Q. Will there be independent and external quality assurance to ensure good practice?

A. Yes, this will be one of the functions of the new National ADC/NFS Unit.

Q. Will there be professional advice for FRAs to refer to?

A. Yes, this will be one of the functions of the new National ADC/NFS Unit.

Q. Will there be a review of the processes?

A. There will be on-going validation of the process during the first 18 months of operation, with reviews at 6, 12 and 18 months. This will produce a final report and any recommended changes to the Practitioners' Forum in March 2007.

Q. Will there be a body like the FSEB to have ownership and stewardship of the processes?

A. Yes, this will be one of the functions of the new National ADC/NFS Unit.

Q. Will the FRS of Scotland and Wales be using the ADC and NFS processes?

A. It is likely that the FRSs within both of these devolved administrations will use processes which are consistent with the English approach. FRSs from Scotland and Wales have played a full part in developing the processes, either directly or in stakeholder groups.

Q. Will the new process adversely impact increasing the numbers of women and Black & Minority Ethnic candidates?

A. The process has been designed to minimise adverse impact and this was assessed during the trials and pilot study by ensuring the test groups included people from diverse backgrounds. There will be an on-going review and a report to the Practitioners' Forum in March 2007.

Q. Were there enough people used to pilot and validate the NFS physical tests and were they necessarily diverse?

A. Yes, a sufficiently diverse number of volunteers and FRS live phase 1 candidates took part in the pilot and validation of the physical tests to enable the tests to be delivered. Data will continue to be collected during implementation in order to provide validation.

Q. As using ladders is an expectation of every FF, isn’t it an omission to have no ladder extension test?

A. The strength needed to raise a ladder safely and effectively is measured during the whole battery of tests. There is also a significant skill element in using ladders and this is one of the skills that firefighters will be taught once they join.

Q. Has an equality impact assessment been carried out? And has the NFS process developed in light of this assessment?

A. Yes. There is a copy of the impact assessment included in the guidance document which is on the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) web site- www.communities.gov.uk

Q. Will an applicant's score be transferable to any FRS?

A. Each FRA can decide to use the score that a candidate received from another FRA but this will not be mandatory.

Q. Isn’t there talk of a national database so that I can check whether a candidate has applied to other FRSs?

A. Yes, this will be one of the functions of the new National ADC/NFS Unit.

Q. The application form is lengthy and complex - won’t it be a deterrent to some applicants?

A. The application form has been designed to ask only what is relevant as determined by stakeholder groups and up-to-date employment law, as well as FRS HR practice. It does take some time for applicants to complete the whole form, though this commitment is minor in relation to a career as a Firefighter.

Q. Why do assessors have to receive training before administering the NFS stages?

A. To ensure NFS is administered fairly, consistently and maintains its integrity to all applicants, assessors must demonstrate that they are suitably skilled before administering any part of the NFS process.

Q. How can we provide feedback to unsuccessful applicants?

A. For the psychometric tests, generic feedback lines are provided and will be given to all applicants after each stage. For the physical tests, assessors are asked to make notes on applicant performance which they should use to provide guidance and advice on their individual development needs.

Q. As this is a new process with its own standards, how can we be sure that it meets the needs of the Service?

A. The new process will continue to be assessed and validated with data from tests and feedback from assessors for 18 months. At this point, any adjustments will be made and the results of this review will be communicated to the Service.

Q. If most applicants are passing the physical tests, then what is the point of them?

A. The physical tests can only be legally defensible if they represent what is required in order to show potential to be a FF – any more would present an unjustifiable standard.

Q. Will the process result in large numbers of applicants reaching the latter stages of the process?

A. This has not been the experience of fire and rescue services who have used the process to date, however, there are a range of measures that FRAs can take to reduce the number of applicants. These could include managing the numbers of application forms and collaborating with other FRS's for joint recruitment drives.

Q. Surely the interview stage will be subjective?

A. The interview guidelines are strict and suitably skilled staff will be able to score objectively - this enables individuals to be ranked and selected in order of performance at the interview stage.

Q. Shouldn't the standards be set high to save the FRS time and money on development?

A. No, the standards should be appropriate for the role. All members of the community must be treated fairly irrespective of ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, sexual orientation or age. This will help FRS's to improve their recruitment processes so that they are able to recruit a diverse range of people with the necessary qualities and skills to enable the Service to meet its objectives.

