Overall summary

Our judgments

Our inspection assessed how well Greater Manchester 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 Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service in January 2021. And in June 2021, 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 Greater Manchester 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 Greater Manchester 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 pleased with the performance of Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service in keeping people safe and secure from fire and other risks. For example, the service has improved how it targets and evaluates its prevention work and continues to provide an effective response to incidents.

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

• The service continues to identify risk well and has an effective community risk management process.
• The service’s fire plan plus its annual delivery plan (ADP) make up its community risk management plan (CRMP). We found this to be based on a comprehensive understanding of risk. Since our last inspection, the service has developed prevention, protection and response strategies and several frameworks to support improvement.
• The service has effective programme and project management processes in place and has achieved consistent improvement through effective governance and performance processes.
• The service has successfully implemented its new terrorist response capability.
• All its stations and fire engines are now equipped and ready to respond to marauding terrorist attacks (MTAs) and other incidents involving large numbers of casualties.
• The service continues to prioritise the improvement of its organisational culture.
• The service has adopted a culture-first approach and considers its values in everything it does.

Overall, I commend the service on the changes it has made and expect it to continue working to resolve the further areas for improvement we have identified.

Michelle Skeer

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

Greater Manchester 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 continues to identify risk well and has improved how it works with its communities

The service has assessed a comprehensive 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. For example, the service uses its response data, demographic data and data from its built environment, including the increasing number of high-rise buildings and Greater Manchester’s transport infrastructure. The service also considers a wide range of future risks, such as the environment, climate change, technological advances and social, cultural and economic factors.

The service has improved how it works with its local community. It works well with Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) and its partners to hold constructive dialogue with its communities and other relevant parties to understand risk and explain how it intends to mitigate it.

The service’s fire plan plus ADP make up its CRMP. The service is reviewing its fire plan, which covers 2021–25. It has consulted on its ADP and has held effective consultation on its recent fire cover review. The service used external and internal communication channels to encourage community involvement. It has hosted face‑to‑face and virtual sessions. It has also worked with GMCA to speak to partner organisations and community groups. We found that the service had involved local communities in areas where changes to fire stations were planned to talk to residents about the potential effects of the changes.

The service has an effective CRMP

The service assesses its risk annually and produces a strategic assessment of risk. This informs the development of its fire plan and the ADP, which make up its CRMP. These describe how the service intends to use its resources, including 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 includes six priorities and commitments to residents, businesses and partners, such as local authorities and other emergency services, across Greater Manchester. These are to:

1. provide a fast, safe and effective service;
2. help people to reduce the risk of fires and other emergencies;
3. help to protect the built environment;
4. use resources sustainably while delivering the most value;
5. develop a culture of excellence, equality and inclusivity; and
6. integrate services in every locality with those of partner agencies.

The fire plan supports the implementation of the wider Greater Manchester strategy, which says:

“We want Greater Manchester to be a place where everyone can live a good life, growing up, getting on and growing old in a greener, fairer, more prosperous city region.”

The service implements its fire plan each year through its ADP. It communicates its progress to the public through an annual delivery report. The service has supporting strategies and frameworks to implement its fire plan. We were pleased to see that since our last inspection, the service has developed prevention, protection and response strategies. The service has also developed strategies for equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI), sustainability and volunteering.

The service has a strong commitment to integrating its work with its partners to make sure the service it provides is as effective as possible and provides value for money. The service has made 30 pledges to partners and the public and implements these through its framework for integrated and place-based working.

The service carries out improvement through change priorities identified within its ADP and monitors key performance indicators for each priority.

The service has improved how it gathers, maintains and shares risk information but could do more to make sure it is consistent

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should ensure it records relevant and up-to-date risk information to help protect firefighters, the public and property during an emergency.”

The service has improved how it routinely collects and updates the information it has about the highest-risk people, places and threats it has identified. This includes operational risk information. It has reviewed its approach to updating risk information and developed a new operational intelligence policy. The service has provided staff with additional training and made improvements to its operational information system. The service has also provided firefighters with a second mobile data terminal. This provides firefighters with access to risk-critical information at emergency incidents. We are satisfied with the progress the service has made in this area. Therefore, the area for improvement identified in our previous report has been closed.

We sampled a broad range of the risk information the service collects. This includes:

• home fire safety assessment (HFSA) files;
• operational intelligence system records including tactical plans;
• site-specific risk information;
• protection files; and
• temporary and urgent risk information.

This information is readily available for the service’s prevention, protection and response staff. This means that these teams can identify, reduce and mitigate risk effectively. However, we did find some inconsistencies in how evacuation plans were recorded. The service recognised this and reviewed its risk information. It has notified staff and provided them with additional guidance. The service should continue to assure itself that its quality assurance processes are robust.

Where appropriate, the service shares risk information with other services and partners. The service is a member of the North West risk information group, which shares and updates risk information to make sure there is an effective cross-border response.

The service has improved how it builds 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 considers future risks in its fire plan and strategic assessment of risk. The service has identified environmental risks, including climate change, and introduced a wildfire suppression burns team to mitigate this and support its response.

The service considers a wide range of learning to support its understanding of risk. For example, the service has considered the Manchester Arena Inquiry report and made improvements including the introduction of its new terrorist response capability. It has also considered the Grenfell Tower Inquiry and the fire at The Cube student accommodation to provide improvement through a dedicated built environment project.

Preventing fires and other risks

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is good 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 has developed a prevention strategy that links to its fire plan

In our last inspection, we found that the service had made limited progress in developing its prevention strategy and that it wasn’t aligned with the risks identified in its fire plan. During this inspection, we were pleased to see the improvement the service has made. The service’s prevention strategy is clearly linked to the risks and priorities it has identified in its fire plan, and its ADP tells the public what its key change priorities are. The service focuses on reducing accidental fires and associated injuries and deaths by carrying out targeted HFSAs. All frontline workers, including volunteers and partners, carry out HFSAs. The service’s prevention strategy includes a series of commitments to its partners and the public.

The service’s teams work well together and with other relevant organisations on prevention, and they share relevant information when needed. They work with partners, including Greater Manchester Police (GMP), to reduce deliberate fires and antisocial behaviour. The teams carry out a wide range of prevention activities aligned with the risks identified in the fire plan. These include road safety, water safety and liaison with at-risk groups.

The service uses information to adjust its planning assumptions and direct activity between its prevention, protection and response functions. For example, it produces annual risk profiles to target prevention activity, and it commits to sharing this with partners to provide a more effective approach.

The service has improved how it prioritises and targets activity

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should ensure it targets its prevention work at people most at risk, including those from hard-to-reach groups.”

We were pleased to see the progress the service has made. It has published its new prevention strategy and updated its annual strategic assessment of risk. The service produces borough risk profiles to support how stations target activity through their action plans. And it has introduced a new HFSA and improved how it prioritises these based on risk.

