Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service 2023-2025

Overall summary

Our judgments

Our inspection assessed how well Norfolk 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 Norfolk 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 Norfolk 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 revisit Norfolk 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 Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service in keeping people safe and secure from fire and other risks. Despite some clear improvements since the appointment of the current chief fire officer, there remain some areas in which the service still needs to improve. For example, the service could improve how it targets its prevention activities to prevent fires and other risks, how it manages performance and how it develops its leaders.

Overall, it is evident that the service has made progress and improvements since our October 2021 inspection. For example, it has improved its relationship with its parent authority, which has led to better outcomes for its staff and the public. It has also made sufficient progress with its prevention work for us to close the cause of concern that we raised in our previous report. We recognise the hard work done by the service to improve this important function.

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

• The service has made prevention a high priority. We were encouraged to find a significant increase in both resources and time allocated to reducing risk.
• The service is good at making sure it is affordable now and in the future. Its medium-term financial strategy is clearly linked to its community risk management plan (CRMP), and this is subject to rigorous analysis and challenge. Overall, the service has a sound understanding of its future financial challenges.
• The service has well-defined values, which staff understand. There is a positive working culture throughout the service, with staff feeling empowered and willing to challenge poor behaviours when they come across them.
• The service needs to do more to further improve performance, productivity and ways of working. It needs to do more to provide effective assurance on the quality of its prevention and protection activities and do more to make sure its workforce is as productive as possible.
• The service needs to make sure staff are appropriately trained for their roles and that the systems used to review workforce capabilities and staff training are effective.
• The service needs to do more to make sure all staff view internal promotion processes as open, transparent and fair. It needs to also make sure that the processes used to identify, manage and develop talent are applied consistently.
• The service needs to make sure that equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) are at the heart of its talent management approach for identifying and developing future and current leaders.

Overall, the service has improved since our last inspection, but there is still more to do. I encourage Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service to continue to make further improvements in the areas we have highlighted.

Lee Freeman

HM Inspector of Fire & Rescue Services

Service in numbers

Percentage of firefighters, workforce and population who are female as at 31 March 2022

Percentage of firefighters, workforce and population who are from ethnic minority backgrounds as at 31 March 2022

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. Read more information on data and analysis in this report in ‘About the data’.

Understanding the risk of fire and other emergencies

Norfolk 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 has improved how it connects with seldom-heard communities to identify risk

The service has assessed a suitable range of risks and threats using a thorough community risk management planning process. In its assessment of risk, it uses information it has collected from a broad range of internal and external sources and datasets, including incident and social datasets. For example, the service uses information and reports extracted from the incident reporting system, English indices of deprivation, ward-profiling demographics (such as ethnicity) and housing data (such as ownership, tenancy, household size and council tax band). It then analyses incident data from its mobilisation system.

The service has also improved how it connects with its local community, including seldom-heard groups, and has tripled the responses to its latest CRMP. 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, to continue to understand barriers to its services, it has spoken to blind residents from Vision Norfolk, members of the deaf community, residents with learning disabilities and Black women.

The service has an effective CRMP

Once it has assessed risks, the service records its findings in an easily understood CRMP. This plan 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 plan sets out the service’s mission to make Norfolk a safer place by:

• preventing fires and other emergencies;
• protecting people, buildings and the environment; and
• responding to fires and other emergencies when they arise.

It sets out its vision as:

• having a service that remains relevant, capable and agile to protect Norfolk as best it can;
• educating and advising its communities to reduce risk;
• ensuring it has the best people, equipment and technology to respond to incidents; and
• investing in its workforce to make sure they are engaged, supported and connected.

The service makes its annual reports and statements of assurance available to the public. Norfolk Fire Authority monitors the service’s performance and progress. It measures these against the priorities outlined in its CRMP.

The service has improved how it gathers, maintains and shares risk information

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure that the risk information it gathers and records is made readily available to all staff. There has been good progress in this area.

The service routinely collects and updates the information it has about the highest-risk people, places and threats it has identified. Staff who are qualified in fire protection inspect and audit premises for fire safety compliance.

We sampled a broad range of the risk information the service collects including information from home fire safety visits (HFSVs), site-specific risk information and temporary risk and protection files. Vulnerable person and premises information is collected and recorded on a central database, called the community fire risk management information system. Premises information is also collected and recorded on a database, called the web risk management 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. Staff at the locations we visited, including firefighters and emergency control room staff, were able to show us that they can access, use and share risk information quickly to help them resolve incidents safely.

The service has systems in place to make staff aware of any important changes to risk information. We saw it communicate new and emerging risks via operational, prevention, protection and health and safety bulletins, safety flash emails and mobile data terminals that are updated by the service’s organisational assurance group. The temporary events files we reviewed had a good level of content to inform staff.

The service learns from operational activity

The service recorded and communicated risk information effectively. It also routinely updates risk assessments and uses feedback from local and national operational activities to inform its planning assumptions.

The service has dedicated staff for the internal communication of national operational guidance and lessons learned from national operational work. The service’s organisational assurance group reviews emerging information gathered from the service’s operational activity and changes its approach to risks where needed.

Preventing fires and other risks

Norfolk 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

In our previous inspection, we found the service hadn’t made prevention activity a high enough priority and it wasn’t adequately identifying those most at risk from fire. We were concerned about the potential risks to public safety and recommended that the service put plans in place to:

• ensure that joint agency reviews take place after significant or fatal fires (reviews should take place at an appropriate strategic level in the service and with relevant organisations);
• target the most vulnerable, who are at greatest risk from fire;
• ensure that all staff have a good understanding of how to identify vulnerability and safeguard vulnerable people.

Good progress has been made in this area.

The service has made prevention activity a high priority

In our previous inspection, we found that the service wasn’t allocating enough resources to meet its prevention strategy. There has been good progress in this area; a significant increase in resource and time has been allocated to reducing risk.

The service provided data which showed that it had increased its prevention department from 3 members of staff to 15. It now has community safety staff dedicated to water safety, road safety and reducing arson. It has dedicated staff working on the Norfolk Safeguarding Adults Board. This makes sure that it can make the correct referrals to the right agencies and support those people most vulnerable to fire and other risks. The service told us that it had made a thousand hours available for on-call staff to carry out prevention activities.

The service’s prevention strategy is clearly linked to the risks it has identified in its CRMP. The service has identified people who may be vulnerable and at higher risk from fire, water incidents and road traffic collisions.

The service’s teams work well together and with other relevant organisations on prevention, and they share relevant information when needed. We were pleased to see that information is used to adjust planning assumptions and direct activity between the service’s prevention, protection, response and risk functions.

