premises. This helps the service provide the range of audit and enforcement activity needed, both now and in the future. It also supports the service in successfully completing its risk-based inspection programme over a three-year cycle. Staff get the right training and work to appropriate accreditation.

The service told us that it was the first fire and rescue service nationally to introduce fire safety checks where wholetime firefighters visit low-risk business premises. Wholetime firefighters are expected to complete the internal foundation course in fire safety. Most staff have received this training.

The service should consider whether it can complete more fire safety audits. As at 31 March 2024, the service had completed 0.7 fire safety audits per 100 known premises, which is much lower than the national rate of 2.0 for England.

The service is adapting to new legislation

Since our last inspection, the Building Safety Act 2022 and the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 have been introduced to bring about better regulation and management of tall buildings.

The service is supporting the introduction of the Building Safety Regulator. The service has seconded a fire safety inspector to support this work. It expects these arrangements to have a manageable impact on its other protection activity.

The Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 introduced a range of duties for the managers of tall buildings. These include a requirement to give the fire and rescue service floor plans and inform them of any substantial faults to essential firefighting equipment, such as firefighting lifts.

We found the service has good arrangements in place to receive this information. When it doesn’t receive the right information, it takes action. And it accordingly updates the risk information it gives its operational staff.

The service works well with others

The service works closely with other enforcement agencies to regulate fire safety and it routinely exchanges risk information with them.

At the time of our inspection, the service was carrying out a prosecution supported by its partners, including the relevant local authority.

The service also regularly carries out joint inspections. For example, every fortnight, a local authority in Devon will identify two houses in multiple occupation to inspect. The service and the local authority will then complete a joint inspection.

The service responds well to building and licensing consultations

The service consistently meets its statutory responsibility to comment on fire safety arrangements at new and altered buildings.

The local authority approved the building of the UK’s largest battery storage facility in Somerset. It consulted with the service to make sure the appropriate fire safety provisions were put in place.

In the year ending 31 March 2024, the service responded to 99.5 percent of building consultations (1,200 out of 1,206) and 99.5 percent of licensing consultations (598 out of 601) within the required timescales.

The service has an effective helpdesk to support businesses

The service proactively works with local businesses and other organisations to promote compliance with fire safety legislation. Two competent fire safety inspectors staff a fire safety helpdesk during office hours Monday to Friday. This provides advice and support to responsible persons and business owners. Interactions are recorded on the protection system to show what support has been provided.

The service also provides information for businesses on its website. It manages primary authority schemes, which give advice to businesses about compliance with fire safety legislation.

We found that the service had a clear process for responding to fire safety complaints from the public. All complaints are received by the fire safety helpdesk, and staff use their discretion on the type of response that is required.

The service is reviewing attendance to unwanted fire signals

A risk-based approach is in place to manage the number of unwanted fire signals. The protection department monitors unwanted fire signals daily. There is a clear process, and the service intervenes when there are premises that regularly have unwanted fire signal activations. The service has successfully recovered the cost of attendance to automatic fire alarms.

In the year ending 30 June 2024, the service attended 7,267 false alarms. This equates to 4.0 false alarms attended per 1,000 population, compared to the England rate of 4.4 false alarms per 1,000 population. This means that its fire engines may not be available to respond to genuine incidents because they are attending false alarms. It also creates a risk to the public if more fire engines are travelling at high speed on the roads to respond to these incidents.

In the year ending 31 March 2024, 19.8 percent of emergency calls were for an automatic fire alarm. Since the year ending 31 March 2020, there has been a steady increase in the proportion of automatic fire alarm requests the service doesn’t attend.

At the time of our inspection, the service was reviewing how it could further reduce the level of attendance to automatic fire alarms. This included ways to reduce its attendance to some buildings during the night. We look forward to seeing how this develops.

Responding to fires and other emergencies

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service is good at responding to fires and other emergencies.

Fire and rescue services must be able to respond to a range of incidents such as fires, road traffic collisions and other emergencies in their areas.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service’s response strategy should be aligned to its CRMP

The service doesn’t have a response strategy but has extended its service delivery strategy 2021–25. The strategy isn’t clearly linked to the risks it has identified in its CRMP. But we recognise that it does carry out planning assumptions to direct its response activity.

The service couldn’t always explain the rationale for the location of all its fire engines, response staff and working patterns. But we recognise that a fire cover review is in progress. The findings from the review will allow the service to identify efficiencies and effective ways of working, and to better match resources to risk.

At the time of our inspection, the service was reviewing its wholetime shift patterns and on-call model (pay for availability) to make sure it was achieving value for money. It was also reviewing attendance to automatic fire alarms. It has carried out a review of its technical rescue capability in line with the actions identified in the CRMP.

The service doesn’t always meet its response standards

There are no national response standards of performance for the public. But the service has set out its own response standards in its CRMP. The service aims for a fire engine to attend dwelling fires within 10 minutes of the emergency call being answered, and road traffic collisions within 15 minutes. The target is to achieve this for at least 75 percent of incidents.

The service doesn’t always meet its standards. In 2023/24, 67.4 percent of dwelling fires were attended within 10 minutes, and 72.8 percent of road traffic collisions within 15 minutes.

Home Office data shows that in the year ending 30 June 2024, the service’s average response time for primary fires was 10 minutes and 24 seconds. This is faster than the average of 10 minutes and 48 seconds for comparable (predominantly rural) services.

The service’s on-call availability is good

The service has 112 fire engines available, and 56 of these are risk-critical fire engines. It aims to have at all times:

• 98 percent of its 56 risk-critical fire engines available; and
• 85 per cent of the remaining 56 fire engines available.

On average, overall availability indicates that the service is meeting these targets. However, it doesn’t always meet its 85 percent target for all fire engines. In the year ending 31 March 2024, the overall availability was 84.7 percent.

