Risk Assessment of Fire in the Hotel Building - Coursework Example

Risk assement Your name Subject Date os submission Introduction Risk assessment is considered as an effective means of identifying risks and determining the most cost effective means of mitigating, and/or reducing risk (Donald, 2010). In recent years, there has been an increase of accidents reports in work place. An independent risk assessment officers can be hired to assess the premises. This paper wil be highlighting some risk assessment tools that are suitable in assessing risks and hazards associated in a hotel buiding as hotels are often exposed to a number of risks for instance fires. Below is the layout of the hotel building in discussion The layout of building is standard. The hotel have a large area where their customers are served. The kitchen area is about fifteen by fifteen feet and has a small patio to welcome their guests. There are alos two extra offices. One is the manager’s office and the other is a store. There are three exits out of the building. Ventilation however is not that good as the building does not have enough windows. The windows that are there are either broken or do not open or shut as they are supposed to work. Companies and organisations have realised that there is need for risk assessment. However most of them do not have necessary tools, the expertise and resources to assess risk in a quantitative manner. Most of these organisations normally use qualitative or semi-qualitative risk assessment tools. It is important for people to identify the risks so that they can know how to avoid them and so risk assessment is important in buildings assesment. This helps to assess the building structure and the best exit strategy in case of an accident. All risk hazards and risks that a building has, are identified and a solution to minimize the risks is offered.Below is the discussion of some of the tools and methods that will be used in risk assessment of the hotel buiding above. 1. Ticklist /checklist with (Layout) There are a number of risks that the building has and a a risk assement will reduce risk greatly. Tick list risk assessment method refers to a self-control type of risk management based on a comparison of a buiding strength and all risks faced by the institutionand assessed on a category-by-category basis (credit risk, market risk, operational risk, etc.). This is a type of comprehensive risk management based on a comparison of the aggregate of various risks measured with uniform yardsticks . The overall risk level is evaluated by a result of qualitative and quantitative assessments of the risks conducted with various methods according to the risk type.Being a systematic evaluation against pre-established criteria in the form of one or more tick lists. It is characterized by: A systematic approach built on the historical knowledge included in checklist questions. Used for high-level or detailed analysis, including root cause analysis. Applicable to any activity or system, including equipment issues and human factors issues. Generally performed by an individual trained to understand the checklist questions. Sometimes performed by a small group, not necessarily risk analysis experts. Based mostly on interviews, documentation reviews, and field inspections. Generates qualitative lists of conformance and nonconformance determinations, with recommendations for correcting non-conformances. The quality of evaluation is determined primarily by the experience of people creating the checklists and the training of the checklist users. Checklist Analysis Evaluation Points Yes No Not Evaluated Comments Subject Area 1 Evaluation Point 1-1 Evaluation Point 1-2 Evaluation Point 1-3 X X X Recommendation A Subject Area 2 Evaluation Point 2-1 Evaluation Point 2-2 Evaluation Point 2-3 X X X Subject Area 3 The tick list is also useful in the following area: Used most often to guide inspection of critical systems. Also used as a supplement to or integral part of another method, especially what-if analysis, to address specific requirements. The hotel employees that work in the building should be trained on how to handle themselves in case of a hazard such as fire. This is important as it will help reduce the number of fatalities when there is a fire. Training employees will also equip them with the knowledge of how to spot any fire risks in the building. A fire risk assessment is extremely important. It will minimize any risks that a building has to catch fire. This will save a company a lot of money and time that a fire brings with it. It will also help to reduce the amount of premiums that are paid to an insurance company. In all, a fire risk assessment will prove an asset to a building as it helps reduce the costs that they incur. Risk Assessment Name of the institution Location of the Building The date assessment was carried out Names of individuals carrying out the risk assessment Area Safety Manager Table 1: Check List Property and Property No. Address Usage Occupancy Level Day Evening Staff Public Remarks Disabled access Yes No Remarks Age of Building Structural and Renovation History Utilities Electricity Gas Water Nearest Fire Station Vehicle Access Remarks Escape Routes Remarks Communication Remarks Above is an example of a risk assessment image with all the safety action. The image can greatly aid the area safety manager in understanding the various measures place in place. The review shows a suitable and sufficient risk audit to help in the management of risks associated with fire in a building. 