The service carries out HFSVs. It assesses whether a person needs an HFSV by using eligibility criteria, such as age, smoking habits, mental health conditions and any vulnerabilities the person may have. Between 1 April 2022 and 31 March 2023, the service carried out 2,233 HFSVs. This was an increase from 1,210 between 1 April 2021 and 31 March 2022. However, compared to other fire and rescue services nationally, the amount of HFSVs completed continued to be the lowest.

The service has developed good relations with a range of partner organisations in the health and care sector. In the year ending 31 March 2023, these partners referred 1,920 individuals who would benefit from an HFSV to the service.

The service is good at carrying out joint reviews after significant or fatal fire incidents

In our previous inspection, we were concerned to find that the service didn’t always carry out serious incident reviews following fatal fires. We revisited in November 2022 and found that the service had carried out six reviews after significant and fatal fires, including with partner agencies such as Norfolk Constabulary and social care teams. But not all had been undertaken in a timely manner or within the time defined within the service’s policy. Since then, there has been good progress in this area.

During this inspection, we found that the service had improved the timeliness of these reviews. Notable learning is shared with other agencies, partners and nationally through the National Fire Chiefs Council. The learning has led to improved outcomes locally. These include upgrading the service’s response to a telecare automatic fire alarm so that it becomes a person’s reported fire and linking new telecare alarm installations to fire alarms. Nationally, the service helped improve the memorandum of understanding between the National Fire Chiefs Council and the Telecare Services Association.

The service needs to improve the targeting of its prevention activity

In our previous two inspections, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure it targets its prevention work at people most at risk, including timely activity to reduce risk. At the time of our revisit in November 2022, we found good progress. However, more needs to be done in this area.

The service uses English indices of deprivation to target its prevention activities and carries out post-incident prevention work, which is an improvement. However, it isn’t using the wide range of data it has to target its prevention work at the people most at risk. Most operational staff who carry out HFSVs told us that the data doesn’t accurately identify people most at risk from fire and other risks. Therefore, they respond to referrals and use local knowledge to identify risks within their area.

The service doesn’t have a clear, risk-based approach that allows it to direct prevention activity towards the people most at risk from fire and other emergencies. During our inspection, the service couldn’t quantify or clarify why there is a 30-day target for completing complex and high-risk individuals’ HFSVs.

The service has made available 1,000 hours for on-call staff to carry out prevention activities. However, we found there weren’t enough staff trained to meet this target. More training is needed.

The service needs to make sure staff are recording HFSV hazards and vulnerabilities and safeguarding referrals

Staff told us they have the right skills and confidence to make HFSVs. The visits cover an appropriate range of hazards that can put vulnerable people at greater risk from fire and other emergencies. For example, a community safety officer or firefighter will check and give advice on:

• fire safety in the home;
• smoking;
• keeping warm in the home;
• clutter and hoarding; and
• medicines and medical equipment.

During this and our previous inspection, we reviewed a range of HFSVs. We were disappointed to still find inconsistencies in the way firefighters record information and limited evidence of the service referring vulnerable people to other organisations if it couldn’t meet their needs. The service’s quality assurance and performance management of its prevention activities are ineffective.

At the time of this inspection, the service was introducing quick-screen tablets for staff to use when undertaking HFSVs. This should improve efficiency and effectiveness. We are interested to see how this develops.

Staff understanding of how to identify vulnerability and safeguard vulnerable people has improved

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure that staff have a good understanding of how to identify vulnerability and safeguard vulnerable people. At the time of our revisit in November 2022, we found significant progress in response to this recommendation. And there continues to be good progress in this area.

In this inspection, we were pleased to that find firefighters had a good understanding of how to identify vulnerability and safeguard vulnerable people. Staff we interviewed told us about occasions when they had identified safeguarding problems. They told us that they feel confident and trained to act appropriately and promptly.

The service works with others to reduce the number of fires and other risks

The service works with a range of other organisations to prevent fires and other emergencies. These include the THINK! Norfolk Partnership, Norfolk Constabulary and East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust.

Arrangements are also in place to receive referrals from other organisations, such as the NHS and other social care providers. And the service acts appropriately on the referrals it receives to provide an HFSV. The service routinely exchanges information with other public sector organisations about people and groups at greatest risk relating to vulnerability, hoarding and scams. It uses this information to challenge planning assumptions and target prevention activity.

The service’s collaboration with Norfolk Constabulary includes persons in crisis, and its work with the ambulance trust provides a first response to specific medical emergencies (emergency medical response) where there is an immediate threat to life prior to an ambulance arriving on the scene.

There are dedicated resources to tackle fire-setting behaviour

In our previous inspection, we found limited involvement in targeting and educating people who show signs of fire-setting behaviour. There has been some progress in this area.

As part of the prevention department’s improvement, the service now has a dedicated member of staff who works to reduce fire setting and arson. 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. These include tailored intervention and education and the fire-setters education programme, which works with families and carers whose children show an unhealthy interest in fires. Station plans direct firefighters to reduce fire setting and arson in their area.

Some prevention activities are evaluated

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should better evaluate its prevention work so it understands all the benefits more clearly. Some progress has been made in this area.

The service has some 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 prevention services that meet their needs. For example, the service makes a follow-up phone call to anyone who has received an initial HFSV. This is so it can assess when people’s behaviours and habits change.

Prevention activities take account of feedback from the public, other organisations and other parts of the service. For example, staff told us that they meet partners to discuss community risks, such as lithium-ion batteries and single-use vapes. They meet different groups, such as utility companies, councils and safety teams from partner agencies.

The service uses feedback to inform its planning assumptions and change future activity, so it focuses on what the community needs and what works.

Protecting the public through fire regulation

Norfolk 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

Protection is linked to the CRMP

The service’s protection strategy is clearly linked to the risks it has identified in its CRMP.

Staff across the service are involved in this activity and effectively exchange information as needed. Inspecting officers and firefighters carry out inspections of premises, and where hazards and risks are identified, they are shared with the appropriate department. For example, we saw the sharing of information on matters such as hoarding and premises with oxygen cylinders via the service’s operational practitioners change group. The service then uses the information to adjust planning assumptions and direct activity between its protection, prevention and response functions. This means resources are properly aligned with risk.

The service aligns protection activity with risk

The service’s risk-based inspection programme is focused on the service’s highest‑risk buildings. Protection staff we spoke to have a clear and consistent understanding of the service’s highest-risk premises.

