FirstNet and AT&T outline Super Bowl support for first responders

First responders support plan for the Big Game

FirstNet, Built with AT&T has outlined a connectivity plan to support first responders and public safety officials during the Super Bowl in the Bay Area.

In a statement, Scott Agnew, President – FirstNet, AT&T said the planning has involved more than a year of coordination with the City of San Jose, the San Jose Police Department and the San Jose Fire Department, alongside other federal, state and local agencies.

The company said the Bay Area already has Band 14 coverage intended to provide dedicated public safety connectivity when needed.

It said its FirstNet Response Operations Group (ROG) will be on scene at the stadium and positioned inside Emergency Operations Centers (EOCs) in the Santa Clara and San Francisco areas.

Deployable assets and emergency operations support

FirstNet said the FirstNet ROG and the AT&T Network Disaster Recovery (NDR) team have multiple portable cell sites powered on and ready from a dedicated FirstNet fleet, including SatCOLTs, Response Communications Vehicles (RCVs), Compact Rapid Deployables (CRDs) and other deployable solutions.

It said it has also drawn on the AT&T commercial fleet, including LEO Cell Trailers (LCTs), described as designed to deliver temporary cell service in harsh environments, positioned to support public safety on FirstNet in the Bay Area if needed.

A LEO Cell Trailer (LCT) was shown deployed to support public safety on FirstNet near the stadium.

San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan said: “San Jose was the first city in the country to fully adopt FirstNet because we believe in equipping our first responders with the best technology to keep our community safe.

“Reliable communication from AT&T is helping thousands of fans have a safe experience at the Big Game in the Capital of Silicon Valley.”

FirstNet said it has a fleet of more than 190 deployable assets dedicated for public safety, in addition to more than 750 AT&T commercial assets nationwide.

Five reasons to go rugged in public safety: Sonim Technologies on building phones for fireground realties

Michael Coad, Senior Vice President, Product Management, Sonim Technologies, Inc. explains rugged device value for responders needing operational reliability within demanding regulatory frameworks

Our firefighters, safety workers, and first responders are under more pressure and performing in more hazardous and difficult environments than ever before.

Studies have found that climate change has already led to an increase in wildfire season length, wildfire frequency, and burned area.

The wildfire season has also expanded in many regions because of factors including warmer springs, longer summer dry seasons, and drier soils and vegetation.

Constant, year-round fire dangers in large swaths of the US have a huge impact on our first responders and is driving the need for more durable, secure, and rugged mobile devices that offer software applications that are applicable for use in the field.

Public safety workers also face tough, rough, dirty jobsites, meaning the risk for mobile device damage or breakage is high.

According to one source, 89% of first responders use their mobile phones as part of their everyday work tasks, highlighting the importance of real-time communications as the bedrock of public safety.

Bottom line: there is a critical and urgent need for mobile-friendly technology to ensure first responders can work anywhere they’re called and stay connected to the people they serve, even in remote areas.

Despite the high probability mobile devices may be damaged in challenging first responder work environments, budgets are generally tight and the procurement cycles long for federal, state, and local governments, leaving little room for breakdowns of technology and broken phones.

Going ‘rugged’ for consistent, clear communications

There are five key reasons why fire and public safety workers should consider rugged devices when choosing handheld mobile phones:

Lower total cost of ownership

Rugged devices hold their value for longer than non-rugged devices, cost less to repair, and don’t require expensive aftermarket accessories.

Using rugged devices reduces the need to replace broken or damaged devices, which can result in missed calls and communications with team members during emergencies.

Built for extreme environments

Devices designed for first responders should be drop-resistant and able to survive drops onto hard surfaces.

Rugged mobile phones should also be safe to use in hazardous environments where flammable materials may be present and resist dirt, water, and chemicals.

The ability to remain operational in extreme temperatures and have non-incendive ratings is especially important for firefighters and public safety workers.

Devices should also be equipped with loud speakers that can be heard clearly in noisy environments.

Enhanced mobile features

Push-to-talk (PTT) capabilities are extremely important for rugged devices designed for first responders.

PTT is helpful for public safety workers who rely on one-touch walkie-talkie style communications.

Modern PTT provides the ability to instantly share files, including videos, which is useful in situations where a visual understanding of the situation is critical.