3.The Risk Ranking tool. A risk ranking tool involves both qualitative and quantitative risk assessment tools. A risk assessment tool has to be designed properly to avoid liability issues that arise due to inaccurate risk assessment results. A good risk ranking tool should have a range of consequences and likelihood range as its axes. It is the combination of a consequence and likelihood range that gives an estimate of risk, or a risk ranking (Donald, 2010). There are various risk assessment matrices that have been developed and it’s important to note that development and application of risk matrices come with its own challenges. Before designing a risk ranking tool, it is important to establish how the tool is intended to be used. Some of the common uses of these tools are to process hazard analyses, facility sitting studies, and perform safety audits. Organisations using the risk matrix have to first define the risk acceptability and tolerance criteria. Lack of adequate consideration of risk tolerability, one can develop a risk matrix that shows high levels of risk tolerability that is higher then what the desired results. Another key factor to be considered in the design of a risk matrix is designing a tool with the capability to evaluate the effectiveness of risk mitigation measures (Donald, 2010). The tool should allow the risk ranking of an incident to be reduced to a risk tolerable level if mitigation measures have been implemented on the scenario. An example of a multiple consequence for a consequence range source Description Category Result Criteria Catastrophic I Could lead to death, disability, and losses exceeding $1,5M. Critical II Could lead to disability, illnesses, losses of $500k Marginal III Could result to injuries, lost work days and losses exceeding $100k Negligible IV Could result to illnesses, injuries and losses between $10k and $100k In the table above, each consequence range details consequences on personnel safety, environment and property damage. Once the consequence range has been defined, corresponding likelihood ranges can then be detailed. Example of likelihood ranges Description Level Specific Individual Item Inventory Frequent A Could occur more than 10-1 in life Continuously experienced Probable B Could occur between 10-1 and 10-2 Occurrence is frequent Occasional C Could occur between 10-2 and 10-3 Occur severally Remote D Could occur between 10-3 and 10-8 Unlikely to occur Improbable E Could occur less than 10-8 Unlikely to occur In the above table, the likelihood has been defined in terms of probability that the suggested possible consequence might occur during. the life of the item. An example of a risk ranking matrix Consequence Frequency 1 2 3 4 IV II I I 3 IV III II I 2 IV IV III II 1 IV IV IV II In first row of the risk ranking matrix, the risk rank changes from a higher consequence category to a lower consequence category once the risk range reduces. A risk assessment matrix is a better tool for assessing fire risk since it combines both qualitative and quantitative measures in assessing and ranking risk. 2. SWOT and PESTLE Risk Assessment application Methods The Strength, Weakness, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis, is a very useful tool for understanding and decision-making for all sorts of situations in business and organizations. The SWOT analysis headings provide a good framework for reviewing strategy, position and direction of a company or business proposition, or any other idea. The SWOT analysis template is normally presented as a grid, comprising four sections, one for each of the SWOT headings: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. In the SWOT, Strengths and Weaknesses are 'mapped' or 'graphed' against Opportunities and Threats. During the assessment a comprehensive analysis should focus on categorizing potential fire hazards, identify mitigation measures such fire equipments, collect necessary information about the building for future reference, audit systems in place for monitoring and reviewing existing control measures. It ensures that safety concerns are clearly dealt with and incorporated in the decision making process. It also queries the utilization of the existing resources within a building (Yung, 2008). Moreover, it evaluates protection requirements and can be used as a planning tool by the developers for future projects. There is a need to develop more guidelines and methods that will provide greater clarity on the approach. These approaches should be of higher quality and consistent in order to provide greater assurance on their usage (Vadrevu, Eaturu, Badarinath, & S, 2010). In developing a more sustainable fire audit procedure, gather information and mount the necessary resources and tools. The approach increases the influence of security analysts and local agencies through their involvement in the exercise (Great Britain. Dept. for Communities and Local Government. 2006). The exercise requires high expertise and knowledge on fire and safety issues. A consultative committee comprising of interest groups is formed to identify the key issues. The information gathered from the exercise should be adequately communicated to concerned stakeholders for further action. 