The service uses a risk-based approach to clearly prioritise its prevention activity towards people most at risk from fire and other emergencies. For example, it has introduced a new online home fire safety check tool on its website, which allows people to book an HFSA. It also completes post-fire HFSAs.

It uses a broad range of information and data to target its prevention activity at vulnerable people and groups. The service uses Mosaic data and fire incident data to identify which areas are more likely to have fires. It then prioritises addresses by considering age, deprivation and NHS data to produce a high-risk list. Firefighters use the list to decide where to carry out HFSAs. The service also considers risk factors, including:

• single occupier households;
• people with long-term disabilities;
• smokers;
• drug and/or alcohol users;
• oxygen users;
• households with no or not enough working smoke alarms;
• blocked escape routes; and
• excess clutter in the home.

Since our last inspection, we were encouraged to see an improvement in the number of HFSAs the service has completed. Home Office data shows that in 2021/22, the service carried out 7,851 HFSAs, of which 3,535 were targeted at vulnerable groups. In 2022/23, the service completed 23,889 HFSAs, of which 23,557 were targeted at vulnerable groups.

The service has improved how it works with partners to target prevention activity. This includes the promotion of its HFSA referral process, a newsletter shared with partners and regular HFSA online training. The service has also reviewed how it shares data with partners. It has a data-sharing agreement with North West Ambulance Service (NWAS) to allow HFSA referrals to be made.

We are satisfied with the progress the service has made in this area. Therefore, the area for improvement identified in our previous report has been closed.

Staff are competent in completing HFSAs

Staff told us that they have the right skills and confidence to carry out HFSAs. These assessments cover an appropriate range of hazards that can put vulnerable people at greater risk from fire and other emergencies. They include identifying fire‑related risks, fitting smoke alarms and providing advice on health and welfare.

The service has put in place a quality assurance process to help improve the standard and the implementation of HFSAs. It also provides prevention training to new firefighters during its apprenticeship programme.

The service has a range of education programmes, and it supports youth engagement

We were pleased to see that the service prioritises youth engagement and carries out a range of activities. In its fire plan, the service commits to providing prevention interventions and youth engagement programmes, which include reintroducing its community fire cadets programme. The service provides Firefly and FireTeam programmes for young people. These are based on firefighting activities and classroom sessions focused on fire, road and/or water safety. It provides education targeted at vulnerable groups through its Bury Training and Safety Centre (BTSC).

The service runs a Prince’s Trust programme across the service. This programme is nationally recognised and provided with partners. The programme offers life skills to people aged 16 to 25 who aren’t in education, employment or training.

The service also runs a youth boxing programme at its Moss Side fire station, where firefighters volunteer as coaches and mentors for young people in the local community.

The service effectively targeted risks identified in its fire plan, including water safety

As part of its strategic assessment of risk, the service has identified the risk to the public from drowning. It has worked to reduce this through dedicated prevention work and staff training. There is currently a water safety partnership for Manchester, but to expand this, the service hosted a Greater Manchester water safety summit with partner organisations. The summit resulted in a commitment to form a Greater Manchester water safety strategic partnership and create a strategy for reducing drownings in canals, rivers and other open water. The service has appointed a dedicated water safety officer to support this work.

The service continues to be effective at responding to safeguarding concerns

Staff we interviewed told us about occasions when they had identified safeguarding problems. They told us they feel confident and trained to act appropriately and promptly. We found that the service had reviewed its safeguarding policy and had a clear process in place. We also found that staff were appropriately trained to respond to safeguarding concerns and received annual training.

The service uses a safeguarding flowchart. This guides staff through the appropriate actions to take and contacts to use when they are making a safeguarding referral.

GMCA has reviewed the service’s arrangements for safeguarding, and we were pleased to see that the service is continuing to evaluate and assure its approach.

The service is committed to an integrated approach to partnership working

The service works with a wide range of other organisations to prevent fires and other emergencies. These include GMCA, GMP and NWAS as well as partnerships for safer roads and water safety.

We found good evidence that the service routinely refers people at greatest risk to organisations that may better meet their needs. For example, it has created a cost‑of‑living response group. It uses incident data, local authority fuel poverty data and resident insight to identify and target prevention activities at those groups likely to be at increased risk from fire and other emergencies related to cost-of-living pressures. It then refers them to available support. Arrangements are also in place to receive referrals from others. The service works with partners to make sure they can refer members of the public for HFSAs.

The service prioritises 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 working with local schools and GMP to identify young people with a history or who are at increased risk of deliberately starting fires.

The service works with partners, young people and their families to offer confidential, one-to-one or group support and education to people who may be exhibiting signs of fire-setting behaviour. The service provides this through its FireSmart programme.

When appropriate, the service routinely shares information, such as the locations and times of fires, with relevant organisations to reduce fire-setting behaviour. It also shares information with GMP to support the prosecution of arsonists.

The service is good at evaluating its activity

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should evaluate its prevention activity so it understands what works.”

We were pleased to see the improvements the service has made, and this area for improvement has been closed.

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 prevention services that meet their needs. For example, the service has developed an evaluation portal and routinely evaluates its projects and activities to make sure that it can continue to improve.

Prevention activities take account of feedback from the public, other organisations and other parts of the service. For example, the service has recently developed online feedback forms for HFSAs and other activities including fire risk assessments and responding to fire at someone’s home.

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

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is good 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 (RBIP) 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 has developed a protection strategy that links to its fire plan

In our last inspection, we found that the service had no current protection strategy. During this inspection, we were pleased to see the improvement the service has made. It has developed a protection strategy that is clearly linked to the risks and priorities it has identified in its fire plan and ADP. These include protecting the built environment and supporting businesses.

Staff across the service are involved in this activity, and they effectively exchange information as needed. For example, firefighters carry out site-specific risk visits to record operational risk information, and the service has improved its policy and procedure to make sure firefighters complete these visits effectively. The service has provided face-to-face training, and protection staff have accompanied each watch on site-specific risk visits to support improvement. The service then uses information to adjust planning assumptions and direct activity between its protection, prevention and response functions.

We found that the service had completed an ambitious restructure of its protection teams to improve its capability and capacity. It has consulted with staff and completed improvements using its organisational change toolkit. This means resources are properly aligned with risk.

The service has improved how its activity is aligned with risk

The service has reviewed its RBIP and continues to identify areas for improvement. The service’s RBIP is focused on the highest-risk buildings. During our inspection, we were pleased to see a risk-based approach to reducing the backlog of audits as a result of COVID-19 lockdowns.

In 2022/23, the service identified 4,321 high-risk premises and completed 606 high‑risk audits from a target of 1,243. This is a decrease of 707 completed audits compared to 2021/22. The service is aware of this and has prioritised improvement. It told us that the reduction in audits was due to a reduction in experienced officers and the support and mentoring provided to 12 new regulators. The service also allocated resources to training and assessment activities during 2022/23.