Devices equipped with a 5000mAh battery ensure longer battery life for all-day productivity, while built-in cameras help document activity at the worksite.

Integrated security

Built-in security features ensure public safety workers have a secure means of communicating, creating mobile workflows, and sending information to and from the cloud, including rural areas.

Other software-based features for public safety applications include Mobile Device Management, barcode scanning, and SOS modes that trigger “man down” or “lone worker” alerts.

Dedicated public safety networks

Rugged devices should provide built-in support for full use of dedicated public safety broadband networks like AT&T FirstNet, Verizon Frontline, or T-Mobile T-Priority.

This support offers extended coverage, particularly in rural and remote areas, and can handle large amounts of data.

These networks allow firefighters and first responders to tap into specialised capabilities required to meet mission needs, helping them to protect their communities.

Features that promote ease of use allow first responders and public safety workers to focus on their mission to keep the communities they serve safe.

Addressing today’s communication challenges

Firefighters, first responders, and public safety workers operate in some of the most demanding and unpredictable environments, where communication, speed, and reliability can mean the difference between life and death.

Challenges such as extreme weather, hazardous conditions, and limited connectivity are why traditional consumer-grade devices often fall short and could compromise operational efficiency and safety.

Rugged mobile devices specifically engineered to withstand harsh environments, resist water and dust, endure drops and shocks, and function reliably in extreme temperatures, ensure uninterrupted communication and performance in critical moments.

Integrating rugged mobile devices into public safety operations offers voluminous benefits that directly support mission success.

By adopting ruggedised technology, our firefighters, public safety workers, and first responders can focus on what matters most—delivering more effective and timely responses to the communities they serve.

About the author

Michael Coad is senior vice president, product management, at Sonim Technologies, and has been with the company for nearly 15 years.

Prior to Sonim, Coad served as a consultant for Comcast’s wireless business and was vice president of partner development for Qualcomm, Inc.

He has deep expertise in advanced design, development, and management of wireless products, services, and applications, particularly for mobile wireless markets using 5G/4G technologies.

This was originally published in the January 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.

Overcoming language barriers during emergencies: How Dals supports police, fire and ambulance teams

Nick Clancy, Key Account Manager at Dals, offers practical steps for using interpreters in times of crisis including briefing, pacing and a short BSL guide

When an emergency occurs, clear communication matters as much as a trauma kit, a charged firehose or the Jaws of Life.

If a caller, casualty or witness doesn’t speak English well, doesn’t understand, or can’t hear you clearly, the resulting uncertainty can escalate an already dangerous situation.

When critical messages don’t reach people in a language they understand, the consequences can be devastating.

For example, the exclusive use of English during official communications in Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans caused widespread confusion, particularly among Hispanic and Vietnamese immigrants.

Similarly, the delayed translation of carbon monoxide warnings led to preventable deaths in the Hanukkah Eve windstorm in Washington State.

To avoid a repetition of such tragic events, language needs to be part of the emergency plan from the outset and qualified interpreters need to be available to everyone who needs them.

First things first

In the early stages of an emergency, most hold-ups happen in three places: confirming the exact location and hazards in the control room; giving safety instructions when the first crew arrives; and passing information across services during handover.

A trained interpreter is fundamental to helping improve understanding at every stage, but it works best if they are involved early.

In fast-moving situations, it’s easy to see why one might assume contacting an interpreter could lead to delays, but with established language services provider contracts, an interpreter typically connects by phone or video in around 30 seconds.

Early connection steadies people, helps crews give clear instructions and avoids risky ad-hoc interpreting by relatives or bystanders.

Thus, as soon as you recognise a language barrier, whether in a control room or at the scene, it’s best to add an interpreter to the conversation.

Telephone interpreting is usually the quickest and most reliable option, though video is the right choice when facial cues matter or when British Sign Language is needed.

Avoid using off-the-shelf machine translation for life-critical instructions because automated systems that have not been developed by a specialised provider often struggle with noise and dialects, mistranslate specialist terms or invent errors.

They can also lead to privacy, safeguarding and evidential risks.

Be alert to sensitivities: a match that’s technically correct may still be the wrong fit – for example, you wouldn’t want to pair a Russian interpreter with a Ukrainian speaker.