Overall, wholetime firefighter availability was 98.5 percent and, encouragingly, on-call availability was 82.8 percent. The service is the largest on-call employer nationally. In our 2019 inspection, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should increase its on-call availability. We closed this area for improvement in our 2021 inspection. We are pleased to find in this inspection that the service has continued to consistently achieve high on-call firefighter availability.

The service commands incidents effectively

The service has trained incident commanders, who are assessed regularly and properly. As at 31 March 2024, most incident commanders had received up‑to‑date training. They are formally assessed every two years and carry out regular continuing professional development between assessments. This helps the service safely, assertively and effectively manage the whole range of incidents it could face, from small and routine ones to complex multi-agency incidents.

As part of our inspection, we interviewed incident commanders from across the service. They were familiar with risk assessing, decision-making and recording information at incidents in line with national best practice, as well as the Joint Emergency Services Interoperability Principles (JESIP).

The service works well with its fire control partners

Through the Networked Fire Services Partnership (NFSP), the service has a partnership with Dorset and Wiltshire, Hampshire and Isle of Wight, and Kent fire and rescue services. There is a shared mobilising system which means that, when necessary, the services can take emergency calls for each other and mobilise their resources to respond.

We were pleased to see the service’s fire control staff integrated into its command, training, exercise, debrief and assurance activity. We found that fire control staff were involved in exercises, including testing the management of high-rise incidents.

Staff have good access to risk information

We sampled a range of risk information on the service’s mobile data terminals (MDTs) and MORI system. This includes the information for firefighters responding to incidents at hotels, hospitals and high-rise buildings, and information held by fire control.

The information we reviewed was up to date and detailed. Staff could easily access and understand it. Encouragingly, it had been completed with input from the service’s prevention, protection and response functions when appropriate.

The MDT is fixed in the front of the fire engine. Some staff told us being able to remove it would make it easier for firefighters to review risk information at an incident.

The service learns from operational incidents

As part of the inspection, we reviewed a range of emergency incidents and training events. These include flooding and fires in domestic dwellings.

We were pleased to see the service routinely follows its policies to make sure that staff command incidents in line with operational guidance. It updates internal risk information with the information it receives. The service has a good process in place to learn from incidents to improve its service for the public.

It has an operational assurance system where staff can feed back any learning, including from operational incidents or training exercises. All the information is available to firefighters, and they can track actions resulting from any learning submitted.

The service told us that since the system went live in September 2022, there had been 1,805 learning submissions. For example, during an evening water rescue exercise, it received feedback about how ineffective the existing light sticks were. In response to a staff member’s suggestion, the service now provides instructors with an LED flexi light. This is much more visible and offers a greater degree of safety.

The service has also altered its rapid intervention vehicle. This is the smallest vehicle used for emergencies and, due to its reduced size, it can respond to incidents such as wildfires more easily. Following reports of minor injuries to hands when stowing the vehicle’s ladder, a safety awareness prompt was issued. The service fitted a frame to the vehicle so that the ladder could be used safely.

The service shares learning from these submissions in several ways, including a bulletin released every four months outlining key operational learning. We were encouraged to see the service is contributing towards, and acting on, learning from other fire and rescue services or operational learning gathered from emergency service partners.

The service submitted joint organisational learning following a national BT 999 outage as there was no point of contact at BT or regular updates except from other agencies. This affected fire and rescue services’ and the public’s ability to make emergency calls.

The service also submitted a national operational learning report for awareness about self-heating meals. It had found that adding water to heat the food creates a chemical reaction which releases carbon monoxide gas. This isn’t dangerous when these meals are used outside because of the amount of ventilation. But using these indoors risks exposing people to dangerous levels of carbon monoxide gas.

The service keeps the public informed

The service has good systems in place to inform the public about ongoing incidents and help keep them safe during and after incidents. This includes cover from a communications team 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The service also works closely with Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly LRF, and Avon and Somerset LRF to provide consistent messages to the public.

The service is making progress in aligning its procedures with national operational guidance

The service has invested in a national operational guidance implementation team. This team has developed an application for operational staff, which gives them access to a range of training aids, in a central place. There is a clear plan in place to implement the service’s strategic plans, and senior leaders have oversight of this.

The service collaborates with the NFSP to implement the part of the national operational guidance about fire control operations, to make sure actions are consistent across the fire and rescue services in the partnership. The NFSP project team is leading this.

Responding to major and multi-agency incidents

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service is good at responding to major and multi‑agency incidents.

All fire and rescue services must be able to respond effectively to multi-agency and cross-border incidents. This means working with other fire and rescue services (known as intraoperability) and emergency services (known as interoperability).

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service is well prepared to respond to major and multi-agency incidents

The service has effectively anticipated and considered the reasonably foreseeable risks and threats it may face. These risks are listed in both local and national risk registers as part of its community risk management planning. For example, the service has plans to deal with risks such as severe weather events, including flooding response and water rescue.

It is also familiar with the significant risks neighbouring fire and rescue services may face, and which it might reasonably be asked to respond to in an emergency. Risk information is shared between fire and rescue services via the NFSP. Firefighters have access to risk information from neighbouring services, and we found risk information was readily available on the MDTs.

The service has an appropriate method for sharing fire survival guidance

In our last inspection, we focused on how the service had collected risk information and responded to the Government’s building risk review programme for tall buildings.

In this inspection, we have focused on how well prepared the service is to respond to a major incident at a tall building, such as the tragedy at Grenfell Tower.

We found the service has developed policies and procedures in place for safely managing this type of incident. Before our inspection, the service had developed and introduced its own electronic method of sharing fire survival guidance. At the time of inspection, the service had only provided training to the teams who were expected to use the system. It has plans to train all operational staff on the new system and process.

At this type of incident, a fire and rescue service would receive a high volume of simultaneous fire calls. We found that the systems in place are robust enough to receive and manage this volume of calls. Staff in the emergency control room, at the incident and in assisting control rooms can share, view and update the actions that result from individual calls.