We look forward to seeing the improvement this has on the number of audits the service completes at our next inspection.

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 RBIP;
• after fires at premises where fire safety legislation applies;
• after enforcement action had been taken; and
• 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 has prioritised improvement of its quality assurance processes

The service carries out proportionate quality assurance of its protection activity. For example, we found that the service had completed an internal audit of its operational intelligence policy and programme of operational risk inspections.

The service has improved its performance management and quality assurance process to include one-to-one and team reviews. These reviews focus on the quality of the audit but also provide assurance that the service is targeting the highest risk. As a result, the service can improve the effectiveness of its activity and make sure all sections of its communities get appropriate access to protection services that meet their needs.

However, staff told us that quality assurance and performance management are often process-driven and can feel heavy handed. Staff told us that this sometimes affects how confident they are to complete inspection and audit work.

The service is taking steps to improve its capability and capacity for enforcement, but it could do more

The service has focused on improving its enforcement activity. It has considered this within its department restructure and has dedicated more resources. The service has also invested in training facilities, which we have identified as innovative practice. The service has improved its training to make sure staff have the qualifications, expertise and understanding of the legal processes required for effective enforcement.

The service consistently uses a range of enforcement powers. We found that it was improving its capability and capacity to help it prosecute those who don’t comply with fire safety regulations. However, this hasn’t yet improved its ability to carry out enforcement action.

In the year ending 31 March 2023, the service issued 0 alteration notices, 423 informal notifications, 160 enforcement notices, 105 prohibition notices and carried out 0 prosecutions. The service had 30 satisfactory audits following enforcement activity.

There has been a decrease in overall enforcement activity carried out by the service, mainly because it sent fewer advisory letters. There was a total of 688 enforcement activities in 2022/23. This is a decrease from 1,446 in 2021/22. The decrease primarily relates to informal notifications, which reduced by 717 following the introduction of new letters related to auditing activity.

We look forward to seeing the improvements the service makes in our next inspection.

The service has made improvements to how it resources its protection department and RBIP but is yet to demonstrate an increase in audits

In our last inspection, we gave the service the following area for improvement: “The service should ensure it allocates enough resources to a prioritised and risk‑based inspection programme.”

While the service has made progress, it still needs to demonstrate an increase in activity, and we have issued a new area for improvement to cover this.

The service is increasing the number of qualified protection staff it has to meet the requirements of its RBIP. In 2022/23, the service recruited 13 new fire safety regulators. Some staff left the service in that period, which resulted in an overall increase in the number of inspection staff from 46 in 2021/22 to 49 in 2022/23. The service has created a new protection training and development suite and started an ambitious programme of training for fire safety regulators and operational staff. This is so they get the right training and work to appropriate accreditation.

At the time of our inspection, the service told us it had increased the number of competent protection staff from 40 in 2021/22 to 45 competent fire safety inspectors and 10 fire safety managers. The service has further recruitment planned.

The service told us that its plans will support the increase in competent staff to make sure it can provide the range of audit and enforcement activity needed, both now and in the future.

We recognise the improvement and plans the service has made in this area. We look forward to seeing the difference this makes at our next inspection.

The service has responded positively to new fire safety legislation

Since our last inspection, the Government has introduced the Building Safety Act 2022 and the Fire Safety Regulations 2022 to bring about better regulation and management of tall buildings.

The service is supporting the introduction of the Building Safety Regulator. The service worked with other fire and rescue services to consider the implications of the regulations. In August 2022, it led a North West fire safety regulator continuing professional development event.

The service has worked with regional fire services to allocate resources to support reform and has advertised for a regional manager to support this work. It has considered these arrangements and expects them to have a manageable effect on its other protection activity.

The service has worked with partners such as the Greater Manchester Housing Providers Group and carried out extensive consultation with businesses to inform their approach. It ran online engagement sessions with housing providers and managing agents to provide information. It has also committed to continue to support residents and the Greater Manchester High Rise Task Force to provide advice and active support.

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 floor plans and inform it 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. For example, it has developed a building fire safety regulations section on its website. This tells people responsible for high-rise buildings what the new law requires them to do and allows them to submit the required information online.

The service continues to work closely with other agencies to regulate fire safety

The service works closely with other enforcement agencies to regulate fire safety, and it routinely exchanges risk information with them. For example, the service works closely with GMP. The service supported Operation Vulcan, which aimed to tackle organised crime in the Cheetham Hill and Strangeways areas of Manchester. This has resulted in a number of prohibition notices to prevent dangerous buildings from being accessed by the public.

We found that the service had a number of primary authority partnerships that have been developed through the Greater Manchester Centre of Regulatory Excellence. The service has expanded its primary authority offer to new partners and has generated income of £79,000 that it aims to reinvest in business engagement.

The service has improved its response to building consultations

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should ensure it allocates enough resources to respond effectively and in time to statutory building control consultations.”

We are satisfied with the progress the service has made in this area. Therefore, this area for improvement has been closed.

As part of its department restructure, the service has implemented a dedicated technical and consultation team and increased the number of fire safety regulators to complete consultations. This means it is in a better position to meet its statutory responsibility to comment on fire safety arrangements at new and altered buildings.

We look forward to seeing the improvements in productivity and performance this makes during our next inspection.

The service’s standard for responding to consultations is 15 days. In 2022/23, the service received 2,091 consultations and responded to 62.9 percent (1,316) within this time frame. This is the fourth lowest in England. In 2021/22, it responded to 66.1 percent (1,322 out of 2,000) within this time frame. The service told us that it has seen an improvement in completed consultations so far in 2023/24, with a completion rate exceeding 90 percent. The service must make sure that it continues to improve its response to building control consultations.

In 2022/23, the service received 1,010 licensing consultations and responded to 957 of these, which is 94.8 percent.

The service is proactive in its approach to working with businesses

The service has developed a business engagement framework that helps it to work with local businesses and other organisations to make sure they comply with fire safety legislation. The service told us that in 2022/23, it held a number of business engagement events. It also provided support outside these and gave advice to 8,419 businesses covering 39,000 premises. This included:

• property advice to 524 businesses following a fire;
• premises-specific advice to 699 businesses following an automatic fire alarm (AFA) incident;
• advice to over 5,000 licensed premises about fire safety and the risk of using indoor fireworks; and
• online fire safety sessions for people managing care homes, licensed premises and blocks of flats.

The service also provides advice and support via its website and has taken part in targeted days of action. These aim to provide advice to businesses and the public on specific risks.

