Avatar photo

Segment Leader Commercial Buildings EMEA, Eaton

October 5, 2016

Download

Whitepaper: Multi-residential access management – The move to digital

How to improve the fire evacuation procedure in a care home

The fire-safety risks surrounding a care home’s fire evacuation procedure were thrown into the spotlight again in August when the Care Quality Commission (CQC) published the findings of an inspection of Elmhurst Residential Home in Enfield.

As reported by IFSEC Global, the CQC found that staff had not received fire safety training and were unaware of how to evacuate residents with limited mobility who were living on the building’s higher floors. Furthermore, the risk assessment had overlooked an individual who posed a significant fire risk and evacuation equipment had not been installed to ensure a safe exit for occupants in the event of an emergency.

The devastating consequences that can arise from such failings were laid bare by IFSEC Global’s report, which listed a number of catastrophic fires within care homes where safety deficiencies were identified by subsequent investigations. In one example, 14 people died and in another, a fine of £380,000 was imposed.

Means of escape

The key to safety is regular completion and review of risk assessments by a responsible and competent person, with appropriate action taken to address any concerns.

In properties that house people with mobility impairments, serious illnesses or disabilities, there are a number of specific factors to consider.

An important point to make is that not all people with disabilities will require assisted evacuation. Disabled people are no different from anyone else in that they prefer to be in control of their own evacuation as far as possible.

At the same time, it should be noted that not all disabilities are immediately apparent and people with ‘hidden impairments’ – such as epilepsy – may require assistance too. A supplementary guide on ‘Means of Escape for Disabled People’, which is contained in the UK Government’s Fire Safety Risk Assessment documents[i], makes the additional point that, in an emergency, people with disabilities may be capable of extraordinary actions that would seem more difficult in everyday life.

Published in 2007, the guide notes that: “The safe evacuation of disabled people is a problematic area for policy makers and one that has not received sufficient attention to date.”

As you can probably gather, this is a complicated landscape to navigate and that is why relevant stakeholders in building safety are encouraged to involve permanent employees or residents with disabilities at all stages of devising, practising and implementing a plan.

Personal emergency evacuation plan for disabled people

An evacuation plan for disabled people is commonly known as a Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan (PEEP). Employees and regular visitors should have an ‘Individual PEEP’, whereas it is considered sufficient to put in place a ‘Standard PEEP’ for occasional visitors. Overall, the PEEP should consider six key groups of people: staff, contractors, visitors, residents, students and customers[ii].

The particular characteristics of a disability will have a major influence on the details of the plan.

People with physical disabilities, for example, will need to reach emergency exits as quickly as possible and this might necessitate specific forms of assistance. Clearly staircases present difficulties to those with physical disabilities but if lifts are automatically deactivated when an emergency alarm is sounded – as is the case in many modern buildings – contingencies need to be considered.

Appointing members of staff to assist in this scenario is one step that could be taken. However, pre-emptive training on disability escape etiquette is recommended by the Government’s guide on Means of Escape for Disabled Peoplevi.

Contingencies must be made for people with impaired eyesight. Remedial actions can include the introduction of higher levels of illumination along exit routes

In buildings with many floors it might be necessary to create designated refuge areas with two-way communication systems, whereby trapped occupants on an upper floor can notify fire and rescue personnel on the ground floor of their whereabouts.

Among the other strategies that can be considered in this case are the planning of carry-down techniques or the installation of ‘evacuation chairs’ which can be slid down a staircase with assistance from one or two helpers.

Contingencies must also be made for people with impaired eyesight, particularly if there’s a possibility of them being unaccompanied in a building at the time when an evacuation procedure is activated. Among the remedial actions that might need to be taken is the introduction of higher levels of illumination along exit routes.

Building owners and facilities managers should take into account the regulatory guidance that governs the output of emergency lighting in terms of lux units. For example, BS 5266-1:2011 points out high-risk areas where increased illumination of 15 lux encourages safer movement of people in the event of a power failure.