The service works effectively with other fire and rescue services

The service supports other fire and rescue services responding to emergency incidents. For example, as part of the NFSP, the service and its partners can take emergency calls for other fire and rescue services across the country during periods of increased demand. It also carries out regular exercises with its partners. It is intraoperable with these services and can form part of a multi-agency response.

The service has successfully deployed to other services. During our inspection, it supported Dorset and Wiltshire Fire and Rescue Service to respond to a significant fire at a café where the building had partially collapsed, and the fire had spread to neighbouring properties.

The service regularly carries out cross-border exercises

The service shares a border with three other fire and rescue services (Avon, Cornwall, and Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue services). We saw evidence of routine cross‑border working. It also has a cross-border exercise plan with neighbouring fire and rescue services. But the plan lacks details and doesn’t include the risks of major events at which the service could foreseeably give support or ask for help from neighbouring services. An effective plan will help them work together effectively to keep the public safe. We were encouraged to see the service uses feedback from these exercises to inform risk information and service plans.

The service has processes in place to track cross-border activities, and share learning. As at 31 March 2024, the service had completed 55 multi-agency exercises, 32 national resilience exercises and 34 exercises with neighbouring fire and rescue services.

Staff have a good understanding of JESIP

The incident commanders we interviewed had been trained in and were familiar with JESIP.

The service could give us strong evidence that it consistently follows these principles. This includes fire control staff being involved in annual exercises involving emergency service partners. Middle managers and above do specialist JESIP training every three years.

We sampled a range of debriefs the service had carried out after multi-agency incidents and exercises. We were encouraged to find that the service is identifying any problems it has with applying JESIP and taking appropriate, prompt action with other emergency services.

The service has taken part in exercises involving a vehicle fire on a ferry and a helicopter crash. It has a specialist team to respond to marauding terrorist attacks and carried out an exercise at a Butlin’s resort during the off-season period. It was also involved in the debrief of an exploded bomb.

The service works effectively with others

The service has good arrangements in place to respond to emergencies with partners that make up the Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly LRF and Avon and Somerset LRF. These arrangements include working with the service’s partners to prepare multi-agency response plans for high-risk sites.

In February 2024, a 500 kg bomb was discovered in the back garden of a residential property in Plymouth. This prompted one of the largest evacuation operations since the end of the Second World War. The service supported other agencies including the British Army, Royal Navy, Plymouth City Council, and Devon and Cornwall Police to safely evacuate more than 10,000 residents from the vicinity. The bomb was then transported to sea, where it was safely detonated.

The service is a valued partner, and it is represented in the strategic and tactical co‑ordinating groups and subgroups of both LRFs. We were told that the service contributes to over 20 subgroups.

It also takes part in regular training events with other LRF members and uses the learning to develop planning assumptions about responding to major and multi‑agency incidents. The LRFs have a schedule of exercises to maximise the availability of key staff, such as a recent exercise at a nuclear premises.

The service shares and contributes to national learning

The service makes sure it knows about national operational updates from other fire and rescue services and joint organisational learning from other organisations, such as the police service and ambulance trusts. It uses this learning to inform planning assumptions that it makes with partner organisations.

National operational learning and joint organisational learning are shared through a single point of contact in the service and managed through its operational assurance system.

Making best use of resources

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service is adequate at making best use of its resources.

Fire and rescue services should manage their resources properly and appropriately, aligning them with their risks and statutory responsibilities. Services should make best possible use of resources to achieve the best results for the public.

The service’s revenue budget for 2024/25 is £92.6 million. This is an 8.4 percent increase from the previous financial year.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service needs to use its resources more efficiently and effectively

The service sometimes uses its resources well to manage risk, but it needs to address some weaknesses. For example, we found that home safety visits completed by firefighters weren’t prioritised based on risk, and they only completed medium and lower-risk visits. The service had previously accumulated over 7,000 overdue home safety visits that have now been cleared.

The service’s financial plans, including allocating resources to prevention, protection and response, continue to be consistent with the risks and priorities it has identified in its CRMP. But the service needs to use its resources much better. And it needs to improve its workforce planning as some teams, such as EDI, aren’t sufficiently resourced.

At the time of our inspection, the service was carrying out a fire cover review. The service has 112 fire engines (99 are on-call) and 83 fire stations. In the year ending 31 March 2023, the pay for on-call availability model cost an additional £2.2 million, compared to the projected costs of the previous scheme.

At the time of our inspection, the service was also considering changes to its wholetime duty system. It has proposed that a flexible rostering system (also known as annualised hours), which is based on the better use of firefighters’ contracted hours, is implemented. The service told us this will be much more efficient, allowing better use of the workforce. But most firefighters that we spoke to didn’t welcome the changes (see the ‘Making the fire and rescue service affordable now and in the future’ section of this report for more detail). The service is working with staff on the design of the working pattern.

We found that not all resources were being used efficiently or effectively and have highlighted this as an area for improvement. The service knows that the findings from the fire cover review will support it to make appropriate changes, based on risk. We look forward to seeing how this develops.

The service builds its plans on sound scenarios. These help make sure the service is sustainable and are underpinned by financial controls that are overseen by the executive board and the fire and rescue authority. This reduces the risk of misusing public money.

Productivity and ways of working can be improved

The service’s arrangements for managing performance clearly link resource use to its CRMP and its strategic priorities. The service produces quarterly reports which include performance information across prevention, protection and response. These are discussed at fire and rescue authority meetings.

The service understands how it uses its wholetime firefighters. It collects data on how they spend their time across day and night shifts. The service has built on its previous performance data which used and reviewed Outlook calendars. It has introduced a new data collection system that wholetime staff complete manually. This complements the data collected centrally. It shows how time is used across prevention, protection, response and other activities. This allows comparisons to be made across duty systems and fire stations. However, some firefighters told us that the data they input wasn’t always accurate. The service therefore needs to make sure that the data being submitted is accurate.

The service would benefit from directing its wholetime staff on their performance expectations based on evidence and analysis of the working day and evening. It relies on staff telling managers what is achievable.