And if a different dialect or a female interpreter would help, ask for it, even if it takes a few extra seconds to arrange.

Give a clear brief

Once you have connected to your interpreter on the most appropriate device, keep your language plain without slipping into slang, jargon or acronyms.

Stay focused on the person you’re helping, not the device, maintaining eye contact, a steady tone and open hand signals.

The interpreter provides your words, but you must lead the conversation.

Be open about timing from the outset.

Some rescues or searches will run longer than a single interpreter can stay on the line, so give details of any expected timeline to the interpreter and switch promptly if they aren’t available for the duration.

If a call drops, reconnect to the same interpreter wherever possible to maintain continuity.

For interpreters, the most common pitfall is crews going too fast.

Often, interpreters try to keep up, and the person being helped nods to be polite even when they haven’t understood.

Slow down the exchange slightly and build in natural pauses.

Give one instruction or question at a time, then stop to allow it to be interpreted.

Check that the message has landed with a simple repeat-back, for example: “Tell me where the children are now.”

Sound matters as much as words, so if you can, step away from machinery and other noise, close a door or turn away from the wind before speaking on a handset or speakerphone.

What seems clear to you can be muffled to an interpreter, so keep the device close rather than dangling at arm’s length.

Always stay in charge of the interaction; the interpreter provides the language and clears the understanding, but you must maintain control.

If a side conversation starts between the interpreter and the person you’re helping, ask for a brief summary and bring focus back to the task.

Once the immediate danger has passed, return to the occupant/survivor with the interpreter and explain what has happened and what will happen next.

That brief update reduces anxiety, avoids repeat 999 calls and makes handovers smoother.

Always record the basics in your log: the language, when you connect, any interpreter changes, and the main points raised, so lessons can be taken, and crews are protected, should any questions arise later.

Preparation is key

It’s worth pointing out that on-demand interpreting only works if you’ve prepared for it.

This requires an active contract with a language services provider that includes telephone, video and British Sign Language.

A good provider and system lets you reconnect to the same interpreter if a call drops.

If it can’t, it will connect to the next available interpreter straight away.

Quality matters and interpreters in emergency work must be properly vetted, trained and experienced.

For example, we require at least 400 hours of relevant work for police clients before adding someone to urgent bookings, along with language testing, right-to-work checks, ID, DBS, Non-Police Personnel Vetting Level 3 or equivalent clearances, references and sector-specific training.

Emotional steadiness also counts, because people in shock or grief need a calm, impartial voice.

Staff need training too.

Crews and control should practise how to connect to an interpreter, switch languages and reconnect after a dropped call until it’s second nature.

Simple phrase sheets in common local languages can help staff until they connect, but they are not a replacement for a qualified interpreter.

Make sure your equipment is fit for purpose.

A rugged tablet with a stand and decent speakers works well in a command vehicle, but don’t overlook the basics: a plain handset often beats a clever app in bad weather.

In many instances, while out on jobs, normal mobile calls are most reliable, while internet calling only helps where there is strong Wi-Fi signal.

Keep power banks charged, so you don’t run out of battery mid-call.

Know where your signal dead spots are in high-rises, basements and rural patches, and agree in advance where you’ll move to get a clearer line when it’s safe.

Plan for situations to progress

Not every incident stays small.

For bigger jobs, such as multi-occupancy buildings, major fires or mass-casualty events, it’s best to use on-demand telephone interpreting to get urgent safety messages across, then bring in in-person interpreters for rest centres, family liaison and longer interviews.

Plan that shift from remote to in-person, work it into exercises, and test it so the changeover is smooth when it counts.

Emergencies move fast, but confusion should never set in when you have capable teams and expert systems in place.

When language support is built into incident planning, crews can stay in control, protect lives and reduce risk, no matter the situation.

With the right preparation, language should never be the weakest link in your emergency response.

Catering for British Sign Language users

There’s a common misconception that British Sign Language (BSL) is a signed version of English, but it’s an entirely different language with its own grammar, syntax and structure.

This means writing to communicate isn’t likely to work well in an emergency.

The obvious further complication is that telephone interpreting isn’t an option.

Thankfully, on-demand BSL video interpreting has become much more available, and interpreters can usually be secured within a minute.