As of 31 March 2023, the service had identified 24 premises as high risk, such as buildings with sleeping accommodation. It has inspected all these premises. This is in line with its risk-based inspection programme, which states specialist fire safety staff will inspect these premises over a two-year cycle.

The audits we reviewed had been completed in the time frames the service had set itself. In the year ending 31 March 2023, the service had completed 29 high-risk audits. These audits, and the changes that should be made to premises as a result, should make the buildings safer for the people who use them.

The quality of fire safety audits is good

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.

The audits we reviewed were completed to a high standard in a consistent, systematic way and in line with the service’s policies. The service makes relevant information from its audits available to operational teams and control room operators.

The service needs to consistently quality assure its fire protection activities

In our previous inspection, we found limited quality assurance of fire safety audits. Disappointingly, this continues to be the case. The service has a formal process in place to quality check the work done by protection staff. However, while we found greater levels of scrutiny with some pieces of work (enforcement or prohibition notices), this quality assurance process doesn’t always happen. The areas we found that weren’t always quality assured were:

• general fire safety audits;
• following a fire safety complaint;
• post-fire inspections;
• checking that work completed by operational crews is correct and in line with fire safety legislation; and
• making sure that responsible persons receive correct advice or guidance.

The service doesn’t have good evaluation tools in place to measure how effective it is or to make sure all sections of its communities get appropriate access to protection services that meet their needs.

Enforcement activities are proportionate to risk

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

The service’s protection strategy is clearly linked to the CRMP and its business engagement and enforcement strategy. It details how the service’s statutory duty is used to enforce fire safety law and to promote fire safety. The service targets premises where it believes or has received information to suggest that there is poor compliance with fire safety laws. For serious fire safety failings, the service takes enforcement action, including informal sanctions or formal court proceedings. The service enforcement strategy is aligned with the Regulators’ Code, which makes sure enforcement actions are proportionate. The service has access to a fire safety specialist barrister for complex cases. Low levels of formal action are balanced with good levels of informal action that effectively change the behaviour of offenders.

In the year ending 31 March 2022, the service issued 0 alteration notices, 63 informal notifications, 2 enforcement notices, 3 prohibition notices and undertook no prosecutions. It completed 3 prosecutions in the 5 years from year ending 31 March 2018 to year ending 31 March 2022.

The service has allocated enough resources to protection

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure it allocates enough resources to a prioritised and risk-based inspection programme. There has been good progress in this area.

The service has experienced a high level of staff turnover in the protection department. However, it now has enough qualified protection staff to meet the requirements of its risk-based inspection programme. In the year ending 31 March 2023, the service had 14 competent and 5 protection staff in development. This is an increase in staff from eight, with no protection staff in development (in training) as of 31 March 2021. This helps it provide the range of audit and enforcement activity needed, both now and in the future.

Staff get the right training and work to appropriate accreditation.

The service has responded positively to new fire safety 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 staff to undertake training and work in this area. It expects these arrangements to have a manageable effect on its other protection activity.

The Fire Safety Regulations 2022 introduced a range of duties for the managers of tall buildings. These include a requirement to give the fire and rescue service floorplans 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 other enforcement agencies

The service works closely with other enforcement agencies to regulate fire safety, and it routinely exchanges risk information with them. For example, the service is an active and valued member of the Norfolk safety advisory groups and works to make sure members of the public are safe at sporting and community events. It also carries out joint fire safety inspection and enforcement activity with local authority property enforcement officers.

The service works as a main partner with a wide range of different enforcement agencies, such as Norfolk Council Trading Standards, the Environment Agency and local authority housing. And it has taken joint action to make sure asylum seekers and refugees are safe from fires and other risks.

The service responds well to building and licensing consultations

In our previous inspection, we had concerns that the service wasn’t always responding to building and licensing consultations in a timely manner. Good progress has been made in this area.

The service responds to all building and licensing consultations on time. This means it consistently meets its statutory responsibility to comment on fire safety arrangements at new and altered buildings. In the year ending 31 March 2023, the service responded to 100 percent of building and licensing consultations within the required time.

The service could do more to work with businesses and other organisations

In our previous two inspections, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure that staff work with local businesses and large organisations to share information and expectations on compliance with fire safety regulations. Not enough progress has been made in this area.

The service has had limited contact with local businesses and large organisations as it doesn’t have the staff capacity or capability to do this work. It relies on social media and online content to connect with businesses.

Although the service has just recruited a business engagement officer to prioritise this work and give support, it could have done more to work with local businesses and other organisations to promote compliance with fire safety legislation.

The service needs to improve the recording and reporting of unwanted fire signals

Data given to us by the service for this inspection shows that the number of automatic fire alarms continues to increase. In the year ending 31 March 2021, the service received 2,252 automatic fire alarm requests. In the year ending 31 March 2022, this increased to 3,737, and in the year ending 31 March 2023, it received 3,724. As a percentage of emergency calls from automatic fire alarms, this is above the England average.

The service has a good unwanted fire signal policy that mirrors the National Fire Chiefs Council’s guidance on call filtering. It has a risk-based approach in place to manage the number of unwanted fire signals generated from automatic fire alarms. However, the service found that it was incorrectly recording and reporting automatic fire alarms. This may affect its ability to identify areas of improvement.

Fewer unwanted calls mean fire engines are available to respond to a genuine incident rather than responding to a false one. It also reduces the risk to the public if fewer fire engines travel at high speed on the roads.

The service has improved the resilience of its 24/7 fire safety cover

In our previous two inspections, one area for improvement was that the service should improve its arrangements for providing specialist protection advice out of hours.

It is encouraging to see that the service now has processes in place, which are resilient, to give technical support to staff at all times of the day and night and that it always responds.

Responding to fires and other emergencies

Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service is adequate 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 plan is clearly linked to its CRMP

The service’s response strategy is linked to the risks it has identified in its CRMP. Its fire engines and response staff, across a mix of wholetime and on-call duty systems, are designed and located to help the service respond flexibly to fires and other emergencies with the appropriate resources. For example, the service makes sure it has a minimum of one fire engine available in Norwich, Great Yarmouth, Kings Lynn, Thetford and Dereham. The service operates at full capacity with 51 fire engines. Based on historical analysis of incident types, the service’s plans are based on the need to respond to two large-scale incidents (five-plus fire engines) plus numerous other small incidents (one to three fire engines). This is based on having 25-plus fire engines ready to respond to incidents as normal.

The service is good at maintaining 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.