The service should do more to make sure its workforce is as productive as possible. This includes considering new ways of working. For example, it could use firefighters more effectively in prevention work by targeting the most vulnerable people in the community who are very high and high risk. The service could consider the number of fire safety audits completed by protection staff. In the year ending 31 March 2024, the service completed 0.7 fire safety audits per 100 known premises, which is much lower than the national rate of 2.0 for England.

The service collaborates well with others, but it needs to review and evaluate this work

We were pleased to see the service meets its statutory duty to collaborate. It routinely considers opportunities to collaborate with other emergency responders. For example, if there are concerns about a person’s welfare, it works with the ambulance service to help enter premises. We also found the service carries out medical co-responding at 20 of its fire stations.

Collaborative work is aligned to the priorities in the service’s CRMP. The service has continued to invest in the NFSP and this has resulted in savings. It has also established three community responders (on-call firefighters who are also special constables) with the police, with the ability to provide a wider range of services at an overall reduced cost to the public.

The service needs to do more to monitor, review and evaluate the benefits and results of its collaborations. There are over 100 organisations on its formal partnership and collaborations register. And approximately 350 partners make home safety visit referrals. The evaluation process is limited in scope, and the service doesn’t use this to learn or change decisions. Therefore, this is an area for improvement.

The service has effective business continuity arrangements in place

The service has good continuity arrangements in place for areas in which it considers threats and risks to be high. It regularly reviews and tests these threats and risks so that staff know the arrangements and their associated responsibilities.

We found that the service has effective continuity plans in place for industrial action. It has adequate resources available for future periods of industrial action. The plans are detailed and comprehensive and include what actions to take, where to locate fire engines and the communication channels to use with the workforce. It has tested these plans and used what it learned to update them.

The service has a primary and a secondary fire control room. As part of the NFSP, the service regularly tests its ability to take calls from neighbouring fire and rescue services.

The service has sound financial management processes in place

There are regular reviews to consider all the service’s expenditure, including its non‑pay costs. And this scrutiny makes sure the service gets value for money. Middle managers are now more involved in setting budgets and are asked to review these regularly. Expenditure is regularly reviewed through the fire and rescue authority scrutiny arrangements and monitored by the executive board.

The service has made some savings and efficiencies, which haven’t affected its operational performance and the service it gives the public. In our last inspection, we reported that the service had made a bold move to close fire stations and relocate its resources where the risks are greater. We were told this hasn’t affected its emergency response.

The service is taking steps to make sure it achieves efficiency gains through sound financial management and best working practices. It is doing this in important areas such as estates, fleet and procurement. For example, as part of the NFSP, the service has made efficiency savings with the purchase of a new mobilisation system. It also makes efficiency savings by bulk purchasing fuel.

In October 2020, the service introduced a voluntary pay for availability scheme for its on-call firefighters where it pays for an individual’s availability by the hour. Retainer fees, attendance and disturbance allowances are combined to reward the individual for the actual hours of availability. We were pleased to find the service had carried out an evaluation.

However, in the year ending 31 March 2023, it told us the scheme cost an additional £2.2 million, compared to the projected costs of the previous scheme. At the time of our inspection, the service was reviewing this to make sure it was providing value for money.

The service has led on two major projects on behalf of the National Fire Chiefs Council: the emergency response vehicles framework and the self-contained breathing apparatus framework. This has resulted in the service collaborating with fire and rescue services nationally and with suppliers, and has led to efficiency savings.

Making the FRS affordable now and in the future

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service is adequate at making the service affordable now and in the future.

Fire and rescue services should continuously look for ways to improve their effectiveness and efficiency. This includes transforming how they work and improving their value for money. Services should have robust spending plans that reflect future financial challenges and efficiency opportunities, and they should invest in better services for the public.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service has identified its future financial challenges

The service has developed a sound understanding of future financial challenges. It has plans to mitigate its significant financial risks.

At the time of our inspection, the service anticipated a potential budget deficit of approximately £1.9 million in 2025/26 rising to around £3.9 million in 2026/27. It was carrying out four major projects and reviews to make further savings:

• changes to the wholetime duty system to better use its workforce and reduce the numbers of supervisors and managers through natural attrition – expected to save £1.3 million;
• renegotiation of the contract for pay for availability terms and conditions – expected to save £250,000;
• changes to the operating model for specialist rescue capability such as boat and animal rescues – expected to save £133,000; and
• amending policy and practice for responding to unwanted fire signals – expected to save £69,000.

The underpinning assumptions are robust, realistic and prudent. They take account of the wider external environment and some scenario planning for future spending reductions. These include financial modelling on income and expenditure variables, such as the projected pay award levels, non-pay inflation levels, contingency budgets and changes to income levels.

We were pleased to see that the service has identified savings and investment opportunities to improve the service to the public or generate further savings.

The service has plans for using reserves

The service has a sensible and sustainable plan for using its reserves. This plan includes using some reserves to reduce long-term borrowing to support its capital investments. It has allocated a total of £16.5 million to support capital investments. It has also set aside £2.2 million to support changes within the service. This includes various workstreams such as the people services project and replacing the finance system.

It has set the level of its general reserves at 5 percent of the annual revenue budget.

The fleet and estate strategies are linked to the CRMP

In our last inspection, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service needs to make sure that its fleet and estate strategies are regularly reviewed and evaluated to maximise potential efficiencies.

We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection. The service’s estate and fleet strategies now have clear links to its CRMP. Both strategies exploit opportunities to improve efficiency and effectiveness. Therefore, we have closed this area for improvement.

The service has produced an environmental strategy and action plan. It has also developed an estate strategy that provides the resources needed to deal with risk. It maximises the opportunities for its estates, including rebuilding three fire stations. And it receives income from partners for the use of its premises. It has reviewed its fleet and has purchased new vehicles.

The service identified a need to improve its ability to get to off-road locations. It equipped five of its new specialist vehicles to deal with these conditions. As a result, the service has improved its wildfire response.

It has also installed telematics (wireless communication) in over 200 vehicles. This allows the service to better manage vehicle movements or any changes that it introduces.

