Introduction to Fire Safety Management

Evaluating existing control measures (workplace 
precautions and risk control systems)
It is unlikely that a building or premises will have no 
controls in place for the management of fi re, it is there-
fore essential when evaluating the level of fi re risk that 
any such controls are analysed and included in a risk 
assessment record. Having identifi ed and recorded the 
current controls that are in place and any shortcomings 
they may have, analysis of residual risk can be made.
Example
. A fi re detection system has been 
installed to meet current British Standards 
and guidance by a competent installation 
company, but is not being subject to regular 
testing, inspection and maintenance; it may 
therefore not operate when most needed. The 
risk in relation to the system being unable to 
give a warning in the event of fi re (to ensure 
that those within the building can respond 
and evacuate safely) has not been reduced to 
the lowest level reasonably practicable and 
will therefore need to be addressed.
A quantum of the level of risk (likelihood 
severity) 
will refl ect the current controls in place, which in the 
case of the example above may rate a medium risk if a 
qualitative analysis is applied (see Chapter 5). The risk 
assessment record should then identify controls that 

---

Fire risk assessment
333
should be implemented to reduce the risk to the lowest 
level reasonably practicable.
Additional control measures (recommended 
actions and prioritisation)
Having identifi ed any shortcomings in the preventive 
and protective arrangements for the management of fi re, 
the next element of the risk assessment record should 
be completed; that of recording recommended actions 
based upon a prioritised order. This prioritisation should 
ensure that those hazards presenting the most signifi -
cant risk can be identifi ed and addressed quickly and 
effectively, so that the risk can be reduced.
The recommended actions should not only identify 
short-term fi xes, e.g. removal of obstructions from a fi re 
escape route but also medium- to long-term issues that 
may need to be addressed to prevent a recurrence.
The prioritisation of any recommendations contained 
within the action plan will also need to refl ect, not only 
the level of risk, but also the feasibility (practicality) of 
implementing the prescribed workplace precautions and 
risk control systems. Risk assessments that merely list 
long-term recommendations, such as ‘review . . . policy’ 
are unlikely to address the immediate requirements 
for managing fi re risks, waiting for a formal policy or 
procedure, for example a review and revision of contractor 
selection and management due to poor management of 
hot work operations, may well take some time to be 
produced, approved and implemented.
When considering priority ratings it is useful to 
determine a key which will give a numerical indication 
of the recommended speed of action. While there are a 
number of such recording mechanisms available a large 
proportion will base themselves on similar ratings to 
those indicated in Table 14.2.