The service continues to manage unwanted fire signals consistently

The service has an effective risk-based approach in place to manage the number of unwanted fire signals. It has reviewed its approach and policy. The percentage of calls it attends remains consistent. In the year ending 31 March 2023, 30 percent of emergency calls received (14,950 out of 49,671) were AFAs, which is the third highest rate for any service in England. This is an increase of 10 percent in AFAs, from 12,257 in the year ending 31 March 2022.

Fire and rescue services don’t need to attend all AFAs, as they aren’t always genuine emergencies. In the year ending 31 March 2023, the service didn’t attend 48.5 percent of these calls. This figure is higher than the England rate of 37.9 percent of AFAs not attended. 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.

Responding to fires and other emergencies

Greater Manchester 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 continues to review its response strategy to make sure it provides the best response to incidents

The service response strategy is clearly linked to the risks and priorities it has identified in its fire plan and ADP.

Its fire engines and response staff, as well as its working patterns, are designed and located to help the service respond flexibly to fires and other emergencies with the appropriate resources. For example, the service has carried out a fire cover review ahead of the development of its new fire plan. This included a review of its fleet of 44 special fire engines, which have specialist equipment and technology for use in specific situations, to assess their effectiveness and performance. The service consulted on the recommendations, which included an increase to its frontline fire engines, changes to some of its staffing arrangements and its enhanced rescue capability.

We look forward to seeing the progress the service makes when it has implemented these proposals and reviewed its fire plan.

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 fire plan. Its target response time to life-risk emergencies is 7 minutes 30 seconds. The service told us that as of May 2023, its performance is even faster at 7 minutes 21 seconds.

The service consistently meets its standards. Home Office data shows that in the year ending 31 March 2023, the service’s response time to dwelling primary fires was 6 minutes and 39 seconds. This was faster than the average for predominantly urban services, which was 7 minutes and 3 seconds.

The service’s overall availability of fire engines continues to support its response standard

In 2022/23, to support its response strategy, the service had 41 fire stations and 50 fire engines. During this period, it had an overall annual availability of 99.6 percent, which is the second highest in England.

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 built an incident command and leadership development academy and provides accredited incident command training and assessment. This includes an annual health check and a full assessment every two years. This helps the service safely, assertively and effectively manage the whole range of incidents it could face, from small and routine 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).

Fire control has some involvement with the service’s command, exercise, debrief and assurance activity

There is evidence that North West Fire Control staff are involved in the service’s command, training, exercise, debrief and assurance activity. Control staff have attended BTSC and received training on the service’s response to MTAs.

We found that the service debrief policy included fire control, but staff aren’t always involved in the debriefs. The service should increase the scope and consistency of this activity.

The service has improved the availability of risk information for firefighters

We found that the service had provided firefighters with a second mobile data terminal. Firefighters rely on this for risk-critical information at emergency incidents. Staff can easily access and understand the information.

We sampled a range of risk information, including the information in place for firefighters responding to incidents at high-risk, high-rise buildings and the information held by fire control.

The information we reviewed was up to date and detailed. Staff can easily access and understand it. Encouragingly, it had been completed with input from the service’s prevention, protection and response functions when appropriate. However, we did find some inconsistencies in how the service recorded evacuation plans. The service recognised this and reviewed its risk information. It has notified staff and provided them with additional guidance.

The service has improved how it records risk information during an incident

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should assure itself that risk assessments are accurately recorded and passed to oncoming crews.”

We were pleased to see the improvements that the service has made. These include the development of a new analytical risk assessment policy and procedure and a thematic review of completed risk assessments. The service has developed and implemented comprehensive staff training and included the process during its incident command assessments. We are satisfied with the progress the service has made in this area. Therefore, the area for improvement identified in our previous report has been closed.

The service has improved how it evaluates operational performance

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should make sure it has an effective system for learning from operational incidents.”

We were pleased to see the improvements the service has made, and this area for improvement has been closed. We found that the service has introduced a new debrief policy. The service has improved its operational learning and recording system, which now includes the ability to track and monitor progress against improvements. This includes improved scrutiny and oversight through its governance framework, organisational learning group and operational improvement steering group. The service has also improved how it communicates learning to staff through its newsletter and the internet.

As part of our inspection, we reviewed a range of emergency incidents and training events. These included major incidents, fires in domestic and commercial properties, road traffic collisions, water rescue and other complex incidents. We also reviewed training exercises. These included high-rise and multi-agency training events, such as response to MTAs and other incidents involving a large number of casualties.

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 national operational learning and joint organisation learning, cross-border incidents and multi-agency exercises.

We were pleased to see that the service has reviewed its policies to improve its evaluation of operational performance and to make sure that staff command incidents in line with operational guidance. However, we acknowledge that this process is new and look forward to seeing the improvements during our next inspection.

The service is good at keeping the public informed

The service 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 24/7 dedicated communications support available through specially trained staff. We found that the service had provided media training to its officers, and staff were positive about this. We found evidence of the service proactively using its social media channels to provide safety information during incidents.

Responding to major and multi-agency incidents

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is adequate 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 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 strategic assessment of risk. For example, the service considers changes to its built environment as a result of growth within Greater Manchester, including an increase in the number of high-rise buildings. It also considers environmental impacts, such as flooding and wildfire.

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. The service forms part of the North West risk information group and shares risk information from neighbouring services.

The service has successfully implemented its new terrorist response capability

The service has implemented its new terrorist response capability. All stations and frontline fire engines are now equipped and ready to respond to MTAs and other incidents involving large numbers of casualties.

The service has trained and exercised its firefighters alongside other emergency services. It has also introduced enhanced trauma equipment, including fast evacuation stretchers and additional personal protective equipment.

We were pleased to see that the service has an ambitious exercising plan that continually tests its response in a multi-agency response and at high-risk sites.

The service’s method of sharing fire survival guidance information and the dedicated communication link isn’t effective

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 actually respond to a major incident at a tall building, such as the tragedy at Grenfell Tower.

The service has considered the recommendations and learning from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry and the fire at The Cube student accommodation through a dedicated built environment project. It has policies and procedures in place for managing this type of incident. Staff at all levels understand them, and training and exercising have taken place to test them. We found that staff were trained in high-rise procedures at BTSC. The service has developed a procedure to manage building evacuation, which includes having a dedicated resource to attend the incident but only once the decision has been taken to evacuate. This has been tested and exercised.

The service has run a series of multi-agency exercises at high-rise buildings. This includes a large-scale exercise at Rochdale that used over 100 volunteers to test evacuation of the building. These exercises have helped to inform the service’s approach to managing a high-rise incident. We found that the service had evaluated these exercises and shared learning.

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 in the service were robust enough to receive and manage this volume of calls. But the service relies too heavily on paper-based systems. It doesn’t have an electronic method of sharing fire survival guidance information. Fire survival guidance information is passed from fire control to the incident ground via radio messages. These processes are too open to operator error. They also mean that staff in the emergency control room, at the incident and in assisting control rooms can’t share, view and update actions in real time. These systems could compromise the service’s ability to safely resolve a major incident at a tall building. The service recognised this and told us that it is finalising a new electronic system that will be in use by February 2024. We look forward to seeing the progress the service has made at our next inspection.