4) FMEA Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is able to identify potential failure modes for a risk before the problems occur, to assess the risk. Ideally, FMEA’s are conducted in the product design or process development stages. The FMEA team determines, by failure mode analysis, the effect of each failure and identifies single failure points that are important. An example is presented below. FMEA) is able to carry out the function expected to hence meet the required goal. 5 Fault tree Fault trees represent a deductive contributory or investigation approach to come up with the causes leading to a given failure. The following are primary event symbols used in fault tree analysis; Basic event, Initiating event, Conditioning event are situations that limit logic gates which include: OR and inhibit. Fault tree is used in risk assessment by companies to understand the reasoning leading to the achievement of desired state results, through show of conformity and fulfillment. Fault tree can be used in optimizing resources, monitoring and control of performance safety for instance, is a certain aircraft safe to take off, when its fuel regulator is faulty. Fault tree can be used in designing a system, for risk assessment and evaluation; fault tree is used as a design tool that helps to create maximum output with available inputs. Fault tree is used in risk assessment as a predictive value tool. It is used to access the impact of different options applied in an incident. For instance; in a fire station in United Kingdom, fault tree could be used to access the risk of locating conveyors in the aeration tunnels to avoid or reduce the possibility of exposing workers to combustion products. Fault tree is used in risk assessment as a freguency occurrence measuring device.Risks assessment such as site selection,dangerous operations stidies,accidents occurrence inquiries and fire hazards. Quantitative fault trees are constructed to determine a frequency or probability for a failure without further development of the failure logic or judgment. For example; fault tree for a flat vehicle tire can be as follows; the flat tire is the top event, which is dived into two direct causative events, road wreckage and tire failure. The causal event of road wreckage is a fundamental event which cannot be divided further into other proceedings unless supplementary information is provided, which could be illustrated in a disk as a fundamental event. The other event, tire failure, could be illustrated in a parallelogram as an intermediary event. All these could contribute to a worn-out tire. Events in a fault tree could also be due to software, human or ecological factors. (Mannan and . Lees, 2005, pg 11). An exampel of a fault tree is presneted below. 6. Common cause analysis Common cause analysis is a technique of inductive uses, factors. The data normally collected through common cause analysis is used as a mechanism for aggregating the causes and solutions towards risks assessment. The following are ways in which common cause analysis is used in risk assessment. Through identification of the factors that cause risks which in turn results to magnitude of losses in a given environment. For effectiveness; common analysis stipulates the necessity of an examination of an organization risk assessment. The purpose of identifying all solutions to a problem is to prevent recurrence at lowest cost in the simplest way. If there are alternatives that are equally effective, then the simplest or lowest cost approach is preferred. Common causes analysis identifies ways in which the problem or event can defined, evaluated through analytical procedure, for overall risk assessment. According to (Wells, G, 1998, pg 122). Common cause analysis is used in investigation of errors in a system, whether new or old system. This leads to identification of solutions used in risk analysis and reducing adverse events with a higher percent. Common cause analysis causes and aggregates the causes of multiple occasions which is beneficial to any firm in risk management and assessment. Common cause analysis identifies root causes covers information gaps which would have lead to occurrence of extensional risks problems leading to losses. 7. Reliability block diagrams In Reliability block diagrams are models in a diagrammatic way which are used to show consistency and dependability of a certain system to its failure or to its success .It is the top to down process of breakdown of a subsystem and its component requirements. Application of Reliability blocks diagrams to risk assessment through reliability blocks, reliability allocation is carried out so as to decode the system reliability prerequisite into more convenient minor level rations for any risk to be assessed. Reliability blocks are used as prediction tool in the progression of quantitatively estimating dependability of a system.Reliability prediction is performed to the lowest level for which data is available. The sub-level reliabilities are then combined to derive the system level prediction. Reliability prediction during design is used as a benchmark for subsequent reliability assessments.Predictions provide managers and designers a rational basis for design decisions.Reliability prediction is the process of quantitatively estimating the reliability of a system. Reliability prediction is performed to the lowest level for which data is available. The sub-level reliabilities are then combined to derive the system level prediction. Reliability prediction during design is used as a benchmark for subsequent reliability assessments.Predictions provide managers and designers a rational basis for design decisions. (Stapelberg, 2008, pg 93). Fig 3: Reliability block diagram. 