The service regularly reviews these strategies so that it can properly assess the effect any changes in estate and fleet provision, or future innovation, have on risk.

The service’s IT systems still need to improve

In our last inspection, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should be aware of, and invest in, developments in technology and future innovation to help improve and sustain operational efficiency and effectiveness. It has since made some improvements and investments in IT. For example, the service created its own electronic method of sharing fire survival guidance information between fire control and teams at the incident ground. And, since our last inspection, it has created a digital data and technology department which provides greater oversight of all IT projects.

However, the service doesn’t always consider how changes in technology and future innovation can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its workforce. For example, there have been delays in getting a new IT system in prevention.

We also found that there were significant issues with the way the service stored equality impact assessments. Unknown to the service, many had been deleted from the system, and it wasn’t clear why this was happening.

Staff use paper-based systems to manage and complete many of their prevention, protection and response activities despite technology being in place to do this. For example, firefighters are provided with laptops, but find them cumbersome to use when collecting risk information. Instead, they find it is easier to complete visits manually and then transfer the information to the IT system later. In addition, on-call firefighters told us they could only work remotely and complete e-learning packages on their own devices if they had a Windows 10 operating system.

The service recognises it has different systems in place, and staff can’t always work effectively or efficiently. This is also preventing it from making some important improvements. Therefore, this area for improvement remains open.

The service needs to manage change more effectively

The service has limited capacity and capability to bring about sustainable change. And it should make sure it has the right skills and capacity to successfully manage change across the organisation.

We spoke to many wholetime firefighters who felt frustrated about the flexible rostering system proposal and felt that they could have been better consulted with and involved in any future decisions. They felt that feedback would be ignored, and their opinions didn’t matter. Of those who completed our staff survey, only 30 percent of respondents (162 out of 532) agreed that they felt change was managed well in the service. This is an area for improvement.

The service’s trading arm is now profitable

The service actively considers and exploits opportunities for generating extra income. Where appropriate, it has secured external funding to invest in improvements to the service it gives to the public.

We were pleased to find it has been successful in securing a Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme grant of £325,000. A sustainability programme has been created to aid ongoing efforts to reduce its environmental impact, with a goal of being carbon neutral by 2030.

The fire and rescue authority had set up a trading arm called Red One Ltd. The company provides services to other fire and rescue services, the public and the commercial sector. At the time of our last inspection, Red One Ltd had an agreed debt. This debt had been accumulated over several years.

During this inspection, we were pleased to find that the debt had been repaid and the trading arm was making a profit. Red One Ltd has now achieved exceptional growth. In 2021/22, the turnover was £1.5 million, and in 2023/24, this increased to £5.4 million. Subject to approval, any retained profit for the year can be paid as a dividend to the fire and rescue authority or it can be retained in the business for future investment.

The fire and rescue authority continues to produce group consolidated accounts reflecting the performance of the service and Red One Ltd. It also continues to have two non-executive directors on the board, with controls in place to safeguard against conflicts of interest.

Promoting the right values and culture

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service requires improvement at promoting the right values and culture.

Fire and rescue services should have positive and inclusive cultures, modelled by the behaviours of their senior leaders. Services should promote health and safety effectively, and staff should have access to a range of well‑being support that can be tailored to their individual needs.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The culture of the organisation has improved, but there is more to do

In our last inspection, we highlighted a cause of concern about the service’s culture. We said that the service had shown a clear intent from the executive board to improve the culture of the service. However, we had found evidence of poor behaviours that weren’t in line with service values. And some staff didn’t have the confidence to report these issues. We recommended that by 31 August 2022, the service should develop an action plan to:

• make sure that its values and behaviours are understood and demonstrated at all levels of the organisation; and
• make sure that staff are trained and supported to identify and challenge inappropriate behaviour when identified and that they have clear mechanisms in place to raise their concerns.

Following the publication of our report, the service created an action plan and introduced several new initiatives. These included speak up guardians who are volunteers (staff working within their existing role) that staff can approach to raise any concerns. Staff can contact the chief fire officer directly with any concerns. The service also introduced an independent reporting line, hosted by an external organisation. Visits were made to every workplace to remove any inappropriate material such as items with derogatory language. The service also ran various managers’ workshops to improve the culture of the organisation.

We recognise the new initiatives will take time to fully take effect. We also acknowledge the considerable work that the service has done to support the necessary improvements. And it has made good progress. As a result, we have closed the cause of concern.

However, there is still more work to do to continue to improve the culture and to realise the benefits of existing initiatives. Therefore, we have moved the two recommendations to areas for improvement. We will continue to monitor progress in our next inspection.

The service has a clearly defined set of values (proud to help, honest, working together and respectful) and has amalgamated them with the Core Code of Ethics. The service has an e-learning package about its values which all staff are expected to complete. In our staff survey, 98 percent of respondents (523 out of 532) said they were aware of the service’s statement of values. But more needs to be done to make sure staff demonstrate the service values. Some staff told us the culture hadn’t improved. And we also heard about behaviour that wasn’t in line with the service’s values.

Some staff told us they don’t feel confident in challenging inappropriate behaviour. And not all staff have been provided with training. We recognise there have been recent senior leader changes in the executive board, but some staff told us some senior leaders don’t always act as positive role models.

Some wholetime firefighters that we spoke to felt that due to the proposed changes to the duty system, morale in some workplaces has been lower than ever and trust has been lost with the senior leaders. We recognise that significant change can be difficult. However, in our staff survey, only 52 percent of respondents (273 out of 523) stated that they felt senior leaders consistently modelled and maintained the service values, compared to 86 percent of managers (448 out of 523) and 91 percent of colleagues (475 out of 523).

We were pleased to find that senior leaders were continuing with their workplace visits. These visits and the key findings are recorded electronically. This is a positive step and a good way for the service to continually ask for feedback from staff on issues that may affect them. Most staff that we spoke to were positive about the workplace visits.