Q. Doesn't the high pass rate of the tests cast doubt as to their validity?

A. The aims of the tests are not to de-select but to identify individuals with the potential to be a firefighter. This move away from a culture of de-selecting will result in an increasingly diverse pool of candidates from which to choose.

Q. What about people who have passed the tests and then failed the occupational health medical?

A. The NFS physical tests have been designed to allow applicants with the potential to develop - the tests themselves are role relevant. The occupational health medical looks at different issues e.g. how long an applicant would be able to carry out the role whether the role could have a detrimental effect on the applicant and wider health and safety issues related to health and ability. All FRS must apply the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act in assessing the suitability of a candidate to carry out the role of firefighter. Guidance on these issues for both FRS medical advisers and managers has been provided by DCLG, CFOA and the Disability Rights Commission (www.communities.gov.uk).

Q. I have heard that someone who is clinically obese has passed the tests - doesn’t this prove the tests are too easy?

A. The tests are role relevant and if an individual passes them they have the potential to develop into a competent FF – if there are health concerns about an individual, this is a responsibility of the FRA and health practitioner.

Q. Does it matter if there are legal challenges to FRAs? If there are only a small number of these challenges, why should we bother changing standards?

A. The issue is one of equality and fairness irrespective of whether a single challenge is made to an FRA.

Q. Why is it referred to as a national process if it is only for England?

A. It is likely that both Scotland and Wales will use processes which are consistent with the English approach. As such both FRSs have played a full part in developing the processes, either directly or in stakeholder groups.

During the consultation on the New Arrangements for the Recruitment of Firefighters and the Progression of Operational and Control Managers in the Fire and Rescue Service, a number of questions were asked about the ADC process. The responses to these questions have been grouped under the following headings:

1. Retained Duty Systems (RDS) and ADCs
2. Quality Assurance (QA)
3. Resourcing
4. Nationally designed processes will stifle local innovation
5. Flexibility
6. Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL)/Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning (APEL)
7. Dealing with serial applications
8. The National ADC/NFS Unit - initial structure and Governance arrangements
9. Competence in current role
10. National transferability
11. Operational Competence
12. Line Manager reference/current performance
13. Role Skipping
14. Development Planning
15. Post ADC processes
16. Starting point
17. Legal position regarding serial applications

1.Retained Duty Systems and ADCs.

Given that all staff are exposed to the same risks and demands irrespective of their duty system it is essential that they are afforded access to the same processes for assessment, development and identification of potential. Although the difficulties of managing this logistically are not underestimated, the Toolkit offers some modular timetables which will help. In some FRAs, ADC processes have been delivered at weekends and over a series of evenings. Others have put RDS staff through the same ADCs as wholetime staff.

Whilst it is accepted that the exercises are challenging to all staff, it is not anticipated that those working on the RDS will be disadvantaged. Indeed, results so far have shown that the scores that RDS candidates achieve in ADC may even be better than those of their wholetime counterparts because their personal qualities and attributes may well have developed as a consequence of the experience gained from their primary employment. Some may already have experienced similar processes with other employers.

This is not to say that success in the ADC process will result in an automatic entitlement to change duty systems. FRAs will remain in direct control of managing movement between different duty systems depending on organisational and establishment needs.

2.Quality Assurance

There is a very clear need to provide robust Quality Assurance for all ADC activities if the system is to be nationally consistent and transportable. Given the intention that all English FRAs should use the national approach, the DCLG will be supporting the further development work including establishing appropriate Quality Assurance systems covering, for example:

• Assessor QA and development
• Tools application
• ADC operation
• Tools review and development
• Version control

3.Resourcing

The resources required to run ADCs effectively are extensive. However, it is recognised that this is an investment in our staff for the future and a means of delivering a workforce which is equipped to deal with the increasing demands of a modern FRS. The implications of the change agenda and the need to focus on a risk-based approach to managing and developing our people mean that it is imperative that we get the right people into the right roles and develop them appropriately. In terms of the FRS Values, if we really Value our People then this investment is one way of demonstrating it in a very real and meaningful way.

