When it comes to certification in the fire service, it’s important to generate discussion and ask questions, but rather than looking to our training or certificates for answers, we should be looking at our service delivery.
Questions we should be asking include:
- Are certification levels in the fire service comprehensive enough?
- Is the delivery of fire and rescue training sufficient and/or accurate for those who need it?
- Should training result in certification?
- Does certification indicate mastery?
- Do we have a system in place that ensures our emergency responders’ training is commensurate with the duties they’re expected to perform?
With regard to the last question above, having such a system in place depends on the type of fire department. Volunteer departments might not have the resources to implement such a system, let alone be able to fund and provide the training necessary to support the system.
The fire service in general has very comprehensive training systems, professional qualifications and certifications, but it’s questionable whether all departments use them as a guide when delivering services, especially those in rural communities. So how do we improve training, certification and qualification levels in all-volunteer and mostly volunteer fire departments so volunteer firefighters are not only safer, but also more successful in serving their communities?
Fire Service Stats
According to the NFPA’s U.S. fire department profile, there are an estimated 30,125 fire departments in the United States. Of these, 2,495 departments are all-career, 1,860 are mostly career, 5,290 are mostly volunteer and 20,480 are all-volunteer. In other words, 70% of all firefighters in America are volunteers, which equates to 768,150 fire and emergency service responders.
But what percentage of these providers is adequately trained and certified to perform the functions they’ve been assigned? According to the NFPA’s Third Needs Assessment of the U.S. Fire Service, 46% of firefighters lack formal training, which indicates that they’re not certified. Thus, the challenge becomes ensuring qualification through training and certification.
Duty- & Community-Based Training?
NFPA 1000: Standard for Fire Service Professional Qualifications Accreditation and Certification Systems, defines training as “the process of achieving proficiency through instruction and hands-on practice in the operation of equipment and systems that are expected to be used in the performance of assigned response duties.” Certification is defined as “an authoritative attestment; specifically the issuance of a document that states that an individual has demonstrated the knowledge and skills necessary to function in a particular fire service professional field.”
Given those definitions, what if we were trained and certified to the level of something like “rural fire support” or “volunteer apparatus operator” or “rural community incident commander”? This may not be the best solution to the training/certification issue, but then again, the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation (NFFF) Life Safety Initiative #5 suggests that we “develop and implement national standards for training, qualifications, and certification (including regular recertification) that are equally applicable to all firefighters based on the duties they are expected to perform.”
Clearly, these recommendations and guidance exist to create a system that ensures our training and certification fit our functions and fire departments.
Going even further, NFPA 1720: Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations and Special Operations to the Public by Volunteer Fire Departments, takes into account the type of community being served. Should our professional qualifications do the same? A firefighter in a rural community may have very different duties than a firefighter in an urban setting, so should our community type help determine whether we’re qualified to do the job?
The “Basic Responder” Idea
In March 2011, the IAFC’s Volunteer and Combination Officers Section (VCOS) began a discussion at their National Leadership Summit in Washington, D.C., on the need for a “cafeteria plan” for certifications and the need for modular training that leads to certifications. This points to the fact that we, as a national fire service, have focused too much on interior operations. It also points to the possibility of having certification for a “basic responder”—someone who is not an interior structural firefighter.
For example, the state of Montana, under the leadership of Butch Weedon and with the cooperation of the fire service of Montana, maintained a certification and training program for exterior firefighters focused on tactics outside the hot zone. This shifts the focus away from interior structural firefighting and puts it on the delivery of fire, rescue and medical responses to the community. This also serves as a model that the rest of the fire service could look to if it follows suit. The challenge will be whether we can we make our certification commensurate with our communities’ needs, the risks we face in them and our capabilities to serve them.
This is by no means an attempt to dilute the national standards or to create more requirements; rather, it is a discussion on how to make them more applicable, especially to rural communities and the volunteer fire departments that serve them. The goal is to make the rules complement reality, not dominate it.
OSHA 1910.156(c) essentially says that the employer shall provide training and education commensurate with the duties that employees are expected to perform. Most volunteer fire departments in America have members who respond to assist on scene in ways that don’t involve entering an IDLH environment. These responders need a set standard or guideline to follow when it comes to their job function, as well as proper training, certification and a medical screening that’s commensurate with their duties. For example, personnel who do not wear SCBA do have a place on the fireground; however, they need a standard operating procedure (SOP), standardized training and a system that outlines the requirements for skill mastery, how long it takes to achieve mastery and the different starting points for individuals with varying skill levels.
A New Pilot Program
To try to answer some of the questions raised in this article, the fire service of South Carolina and the South Carolina Fire Academy are embarking on a pilot program to develop training, certifications and physicals that are commensurate with firefighter job functions, particularly in volunteer fire departments. We intend to follow NFPA 1000 and to continue to use established accreditation organizations, such as the International Fire Service Accreditation Congress (IFSAC) and Pro Board, for guidance. Curricula certified by these organizations follow the Fire and Emergency Services Higher Education (FESHE) model from the National Fire Academy. We’ll also be working in cooperation with our community college, which helps direct firefighters toward a degree in fire and emergency services.
Our overall goal is to ensure that our volunteer responders are safer and can provide more successful service to their citizens. If you’d like to contribute ideas or feedback to this pilot program, please contact me at 615/405-5661 or chiefrays@aol.com.