In the early stages of an incident, family or friends will often try to help and this can be useful.

However, it’s best to move to a qualified BSL interpreter as soon as possible.

Once you’ve connected to an interpreter, make sure your tablet or other screen is at eye level, with adequate lighting, so the signer can clearly see.

It’s important to be patient while the interpreter communicates your words as signing takes longer than speaking.

Keep your non-verbal cues steady and visible.

Check understanding by asking the interpreter to relay, in their own words, what the person has signed.

For longer welfare, safeguarding or formal statements, keep the same interpreter connected where possible.

This was originally published in the January 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.

Public safety LTE and 5G investment to pass $6.3bn, shaping fire sector communications

Public safety broadband investment and fire sector impact

Annual global spending on LTE and 5G New Radio (NR) – based public safety broadband infrastructure and devices is forecast to exceed $6.3 billion by the end of 2028, with fire and rescue services among the agencies expected to transition away from legacy radio systems.

SNS Telecom & IT stated that the growth is being driven by migration from land mobile radio (LMR) systems, including TETRA and Tetrapol, to 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) broadband technology across multiple national markets.

Western and Northern European countries, including the United Kingdom, France, Finland and Sweden, are moving ahead with plans to migrate all public safety users, including fire services, to nationwide mission-critical 3GPP networks between 2028 and 2031.

South Korea completed its transition earlier, attributed to the absence of a digital LMR network with nationwide coverage.

National public safety networks and emergency response operations

Multiple national-scale public safety broadband deployments are operational or moving into the delivery phase, directly affecting emergency response agencies.

Saudi Arabia’s $8.7 billion mission-critical broadband network is being delivered for defence, law enforcement and intelligence agencies, forming part of a nationwide platform that will support emergency communications.

The Hong Kong Police Force’s $250 million 5G-based NGCS project was cited as a comparable national-scale initiative in a smaller market.

Other major programmes referenced include the United States’ FirstNet, South Korea’s Safe-Net, Great Britain’s Emergency Services Network (ESN), France’s RRF, Sweden’s SWEN, Finland’s VIRVE 2, New Zealand’s Public Safety Network (PSN), Japan’s PSMS, Ireland’s new mission-critical communications system, Spain’s SIRDEE broadband network and Italy’s public safety LTE and 5G service.

These networks are designed to support mission-critical voice, data and video services used during emergency response operations.

Network capabilities relevant to fire and rescue services

3GPP-compliant mission-critical (MCX) services are described as a foundational element of nationwide public safety broadband networks, with recent contracts awarded for interoperability gateways and standards-based IWF technology.

Other development priorities include in-building coverage enhancement, 5G NR sidelink, hybrid LMR-broadband terminals and other alternatives for off-network communications, rapidly deployable network assets and satellite direct-to-device connectivity.

Integration of NG911, live video, geolocation services, AI analytics and situational awareness platforms is also cited as part of the technical scope.

SNS Telecom & IT estimated that annual investments reached $5 billion in 2025 and forecast market growth at a compound annual growth rate of about 8% over the next three years, reaching more than $6.3 billion by the end of 2028.

BSI committee considers new emergency communication Code of Practice for premises plans

Emergency communication standard proposal and scope

A proposal is being considered to develop a new British Standard covering the use of sound systems for emergency purposes in premises where a formal communication plan is required.

The Fire Industry Association (FIA) said it has been informed of the proposal being considered by BSI committee EPL/100 – Audio systems for emergency communication.

The proposal relates to a new British Code of Practice for emergency sound systems used under the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025 (Martyn’s Law), including communication for lockdown, evacuation and invacuation scenarios.

It also covers emergency sound systems used for fire emergencies, particularly in high-rise residential buildings, where audio communication systems operate independently of the fire detection and alarm system.

Purpose, content and consultation window

BSI is considering the new standard to address areas where existing guidance is limited or fragmented.

The proposed Code of Practice would focus on communication outcomes, with guidance on planning and system design.

It would also cover audibility and intelligibility.

It would include guidance on testing and the ongoing operation of emergency audio systems.

The standard is intended to complement existing fire, security and product standards, rather than duplicate them.

The proposal is open for comment until 19 February.