To put the resourcing issue into perspective, the old FSEB practical examinations often required an assessors/administrators to candidate ratio of up to 15:1, whereas the new ADC processes require a 5:1 ratio. So in real terms, whilst the ADC process is acknowledged to be resource intensive, we believe that in real terms it is actually more efficient and cost-effective than the systems that it replaces.

4.Nationally designed processes will stifle local innovation.

Local innovation does not sit comfortably alongside national consistency and would make QA – if possible at all – a cumbersome and expensive process. It would also mean that the transferability of ADC outcomes would at best be questionable and at worst non-existent. FRAs, quite properly, have plenty of scope for innovation and autonomy in terms of mitigating local risk through their IRMPs and the people management required to support them. Some processes, however, are co-ordinated centrally but still afford opportunities for involvement and contributions which can promote and share innovation.

5. Flexibility

Whilst there is a need to establish a nationally consistent approach to ADCs, FRAs remain in direct control of decision making post ADC and of how the outcomes of the ADC are progressed. There is flexibility in terms of the ability to plan ADCs so that they occur at the right time to meet organisation demand and to support HR planning.

Whilst it will be appropriate to set a national minimum score this will be set at a level that will give FRAs the flexibility to manage the process according to local needs. The minimum score will also be kept under review.

6. APL/APEL

There is a clear need to establish processes which allow for external recruitment. Whilst these will utilise the Tools there will be other elements involved around the process which will provide the means to assess and acknowledge the qualities and competences that have accrued from prior experience – this is essential to establish organisational “fit” and to facilitate sifting. Within the ADC process, we are concerned with assessment of potential. It is wholly reasonable to expect that prior experience will inform a participant’s behaviour in the ADC simulations and this is where prior learning or experience will make itself evident. The ADC will thus provide for APL/APEL as a matter of course, as prior learning and knowledge are applied within the situations designed to simulate working in a new role. The same applies to internal participants. APL and APEL are also important in the post ADC process of aligning individuals to specific roles.

We are designing an external recruitment process and will be looking at the issue of APL/APEL within that piece of work.

7. Dealing with serial applications

There is a need to establish and manage a National Database which will provide a means of tracking applications and results of ADCs across the FRS. This will allow for the identification of serial applicants, if only to allow for fair and equitable opportunity to access the ADC process. It is proposed that the National Unit will have responsibility for managing this Database.

8. The National ADC/NFS Unit – initial structure and Governance arrangements

It is imperative that work on ADC/NFS processes develops in response to the consultation and the decision to move to national processes. In the short term, the national ADC/NFS Unit will operate alongside the IPDS Team within the Centre of Excellence and will report to DCLG and the IPDS Project Board. The Unit will engage actively with stakeholders and practitioners. It is regarded as essential that the Unit maintains effective networks with assessors and practitioners and continues to support the ADC Forum, which will widen its remit to include NFS issues.

9. Competence in current role

The Grey Book requirement for people to have demonstrated competence in the current role before undertaking “acting-up” or “temporary promotion” does not apply to those aspiring to gain promotion to the next role. This is because the Grey Book requirement was intended to prevent people from casual acting-up before they had acquired the necessary competences to be able to contend with all of the additional risks that they would encounter in a new role.

This proviso does not apply to those who have been conditionally appointed as the result of an ADC process and who are undertaking a development programme. This is because the programme should ensure that people are not exposed to a quantum of risk for which they are unprepared without the benefit of an appropriate level of support and guidance. Only when the development programme candidate has demonstrated that they have gained the requisite competences would they be allowed to function in that capacity without further support. Obviously, support of this type would not be available on a casual basis and for this reason the proviso regarding competence in the current role was included in the Grey Book conditions of service.

If the rule regarding competence in the current role was applied to existing FRS people so that they would have to be competent in one role before they could apply for the next, this would effectively make non-sequential progression through the roles impossible. Any such principal of sequential progression would effectively prevent people from outside the FRS applying for direct entry to the managerial tiers of the service, which is clearly at odds with the current approach that welcomes applications from such people. In addition, to require internal applicants to be competent in role before applying for ADC would place a constraint on internal applicants that would not apply to applicants from outside the FRS.

