Preventing the thousands of fire-related fatalities that occur each year is an important mission of fire departments across the U.S., yet there is no clear picture of how the fire services conduct prevention or what best practice is for these activities. Through three related studies of fire prevention services, Center faculty have been able to bring the picture of fire prevention in U.S. fire departments into clearer focus. As a whole, this research will provide new knowledge about how injury control and public health professionals can work in partnership with fire departments to promote prevention. In 2007, Center faculty conducted a national survey of U.S. fire departments to establish a benchmark of fire and life safety education (FLSE) activities, and to identify barriers and facilitators to prevention education efforts. A 35-item survey was completed by 1,523 fire departments. National weighted estimates from the survey indicate that: 90% of fire departments conduct some type of FLSE, most frequently using uniformed personnel with multiple responsibilities (65%). Having staff assigned exclusively to FLSE activities is rare (14%). Elementary school presentations (86%) and fire safety week or month events (76%) were the most frequently reported types of FLSE activities. The focus of FLSE activities was most commonly reported as fire prevention (88 %), fire escape planning (78%) and smoke alarms (76%), while home sprinkler systems (8%) and public health emergencies (16%) were reported less frequently. 68% of fire departments distribute or install injury prevention products, most commonly conventional smoke alarms (51%). Fire escape ladders (3%) and bicycle helmets (10%) are less commonly distributed or installed. 50% of fire departments evaluate their FLSE activities most commonly by informal feedback, debriefing or tracking participation at events. Most respondents were either very satisfied (28%) or satisfied (39%) with their department's FLSE activities; 14% reported being very dissatisfied. 58% of fire departments conduct some type of advocacy at the local, state or national level. These and other results are being shared with fire service representatives through conferences and reports available on the Center website and the Home Safety Council.
For more information contact Andrea Gielen at agielen@jhsph.edu. To create an in-depth understanding of fire prevention activities and to identify elements of effective programs, Center faculty conducted two case studies of statewide fire prevention activities. In Delaware, sixteen members of the fire service from around the state were interviewed, documents about fire prevention efforts were reviewed, and existing fire data was analyzed. From this information, Center faculty identified three model characteristics of fire prevention in the state: Strategic: Initiatives are carefully considered, building on important partnerships and existing opportunities. Comprehensive: Initiatives are inclusive of diverse populations, multiple risk factors and a range of potential solutions. Coordinated: Partnerships are formed to maximize resources and impact.
In Pennsylvania, similar work has just begun. Interviews will be conducted with 18 members of the fire service, and documents related to fire prevention efforts will be reviewed. Based on the first few conversations, it is already apparent that Delaware and Pennsylvania are very different with respect to fire prevention practices. Such contrasts may highlight important differences in effective fire prevention programs and services that can have implications for other states throughout the country. For more information, contact Shannon Frattaroli at sfrattar@jhsph.edu. |
