Consultation outcome

EEIS consultation document (easy read version) (accessible)

Updated 2 December 2024

What do you think about Emergency Evacuation Information Sharing?

This is quite complicated in places so ask a support worker or friend to go through the consultation with you.

A PDF version of this consultation document with supporting images (PDF, 1099KB) is also available.

July 2022

What the words mean

Term	Definition
PEEP	Personal emergency evacuation plan. It is a plan for each resident who has mobility problems or who doesn’t understand what to do, so they can get out of the building safely if there is a fire.
Responsible person	The owner or manager of a building where people live, who is responsible for fire safety.
Stay put strategy	Most buildings have a ‘stay put’ strategy to follow if there is a fire. This means if there is a fire in your building, it is probably safest to stay in your own home until the fire is put out.
Simultaneous evacuation strategy	Some buildings are less safe or are at higher risk of a dangerous fire, so have a ‘simultaneous evacuation’ strategy to follow if there is a fire. This means if there is a fire everyone needs to leave the building, even if there is no fire in their own home.

Background

Grenfell Tower was a block of flats in London. In June 2017 a fridge freezer caught fire in one of the flats. The fire spread quickly to other floors and 72 people were killed and many more were injured.

In August 2017 an inquiry was started. This was to look into what happened. It is in 2 parts, called Phase 1 and Phase 2.

Phase 1 looked at what happened on the night of the fire, including what the emergency services did. It published its report in October 2019.

Phase 2 started in January 2020. It is looking at why the fire could have happened and what happened after the fire.

The Phase 1 report recommended that the responsible person for each high rise building where people live, must make a plan for each of their residents who would have problems leaving the building if there was a fire. This is so they can get out of the building safely. This plan is called a personal emergency evacuation plan or PEEP.

The Phase 1 report also recommended that the PEEP and other information about these residents be kept up to date and in a box in the building. This is so the fire and rescue services can read them if there is a fire.

In the summer of 2021, the government asked people how they could make sure these things happened. The government then thought about the things people said and, in May 2022, they published a report that explained why they would not be able to make these 2 recommendations, explained in the section above, happen.

Instead, the government has come up with different ideas to help keep vulnerable residents safe from fire. Now they are asking what people think about these ideas.

About this survey

This is an easy read and shorter version of the consultation questions. See the main consultation survey for the full list of questions.

You can also say what you think about these ideas and answer these easy read questions by sending an email to [email protected].

Ideas the government wants your views on

These ideas are just for residential buildings where there are 2 or more households like flats. It is not about commercial buildings like businesses, factories, offices and shops.

Step 1 – Deciding which buildings these ideas are for

Most buildings have a ‘stay put’ strategy to follow if there is a fire. This means if there is a fire in your building, it is probably safest to stay in your own home until the fire is put out. Sometimes, due to the way it has been built, a building can be assessed as less safe or more at risk of a dangerous fire. These buildings will have a ‘simultaneous evacuation’ strategy to follow if there is a fire. This means if there is a fire everyone needs to leave the building, even if there is no fire in their home.

The government wants to focus the majority of its plans (which are steps 2 – 5 below) on these buildings with ‘simultaneous evacuation’ strategies in place.

Q.1 Should the government put in place steps 2 – 5 below just in buildings with the greatest risk of having a dangerous fire, i.e. where there is a simultaneous evacuation strategy in place?

There is also a plan to make a document to help responsible persons keep their residents safe from fire. This would include real life examples of what other responsible persons are already doing to protect their residents and would be available to all responsible persons no matter what strategy their building has in place.

Q.2 Do you think this document is a good idea?

Q.3 Do you know of any good examples to include in the document that could help keep vulnerable residents safe if there was a fire? They could be good examples for others to put in place.

Step 2 – Knowing who are the residents who need help to get out

The government is suggesting that, in the buildings with a simultaneous evacuation strategy in place, the responsible person has to ask the residents to identify themselves if they would need help to get out of the building if there was a fire. This could be because they have mobility difficulties or because they can’t understand what to do.

The responsible person could do this by email, a letter or a visit to the building. They also need to make sure the list of people who identify themselves is up to date at least every year.

Q.4 What do you think about this idea that responsible persons have to ask residents to identify themselves if they need help to get out if there is a fire?

Do you think it’s a good or bad way to find out? If you don’t like it, what would you do instead?

Step 3 – Person-centred fire risk assessment checklist

For every resident who tells their responsible person that they would need help to get out if there was a fire, the responsible person needs to carry out a person-centred fire risk assessment with them. This assessment would look at the risk of fire inside the person’s flat.

It would also look at the building’s common areas like corridors, stairs and lobbies to see if there is anything that could be changed to help the person get out of the building safely, such as better signs, ramps, extra hand rails or a special fire alarm.

The resident and the responsible person would look at the assessment and decide what things they could do to make the resident safer if there was a fire.

Q.5 What do you think about this idea to carry out a person-centred fire risk assessment and put in place things to make the resident safer in the event of a fire?

Do you think it’s a good or bad idea?

If you don’t like it, what would you do instead?

Step 4 – Sharing information with the local fire and rescue service

Hopefully the things that the resident and the responsible person put in place after completing the risk assessment will help the resident to get out of the building if there was a fire. But there might be times when nothing reasonable can be done to help them get out.

Where this happens, the government wants the responsible person to share information about these residents and the help they need with the local fire and rescue service. This would be shared with them by using a computer. But the information could also be put into a secure box in the block of flats where the resident lives. The responsible person must keep the information up to date and review it at least every year.

Q.6 What do you think about this idea of sharing this information with local Fire and Rescue Services?

Do you think it’s a good or bad idea?

If you don’t like it, what would you do instead?

Step 5 – The fire and rescue service using this information

The plan is that the fire and rescue service would look at this information and use it to help get the residents who need more support out of the building if there is a fire.

Q.7 What do you think about this idea for the fire and rescue service to have this information and use it to get people out who need extra help when there is a fire?

Do you think it’s a good or bad idea?

If you don’t like it, what would you do instead?

Q.8 Do you have any other comments or ideas about steps 1 - 5 above?

Some people have suggested that someone should stay in the building 24 hours a day, to give information, advice and help to residents and the fire and rescue service if there was a fire. But this would cost a lot of money that the residents of the building would likely have to pay and the person would not be there to physically evacuate residents.

Q.9 What do you think about this idea? Do you think it’s a good or bad idea?

Evacuation plans

As well as steps 1–5, the government wants to make responsible persons produce an important plan for each building with a simultaneous evacuation strategy in place, that tells all residents what they must do to get out of the building if a fire happens.

Q.10 What do you think about this idea? Do you think it’s a good or bad idea?

If you don’t like it, what would you do instead?

Can you share any ideas that work well to keep vulnerable residents safe?

The government wants to be sure that they have thought about all options to support the fire safety of residents with mobility problems. So they want to know if you have examples of fire safety initiatives that you could share.

Q.11 Do you know of any good examples of:

• an existing personal emergency evacuation plan (PEEP)

• buildings that have people in place to support the evacuation of residents

• other fire safety initiatives to keep vulnerable residents safe from fire and to help them get out of their building if there was a fire

• the average number of residents in a building that might struggle to evacuate without help

Deadline

Please send in your answers and ideas by 21 August 2022.

You can also say what you think about these ideas and answer these easy read questions by sending an email to [email protected].