The service should consider what more it can do to continue to work with all parts of its workforce to build trust and confidence. It should consider how it can limit the influence of the service’s previous poor culture and unacceptable behaviour on the changes it is trying to make. It should make sure all staff receive meaningful training to identify and challenge inappropriate behaviour when identified. It also needs to review and evaluate how effective its initiatives and actions have been and whether they are having the intended impact to improve the culture of the organisation.

The service continues to have good well-being provisions in place

The service continues to have well-understood and effective well-being policies in place, which are available to staff. A significant range of well-being provision is available to support both physical and mental health. For example, the service has trained mental health first-aiders to support staff. Staff can also access an external workplace counselling service and occupational health services.

The service has trained defusing officers who provide support to staff immediately after they have experienced a traumatic incident. Attendance is mandatory but participation isn’t. In our last inspection, we heard from some staff that the defusing sessions weren’t always consistent, and the quality of the sessions varied. But we were pleased to find all staff that we spoke to were positive about the defusing process.

The service promotes staff well-being well. In our staff survey, 97 percent of respondents (515 out of 532) felt that they could access services to support their mental well-being, and 72 percent (382 out of 532) agreed that they achieved a good balance between their work and private life.

The service should improve how it manages health and safety

The service has health and safety policies in place. The health and safety documents we reviewed were up to date and clear. Representative bodies have confidence in the health and safety approach the service takes. They told us the service usually included them in the decision-making process for health and safety related issues. Staff are encouraged to report all accidents, near misses and dangerous incidents.

However, following a firefighter experiencing a medical incident that resulted in hospitalisation, the service commissioned an external health and safety review.

The service has a training facility, also known as the hot villa, where firefighters enter an environment filled with smoke and heat generated by controlled fires. During these exercises and scenarios, firefighters wear full protective equipment and use breathing apparatus sets. The review found that the temperature monitoring system and the alarm were ineffective, and this may have led to the maximum temperature being exceeded. This resulted in the firefighter being hospitalised.

We found that staff had previously reported concerns about working in the hot villa and training in a safe environment. But the service hadn’t acted on these concerns to reduce the risk of another safety event occurring. It is vital that essential learning takes place after a safety event and that the necessary actions are taken. This is an area for improvement.

The service reported this significant incident to the Health and Safety Executive, which carried out its own inspection. The service has now invested approximately £500,000 to make the hot villa safer. At the time of our inspection, there were plans to reopen the facility. The service was working to address the ten recommendations highlighted in its own investigation and the Health and Safety Executive inspection.

The service needs to do more to monitor staff with dual contracts

During both our 2019 and 2021 inspections, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should monitor secondary contracts to make sure working hours aren’t exceeded.

Disappointingly, in this inspection we found the service has made limited progress. Firefighters and supervisory managers we spoke to had little awareness of the policy and guidance. And the processes the service had introduced weren’t effective enough.

We spoke to firefighters who told us they had dual contracts. Some were under pressure to maintain their on-call availability, which wasn’t being monitored. As at 31 March 2024, 36.2 percent of wholetime firefighters had a dual contract within the service. The service needs to do more to make sure staff don’t work excessive hours. Therefore, this area for improvement remains.

The service has clear absence management processes

We found there are clear processes in place to manage absences for all staff. There is clear guidance for managers, who told us they are confident in using the process. Most staff we interviewed thought that the service managed absences well and in accordance with policy. We spoke to managers who told us that a well-being discussion took place when staff returned to work, and senior leaders monitored absences and trends.

Getting the right people with the right skills

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service requires improvement at getting the right people with the right skills.

Fire and rescue services should have a workforce plan in place that is linked to their community risk management plans. It should set out their current and future skills requirements and address capability gaps. This should be supplemented by a culture of continuous improvement, including appropriate learning and development throughout the service.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service still hasn’t addressed its workforce planning gaps

In our last inspection, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should make sure its workforce plan takes full account of the necessary skills and capabilities to carry out the integrated risk management plan (now known as the CRMP). The service reviews staffing levels every two months, and this includes data such as recruitment, sickness and retirement profiles. But we found the service still didn’t have a workforce plan, although we recognise one was in draft.

The service does some workforce planning, but it doesn’t take full account of the skills and capabilities it needs to effectively carry out its CRMP. For example, we found there was unexpectedly high staff turnover in prevention which led to a large number of outstanding home safety visits.

We found limited evidence that the service’s planning allows it to fully consider workforce skills and overcome any gaps in capability. For example, to meet immediate need, the service has appointed temporary posts. And there are limited staff resources in the EDI team.

Overall, there hasn’t been enough progress in workplace planning. Therefore, this area for improvement remains open.

The service also needs to do more to improve the way it considers its future needs and succession planning. We found that not all departmental heads considered succession planning. The service would benefit from making sure there is a clearer link between its CRMP and strategic overview of workforce and succession planning.

Firefighters can’t record their continuing professional development

Most staff told us that they could access the training they need to be effective in their role. This wasn’t just focused on operational skills. The service’s training plans make sure they can maintain competence and capability effectively. For example, protection teams and specialist prevention officers have regular training. Of those who responded to our staff survey, 85 percent (451 out of 532) said that they had received sufficient training to do their job effectively.

The service monitors its staff competencies using a system which records all training in a central place. This includes risk-critical training for operational staff. However, we found the process wasn’t consistent and firefighters were frustrated that they couldn’t record any regular continuing professional development on the system. This means that the service can’t assure itself that firefighters are completing the required training to maintain their competency.

At the time of our inspection, the service was introducing a new system to record firefighters’ continuing professional development. However, this is an area for improvement.

We found the issues with the hot villa, as discussed in the section on ‘promoting the right values and culture’, hadn’t had a detrimental effect on staff training as the service had used alternative training locations.

The service supports staff with learning and development

The service promotes a culture of continuous improvements throughout the organisation, and it encourages staff to learn and develop. For example, protection managers who have an operational background are required to maintain their competencies and provide operational cover one day per week.

We were pleased to see that the service has a range of resources in place. These include formal development courses, e-learning modules, training courses and continuing professional development.

Most staff told us they can access a range of learning and development resources. In our staff survey, 77 percent of respondents (410 out of 532) agreed that they could access the right learning and development opportunities when they needed to. This allows them to do their job effectively.

In our last inspection, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should address the high number of staff in temporary promotion positions. The HR function prioritised this area of work and has successfully reduced the number of temporary positions. As at 31 March 2024, 40 staff (2 percent of the workforce) were on a temporary promotion compared to 65 people the previous year. Therefore, we have closed this area for improvement.

We spoke to many on-call firefighters who felt that the weekly two hours of training given wasn’t sufficient for what they needed to cover. Some on-call firefighters told us that they were sometimes required to travel to another fire station to carry out specific training as their fire stations didn’t have the appropriate facilities. This wasn’t always practical.

On-call firefighters can claim an extra 1.5 hours per month to complete e-learning packages. But not all firefighters are aware of this. The service should consider completing an analysis of its on-call weekly two hours of allocated training time and review whether this is sufficient.

Ensuring fairness and promoting diversity

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service requires improvement at ensuring fairness and promoting diversity.

Creating a more representative workforce gives fire and rescue services huge benefits. These include greater access to talent and different ways of thinking. It also helps them better understand and engage with local communities. Each service should make sure staff throughout the organisation firmly understand and show a commitment to equality, diversity and inclusion. This includes successfully taking steps to remove inequality and making progress to improve fairness, diversity and inclusion at all levels of the service. It should proactively seek and respond to feedback from staff and make sure any action it takes is meaningful.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service should seek and act on feedback received

The service needs to do more work to build trust and confidence between senior leaders and the workforce. It should improve the way the service invites challenge, gathers feedback from all staff and responds to staff concerns.

The service has developed several ways to work with staff on issues and decisions that affect them. These include methods to build all-staff awareness of fairness and diversity, as well as targeted initiatives to identify matters that affect different staff groups. For example, senior leaders make regular workplace visits to receive feedback. And the service has carried out staff surveys and external reviews into its culture. It has created a diversity inclusion commission that meets quarterly. In addition, there are five staff networks where staff can give feedback or suggest improvements. The chief fire officer completes a weekly blog and can be contacted directly to provide any feedback or raise any concerns.

In our staff survey, 57 percent of respondents (303 out of 532) said they felt confident in the processes for providing feedback at all levels. And 52 percent (278 out of 532) felt their ideas or suggestions would be listened to. As we outlined in the ‘Promoting the right values and culture’ section of this report, the service should assure itself that any staff concerns are responded to and acted upon, particularly in health and safety. For example, staff had raised concerns previously about the hot villa, and the service had taken limited action.

We also spoke to many wholetime firefighters who felt frustrated about the flexible rostering system proposal and that they could have been better consulted. Some felt that decisions had already been made. And some stated that morale had been lower than ever, and trust had been lost with senior leaders. It was felt that feedback would be ignored, and their opinions didn’t matter.

Staff still don’t have confidence in the grievance process

Although the service has clear policies and procedures in place, staff have limited confidence in how well it can deal effectively with cases of bullying, harassment and discrimination, as well as grievances and discipline.

During both our 2019 and 2021 inspections, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should make sure that it has effective grievance procedures, and it should identify and implement ways to improve staff confidence in the grievance process.

During this inspection, we were disappointed to find that this still hadn’t been addressed and progress had been slow. Therefore, this area for improvement remains open.

We found that staff didn’t always raise workforce concerns because they had limited confidence in the process. Some staff don’t feel the grievance process is robust enough to protect them from retribution. We spoke to staff who had been involved in the grievance or disciplinary process. They told us that cases took too long to investigate, and that communication could have been better.

To increase transparency, the service now publishes information on grievances and disciplinaries every six months. It has a performance target to conclude grievance investigations within 30 days and, if this hasn’t been achieved, the reasoning must be justified. We recognise there are new HR teams in place, and it will take time for them to make improvements.

In our staff survey, 16 percent of respondents (85 out of 532) told us they had felt bullied or harassed at work in the last 12 months. The primary reason for not reporting the bullying or harassment was concerns it would make the situation worse. In addition, 14 percent of respondents (74 out of 532) told us they had felt discriminated against at work in the last 12 months. The primary reason for not reporting the discrimination was that they thought nothing would be done about it. The service has set up a professional standards board that oversees key projects and actions in this area.

The service is addressing disproportionality in recruitment and retention

There is a clear recruitment process for staff or those wishing to work for the fire and rescue service. The service has an effective system to understand and remove the risk of disproportionality in recruitment processes. For example, one of the practical assessments to become a firefighter is to carry out a ‘ladder lift’. This tests upper and lower body strength and co-ordination. Some applicants were failing this test due to the awkward body posture positioning needed to successfully complete the lift. Therefore, the service created a ‘Viking lift’. This is an alternative test which requires candidates to lift a pole (a similar weight to the ladder lift).

At the time of our inspection, the service was planning a recruitment campaign for wholetime firefighters. As at 31 March 2024, 7.9 percent of wholetime firefighters and 6.6 percent of on-call firefighters identified as a woman. And 14.7 percent of the service’s overall workforce identified as a woman, compared to an average of 20.2 percent in all fire and rescue services.

As at 31 March 2024, 3.5 percent of wholetime firefighters and 2.7 percent of on-call firefighters identified as being from an ethnic minority background. And 3.2 percent of the overall workforce identified as being from an ethnic minority background. This is much lower than the local population of 7.8 percent of people being from an ethnic minority background.

The service hasn’t recruited for wholetime firefighters since 2022. It is the largest on‑call employer in England and faces challenges in recruiting into these roles from diverse groups.