FIA members who wish to contribute are encouraged to submit comments directly to BSI via the project link, where registration may be required.

The FIA said further details on the proposal can be found on the BSI Standards Development Portal.

The future of fire service data: How FSRI rebuilt US incident reporting with NERIS

Dr Craig Weinschenk, Lead Engineer for NERIS at the Fire Safety Research Institute, discusses rebuilding the foundation of US emergency data management from the ground up

For nearly half a century, US fire departments have relied on the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) to record and share incident data.

But a framework designed for paper forms in the 1970s has struggled to keep pace with the demands of a connected, data-driven era.

Its manual processes, static structure and years-long data lag limited the fire service’s ability to analyse trends or act on emerging risks in real time.

The new National Emergency Response Information System (NERIS) aims to change that.

Developed by the Fire Safety Research Institute (FSRI) in partnership with the US Fire Administration and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Science and Technology, NERIS provides a cloud-based, geospatial and user-focused platform that captures and shares fire data almost instantly.

IFSJ Editor Iain Hoey sat down with Dr Craig Weinschenk, Lead Engineer on NERIS at FSRI, to learn how the system was built and what it could mean for the future of fire service data.

NFIRS served the fire service for nearly 50 years – what were its limitations, and why was a new approach required?

NFIRS was conceived in 1973 after the Fire Control Act and it started as paper forms, even carbon copy forms where you had three copies.

To make field reporting doable, “structure fire” became “111” because three numbers are easier to process than handwriting.

That served the field well for a long time, but you needed a big lookup table to know the codes.

When things started to digitise in the late 80s, early 90s into the 2000s, the approach was to digitise NFIRS.

It became a digital version of paper forms instead of taking advantage of advances in database technology.

Expectations for data expanded, but the system stayed tied to that older mindset.

It was not geospatial.

You filled out a complete address but there was no latitude and longitude in the payload, even though incidents all occur somewhere.

It was also very manual.

You completed the record locally, exported a text file, sent it to the state, then to the federal government.

Everyone processed plain text files that were emailed around.

That does not scale and it creates data lag.

When your environment changes in three-to-nine-month windows but the data lags 18 to 24 months, you miss chances to make real time impact because by the time it is aggregated you are looking too far in the past.

There were practical constraints too.

The hardware was old and the software was old, and you could not upgrade one without breaking the other.

If you tried to build an NFIRS 6.0 you were rebuilding the same system and moving one step forward.

The decision was to rebuild from the ground up, take lessons learned from geospatial needs and time lag, and put the fire service first on incident collection.

That is what we did with NERIS.

How did this public-private partnership work in practice, and why was it important?

We work hand in hand with the United States Fire Administration and with DHS S&T.

We have weekly stand-ups and the rigor you expect from a national project.

We produce documentation and artifacts, and we have oversight from security scans to operational performance metrics, all documented and shared with the federal government.

That oversight ensures we have no blind spots and keeps the project healthy.

As a nonprofit building this, we can also be nimble.

We are not owning local data or hosting on federal servers inside federal firewalls, which have limitations.

We can hire a dynamic team and move quickly while following standards and best practices.

We see ourselves as stewards of a national system by and for the local fire service, building to support USFA’s mission and DHS’s mission while putting the fire service first.

Data governance is foundational.

Local departments own their data.

They collect it and send it.

The value is in aggregating at local data  regionally statewide, and nationally, but the department still owns the record.

That principle is a critical piece that makes this work.

What is causation data and why does it matter for incident reporting and prevention?

In NFIRS the causation data was in the primary record.

That created a challenge.

Either the record stayed open while you waited for an independent investigator to provide answers, or people put something in just to close the record.

We decoupled the schemas.

We have a core schema that looks at general causality from a fire behaviour and safety perspective, not from criminality.

We are deliberate in our language so we can understand the incident from safety, response and frequency perspectives.

Then we have a follow-on called Incident Analysis.

The two are decoupled.

You can close the first part so we know the call happened and we can run metrics on demand, while the analysis can be completed 24 or 48 hours later when the right staff are available or when more time is needed to understand the incident.

That puts the right information in front of the right people at the right time, instead of forcing someone who may not be qualified to answer those questions.

How does the system balance the need for national-level analysis with the practical, day-to-day needs of local departments?