10. National transferability

The vision for ADCs across the FRS is to achieve a position whereby people can transfer ADC results between FRAs. In the longer term this could lead to the possibility of collaboration that would lessen the burden on individual FRAs and enable them to rationalise the assessment of small numbers of people. Again, this depends on FRAs having confidence in the processes and each other and is directly linked to the establishment of an effective QA mechanism.

11. Operational Competence

Putting people into roles with an operational element means that it is imperative that their ability to manage within a risk critical environment is developed prior to unsupported exposure to any such risk. While ADCs are not designed to assess operational competence – they do provide a base-line assessment against the PQAs that inform operational activity. Once those with the potential to be developed into new roles have been identified, it then becomes necessary to establish their suitability for specific roles and to provide development and support as appropriate.

Suitable risk assessment will be followed by on site coaching by experienced staff, secondary deployment and workplace assessment. Supported exposure to risk critical environments should only occur as part of a detailed development programme. Once the individual is deemed competent, their appointment can be confirmed. This applies equally to internal and external applicants.

Some FRAs are already recruiting at supervisory and middle management levels and, with suitable development and assessment, have been able to assimilate people into operational roles from non–fire service backgrounds.

12. Line Manager references/current performance

It is a basic principle of IPDS that Line Managers are best placed to assess the current performance of their people. While it is true that such assessments can often inform judgements about likely future performance, research across a range of industries has shown that objective appraisals of potential are better determined by simulating the requirements of the new role in a realistic setting. The ADC exercises are designed to test the ability of the individual to perform in situations which are very close to those they will meet in the new role. Assessors are trained to assess against detailed constructs which are drawn from the PQAs for each level. This is a skilled and involved activity which is very different from assessing current performance.

Post ADC, it is useful to look at the current performance, skills and competences of the individual when deciding which role may best suit them. At this stage, references and evidence from current line managers may indeed be relevant.

13.Role Skipping.

It is vital that the FRS can manage talented people effectively - from wherever they may originate. This is absolutely vital to ensure that it has the very best workforce and leaders. Where people have particular skills and abilities, it would be appropriate for them to progress quickly to a point in the service where those skills and abilities will be most effective. This may involve skipping some roles. If we wish to recruit and retain high calibre people, we will need to offer a clear career path and opportunities for development which allow them to achieve their full potential within the service in a realistic and timely manner.

The work on the High Potential Development Scheme, recently the subject of consultation, suggests that individuals on the scheme would still need to be successful at each ADC. If someone can demonstrate the potential to be developed into a new role they should not be hindered or prevented from doing so.

As we have already stated, success at ADC does not guarantee a position and the individual will be subject to a series of additional processes to assess readiness for a specific role and to determine the development needs associated with that role. Finally, they will need to be supported and assessed in the workplace to ensure that they are competent in the role before any appointment is confirmed.

14.Development Planning

Responsibility for creating and implementing the development plans resulting from participation in an ADC should be shared between the individual and the organisation. Because IPDS requires that all development is role specific, people will need to focus on what they can achieve in their existing role. There will be opportunities to gain additional experience within the job role and line managers should be alert to the need to provide development opportunities through delegation, projects, short term secondments, shadowing, mentoring and role modelling.

15.Post ADC processes

The ADC alone does not constitute a selection process. Where FRAs are making appointments to new roles, they will have to take into account the specific skills and competences required by the role. These should then be used to inform the conditional appointee’s development plan. A development period can be agreed, followed by workplace assessment and appointment confirmed.

The decision making around allocation of people to roles rightly remains the responsibility of the FRA. It is essential however, that the ADC score provides the base line assessment and that the processes used by FRAs to determine who is appointed to which role are as robust, transparent, objective and as fair as the ADC process itself.

16.Starting point

The implementation of ADCs across the FRS is a future-facing activity. This means that substantive role-holders should not be required to undertake the ADC process that is appropriate for their current functional level. They should, however, be assessed against the appropriate role-map so that any developmental need can be identified and addressed as expeditiously as possible.

17.Legal position regarding serial applications

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development Legal Team have advised that, although the FRS does not have single employer status, the application of consistent tests means that individuals can be prevented from applying to more than one FRA within a given period without legal challenge. Clearly, where the tests may be shown to be unfairly applied, for example where no reasonable adjustment has been made for someone with a disability, then an individual could raise a challenge under employment and equalities legislation.