The Industry Committee for Emergency Lighting (ICEL) provides a list of areas that can be considered high-risk areas, including particular task areas in industrial, medical and catering facilities, exit routes, fire safety equipment storage points, refuges, staircases and reception areas.

Visual Alarm Devices for the hard of hearing

The needs of people with hearing impairments are another key set of considerations. There are estimated to be almost eight million deaf or hard-of-hearing people in the UK alone, with almost 800,000 of these being categorised as having ‘severe to profound deafness’ according to the Royal National Institute for Deaf People (RNID).

Most of the risks are encountered when a deaf or hard-of-hearing person is alone and cannot rely on others to warn them of an emergency. This risk applies to even short periods of time, as minutes or even seconds can make all the difference during evacuation.

The risk of not hearing an audible alarm is not only an issue for people with hearing difficulties but also those who are present in noisy environments. This includes areas such as factories or when the intended recipient is wearing ear defenders or headphones.

The most common solutions are flashing beacons known as VADs (Visual Alarm Devices) or tactile devices, such as pagers and vibrating pillows or beds. Each of these technologies has its advantages and shortcomings and each one has to be weighed against the perceived risk.

Cognitive impairments and the ‘stay put’ policy

An additional category of people to be considered are those with mental disabilities, which can also be described as cognitive impairments. It is a particularly complicated set of circumstances to negotiate, since mental disabilities can vary greatly and have differing impacts on both perception of danger and responses to it.

For example, there is anecdotal evidence that many care homes and dedicated hospital wards for people with dementia have implemented a ‘stay put’ policy, whereby residents are locked in their rooms in the event of an emergency.

The thinking behind this is that it is safer for them to be kept in one place until they can be rescued, rather than to be wandering around the building in a potentially very distressed state that leaves them vulnerable to the hazard.

The advantages and disadvantages of this approach are open to debate, depending on the particular circumstances of the building, but it certainly gives rise to some questions about the additional equipment that might be necessary to reduce elements of risk. For example, a two-way communication system could be considered to enable contact between trapped residents and rescue personnel.

The UK Government’s Fire Risk Safety Assessment guide for Residential Care Premises advises that any ‘protected bedroom’ should be of 60-minute fire-resisting construction with a fire-resistant door fitted with a self-closing device

Emergency lighting

Another helpful measure could be the installation of emergency lighting in rooms. In the case of a fire, this would help maintain calm and enable the person to find a telephone or place a damp towel under the door to enhance protection.

The UK Government’s Fire Risk Safety Assessment guide for Residential Care Premises[iii] advises that any ‘protected bedroom’ should be of 60-minute fire-resisting construction with a fire-resistant door fitted with a self-closing device.

This document advises that all occupants should be evacuated to a place of reasonable or total safety within two-and-a-half minutes of the alarm being raised, but where this is not possible, a ‘delayed evacuation’ strategy, as described above, can be deployed.

Considering the sheer breadth of potential eventualities, the need for professional consultation is impossible to ignore. However, understanding the fundamental need for diverse and dynamic evacuation planning is the first and arguably most important step to safety.

 

[i] HM Government, Fire Safety Risk Assessment, Supplementary Guide: Means of Escape for Disabled People. Endorsed by the Disability Rights Commission. Published March 2007.

[ii] http://www.nifrs.org/firesafe/downloads/evacuation.pdf

[iii] HM Government, Fire Safety Risk Assessment: Residential Care Premises. Published May 2006.

2023 Fire Safety eBook – Grab your free copy!

Download the Fire Safety in 2023 eBook, keeping you up to date with the biggest news and prosecution stories from around the industry. Chapters include important updates such as the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 and an overview of the new British Standard for the digital management of fire safety information.

Plus, we explore the growing risks of lithium-ion battery fires and hear from experts in disability evacuation and social housing.

FireSafetyeBook-CoverPage-23

Related Topics

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Topics: