A GAP – WHAT’S IN A NAME?

Those following the changes in regulatory guidance may feel that the outcome of the Government consultation on the provision of sprinklers in care homes from the beginning of this year will cover such future builds. After all, wasn’t Beechmere a care home? No, it was not. Beechmere was an extra care living accommodation, a form of specialised housing. It was also timber framed and therefore not a “common building” type.

The fire in August 2019, started in the roof area of Beechmere Retirement Village facility in Crewe but then spread rapidly and destroyed the majority of the complex. There followed announcements of a swift rebuild, with plans submitted and approved featuring a sprinkler system. However, as we reach the end of 2023, construction on the new facility has yet to commence.   

Upon closer examination, it is unsurprising to find there is only fire safety guidance for specialised housing, such as the guidance provided by the National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC). It advocates the use of suppression systems, but it is not statutory. Those wishing to comply with the Building Regulations would have to consider the elements and form their own approach. It also highlights that the consultation on care homes, whilst most welcome, leaves a gap. A gap in which people with similar risk characteristics to those in care homes will receive differing fire safety provisions, unless a developer takes the initiative to provide fire suppression, or they trigger another element of statutory guidance.

Some may argue that this is the balance that the guidance must strike over regulations. However, the current situation is questionable. As we have continued to follow the outcome of the fire in Cheshire, we have noticed actions by the operator. There were four other facilities built as part of the same initiative in Cheshire and similarly operated by the same group, Your Housing. These are all extra care facilities. A review of the Group’s financial statements note that several million pounds was set aside for fire safety improvements. A serious fire incident often causes reflection and action. In this case they include retrofitting sprinklers into those four facilities. The note in the financial statement highlights it was “part of the solution agreed with the Fire and Rescue Service”. 

It should also be noted that there were several other timber-framed extra care living accommodations constructed around the same period as Beechmere. It was a favoured form of construction for such buildings for a period of time. We are curious  as to whether similarly constructed accommodations have undergone additional safety reviews and risk mitigation efforts following the Beechmere fire.

It is clear why the NFCC would advocate for such fire suppression in their guidance. When fires occur, sprinklers quickly activate to control or extinguish flames, minimising damage and fire spread. Sprinkler systems add another layer of protection affording additional time for residents to evacuate or be helped to evacuate. They also make such buildings resilient to the impact of fire because they automatically control or even put out the fire before the Fire and Rescue Service arrives. These systems also provide a secondary benefit to the wellbeing of staff, residents and relatives knowing there are additional measures in place and reduces the likelihood of residents needing to be rehomed.

The BSA has long since advocated for the installation of sprinkler systems in care homes. We saw the government’s proposal for changes to Approved Document B (ADB) of the Building Regulations at the beginning of 2023 to mandate sprinklers in new care homes as a positive step. We agree there is no one-size-fits-all when it comes to fire safety but there appears to be a gap and we question whether this will be closed or is it all just in a name?

For more information about the BSA visit the www.business-sprinkler-alliance.org

¹ https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/primary-fires-in-care-homes-2010-11-to-2020-21

Image by rawpixel.com