In addition to collection, we are building an analytics platform that runs as part of the system.

Every department gets an Insights tab with high level information about response.

Incidents appear on maps, colour coded by response duration so you can spot hotspots.

We are deploying a unit-level response dashboard to see metrics on particular units, frequency of units running together and distances travelled.

We also show things around casualties and rescues, so you can understand both loss and saves.

Data ladders up.

A state sees the same dashboards in aggregate.

They can view activity percentages, performance across the state and distributions of calls by discipline.

Because we built an API-based system instead of manual data movement, when a record shows up it is available to the local and to the state, and it is available to be pulled by the federal government into its infrastructure via secure API.

They keep a full copy and can run their analytics in real time.

We have cut lag from roughly 14 or 15 days from local to state, and 6, 12 or 18 months to federal, down to hours.

In practice we usually see records completed at the end of a shift, QA and QC over the next shift, then submission.

If you want to keep using your own tools, you can do that and still access your data via secure API.

Looking ahead, what do you see as the next steps for NERIS?

NFIRS sunsets on 31 December 2025.

Looking at 2026 there are two phases: take what we learned on onboarding and improve the system, schemas, questions and workflows.

Then focus on analytics.

Provide products that help departments do their job, identify gaps in response at hyper-local levels, and surface larger trends regionally, at state level and nationally.

The aim is to identify the next hazard and where to invest in research, because we are seeing data fast enough to act.

This was originally published in the January 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.

Norfolk fire service rolls out body-worn cameras across 42 stations

Body-worn cameras rollout across Norfolk fire stations

Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service has rolled out 160 body-worn cameras across 42 fire stations in the county.

Axon confirmed the rollout involves Axon Body 4 cameras with live streaming, real-time location data and two-way communication.

The company said the capability is intended to support quicker decision-making during complex incidents and improve coordination with other emergency services, including police and ambulance.

Axon said footage is also intended to support transparency, learning and post-incident review, alongside training and development.

Deployment scope, early usage and stated aims

The cameras were rolled out across the service in December, with nearly 100 hours of footage from over 500 video clips already stored.

Axon described the Norfolk deployment as its second-largest body-worn camera rollout with a UK fire and rescue service, following West Yorkshire.

Axon said it works with eight UK fire services on body-worn cameras in daily operations, adding that 55% of UK police forces use the technology.

Alex Lowe, Senior Director for UK and Ireland at Axon, said: “We’re delighted that Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service is adopting our cutting-edge body-worn camera technology.

“Our cameras have been invaluable for first responders, and we’re excited to see them play an important role in ensuring fire personnel safety and enhancing public trust in Norfolk.”

Scott Norman, Deputy Chief Fire Officer at Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service, said: “We’re keen to utilise technology wherever we can to keep the people of Norfolk safe, and these body-worn cameras are a great demonstration of that.

“The devices will be brought in to support firefighters at all of our stations in Norfolk, helping us with learning at incidents, providing evidence for fire investigations, and enhancing the safety of our staff.

“Our teams have already said they’re benefitting from the technology, so I’m sure this will be a major boost for how our service operates, and for the communities we serve.”

Cllr Margaret Dewsbury, Norfolk County Council Cabinet Member for Communities and Partnerships, said: “I am really pleased NFRS has taken this step to use body-worn cameras.

“This new technology will enhance the fantastic work already undertaken by the service, offering multiple benefits to keep fire staff and Norfolk’s communities safe.”

The rollout is intended to support incident learning, evidence capture for investigations and staff safety during operational activity and routine visits.

Motorola Solutions delivers control room upgrade for Scotland’s 999 response

What a £30 million control room rollout changes

Motorola Solutions has delivered the first live component of Scotland’s New Mobilising System, now operating across the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service’s (SFRS) three Operations Control sites in Edinburgh, Johnstone and Dundee.

The first component is the Integrated Communication Control system (ICCS), delivered through a £30 million contract.

The company said the ICCS provides a telephony and radio communications platform designed for resilient operations.

The rollout followed a phased implementation supported by months of training and testing.

Control rooms and call handling changes

The new system is intended to improve how control rooms answer 999 calls.

It is also designed to improve how SFRS mobilises resources when incidents are reported.

