Learning from the past, investing for the future: by Robert Yates, Head of Building Products Fire Safety UK, Siemens
Most countries have policies in place which make it a legal requirement that educational facilities have fire detection systems fitted to protect not only the pupils and staff, but also a site’s buildings and contents. The majority of such systems are automated, particularly in the construction of new facilities but also when retro-fitting and extending of existing sites is undertaken. However, there are some older sites that continue to rely on systems which while they may meet the basic legislative requirements, are not conducive to contributing to an effective and robust fire safety strategy.
Addressing out-dated systems
As with any building which accommodates often significant numbers of people, a fire safety risk assessment (FSRA) offers the means to match the requirements with the approach. In the UK, all schools are legally required to have a FSRA, with the Department for Education (DfE) setting standards for how new schools should be designed. In the past schools tended to be heavily populated only during their hours of operation - the typical school day - with the premises therefore often originally fitted with basic systems that are reliant on detection and alarm initiation from the occupants themselves. This is understandable in terms of a life safety focus given that staff and pupils were considered to be most at risk when the site was busy and the potential for fire was greater because of the activities and numbers of people present. However, it makes no allowance for protecting school buildings and their assets when a site is unoccupied.
The basic systems still seen in many older educational premises were often fitted at a time when there was generally a lack of awareness of the potential consequences of a fire, in addition to there being a perceived lack of a real threat. Many were also installed by local councils suffering from budgetary constraints, with schools usually closed at the end of the academic day and seldom used much for anything other than daytime education of the children, hence there was a tendency to focus on the escape routes rather than protecting the whole site. While the budgetary pressures remain for local authorities, what has changed is the proliferation of schools that now look after their own budgets, increasingly with other educational establishments under the umbrella of a MAT (Multi Academy Trust) and directly funded by the DfE rather than the local authority. There has also been an increase in the use of school premises in general. No longer limited to daytime education, schools often now see a significant extension of their operating hours through initiatives such as breakfast clubs for children dropped off by parents early in the morning and classes for those picked up some time after school has finished. In addition, many schools are the location for clubs, societies, team games and group practices that are increasingly provided for pupils. Adult education classes further extend the opening hours into the night and other multi-community uses can see schools open at weekends.
Some of the older fire systems have often only been maintained to the basic minimum relevant legal requirements. However, many government authorities, both national and local, have placed a greater emphasis on the value of schooling and, as a result, education has seen significant investment in building stock, equipment and facilities.
Increased use means increased risk
The increasing value of assets contained within schools comes at a time when there is also a greater focus on protecting pupils and staff. This is not only relating to fire but also to address a number of growing physical threats to their safety. Various events and incidents around the world - some accidental and some deliberate - have raised the perception of possible physical threats to children, teachers and administrative staff. The extended use and wider hours of opening come about as schools are also often witnessing more disruptive behaviour from some pupils. The deliberate triggering of false alarms by the wanton operating of manual call points is not an uncommon occurrence and while products are available to mitigate this issue, it still poses a problem, particularly given the disruption that an evacuation causes to the day-to-day running of a school.
In essence, the fire safety challenges presented by a school have changed. While life safety has, quite rightly, continued to be a constant, there is an increased focus on protecting the buildings and their contents when unoccupied. An audible-only system, for example, is largely pointless if a fire occurs when there is nobody present to hear the alarm. This requires a re-evaluation of some of the now out-dated systems that are still in use, recognising the benefits that the advances in technology can bring to the education environment.
Meeting challenges with AFD
Automatic fire detection (AFD) systems are much more in keeping with the needs of today’s educational facilities. Importantly, they do not rely on an alarm being manually activated and therefore protect schools not only during the increasing number of hours in which they are in use but also when they are empty. In addition, they offer several key features. These include fast and reliable smoke detection throughout all of the school premises; programmable alarming concepts to suit different site conditions; automatic connection to local fire services and alarm receiving centres (ARCs); and false alarm rejection. The different alarm concepts can offer delays to manual call point activation to overcome the irritation of unruly students misusing the devices, coverage can be varied to reflect occupancy levels and EN54-23 approved visual alarming is available for staff, pupils and visitors who might be deaf or hard of hearing. Most of today’s automated fire detection systems are therefore much safer and infinitely more flexible than the basic, manually operated systems.