According to these standards, the first fire engine should arrive within 10 minutes to fires where life may be at risk. For other emergencies where life may be at risk, a fire engine should be on scene within 13 minutes, 80 percent of the time. The service consistently meets these standards. It told us that it achieved its standard for getting the first fire engine to fires where life may be at risk 84.8 percent of the time in both the year ending 31 March 2022 and the year ending 31 March 2023. And it told us that it achieved its standard for getting the first fire engine to other emergencies where life may be at risk 91.3 percent of the time in both the year ending 31 March 2022 and the year ending 31 March 2023.

Home Office data shows that in the year ending 31 March 2023, the service’s response time to primary fires was 11 minutes and 3 seconds. This is in line with the average for predominantly rural services.

More needs to be done to improve on-call availability

To support its response strategy, the service aims to have 90 percent of its first on-call fire engines and 100 percent of its wholetime fire engines available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The service doesn’t always meet its standards. In the year ending 31 March 2023, wholetime fire engine availability was 99.7 percent, but on-call fire engine availability was 76.2 percent.

Staff have a good understanding of how to command incidents safely

The service has trained incident commanders who are assessed regularly and properly. It has an effective system to make sure that they have regular level 2, level 3 and level 4 incident command training. The service uses an externally accredited framework to assess commanders’ competence every two years in line with national occupational standards. 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 are 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. They are also confident in the use of operational discretion: they know when to use their professional judgment in an unforeseen situation at an incident and that the service will support their decisions.

The service should make sure fire control staff are involved in debrief and assurance activity

We were disappointed to find that the service’s control staff weren’t always included in its debrief and assurance activity.

Fire control staff gave examples of times when they had been involved in major incident training exercises arranged by the service, but they weren’t always involved in the debriefs following significant incidents. This means that fire control staff may not have the opportunity to learn from other departments and organisations.

Risk information is readily available and up to date

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure its mobile data terminals are reliable so that firefighters can readily access up-to-date risk information. There has been good progress in this area.

We sampled a range of risk information, including:

• records on the service’s community fire risk information management system;
• records on the service’s web risk management system; and
• site-specific risk information records on the fire engines’ mobile data terminals.

The records included the information in place for firefighters responding to incidents at high-risk, high-rise buildings and the information held by fire control.

In our previous inspection, firefighters told us that the service’s mobile data terminals were unreliable. Sometimes they froze, which prevented operational staff from accessing site-specific risk information.

In this inspection, the information we reviewed was up to date and detailed. Staff could easily access and understand it. Encouragingly, the mobile data terminals were more reliable, and risk information had been completed with input from the service’s prevention, protection and response functions when appropriate.

Responding to learning is good, but evaluation of operational performance is inconsistent

In our previous two inspections, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure it has an effective system for staff to use learning and debriefs to improve operational response and incident command. More progress needs to be made in this area.

As part of this inspection, we reviewed a range of emergency incidents and training events including:

• domestic fires;
• commercial premises fires;
• water rescues; and
• major incidents.

We found that the service had systems for staff to use information from learning and debriefing activity to improve operational response and incident command. It has a good organisational assurance governance policy. We found that staff had good knowledge and understanding of these.

The service has responded to learning from incidents to improve its service for the public. For example, it has changed how it responds to emergency telecare alarms following several fatal fires.

We were encouraged to see that the service is contributing towards and acting on learning from other fire and rescue services or operational learning gathered from emergency service partners. This includes sharing learning from a flat fire where firefighters experienced dropped electrical cables and cable fixings that weren’t fire compliant.

However, we found that many staff were unable to recall participating in a formal debrief and some managers weren’t carrying out hot debriefs. There is a lack of performance management to make sure hot debriefing is carried out and the learning shared. The service mainly focuses on debriefing and reviewing significant and fatal fire incidents. As a result, it is missing risk-critical information that may affect the health, safety and welfare of people involved.

The service has improved how it keeps the public informed

The service has increased its media and communications team.

It has good systems in place to inform members of the public about ongoing incidents and help keep them safe during and after incidents. This includes:

• the proactive use of social media, particularly X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook, with plans for TikTok and Instagram;
• the incident tab on the service’s website; and
• media-trained incident commanders.

We saw evidence that the service gives incident updates using these systems.

Responding to major and multi-agency incidents

Norfolk 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 prepared for 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. These risks include, among others:

• fires in waste sites;
• flooding;
• severe weather;
• industrial action; and
• widespread electricity failure.

The service’s approach to a total failure of the electricity transmission network has been tested through Mighty Oak, a national training exercise that tested local tactical plans.

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. These include control of major accident hazards incidents and flooding on the east coast. Firefighters have access to risk information from neighbouring services.

The service is able to respond to major and multi-agency incidents

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.

At this type of incident, a fire and rescue service would receive a high volume of simultaneous fire calls. During this inspection, we tested the service’s systems for sharing fire survival guidance information and reviewed how the fire control room directly communicates with the incident commander. We found that the systems in place were effective and robust enough to receive and manage this volume of calls.

The service has carried out realistic training and exercising at tall buildings. This included testing an electronic method of sharing information from multiple fire survival guidance calls between the incident command unit, the bridgehead (the position where firefighters are carrying out firefighting operations) and the fire control room. It also tested the dedicated communication link between the fire control room and the incident commander. These are Grenfell Tower Inquiry recommendations.

The service works well with other fire and rescue services

The service supports other fire and rescue services responding to emergency incidents. For example, the service has specialist, national inter-agency liaison officers who provide cover at all hours of the day and night to support its marauding terrorist attack response and national resilience assets. These are:

• urban search and rescue teams;
• specialist rescue teams; and
• a high-volume water pump and hose layer.

It is intraoperable with other services and can form part of a multi-agency response.

The service takes part in cross-border exercising

The service has a cross-border exercise plan with neighbouring fire and rescue services, which helps them work together effectively to keep the public safe. The plan includes the risks of major events at which the service could foreseeably give support or ask for help from neighbouring services. The service recently participated in marauding terrorist attack exercises led by the regional counter-terrorism police, where it tested its response with specialist and non-specialist responders. We were encouraged to see that the service uses feedback from these exercises to inform risk information and service plans.

Data given to us by the service for this inspection shows that the number of multi‑agency exercises has increased over the last four years, from 6 in the year ending 31 March 2019 to 19 in the year ending 31 March 2023. There was a decrease in the number of exercises with neighbouring fire and rescue services from 13 in the year ending 31 March 2022 to 1 in the year ending 31 March 2023. However, we found that exercises hadn’t always been recorded.

The service has improved its access to cross-border risk information

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure its firefighters have good access to relevant and up-to-date risk information. This should include cross-border risk information. There has been good progress in this area.