SFRS said the ICCS phase forms part of its long-term Strategic Service Review Programme.

The service said the new system is intended to bring greater stability and resilience to mobilisation, supporting communities and operational crews.

Scale of demand on operations control

SFRS said firefighters across Scotland attended more than 74,000 emergencies last year.

The service said each emergency required one or more 999 calls.

SFRS said the new system will allow Operations Control staff to deal with day-to-day incidents effectively and efficiently.

What SFRS leaders said about ICCS

Jonathan Henderson, Assistant Chief Officer at the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, said: “Our Operations Control staff handles some of the most challenging situations every day.

“This new ICCS platform gives them tools to help them work faster and with greater confidence.

“Delivering the upgrade on time shows the strength of the partnership behind it, and ultimately it means the public benefits from a more resilient emergency response.”

Ministerial visit to Edinburgh control

SFRS said Siobhian Brown MSP, Minister for Victims and Community Safety, visited Edinburgh Operations Control on Wednesday 7 January 2026.

Brown said: “This modern mobilisation system, backed by record Scottish Government funding, enhances resilience, strengthens communication, and ensures that the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service can reach those who need them as swiftly as possible.

“It gives control room firefighters the tools they need to make critical decisions quickly and effectively, helping keep communities across Scotland safe.

“I am grateful to all those who work in SFRS control rooms for their continued professionalism and dedication.”

Motorola Solutions on delivery and next steps

Dave Shorland, U.K. and Ireland Sales Director of Motorola Solutions, said: “The control room lies at the heart of emergency response, and the staff who manage these high-pressure situations deserve modern, resilient technology to mobilise help exactly where it’s needed.

“This new platform empowers call handlers to respond to 999 calls with greater speed and clarity.

“We’re proud of our close collaboration with SFRS, defined by our shared dedication to helping to protect and save lives across communities in Scotland.”

SFRS said it will continue monitoring performance and supporting staff with Motorola Solutions.

The service said it is also preparing for future development and optimisation work.

Survey finds Australians back AI for emergency call handling upgrades

AI in call handling wins trust

Motorola Solutions said an independent research study found strong public support in Australia and New Zealand for sharing personal data with emergency services and using AI to improve emergency call handling.

The findings were published in Melbourne on Thursday 11 December 2025, following a September 2025 survey of more than 2,500 residents across the two countries conducted by Researchscape.

According to Motorola Solutions, the research was designed to inform emergency services agencies as they plan new emergency call handling and computer aided dispatch deployments.

The company said the report frames this work as a modernisation effort for emergency call handling services first introduced in the early 1960s.

Location and health data willingness

Motorola Solutions said 86% of respondents reported feeling comfortable sharing their exact location data with emergency services.

The company said 75% were comfortable sharing personal information about medical conditions or allergies.

Motorola Solutions added that 54% were comfortable sharing wearable health data from smartwatches, rings and other devices.

The report also recorded what it described as an expectation gap between public willingness to share data and beliefs about whether emergency services can receive and use it.

Motorola Solutions said expectations of capability were lower by 1% for exact location data, 20% for medical conditions or allergies and 16% for wearable health data.

AI options for emergency call handling

Motorola Solutions said 58% of respondents supported the use of AI to detect critical keywords in emergency calls, citing examples such as “knife” or “collision” to accelerate emergency response.

The company said support also extended to ranking emergency calls by urgency at 55%.

Motorola Solutions said 52% supported automatically identifying potential safety threats in live video footage and 52% supported enabling live translations of callers speaking foreign languages.

Motorola Solutions said 78% of respondents were unaware that AI technology is currently being used or developed for emergency call handling.

The company said those aware of AI usage were almost three times more likely to trust it, with 56% trust among those aware compared with 19% trust among those unaware.

Craig Anderson, Executive Chair, National Emergency Communications Working Group, said: “The Triple Zero and 111 hotlines have provided a lifeline for the public in times of crisis for more than 60 years, but the need to modernise emergency call handling technology has never been greater.

“These research findings show that communities expect emergency services to keep pace with rapid technology change, as well as clear generational shifts among younger users to provide more ways to contact emergency services in addition to voice calls.”

How people want to contact emergency services

Motorola Solutions said phone calls remain the dominant preferred method for contacting emergency services, cited by 88% of respondents.