The service has taken steps to improve diversity. For example, it runs monthly fitness sessions aimed at under-represented groups, where potential applicants can improve their physical fitness before applying to become a firefighter. The service also runs regular ‘have a go’ days in various locations across the area it serves. At the time of our inspection, it was too early to see the results of these initiatives. We look forward to seeing how effective these are at increasing the diversity of the workforce.

The service has put considerable effort into developing its on-call recruitment processes so that they are fair and potential applicants can understand them. The service found some applicants were waiting up to 18 months to join the service. So in February 2023, it paused all on-call recruitment for seven months. It has now changed its process to make it more effective. For example, it now uses online tests, an interview is completed before the practical tests, and the process is centrally managed. The service told us that this has resulted in applicants joining the service much faster.

The service advertises recruitment opportunities both internally and externally, including on the National Fire Chiefs Council website, social media and its own website. However, it could do more to encourage applicants from diverse backgrounds, including for middle and senior management roles. The service commissioned an external organisation to support its recruitment campaign for a senior leader post, but there were limited applicants from diverse backgrounds.

At the time of our inspection, the recruitment policy was still in draft.

The service doesn’t have enough staff resources to manage EDI

The service needs to improve its approach to EDI. We were disappointed to find that the EDI team didn’t have sufficient staff resources. This means staff have excessive workloads and some improvements have been delayed.

Staff are required to complete an e-learning EDI training package, and we found there were high completion rates.

In our last inspection, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should improve staff understanding of the purpose and benefits of positive action. We had found that some staff had misconceptions about positive action and positive discrimination.

In this inspection, we found that staff still didn’t have a sound understanding of this. Therefore, this area for improvement remains open.

The service has taken action to assure itself that equality data is more accurate. We were pleased to find that most staff had disclosed their equality data. The service publishes an annual report which details workforce diversity.

We found that the service sent out exit surveys. Exit interviews are also offered to staff leaving the service, but these are rarely carried out. This means the service may be missing opportunities to work with staff to find out what does and doesn’t work and identify opportunities for improvement.

Although the service has a process in place to assess equality impact, it doesn’t properly assess or act on the impact on each protected characteristic. We found that the system used to manage equality impact assessments wasn’t effective as it had deleted some existing assessments. We also found that there was a lack of oversight to make sure actions were completed. This may mean the service doesn’t properly assess or act on the impact on each protected characteristic. Therefore, this area for improvement remains open.

Managing performance and developing leaders

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service requires improvement at managing performance and developing leaders.

Fire and rescue services should have robust and meaningful performance management arrangements in place for their staff. All staff should be supported to meet their potential and there should be a focus on developing staff and improving diversity into leadership roles.

We set out our detailed findings below. These are the basis for our judgment of the service’s performance in this area.

Main findings

The service has a new personal performance development system, but not all staff have completed a performance review

During both our 2019 and 2021 inspections, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should improve all staff understanding and application of the performance development review process.

We were disappointed to find that as at 31 March 2024, only 26 percent of on-call and 70 percent of wholetime firefighters had completed a personal performance development (PPD) review. In support teams, 82 percent of corporate staff and 54 percent of fire control staff had completed it. We recognise that the service consulted staff about the new PPD system. This went live in November 2024. It will take time for all staff to complete a PPD. But, at the time of our inspection, not all staff had specific and individual objectives, and some hadn’t had their performance assessed in the past year. Some staff told us they felt PPDs held limited value. Therefore, this area for improvement remains open.

Staff still don’t have confidence in the promotion process

The service needs to do more to make sure its promotion and progression processes are fair. During both our 2019 and 2021 inspections, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should make sure its selection, development and promotion of staff is open and fair, and that feedback is available to staff.

In this inspection, some staff told us the processes and requirements had changed while they were going through the promotions process. The whole process wasn’t consistent, and some of the benefits promoted for the position had also changed.

The service doesn’t have strong succession-planning processes in place to allow it to effectively manage the career pathways of its staff, including roles needing specialist skills. Some staff told us that the service had made immediate temporary appointments in various roles without any process taking place. Of the respondents to our staff survey, 44 percent (235 out of 532) agreed that the promotion process in their service was fair.

The service has made improvements. For example, following a promotions process, staff receive feedback. The service has also redesigned the shortlisting form to make it more user-friendly. The HR teams are still new and therefore the new processes will take time to show lasting improvement.

Given this evidence, this area for improvement will remain.

The service should aim to diversify the pool of future leaders

The service knows it needs to go further to increase workforce diversity, especially in middle and senior management. It tends to advertise and fill these positions internally, so it isn’t making the most of opportunities to make its workforce more representative. The service commissioned an external organisation to support its recruitment campaign for a senior leader post, but there were limited applicants from diverse backgrounds.

The service still needs to do more to develop leadership and high-potential staff at all levels

In our inspections in 2019 and 2021, we highlighted an area for improvement that the service should put in place an open and fair process to identify, develop and support high-potential staff and aspiring leaders.

In this inspection, we found the service had made limited progress. Therefore, this area for improvement remains open.

The service needs to improve the way it actively manages the career pathways of staff, including those with specialist skills and those with potential for leadership roles.

The new PPD system will help the service to develop staff. It also has some talent management schemes in place to develop leaders and high-potential staff, such as leading conversation events and skills building sessions. There are also various apprenticeship opportunities available.

The service should consider putting in place more formal arrangements to identify and support members of staff to become senior leaders. There is a significant gap in its succession planning. But the service recognises it needs to do more.

We note that the service has considered the December 2022 Leading the Service and Leading and Developing People fire standards and how it will implement them. These provide useful leadership and staff development frameworks for fire and rescue services.

Further information

Download the PDF report

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service 2023-2025

More about Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service

You can find more about Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service on our dedicated service page.

Get the press release

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service has improved in some areas, but further progress is needed in prioritising fire prevention

Our work

Find out more about HMICFRS’s work and other inspection areas.

Other services

Find out how well other services have performed during their FRS assessment.

Inspection programme and framework

Detailed information about the inspection methodology.

Useful links

Fire and rescue national framework for England 
National Operational Guidance website
National Fire Chiefs Council website