8. Event tree tool for risk assessment According to the Society of Risk Analysis, risk is the possibility of recognition of superfluous outcome to life, property or environment. Assessment of risk is realized through calculation of the probability of the times an event occurs when it occurs. This covers the beginning of the event, development as well as diffusion of the event as well as the conditions that lead up to the occurrence of the event. In the case of a fire outbreak, risk is equaled to the unwanted fire dangers that lead up to loss of life, damage to property and the environment hence calling for fire risk management techniques. Fire risk management is not as hard as it might seem but depending with the magnitude of the fire, certain methods would be necessary to deal with it. Fire risk management method needs an appropriate strategy and software in order to know what to do and do it very well. The first way to analyze a risk is through event tree analysis. This is a comprehensive analysis method that entails the process and necessary safety measures. It is based on a double judgment whereby the event has taken place or it is likely to take place smoothly or something has gone wrong with it. Event tree analysis is suitable for analyzing the outcome from an event that has failed or gave unpleasant results. An event tree has a commencement point which could be malfunction of a constituent, release of a dangerous element or increase in temperature or pressure. The outcome of the event takes individual paths which can be assigned possibility of happening and that possibility calculated. As much as more technologically advanced methods have been created, this method is still used to give introductory details or comprehensive details about fire risk and general safeguarding of the fire system. The dependability of fire protection systems is also premeditated through this method. This method involves visual representation of all the activities that take place within a system. Just like a tree that spreads out when it grows; this method broadens with the increased number of events. All these events have a common starting point which is the initiating event. This method is useful where the event takes place in succession. It becomes possible to determine areas or situations where fire is likely to break through the facts previously gathered about the start, spread and management of fire. The possibility of fire occurrence analyzed from the previous situations is useful in management of current and future occurrences. Such is the main aim of the event tree tool for fire risk assessment. The top-down method is important whenever the operational feature of a fire system is under scrutiny. Besides the main cause being examined, the resulting events are also scrutinized and how they lead up to the main cause. An event tree provides a suitable graphical presentation that shows clearly the root cause and other minor causes that result from the main cause. Through the presentation, it becomes easier to establish the events that need to occur simultaneously in order for the main event to take place. Such events are categorized together because they are the ones that set off the main event. In case only one of the minor causes is necessary to trigger the main cause, they are placed separately. For faster analysis and calculations, event tree software is vital. The software comes up with event trees that are clear and comprehensive. There is a variety of this software in the market and choice should be made depending with your business. Some of the features that the software should have are authentic monitoring and reporting features to keep you on track whenever there is an incident. The software should have clear guidelines, policies and procedures that make it user-friendly hence give accurate account of the happenings. In case this seems challenging, companies that provide these services can be contracted. They might be costly but they can be reliable therefore saving you the hassle of doing the work yourself. event tree for fire risk assessment sample Causes 9. Cost Benefit analysis Cost Benefit analysis is a method of risk assessment that ascertain that the analysis of the risk assessment is efficiently performed by guaranteeing that there is a proper analysis done. Consequently the risk assessment system used is partitioned into smaller and controllable levels (Vose, 2008). This makes them easy to work with as one can find the most favorable combinations of requirements of a given analysis. Afterwards a risk prediction is performed depending on secondary data such as the probability of risks arising from for instance failure of fire detectors or even on similar risky events that occurred in the past (Vose, 2008). Cost Benefit analysis identifies sources of fire, hazards and assesses the control measures that are already in place and finally proposing measures that can be implemented to maximize fire safety within the building. For instance, fire risks can be caused either by natural means or man-made appliances like electric devices used in daily activities. The fire risks in buildings cannot be easily eliminated hence a need of ways of reducing the probability of these risks occurrences and consequences they come with. Fire risk assessment must always be carried out so as to identify risks, evaluate them, eliminate, reduce, transfer or retain the possible risks depending on approaches used to ensure fire safety in the buildings that can be purposeful or accidental in nature. It is an obligation of every individual to be certain that control measures are up to date in dealing with fire outbreaks for instance, in the UK fire risk assessment is a must for all business premises and it must be conducted in a manner that comply with UK Fire Safety Regulations (Vose, 2008). 