The service shares risk information with neighbouring fire and rescue services and makes this available to other statutory organisations on Resilience Direct. Firefighters were able to show us over-the-border risk information and that the service’s mobile data terminals, which give access to site-specific risk information, are more reliable.

Incident commanders have a good understanding of the Joint Emergency Services Interoperability Principles

The incident commanders we interviewed had been trained in and were familiar with the Joint Emergency Services Interoperability Principles.

The service could give us strong evidence that it consistently follows these principles. This includes:

• staff having knowledge and making use of the joint decision-making model; and
• using messaging (that all emergency services and related agencies understand).

We sampled a range of debriefs the service had carried out after multi-agency incidents or exercises. We found that the service had a good, detailed and clear organisational assurance governance policy that features learning, incident monitoring and debriefing. Most staff could recall the collection and sharing of risk information and operational learning through formal or informal debriefs.

The service is an active member and lead partner of the Norfolk Resilience Forum

The service has good arrangements in place to respond to emergencies with the other Category 1 and 2 responders that make up the Norfolk Resilience Forum. These arrangements include having dedicated staff available to respond to requests from partners.

The service is a valued partner. The deputy chief fire officer is the vice-chair (taking over as chair in 2025) of the local resilience forum, and staff chair the tactical co‑ordinating groups. The service takes part in regular training events with other members of the forum and uses the learning to develop planning assumptions about responding to major and multi-agency incidents. For example, it participated in the national three-day power outage (Mighty Oak 2023) training exercise.

The service keeps up to date with national learning

The service makes sure it knows about national operational updates from other fire and rescue services and joint organisation learning from other organisations, such as the police service and ambulance trusts. The service has effective processes for sharing the learning through operational safety flashes, case studies and the ‘what’s hot?’ news page via the intranet. It uses this learning to inform planning assumptions that it makes with partner organisations.

Making best use of resources

Norfolk 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 2023/24 is £31.7m. This is an 8 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 has improved how it allocates resources to risk

In our previous inspection, two areas for improvement were that the service should make best use of the resources available to it, including from elsewhere within Norfolk County Council, to increase resilience and capacity and to make sure that resources are appropriately allocated to support the activity set out in its integrated risk management plan (IRMP). There has been good progress in these areas.

We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection. It now does financial forecasting and planning on both a short-term and long-term basis. Longer-term planning means the service knows its fleet, estate and IT requirements. It has improved its relationship with its parent authority, Norfolk County Council, and it is making more growth bids.

The service’s financial plans, including allocating resources to prevention, protection and response, are consistent with the risks and priorities it has identified in its CRMP. The service’s prevention, protection and response delivery plans clearly detail how the service will reduce risk. The amount of prevention activity has increased. Staffing levels in the control room and protection team have improved.

The service has evaluated its mix of crewing and duty systems. It has analysed its response cover and can show it deploys its fire engines and response staff to manage risk efficiently.

It builds its plans on sound scenarios. They help make sure the service is sustainable and underpinned by financial controls that reduce the risk of misusing public money. Norfolk Fire Authority oversees and scrutinises the service’s budget performance to make sure it uses public money appropriately.

The service has a clear capital investment programme with a capital investment allocation of £42.83m for the five financial years 2022/23 to 2026/27. The capital budget is intended to provide for:

• fire engine fleet;
• specialist rescue vehicles;
• property maintenance; and
• information management and technology.

It is making best use of its resources. The service has reviewed its people and support services and identified that resilience and capacity require improvement. For 2023/24, it secured funding of £1.59m from the county council for ‘people growth’ investment. It has reorganised its HR function (people), with a new dedicated head of people, a programme manager and a communications team at a cost of £414,000. It has spent £164,000 on increasing its dedicated people resource staffing. Increased support for on-call physical and mental well-being has cost £188,000, and it has spent £828,000 on enhanced well-being and psychological support.

The service’s forward financial plans include an ongoing people growth bid of £1.19m.

The service needs to do more to improve its performance, productivity and ways of working

In our previous inspection, we found that the service’s arrangements for managing performance were weak and didn’t clearly link resource use to its IRMP and strategic priorities. More still needs to be done in this area.

The service has an organisational performance management process. Its people and community safety, community risk and operational assurance groups review performance and progress against its CRMP, action plans and strategic priorities. The CRMP dashboard provides one place for monitoring performance.

However, we found that there was a lack of effective performance management of the service’s prevention and protection activities and the quality of work carried out. There is little corporate oversight of these functions, and the service’s arrangements for managing performance are weak. It doesn’t make the most of its capacity. For example, in our last inspection, we found that on-call staff didn’t carry out prevention activities, and the service carried out fewer HFSVs in the year ending 31 March 2021 than any other fire and rescue service in England. The service responded by allocating 1,000 hours for its on-call staff to carry out prevention activities, particularly to increase the number of HFSVs. This had increased as of 31 March 2022. However, most on-call staff that we spoke to hadn’t been trained to carry out HFSVs, and the service still completed the lowest number of HFSVs in England. We also found that firefighters weren’t recording the hazards and vulnerabilities identified during HFSVs or safeguarding referrals.

The service told us that the current process for carrying out HFSVs is paper based and involves manual data entry. This is affecting the effectiveness and efficiency of the service. As part of the digital and technology programme, the service has procured and will provide staff with quick-screen tablets to enhance productivity. We look forward to seeing the improvements this will bring.

The service doesn’t make the most of flexible workforce patterns to make sure the services it provides are proportionate to risk and public safety. Some control staff work part-time. However, expansion or further consideration could be given to the availability of flexible working for firefighters and control staff, such as part-time working and job sharing.

The service collaborates well with others

We were pleased to see that the service meets its statutory duty to collaborate. It routinely considers opportunities to collaborate with other emergency responders. Collaborative work is aligned with the priorities in the service’s CRMP. This includes:

• membership of the East Coast and Hertfordshire Fire Control Consortium;
• shared buildings with the East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust;
• shared buildings, including a fire control room, with Norfolk Constabulary; and
• mutual access to drones with Norfolk Constabulary.

The service comprehensively monitors, reviews and evaluates the benefits and results of its collaborations. This control makes sure that the service only maintains collaborations where there is a benefit. Notable results include the discontinuation of The Prince’s Trust programme and reorganisation of its youth education provision.

The service has effective 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 well-tested business continuity, fire control and industrial action plans. The service has appropriate business continuity plans in place for industrial action. It has assured itself and can show that it has enough resources available for future periods of industrial action. Resilience arrangements make sure staff would be available to provide cover and maintain critical services.