AFD systems are, however, not without potential issues. False alarms continue to be a problem. Though not specific to the education sector, the official figures highlight the extent of the challenge. The Fire and Rescue Service in England attended 577,053 incidents in the year ending March 2022, with 229,844 turning out to be false alarms, some 69 percent of which were due to apparatus.[1] Over the same period there were 52,646 false alarms in Scotland, an increase of 10.5% on the previous year. [2]
This has led to various initiatives by the fire service and by manufacturers of fire detection systems to address the seemingly perennial problem. This includes schemes such as that introduced in 2013 when the London Fire Brigade became the first fire service in the country to levy charges against those responsible for buildings where firefighters were called out to false alarms ten times or more over a twelve-month period. The latest initiative saw the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) introduce a scheme from 1 July 2023 whereby they will no longer attend automatic fire alarm call outs to commercial business and workplace premises unless confirmation of a fire has been provided. Although there will be an exemption for premises with sleeping accommodation, this will affect thousands of sites, including schools.
False alarms are also a significant disruption in schools - potentially dangerous if an evacuation is required. There is also the issue of repeated false alarms creating a culture of apathy: if fire systems are regularly generating false alarms, it can breed a complacency and a lack of response, a significant danger in the event that an actual fire is in progress.
This is why it is so important that education facilities look to fire system manufacturers who are actively addressing the issue of false alarms in their technologies. Some actually offer guarantees against false alarms, employing technologies that ensure the highest degree of safety by quickly and reliably detecting smoke, heat, and carbon monoxide, without being affected by deceptive phenomena.
The Fire & Rescue Service clearly has a responsibility to protect not only the lives but also the properties that are fundamental to a community, schools being a prime example. Automatic fire detection systems are crucial in helping to achieve this but the Service needs to have faith in the systems, hence the need to continue to address the issue of false alarms.
The digital age
The development of IOT-enabled systems also offers potential for further improving the protection of educational facilities from fire. The cloud connectivity now available offers significant advantages. In terms of programming of a fire safety system, this can be done off-site. Device, zone section and area information can all be programmed from a remote location, as can evacuation and control zones. Beyond the initial system set-up, it also enables a proactive rather than a reactive approach to maintenance, continuously and automatically measuring and evaluating performance and thereby anticipating failures and the need for maintenance checks.
Digitalisation means these checks can be undertaken off-site, with flexible remote access 24/7 minimising time-consuming and potentially disruptive on-site visits. Detectors with a self-testing capability enable daily testing, significantly reducing downtime compared to a conventional site-based interval testing regime. They operate in the background, autonomously, silently and intelligently, with the back-up of skilled engineers to provide the necessary remote maintenance and support. These smart systems have been designed with ease of operation in mind through user-friendly interfaces.
Integrated solutions
Returning to the issue of potential physical threats, the new technologies, with their open communication protocols, are bringing about the integration of fire systems with other security and building solutions. In recent years, the increased risk of attacks within schools and other places of education has highlighted the vulnerability of pupils and staff. The integration of the fire protection system with other security systems (video surveillance, intruder alarm, access control etc.) and building automation systems (lighting, HVAC, elevators etc.) can provide greater safety, security, comfort and efficiency for the people and assets. Effective mass notification in the case of a possible incident within the school is possible via screens placed in classrooms and other strategic points. Alerts can also be transmitted automatically to the personal devices (phones, watches tablets, laptops etc.) used by pupils and staff alike. In the event of a fire, equipment using electrical power can be immediately shut down and emergency lighting switched on to illuminate exits and escape routes. Air dampers are shut and fans can be deactivated in order to slow the spread of the flames, but when thick smoke is threatening the building’s occupants and hampering their escape, the dampers can be opened and fans switched on to assist the extraction of the smoke.
Hard-hitting consequences
The very real threat to every school if fire destroys all or part of the buildings is the loss of its ability to carry out the education of its pupils. Even if the school is out of action only temporarily, the inconvenience and problems caused to the parents and staff in their everyday lives is significant enough, but the unsettling and distracting changes to the children’s routines may well have a detrimental effect on their education. In the case of private schools, the impact on revenues caused by the upheaval to fee-paying parents and the damage to the school’s image and reputation could be far-reaching.
The emotional impact of fire damage too should not be under-estimated. Many schools, particularly traditional public schools, often have buildings of historical interest or architectural merit. If destroyed by fire, such iconic buildings are irreplaceable. Even in the most ordinary schools, the resulting impact on students following a fire can be quite considerable. Course work, study notes, exercise books and artwork in which they have often invested days or even months of hard study and effort can literally go up in flames. These consequences need to be considered in the ongoing development of fire service response initiatives: the costs of not responding to an AFD in the event of a fire can be considerable.
Fire detection technology has moved on exponentially from the days of systems based on the simple activation of manual call points. Minimising the number of fire related incidents and the way in which a response is managed in the event of an incident is an important priority in educational facilities and one to which AFD systems can make a significant contribution.
[1] ‘Fire & Rescue Incident Statistics: England, year ending March 2022’. Gov.uk, Home Office
[2] ‘Fire and Rescue Incident Statistics (Scotland), 2021-22’. Scottish Fire and Rescue Service