The service works effectively with other fire and rescue services

The service supports other fire and rescue services responding to emergency incidents. For example, it has developed a wildfire suppression burns team and tested and exercised this with other services, including Lancashire and Cheshire fire and rescue services. The service has five neighbouring services, and we saw evidence of routine cross-border working. It is intraoperable with these services and can form part of a multi-agency response.

In our staff survey, 83.3 percent (145 out of 174) of respondents agreed that the service is intraoperable with neighbouring services.

The service has successfully deployed to other services and has tested the use of national resilience assets, such as its own detection information and monitoring unit, mass decontamination unit and high-volume pumps. The service also has an environmental protection unit.

The service has improved its approach to cross-border exercising

The service has developed a regional cross-border exercise strategy with North West fire and rescue services and North West Fire Control. This strategy also includes other fire and rescue services, helping 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.

We were encouraged to see that the service regularly carries out testing and exercising at high-risk sites as part of its plan. This helps it to test its risk information and response plans.

The service has improved staff understanding and application of JESIP

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should ensure it is well-prepared to form part of a multi-agency response to an incident and all relevant staff know how to apply JESIP [Joint Emergency Services Interoperability Principles].”

We were pleased to see the improvements that the service has made, and this area for improvement has been closed. It has improved the training available for operational staff. We found that incident commanders received regular assessments and that JESIP formed an important part of these assessments.

The incident commanders we interviewed had been trained in and were familiar with JESIP. We found a consistent level of awareness, knowledge and understanding of the principles and how they are applied by staff who respond to emergency incidents. Our inspectors spoke to firefighters and incident commanders at all levels who were all able to explain how they use JESIP to work with other emergency responders, and they explained the benefits that this brings to their roles.

The service could give us strong evidence that it consistently follows these principles. It has an ambitious multi-agency training schedule and routinely tests its response with other emergency services and partners.

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

The service works effectively with partners

The service has good arrangements in place to respond to emergencies with partners that make up the Greater Manchester Resilience Forum. These arrangements include major incident plans and standard operating procedures for incidents such as high-rise fires, wildfires and severe weather incidents. We also found that the service had worked with partners to develop site-specific risk plans for venues, including Manchester Arena, Manchester Airport and its sporting stadiums.

The service is a valued partner of local resilience forum and has representation on the forum at a strategic and tactical level. It is involved in several key workstreams, including being the lead on exercising and training. Partners were positive about the service’s contribution. The service also chairs the blue light collaboration group, which includes GMP and NWAS.

The service takes part in regular training events with other members of the local resilience forum and uses the learning to develop planning assumptions about responding to major and multi-agency incidents. For example, events include exercises to test responses to power outages and COMAH sites. The service also participates in national rail exercises and multi-agency exercises that include responses to terrorist attacks and high-rise incidents.

The service has an ambitious multi-agency training and exercising plan that regularly tests its plans and response with other emergency services and partners in the local resilience forum, including the Greater Manchester local health resilience partnership and the voluntary, community, social enterprise and faith sectors.

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 GMP and NWAS. It uses this learning to inform planning assumptions that it makes with partner organisations.

Making best use of resources

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is good 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 £130m. This is a 6.4 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 has good plans, which support the achievement of its objectives

We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection. Its financial and workforce plans, including the allocation of resources to prevention, protection and response, are consistent with the risks and priorities identified in its fire plan. Since our last inspection, the service has developed effective strategies for response, prevention and protection. The fire plan has clear links to other supporting strategies, such as its framework for integrated and place-based working, which supports how it works efficiently with partners and GMCA. The service continues to implement the priorities set out in its ADP.

We found that the service had considered the resources it needs in its protection department and carried out an ambitious restructure to support the implementation of its strategy.

The service has evaluated its mix of crewing and duty systems. We found that it had carried out a fire cover review in line with the development of its fire plan so that it can show it deploys its fire engines and response staff to manage risk efficiently. This work has included a strategic review of special fire engines. It has consulted on these options with its staff, communities and partners.

The service builds its plans on sound scenarios. They help make sure the service is sustainable and are underpinned by financial controls that reduce the risk of misusing public money. The executive board oversees and scrutinises the service’s plans and budget performance.

The service has improved its MTA capability but at an additional cost

In our last inspection, we gave the service a cause of concern and recommended that it should have its own MTA response that is resilient, timely and cost effective.

We were pleased to see that the service has implemented its new terrorist response capability. It has provided staff with additional skills and training. Its improved capability helps to meet its local risks and reflect the needs of its communities. All its stations and frontline fire engines are now equipped and ready to respond to an MTA and other incidents involving large numbers of casualties.

We are confident that the service’s ambitious multi-agency training and exercising will make sure it is properly prepared to form part of a multi-agency response to terrorist incidents. We are also confident that the service can provide a timely response to make sure it keeps the public safe.

However, we found that the service had budgeted £1.385m for a skills allowance, which is equivalent to 2 percent of base pay, to compensate firefighters for performing fire and rescue duties in the case of an MTA. This is in effect paying firefighters twice for an essential service. As a result, we are yet to be satisfied that this is an efficient use of public money.

We recognise the challenges the service has faced to reach a position where it can provide a timely and effective MTA response. But this solution comes at an additional cost.

The service has improved its performance and productivity

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should have effective measures in place to assure itself that its workforce is productive and that their time is used as efficiently and effectively as possible to meet the priorities in the IRMP [integrated risk management plan].”

We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection, and this area for improvement has been closed. We were pleased to see that the service’s arrangements for managing performance clearly link resource use to its fire plan and its strategic priorities. The service consistently achieves its priorities set out within its ADP. And it monitors performance and improvement through its governance framework and key performance indicators.

The service understands how it uses its wholetime firefighters. It collects data on how they spend their time across day and night shifts. For example, the service completed a project to understand how its firefighters use their time. It has established a productivity working group to take forward the recommendations. The service identified that firefighter time could be better used. It has set an annual target of 6,500 hours to be spent on more productive tasks, such as prevention and protection activities. Progress is reported to the senior leadership team and monitored through its improvement board.

The service is taking steps to make sure the workforce’s time is as productive as possible. This includes putting in place new ways of working. The service has provided staff with a second mobile data terminal, and its new fire engines have 5G wi-fi. This means that operational staff will be able to use the wi-fi on the fire engines so that they are productive when other crew members are carrying out community and business safety activities.