The service provides training so that staff maintain the skills required for their roles. The degradation plan, which would be followed during industrial action, was activated at times during the pandemic.

The service shows sound financial management and value for money

In our previous inspection, we found limited monitoring and evaluation of the effect of non-pay cost savings and a lack of scrutiny of the fleet management to make sure that it was gaining efficiencies and getting value for money. There has been good progress in this area.

We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection.

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. For example, Norfolk County Council’s finance team attends the service’s senior leadership team meetings monthly. Actual expenditure compared with forecasted expenditure and progress against savings requirements are reviewed so appropriate action can be taken. The service has carried out a benefits analysis of recent fleet projects, such as the introduction of tactical response vehicles and new equipment added to fire engines.

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. Non-pay cost savings have been made by using the G-Cloud framework, and energy procurement is made through the public sector energy procurement framework.

Making the FRS affordable now and in the future

Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service is good 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 understands its future financial challenges

In our previous inspection, two areas for improvement were that the service should make sure scenario plans for future spending reductions are subject to rigorous analysis and challenge, including the effect on services to the public, and that it should assure itself it has effective budget management planning in place, with appropriate levels of financial management capability and capacity. We advised that the service should make sure it has sufficiently robust plans in place to address the medium-term financial challenges beyond 2024 and secure an affordable way of managing the risk of fire and other risks. There has been good progress in these areas.

We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection. The service has a sound understanding of future financial challenges. It has worked closely with its parent authority, Norfolk County Council, to develop evidence-based funding bids. As a result, Norfolk County Council has supported the service with increased funding for its improvement plans. Additional growth bids are being considered as part of the current financial planning cycle. And increased funding has also been provided by Norfolk County Council to mitigate the service’s main or significant financial risks. For example, the 2023/24 revenue budget includes additional funding to cover price and pay inflation pressures, including the firefighter pay award agreed for 2022/23 and 2023/24.

The service’s approach to scenario planning for future spending reductions is now linked to its medium-term financial plan and its CRMP. The underpinning assumptions are robust, realistic and prudent and take account of the wider external environment. It has carried out work to identify how future changes in demand and risk may affect resourcing and budget requirements. And it has also developed some costed options with ways the service could make savings if it faces financial pressures in the future, along with the anticipated risks to and effects on the service.

The service has carried out some benchmarking against other similar fire and rescue services to identify potential areas where it is comparatively expensive. And it is reviewing all its contracts to identify where there may be more efficient options available.

The service should continue to build on the work it has carried out since our last inspection, including identifying possible savings it could make with a view to reinvesting to support further improvements. As a result of the work carried out by the service, we have closed the two areas for improvement related to scenario and budget management planning.

There are clear arrangements for the use of reserves

Norfolk County Council holds the service’s reserves. There is a robust process in place for the service to access them. The service told us that in the year ending 31 March 2023, Norfolk County Council made reserves of £1.9m available.

Fleet and estates strategies are linked to the service’s CRMP and financial plans

In our previous inspection, we found the fleet and estates management programmes weren’t clearly linked to its IRMP. We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection.

The service’s estate and fleet strategies have clear links to its CRMP, the One Public Estate programme, Norfolk County Council’s, Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service’s capital strategy and Norfolk County Council’s digital strategy and roadmap. Both strategies exploit opportunities to improve efficiency and effectiveness.

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

The estate strategy sets out the current provision and evaluation of the service’s estate requirements in the short, medium and longer term. There is a funded programme in place to carry out these works. The problems identified during our last inspection with vehicles, equipment repairs and delays in returning operational equipment have improved. There is a funded fleet replacement programme in place covering the period until 2026/27.

There are clear systems in place to monitor, review and evaluate the benefits and results of its service provisions to make sure it gets value for money.

The service has good plans to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its workforce through technology and innovation

In our previous inspection, we found the service was updating the computer systems in fire stations and the communications and mobile data terminals on fire engines. It was in the first stages of reducing its carbon footprint by replacing its diesel and petrol vehicles with electric and hybrid versions.

However, it has been slow at bringing changes in technology and future innovation to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its workforce. The implementation of a new HR system has affected workforce and succession planning. The service is aware of this and has a good digital and technology road map with £1.45m capital finance to put in place the capacity and capability it needs to achieve sustainability. Progress against the programme is considered by the senior leadership team every six weeks. We were encouraged to see the improvements planned for a further upgrade of the service’s mobile data terminals, replacement of the mobilisation system, procurement of an asset management system, purchase of smartphones and quick-screen tablets and tendering for a new learning management system.

An external company has environmentally reviewed the service’s estate. The report has led to an energy and decarbonisation programme that includes:

• the installation of 47 electric vehicle points at 19 stations; and
• energy reduction measures in fire stations, such as energy-efficient lightbulbs.

The service is proactive in seeking income-generating opportunities

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 the public. These include:

• £20,000 for smoke alarms from the household support fund (Department for Work and Pensions);
• £20,000 to support road safety interventions from the Norfolk speed camera safety partnership;
• generating £66,000 from the Government’s apprenticeship levy;
• £30,000 from petroleum licences, firework/explosive licences and environmental and fire incident reports; and
• a hydrants income stream of £43,000 for the financial year ending 31 March 2024.

Promoting the right values and culture

Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service is adequate 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 service’s culture, behaviours and values are improving

In our previous inspection, two areas for improvement were that the service should make sure its values and behaviours are understood and demonstrated at all levels of the organisation and that it should assure itself that senior managers are visible and demonstrate service values through their behaviours. There has been good progress in these areas.

The service has well-defined values, which staff understand. We found that staff at all levels of the service showed behaviours that reflect service values. There is now a member of the senior leadership team who is responsible for improving workforce culture. We were encouraged by the cultural improvements the service has made. It has implemented the Core Code of Ethics, but more work needs to be done to make sure staff understand it.

In our staff survey, 91 percent (191 out of 209) of respondents said they are aware of service values and 83 percent (158 out of 191) of those are aware or agree that senior leaders consistently model the values.

Staff told us the visibility of senior leadership has increased and that communication has improved. Senior leaders act as role models. For example, staff told us senior leaders are more focused on people and well-being and that they are taking a zero-tolerance approach, holding staff to account and driving the service’s values through their behaviours.

There is a more positive working culture throughout the service, with staff empowered and willing to challenge poor behaviours when they come across them. However, the service is aware there is more work to do in this area.

Workforce well-being is a high priority

The service has improved its provisions to promote staff well-being. Well-being is a high priority. The service continues to have well-understood and effective well-being policies, which are available to staff. Most staff understand and have confidence in the well-being support processes available.