10. Utility Function Method for Risk Assessment The utility function explains how risk assessment can be conducted to satisfy the needs of all individuals within and around the building . The function is normally expressed in mathematical terms. The owner and people involved in daily activities within the building ought to obtain a greater level of satisfaction when perceived risk of fire is low (Michael Frenkel, 2005). Therefore, an option made should be desirable to the people ensuring they are safe from all consequences of fire occurrence. Moreover the Utility function method propels the owner of a building to point out operational risks grading them in on the basis of integrated utility quantifier (Michael Frenkel, 2005). It normally leads the decision makers to come up with their resolutions as risk aversion that is, completely avoiding risks; risk neutral or to take risks as they come thus an individual is able to convey his or her anticipation of the risks of fire occurrence and the possible consequences. The utility function method of risk assessment leads one to select the utmost risk option so as to lower the general projected utility (Michael Frenkel, 2005)that is the decision picked must maximize safety from any impending danger of fire within the buildings. 11) pros and cons of the different methods for risk assessment. Fire risk assessment of a building is very essential. It is a responsibility that should never be ignored because it is through this assessment that fire hazards can be identified, evaluated and removed hence ensuring that enough fire safety arrangements are made and people’s well being within the building is maximized. It ensures that dangerous substances are stored safely or removed from the building. This would mean no hazards are put close to any fuel thus reducing fire risks (Drysdale, 2011). It boosts the installation of fire detection and warning systems within the building so that people can know when there is fire and escape. Ensure that there are emergency routes established within the building which can help when there is danger (Drysdale, 2011). Furthermore the exit plan is put in place that can assist everybody escape including children and disable individuals. 12) How you would allocate a fixed budget to respond to the risks as assessed Allocation of a fixed budget to respond to the risks as assessed requires plausible and precise quantitative assessments of the susceptibility. Sensibility of risk assessment can be implemented through recognition of hazards and stressors and analysis of the connection between the two. Optimum allocation of resources can be performed as follows: Through Research: research avails the efforts and practical knowledge to implement resource allocation models which helps to eradicate difficulties in encountered in risk management and assessment. It also assists in formulation of decision and risk analysis models which are required in probability of accurate assessments. For instance a case study of a researcher expression of analytic procedures and use of expensive set of tools is an optimal resource allocation well-versed with risk assessment. The main focus in every research is risk management, which perilously depends on risk and economic assessment contexts. Applied Relevance: This includes delivering information and resources where it is needed, leading to avoidance and management of risks. Corporate governance: Corporate governance is the convenient and affordable system to control and optimize resource allocation. The formation of a stewardship is an arm of the corporate governance to impose responsibilities and guard resources. The formulation of strategic goals, providing of leadership contributes to effectiveness of management and risk management and review of the effectiveness of internal control, which In the UK, has a series of reports that had a noticeable power on the on risk assessment and management through corporate governance (Ostrom and Cheryl, 2012, pg 114). References Drysdale, D. (2011). An Introduction to Fire Dynamics, 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. Michael Frenkel, G. D. (2005). Risk Management; Challenge and Opportunity, 2nd ed. Springer. Vose, D. (2008). Risk Analysis; A Quantitative Guide, 3rd ed. . Chippenham. Wiltshire: Antony Rowe Ltd. Yung, D. (2009). Principles of Fire Risk Assessment in Buildings. Wiley. Donald D.(2010). Designing an Effective Risk Matrix. ioMosaic Corporation White Paper. Retrieved from http://www.iomosiac.com/docs/whitepapers/risk-ranking.pdf Great Britain. Dept. for Communities and Local Government. (2006). Fire safety risk assessment : offices and shops. Wetherby : Dept. for Communities and Local Government. Vadrevu, K. P., Eaturu, A., Badarinath, K. V., & S. (2010). Fire risk evaluation using multicriteria analysis--a case study. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment , 223- 239. Yung, D. T. (2008). Principles of fire risk assessment in buildings. Chichester: Wiley. Quantified risk assessment techniques-Institute of engineering and technology-health and safety (August 2012) Literature review of fire risk assessment -G.V. Hadjisophocleous and Z. Fu (2003)- http://www.bse.polyu.edu.hk/researchCentre/Fire_Engineering/summary_of_output/j ournal/IJEPBFC/V6/p.28-45.pdf Ostrom, T Lee and Wilhelmsen Cheryl, 2012, Risk Assessment: Tools, Techniques, and Their Applications. New york: John Wiley & Sons. Antony, Albin, 2006, Fault Tree Analysis for Automotive Pressure Sensor Assembly Lines. London: ProQuest. Wells, G. 1998, Hazards Identification and Risk Assessment, IChemE. Mannan, Sam and P Frank, 2005, Lees. Lee's Loss Prevention in the Process Industries:. Ed. Sam Mannan and P Frank . Lees. Vols. 3, illustrated. Chicago: Butterworth-Heinemann. Stapelberg, Frederick Rudolph, 2008, Handbook of Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety in Engineering Design. Washington DC: Springer. Read More