However, we found that wholetime firefighters could still be more productive and that some new ways of working weren’t always being fully used to maximise capacity. For example, the service has used risk data to improve how it targets activity through station action plans. There is increased activity in some areas, such as the number of HFSAs completed and support provided for the training of apprentice firefighters. However, operational staff still have the capacity to do more, and not all staff use technology in a way that makes their work more efficient. Some firefighters told us that they still use paper forms to record prevention and protection instead of the new mobile data terminals.

The service has improved its recruitment of firefighters and development of managers to make sure that it has enough competent staff to implement its fire plan. It has also reviewed its use of overtime. Data from 2021/22 shows that the service had higher levels of overtime compared to the England rate. For example, the service’s pre-arranged overtime per head of workforce was £1,579, while the England rate was £833. However, the service told us that the work it has carried out as a result of its review has reduced its overtime spend. It has also invested in the training of staff, including the maintenance of risk-critical skills, and in the implementation of its inclusive culture training.

The service has improved how it collaborates with others and evaluates activity well

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should ensure it effectively monitors, reviews and evaluates the benefits and outcomes of any collaboration activity.”

We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection, and this area for improvement has been closed. The service effectively monitors, reviews and evaluates improvement. It uses effective project management and evaluation to make sure the priorities in its fire plan are implemented. The service has a project management framework in place and has provided training to managers so that evaluation is considered for all projects and collaborations.

We were pleased to see that the service meets its statutory duty to collaborate. It routinely considers opportunities to collaborate with partners and other emergency responders.

The service is collaborating with GMCA across a number of services, including shared facilities at Wigan fire station. The service also shares fire stations with GMP and NWAS. And we found that it generated some income from using training space. Where possible the service uses procurement frameworks to generate savings, such as for the purchase of smoke alarms, which has generated savings of £30,000 a year.

The service continues to share its fire control function with Cheshire, Cumbria and Lancashire fire and rescue services. The service has evaluated this collaboration and continues to work with other services to improve how services are provided to the public.

Collaborative work is aligned with the priorities in the service’s fire plan. For example, the service priorities include integrating services in every locality with those of partner agencies. The service consistently works well with GMCA to meet the commitments in its integrated place-based working framework. The service has made a commitment to the public to work with partners to respond to specific local risks in a more efficient and effective way. It comprehensively monitors, reviews and evaluates the benefits and results of its collaborations. The service has developed an evaluation portal to make sure it achieves continuous improvement.

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 were pleased to find improved testing and exercising of fire control continuity plans.

The service has appropriate business continuity plans in place for industrial action. It has assured itself and can demonstrate that it has adequate resources for future periods of industrial action. Resilience arrangements make sure staff would be available to provide cover and maintain critical services.

The service has good 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. The service’s budget management group regularly reviews revenue and capital expenditure, progress against savings requirements and procurement decisions. The service also monitors costs through its approach to programme and project management. This makes sure the implementation of service priorities and annual improvements is consistent.

The service has made savings and efficiencies, which support its operational performance and the service it gives the public. The service met its 2022/23 savings target of £788,000.

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. The service uses national and regional procurement frameworks or works directly with partners at a regional level to get the best possible purchasing power.

The service works with GMCA’s commercial team to design and manage its procurement and contracts. The service’s new mobile phone contract has led to an annual saving of £49,000.

Making the FRS affordable now and in the future

Greater Manchester 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 has developed a sound understanding of future financial challenges

Although the service’s published medium-term financial plan shows an anticipated future budget shortfall and the use of general reserves to balance the budget, this is based on the service’s worst-case scenario planning. It assumes no increase in the council tax precept in future years. The service’s modelling around a more realistic scenario with council tax precept increases results in being close to a balanced budget.

The underpinning assumptions are relatively robust, realistic and prudent. They take account of the wider external environment and scenario planning for future spending reductions. These include assumptions on pay, inflation and future funding.

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’s 2023/24 budget includes around £700,000 of identified savings. The service plans to carry out a number of reviews to develop other savings options.

The service completed a £5.3m programme of investment in BTSC. It also completed a £1.3m upgrade of Littleborough Fire Station and has identified further investment in its estates improvement programme.

The service has invested in its fleet, which includes a review of its fire engines and specialist vehicles. And it has invested in a wildfire suppression burns team, along with new vehicles and equipment specifically designed to deal with this risk. The service has ordered 13 new electric vehicles and has begun procurement for new electric vehicle charging infrastructure at 18 of its 45 sites.

The service has clear arrangements for the use of reserves

The general reserve is maintained at £11.8m, which represents around 9 percent of the service’s annual revenue budget. This relatively high level of general reserves provides contingency against future funding and spending uncertainties.

The service has used its reserves to fund new ways of working, such as the purchase of MTA equipment.

The service has improved its fleet and estates strategy and clearly aligned these with its fire plan

We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection. Its estate and fleet strategies have clear links to its fire plan. These include change priorities, such as investing in its buildings and implementing a station refurbishment programme. For example, it has invested £3.2m in its fire stations to improve welfare and gym facilities. Both strategies exploit opportunities to improve efficiency and effectiveness. For example, the service has prioritised the implementation of carbon reduction schemes at some of its fire stations and looked to reinvest in the future through improvements to its fleet.

The service regularly reviews these strategies so that it can accurately assess the effect any changes in estate and fleet provision, or future innovation, have on risk. The service has considered the effect that its fire cover review and strategic review of specialist resources will have on its fire plan and reviews its fleet and estates strategies to support this.

The service has improved how it uses technology and considers future innovation

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should assure itself that its IT systems are resilient, reliable, accurate and accessible.”

We were encouraged to see the improvements the service has made since our last inspection, and this area for improvement has been closed. For example, the service has completed a project to equip its fire engines with a second mobile data terminal. This provides firefighters with access to risk information and allows operational staff to carry out a range of activities remotely to improve productivity. The service has also adopted the use of virtual reality to improve its prevention activity and as part of its fire safety training and competency assessments.

The service actively considers how changes in technology and future innovation may affect risk. It also seeks to exploit opportunities presented by changes in technology to improve efficiency and effectiveness. For example, the service has prioritised key improvement projects for 2023/24 to develop and implement a prevention and protection digital system that will provide a single digital method for recording activities.

The service has put in place the capacity and capability it needs to achieve sustainable transformation, and it routinely seeks opportunities to work with others to improve efficiency and provide better services in the future. It works closely with GMP and NWAS and continues to collaborate on training, service delivery and estates. The service also works closely with partners to provide prevention and protection.

The service considers some income-generation opportunities

The service considers and exploits some opportunities for generating extra income. It has recently extended its primary authority scheme to new partners and has generated £79,000, which it has reinvested in business engagement. It has identified future income generation by taking advantage of commercial training opportunities linked to the completion of BTSC. And it continues to work with GMCA and partners to identify other opportunities to generate further income.