A significant range of well-being support is available to support both physical and mental health. These include:

• an effective trauma-focused peer support system (trauma risk management), with trained staff to support colleagues who have experienced a traumatic or potentially traumatic event;
• mental health first aiders;
• well-being champions;
• Oscar Kilo 9 well-being and trauma support dogs;
• a psychological assessment service;
• Blue Light Together;
• debt management advice;
• addiction support; and
• access to The Fire Fighters Charity.

The service has appropriate health and safety provisions in place

The service continues to have effective and well-understood health and safety policies and procedures in place. It gives health and safety training to all its staff as part of their induction. Staff have confidence in the health and safety approach taken by the service.

These policies and procedures are readily available, and the service promotes them effectively to all staff. Our staff survey found that 87 percent of respondents (181 out of 209) felt their personal safety and welfare are treated seriously at work, while 97 percent (202 out of 209) said the service has clear procedures to report all accidents, near misses and dangerous occurrences. The service also has effective processes for investigating and sharing the learning of accidents and near misses.

Both staff and representative bodies have confidence in the health and safety approach the service takes.

The service should monitor secondary contracts

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should monitor secondary contracts to make sure working hours aren’t exceeded. Disappointingly, little progress has been made in this area.

The service has a high proportion of firefighters who undertake secondary employment within the service and elsewhere. As of 31 March 2023, records show the service had the second highest proportion nationally of firefighters on dual contracts within the same fire and rescue service at 45.8 percent (126 out of 275). This is typical of previous years.

The service has a policy that allows firefighters to undertake secondary employment with the permission of the chief fire officer, but we do have concerns. The service doesn’t have a formal process to manage and monitor the hours, health and well‑being of staff who take on additional hours and secondary employment, and we found members of staff with up to four contracts within the service.

The service needs to do more to make sure staff don’t work excessive hours. In this inspection, we found that staff who have secondary employment or dual contracts didn’t always understand their responsibilities. The service is drafting policies to address this. We are interested to see how these develop.

Long-term absence and absence management need to be reviewed

We found there are clear processes in place to manage absences for all staff. There is clear guidance for managers and good processes to monitor patterns and trends. However, the policy hasn’t been reviewed or updated for more than ten years and we found inconsistencies in the levels of training in absence management. Some managers told us that they feel insufficiently trained to carry out absence management and managers don’t receive formal absence management training.

Data provided by the service shows the average number of days not worked per firefighter due to long-term sickness increased between 2018/19 and 2022/23. There has been a decrease in both long and short-term firefighter sickness in the most recent year.

Getting the right people with the right skills

Norfolk 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 CRMPs. 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

More needs to be done to improve workforce planning

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure that its workforce plan takes full account of the necessary skills and capabilities to carry out the integrated risk management plan. Some progress has been made in this area.

In our previous inspection, we found that at a local level, the service understands the risk-critical safety capabilities of the workforce and risk-critical training plans necessary to meet current and future organisational needs. However, the service didn’t have a workforce plan and workforce planning was reactive. The service’s HR IT systems to review workforce capabilities were ineffective. Managers didn’t have direct access to staff non-risk-critical training records and contracts.

In this inspection, we found that the risk-critical safety capabilities of the workforce necessary to meet current and future organisational needs continued to be managed locally. However, in response to our previous inspection, the service has employed a workforce programme manager to review workforce planning and develop a workforce plan. The service is also working with its parent authority to resolve the issues it experienced with the HR IT systems. We are interested to see how these develop.

Systems to monitor workforce skills and capabilities are ineffective

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should assure itself that all staff are appropriately trained for their roles. Not enough progress has been made in this area.

The service focuses on operational skills. It doesn’t consider management skills in its training plans.

The service carries out its risk-critical training for operational staff well. Staff told us that they can access the training they need to be effective in their roles. We found that there were good systems in place to make sure managers take responsibility for maintaining their team’s critical competencies.

There is a system in place to review workforce capabilities and the HR IT and e‑learning systems. However, it is ineffective, and there is a risk staff may lack important skills for the future. For example, there is no monitoring of e-learning, and managers are unable to directly access their staff’s non-risk-critical training records. We were told the service uses the county council’s e-learning system, but managers don’t have access rights to all of their staff’s records. Managers were unable to provide inspectors with accurate records of staff EDI training.

The service is looking to invest in a new learning and management system through its digital and technology programme. We are interested to see how this develops.

The service needs to improve learning and development

In our previous inspection, we identified that there were no formal development programmes for station managers and above and that development wasn’t needed for promotion. Staff told us that the service encouraged them to learn and develop, and there were plans for all managers to take part in formal development programmes in the future. However, there has been little progress in this area.

In this inspection, we found that development programmes and apprenticeships for station managers or above were optional and development still wasn’t needed for promotion. Again, staff told us there are plans for all managers to take part in formal development programmes in the future.

Most staff told us that they can access a range of learning and development resources. This includes EDI and safeguarding. However, non-risk-critical training is optional. Disappointingly, we still found some staff who hadn’t received the appropriate training for their roles. For example, leadership and management, discipline, grievance, capability and absence management learning are all optional. Some operational staff hadn’t received training in how to gather risk information. Most managers that we spoke to said they hadn’t received the appropriate training in how to prevent workforce stress or how to manage absence.

This is likely to affect what the service can offer the public.

Ensuring fairness and promoting diversity

Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service is adequate 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 EDI. 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

More needs to be done to improve staff confidence in the service’s feedback systems

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should assure itself that staff are confident using its feedback processes. There has been good progress in this area.

The service has developed several ways to work with staff on issues and decisions that affect them. This includes methods to build all-staff awareness of fairness and diversity as well as targeted initiatives to identify matters that affect different staff groups. The service regularly requests and gives feedback through internally provided surveys and internal communication systems, such as email and through senior manager seminars and visits. Representative bodies and staff associations reported that the service communicates with them well.

However, more needs to be done to improve staff confidence in the service’s feedback systems. Of the respondents to our staff survey, 79 percent (165 out of 209) felt that the service keeps them informed about matters that affect them, and 62 percent (130 out of 209) felt that change is managed well in the service. This is a decrease in response to our previous staff survey.

The service is doing more to tackle bullying, harassment and discrimination

In our previous inspection, one area for improvement was that the service should assure itself that it has effective grievance procedures. There has been good progress in this area.

The service is acting against poor behaviours in the workplace. It deals more effectively with disciplines, grievances and dismissals. From the year ending 31 March 2022 to the year ending 31 March 2023, disciplines increased from 6 to 14, grievances from 7 to 13 and dismissals from 1 to 2. Staff have a good understanding of what bullying, harassment and discrimination are and their negative effects on colleagues and the organisation. We found that staff were more confident to challenge behaviours outside the service’s values and behaviours due to it taking action. There are good processes in place for monitoring grievances and disciplines.

However, in this inspection, 20 percent (41 out of 209) of respondents to our staff survey told us they had been subject to harassment and 12 percent (26 out of 209) to discrimination over the past 12 months. Of those who said they felt bullied or harassed, the primary reason most respondents didn’t report the bullying or harassment was because they felt nothing would happen. And the primary reasons most respondents didn’t report the discrimination was because of concerns about confidentiality and feeling that nothing would happen. We hope to see the service continue to make improvements in these areas a priority.

The service’s actions haven’t been effective at addressing disproportionality in recruitment and retention

There is an open, fair and honest 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, interview panels include representatives from staff networks and HR.

The service has put considerable effort into developing its recruitment processes so that they are fair and potential applicants can understand them. The recruitment policies are comprehensive and cover opportunities in all roles. The service advertises recruitment opportunities both internally and externally.

It is aware more needs to be done to improve its facilities for all staff groups. The service has taken steps to improve diversity. It has carried out a community project that targets seldom-heard communities to better understand barriers to recruitment in fire and rescue roles faced by people from under-represented groups. The project identified a range of findings that included evidence of established gender norms within the local population that firefighting is a masculine role and other stereotypes around general health and fitness. The service runs ‘have a go’ days and bespoke recruitment campaigns locally. The workforce supports this. However, there has been little progress in improving diversity, and not all staff understand the value of positive action and having a diverse workforce.

As of 31 March 2022, 9.2 percent of the service’s workforce were women compared to an average of 18.6 percent throughout all fire and rescue services. This is the lowest proportion of women in the workforce of all fire and rescue services in England. But this varies by role. Women made up:

• 3.8 percent of on-call firefighters;
• 6.4 percent of wholetime firefighters;
• 41 percent of support staff; and
• 48 percent of fire control.

For the whole workforce, as of 31 March 2022, 8.5 percent were from an ethnic minority background compared to 10.6 percent in the local population. By role, workers from an ethnic minority background made up:

• 6.5 percent of on-call firefighters;
• 12.1 percent of wholetime firefighters;
• 7.9 percent of support staff; and
• 9.1 percent of fire control.

The service needs to do more to increase staff diversity.

As of 31 March 2022, the proportion of firefighters from an ethnic minority background decreased from 9.9 percent (68 people) in 2020/21 to 8.5 percent (56 people) in 2021/22. The proportion of female firefighters increased from 4.5 percent (35 people) in 2020/21 to 4.7 percent (36 people) in 2021/22.

The service’s approach to EDI is good

The service continues to improve its approach to EDI. It actively promotes equality and diversity in its strategies. We found an inclusive working environment on some stations. The service has a good people strategy that aims to attract, retain and develop a diverse and talented workforce, create an inclusive culture and better represent the community it serves.

It makes sure it can offer the right services to its communities and support staff with protected characteristics through its range of staff networks, staff working groups and membership of external networks such as the Asian Fire Service Association and Women in the Fire Service UK.

During this inspection, we found more staff who were confident to be themselves at work. For example, the service continues to improve its effective process for equality impact assessments. The recording of assessments has been moved from an Excel spreadsheet to a web-based platform that is easy to follow and where all protected characteristics are considered, impact is assessed and the positives and negatives are analysed. There is good governance, and the service consults all relevant staff groups for advice or where there is an impact. All actions proposed are assigned to an individual with clear time frames for completion.

The service has reviewed its fire stations to make sure they have appropriate facilities for all staff. Some stations have been prioritised for refurbishment. However, this needs to be progressed quickly to make stations more inclusive.

Managing performance and developing leaders

Norfolk 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 needs to make sure individuals’ performance conversations are meaningful

The service is effective at making sure that staff have regular performance conversations. The service told us the rate of personal development reviews is improving and is good. In the year ending 31 March 2022, 100 percent of wholetime, on-call, fire control and support staff completed personal development reviews. The rate of completion for all staff rose on average from 94 percent in the year ending 31 March 2021 to 100 percent in the year ending 31 March 2022.

There is a good performance management system in place, which allows the service to effectively develop and assess the individual performance of all staff.

In our staff survey, 85 percent (177 out of 209) of respondents told us they had received a formal personal development review/appraisal in the last 12 months. Each staff member has individual goals and objectives and regular performance assessments. Staff feel confident in the performance and development arrangements in place. However, 42 percent (75 out of 177) reported that they disagree/tend to disagree that they find them useful.

Not all staff feel the promotion and progression processes are fair

In our previous two inspections, one area for improvement was that the service should make sure its selection, development and promotion processes are open, transparent and fair. Not enough progress has been made in this area.

The service has put considerable effort into developing its promotion and progression processes so that they are fair and all staff can understand them. The promotion and progression policies are comprehensive and cover opportunities in all roles.

However, the service needs to do more to make sure its promotion and progression processes are viewed as fair. Disappointingly, there continues to be a perception among some staff we spoke to that the promotion process isn’t open, transparent and fair. In our survey, 48 percent (101 out of 209) of respondents didn’t agree that the promotion process in their service is fair.

The service needs to do more to diversify leadership in the future

The service needs to encourage applicants from diverse backgrounds into middle and senior-level positions. The service knows it needs to go further to increase workforce diversity, especially in middle and senior management.

The service advertises vacancies internally and externally. At senior leadership level, it has recruited seven members from non-operational backgrounds who bring a range of differing skills.

However, more needs to be done to improve the diversity of the pool of future and current leaders. For example, the service has only two operational females above watch manager level. The service has considered direct entry recruitment, but we were told that it isn’t introducing this now due to funding and capacity issues.

The service isn’t succession planning or developing leadership and high-potential staff effectively

In our previous two inspections, two areas for improvement were that the service should put in place an open and fair process to identify, develop and support high-potential staff and aspiring leaders and that it should assure itself it has an effective process in place for succession planning, including senior leadership roles. Disappointingly, not enough progress has been made in these areas.

The service needs to improve how it actively manages the career pathways of staff, including those with specialist skills and those with potential for leadership roles. It 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 at present. However, these are areas of focus for the new workforce programme manager, and the service is working to implement the December 2022 leading the service and leading and developing people fire standards. We are interested to see how this develops.

Further information

Download the PDF report

Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service 2023-2025

More about Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service

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

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