Promoting the right values and culture

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is good 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 prioritises culture, behaviours and values

The service continues to have well-defined values, which staff understand. We found that staff at all levels of the service showed behaviours that reflect service values. In our staff survey, 97 percent (345 out of 356) of respondents stated that they are aware of the service’s statement of values. And 92 percent (317 out of 345) of respondents agreed that their colleagues consistently model and maintain the service values while 89 percent (306 out of 345) of respondents stated that line managers model and maintain the values.

The service has made progress in providing new inclusive culture training, and staff were positive about this work. We were encouraged by the cultural improvements the service had made. It has implemented the Core Code of Ethics well and most staff understand it. The service has made a strong commitment to cultural improvement and prioritises it within its fire plan and ADP.

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should assure itself that senior managers demonstrate service values through their behaviours.”

Staff told us that they had seen improvements in both culture and leadership and that the chief fire officer continued to be a positive role model. Staff were clear that there is a positive people-focused approach to leadership and that the senior leadership team has clearly communicated its expectations to staff.

The service has recognised that some staff still felt that managers didn’t always demonstrate a management style that was consistent with service expectations. Staff gave examples of heavy-handed process-based management. The service has recognised this and committed to continuing to provide management training, coaching and mentoring to support its focus on improved culture.

There is a positive working culture throughout the service, with staff empowered and willing to challenge poor behaviours when they come across them.

We were also pleased to see that the service has prioritised the development of a new and improved rewards and recognition framework to celebrate the dedication and commitment of its staff.

Therefore, the area of improvement identified in our previous report has been closed.

The service has good well-being provisions in place and prioritises both mental and physical health

The service continues to have well-understood and effective well-being policies in place, which are available to staff. There are good provisions in place to promote staff well-being and to support both physical and mental health. For example, the service has invested in improvements to gym facilities at its fire stations and has reviewed and improved the support it gives to staff after incidents.

In response to our staff survey, 93 percent (332 out of 356) of respondents agreed that they feel able to access services to support their mental well-being. In the survey, 88 percent (315 out of 356) of respondents also told us that they had discussed their personal well-being or work-related stress with their line manager. However, some staff told us they don’t have confidence in the well-being support processes available. The service has recognised staff concerns and taken steps to consult with staff to make sure that the provision of its external provider meets their needs and expectations.

The service has prioritised the implementation of its well-being and occupational health strategy and framework in 2023/24.

Staff understand and have confidence in health and safety policies

The service continues to have effective and well-understood health and safety policies and procedures in place. In our staff survey, 96 percent (341 out of 356) of respondents agreed that they understand the policies and procedures the service has in place to keep them safe.

These policies and procedures are readily available, and the service promotes them effectively to all staff. In our staff survey, 95 percent (340 out of 356) of respondents agreed the service has clear procedures to report all accidents, near misses and dangerous occurrences.

The service has also implemented a new accident reporting system that maintains a record of accidents, near misses, damage to equipment and vehicle incidents.

We found that the service provided accredited health and safety management training to managers at all levels.

The service has reviewed its secondary employment policy so that it can monitor staff who have secondary employment or dual contracts to make sure they don’t work excessive hours. As of March 2022, 11.2 percent (154 out of 1,373) of wholetime firefighters had external secondary employment.

The service has improved its processes to manage absence, but more could be done

We found that there were clear processes in place to manage absences for all staff. There is clear guidance for managers, who are confident in using the process. The service manages absences well and in accordance with policy. However, the service still needs to do more to see an improvement in sickness and staff attendance.

In 2021/22, the number of days not worked by firefighters due to long-term sickness increased to 8,459 days compared to 5,846 days in 2020/21. Over the same period, the number of days not worked by firefighters due to short-term sickness increased to 7,104 days from 3,579. There has since been a slight reduction in short-term firefighter sickness.

Getting the right people with the right skills

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is good 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

Workforce planning continues to make sure that the required skills and capabilities are available

The service has good workforce planning in place. This makes sure skills and capabilities align with what it needs to effectively carry out its fire plan. For example, the service has made improvements to the number of firefighters and incident commanders through investment in BTSC and its incident command and leadership development academy. The service is an effective apprenticeship provider. The service uses the GMCA Apprenticeship Matchmaking Levy Service to access additional income to support its firefighter apprenticeship provision. It continues to review and develop its specialist capability aligned with the risks identified in the fire plan.

The service subjects its workforce and succession planning to consistent scrutiny in the form of regular meetings to discuss requirements.

The service effectively records and monitors the skills and capabilities of its staff

The service treats risk-critical training as a high priority and has invested £5.3m in BTSC. It has also made improvements to its incident command and leadership development academy. Most staff told us that they can access the training they need to be effective in their roles, including management skills. The service has introduced a frontline leadership course to support the development of management skills, as well as Skills for Justice Level 3 incident command courses. We found that staff were competent in risk-critical skills and that the service had effective governance, policy, and procedure in place to make sure it can maintain competence and capability effectively.

The service monitors staff competence through its governance and performance frameworks. Staff have access to an effective maintenance of competency recording system.

The service regularly updates its understanding of staff skills and risk-critical safety capabilities through training needs analysis so that it can identify gaps in workforce capabilities and resilience. It also means it can make sound and financially sustainable decisions about current and future needs.

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, it has introduced additional learning opportunities, which include leadership training and apprenticeships.

We were pleased to see that the service has a range of resources in place. The service has developed a people strategy, which is supported by a learning and development strategy and a training strategy. Staff are aware of the resources available to them.

Most staff told us they can access a range of learning and development resources. These include access to coaching and mentoring, incident command development and tailored development identified through personal reflective appraisals. This allows them to do their jobs effectively.

Ensuring fairness and promoting diversity

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is good 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 (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

The service is good at seeking and acting on staff feedback and challenge

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 has introduced a cultural sounding panel, which includes staff representation from across the service to provide feedback on decisions that affect them. We also found that the service continues to use its staff survey.

The service has taken action to address matters that staff have raised, which include the review of staff feedback and the introduction of a new promotions pathway. Most staff have received these actions positively. We found that the service consulted with the representative bodies and staff associations that were invited to its Culture First Board.

The service has improved how it tackles bullying, harassment and discrimination, but more could be done

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should review how effective its policy on bullying, harassment and discrimination is in reducing unacceptable behaviour towards its staff.”

Since then, the service has reviewed its policies. We found that these policies had been used effectively. The service has made sure that staff are trained and clear about what to do if they encounter inappropriate behaviour.

The service has a case review process, which includes senior managers, that aims to make sure cases are dealt with proactively and proportionately. The process provides consistency and makes sure actions are aligned with the Core Code of Ethics.

The service has improved staff understanding of bullying, harassment and discrimination, including their duty to eliminate these behaviours. In our staff survey, 17 percent of respondents (61 out of 356) told us they had been subject to harassment and 10 percent (36 out of 356) to discrimination over the past 12 months. Although the service has clear policies and procedures in place, some staff have limited confidence in how consistently the service deals with cases of bullying, harassment and discrimination. The service has a higher-than-average number of grievances. The average number of grievances in the past five years was 21.6 compared to 9.3 in England. In 2022/23, the service had 26 grievances: 12 involved bullying or harassment and 9 involved discrimination. This is a decrease from 29 in 2021/22.

While we have closed the area for improvement regarding bullying and harassment identified in our previous inspection, the service should continue to focus on how it can improve in this area.

The service is actively working to address 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, the service has reviewed its recruitment and attraction strategy and uses data effectively to improve its process and monitor improvement.

The service has put considerable effort into developing its recruitment processes so that they are fair and potential applicants can understand them. The service uses staff from across the service to support these and improve understanding. Its recruitment policies are comprehensive and cover opportunities in all roles. The service advertises recruitment opportunities both internally and externally and evaluates these to improve its approach. It works hard to reduce barriers to recruitment and promotion and has made its processes more inclusive as a result. This has encouraged applicants from diverse backgrounds, including into middle and senior management roles.

The service has made some improvements in increasing staff diversity at all levels of the organisation but still needs to do more. In 2021/22, 15 percent (111 people) of new joiners self-declared as being from an ethnic minority background. The proportion of firefighters from an ethnic minority background increased from 7.2 percent (87 people) in 2020/21 to 8 percent (99 people) in 2021/22. The proportion of female firefighters increased from 6.5 percent (89 people) to 7 percent (97 people) over the same period.

For the whole workforce, in 2021/22, 7.5 percent were from an ethnic minority background compared to 27.6 percent in the local population and 8 percent throughout all fire and rescue services. And 14.8 percent were women compared to an average of 18.6 percent throughout all fire and rescue services.

The service’s approach to EDI is good

The service continues to prioritise improvements in EDI. It makes sure it can offer the right services to its communities and can support staff with protected characteristics. For example, the service prioritises an inclusive culture in its fire plan. This is supported by its EDI strategy for 2022–25 and its action plan. And the service has good governance arrangements, which include its Culture First Board. It has active staff networks, which it works with regularly. These include:

• the armed forces staff network;
• the enable staff network;
• the Greater Manchester women’s staff network;
• Women in the Fire Service UK;
• the race and faith staff network; and
• the rainbow staff network (LGBTQ+).

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should improve staff understanding of the purpose and benefits of positive action.”

We were pleased to see the progress the service has made, and this area for improvement has been closed.

The service has recruited an EDI training co-ordinator to support the implementation of staff training. It provides all staff with mandatory online training. It has started inclusive culture training, which is given face-to-face. We found that most staff had received this and were positive about the approach. The service has also included training on inclusive leadership as part of its frontline leaders’ programme. It has developed and introduced mutual mentoring and developing diverse leaders’ programmes, which support people from under-represented groups at all management levels. The service has also introduced anti-racist practice sessions for its senior leadership team.

We were pleased to see that the service has reviewed and improved its approach to assess equality impact. This is monitored through its equality impact working group. This makes sure that it acts as needed to improve equality. The service uses equality data well, and we saw evidence of positive change to its promotion processes as a result. These are new processes, so we look forward to seeing the difference this makes at our next inspection.

Managing performance and developing leaders

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is good 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 improved how it manages individuals’ performance

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should improve all staff understanding and application of the performance development review process.”

There is a good performance management system in place, which allows the service to effectively develop and assess the individual performance of all staff. Since our last inspection, the service has reviewed its approach to personal reflective appraisals. The service has provided staff with guidance and support on the purpose of these appraisals and how to complete them. They are completed annually and reviewed every six months. We found that they had an important role in the service’s approach to development and access to its promotions pathways and talent management. At the time of our inspection, we found that the service had just introduced its 2023 personal reflective appraisals. The number of completed appraisals was already higher compared with previous years.

Through our staff survey, most staff reported that they have regular discussions with their manager and that these are meaningful. Of the respondents to our survey, 93 percent (332 out of 356) told us that they had discussed how well they are performing with their line manager, and 95 percent (337 out of 356) told us that they have had a formal personal development review 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.

We are satisfied with the progress the service has made in this area. Therefore, the area for improvement identified in our previous report has been closed.

The service has improved its promotion and progression processes to make sure they are fair and support staff development

In our last inspection, we identified the following area for improvement: “The service should put in place an open and fair process to identify, develop, and support high‑potential staff and aspiring leaders.”

The service has put considerable effort into developing its promotion and progression processes so that they are fair and all staff can understand them. We found that the service listened to staff feedback and has developed a clear leadership development framework that is aligned with the National Fire Chiefs Council leadership framework and a promotions pathway framework. Its promotion and progression policies are comprehensive and cover opportunities in all roles.

The service has effective succession-planning processes in place, which allow it to effectively manage the career pathways of its staff, including roles that need specialist skills.

It manages selection processes consistently. The promotions pathways we reviewed were completed in line with service policy in a fair and transparent way. We also found that the service reviewed these pathways to make sure it can continue to improve them. And it uses temporary promotions appropriately to fill short-term resourcing gaps.

We are satisfied with the progress the service has made in this area. Therefore, the area for improvement identified in our previous report has been closed.

The service has considered how it can diversify leadership in the future

The service knows it needs to go further to increase workforce diversity, especially in middle and senior management. It has put in place plans to address this. The service has started mutual mentoring and is developing diverse leaders’ programmes, which support people from under-represented groups to develop into management roles at all levels.

We found that the service had reviewed its promotions processes to make sure that they are accessible to a diverse group of people. This includes removing barriers and making sure that the service supports staff with the training they need to carry out their roles.

The service has successfully advertised positions and filled them with external candidates. It continues to look for opportunities to make its workforce more representative. We were pleased to see that as part of the service’s approach to talent management, applicants were welcomed from group manager positions for its recent assistant chief fire officer role. The service provided taster days where applicants could meet senior managers and members of GMCA, including the deputy mayor.

The service has improved the way it develops leadership and identifies high‑potential staff

The service has effective succession-planning processes in place, which allow it to manage high-potential staff into leadership roles. We found that the service had been able to reduce the shortfall in supervisory managers through its new development and promotion pathway. Staff who had been through this process were positive about the development they had received, including the frontline leaders’ course and incident command training and assessment.

There are talent management schemes to develop specific staff. Development opportunities are available through the service’s development pathway. The service advertises all talent and leadership opportunities fairly through its intranet for all staff to consider, and these are also available to staff in GMCA.

The service has considered the December 2022 National Fire Chiefs Council and how it will implement them.

Further information

Download the PDF report

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service 2023-2025

More about Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service

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

Get the press release

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service praised for good performance

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