The company said respondents also identified SMS or text messaging at 41%, smartphone apps at 38% and video calls at 15% as top alternatives.

Motorola Solutions said communication preferences differed across generations, with 95% of Baby boomers preferring traditional voice calls.

The company said smartphone apps were the preferred contact method among Millennials at 35%.

Con Balaskas, Managing Director, Motorola Solutions Australia and New Zealand, said: “In an era where we can track the arrival of rideshare services and use AI to deliver faster insights and improve our decision making, it’s not surprising that the public wants to see their emergency services make use of these innovations to help keep our communities safer.

“These findings provide valuable insights to help public safety agencies align their technology modernisation strategies with community needs and expectations, fostering stronger collaboration, better emergency management and a pathway to a safer future.”

What this means for emergency communications teams

Emergency call handling leaders and control room managers can use the reported figures to benchmark public acceptance of sharing exact location data, medical conditions or allergies and wearable health data during emergency calls.

Procurement officers and emergency communications programme leads can also use the breakdown of preferred contact methods, including SMS, apps and video, when assessing requirements for future call handling and computer aided dispatch upgrades.

Training officers and call taker supervisors may want to note the stated support for AI functions such as keyword detection, call ranking and live translation, alongside the reported trust gap between people who are aware of AI use and those who are not.

Technology and integration teams planning media-rich contact channels can also use the generational preference split, including high voice-call preference among Baby boomers and higher app preference among Millennials, when mapping channel demand and data intake needs.

Suffolk action plan progresses but culture concern stays open, says HMICFRS

Inspectorate keeps Suffolk culture concern open

His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) has reported that Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service has made early progress on a cultural action plan but that a formal cause of concern over values and leadership remains open after an October 2025 revisit.

HMICFRS inspected Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service in August and September 2024 and raised a cause of concern focused on values, culture and leadership behaviour.

The inspectorate made five recommendations, covering internal governance, role modelling by senior leaders, demonstration of values, communication with staff and confidence in raising concerns.

Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service submitted an action plan on 24 February 2025 setting out how it would respond.

HMICFRS staff revisited the service between 20 and 23 October 2025 to review progress against that plan.

In a letter dated 3 December 2025, His Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary and His Majesty’s Inspector of Fire & Rescue Services Lee Freeman stated that he was satisfied with current progress but that more work is needed to improve culture across the organisation.

The cause of concern and all five recommendations will therefore remain open until the next full inspection.

Governance changes and external support measures

According to the letter, Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service has produced a comprehensive action plan covering the cause of concern and recommendations.

The plan was developed with input from managers, staff groups and staff representative bodies, and draws on learning from the National Fire Chiefs Council.

It contains 37 goals, each broken down into actions, with senior responsible officers and deadlines identified for delivery.

The Chief Fire Officer is accountable for ensuring all recommendations are met.

Suffolk County Council has provided an additional £1.6 million over two years to support work on culture and staffing.

The cause of concern has been added to the service risk register, which brings it under formal oversight and scrutiny.

New governance arrangements now include a monthly continuous improvement meeting, a monthly senior leadership board and quarterly people, performance and projects meetings.

The continuous improvement meeting is chaired by a senior leader, attended by all middle managers and monitors progress against the action plan.

A quarterly performance assurance board also monitors progress, and issues can be escalated to the senior leadership board chaired by the Chief Fire Officer.

The action plan features in monthly performance conversations between the Chief Fire Officer, the Deputy Chief Fire Officer and area managers.

Terms of reference for each board have been reviewed, and some managers have been consulted on the new structure.

HMICFRS reported that it is too early to judge whether these governance changes will deliver sustainable benefits, as some staff do not yet understand the new arrangements or how they affect their work.

The recommendation on internal governance therefore remains open.

Values, leadership behaviour and Suffolk culture work in progress

HMICFRS stated that Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service is working to embed Suffolk County Council’s WE ASPIRE framework and the Fire Standards Board’s Core Code of Ethics.

An e-learning package on values has been introduced, and all staff are expected to complete it by 31 March 2026.

A new performance development review system has been published, including a behaviour-based objective and a specific objective for equality, diversity and inclusion.

Values are now referenced in governance meetings and learning and development sessions, and the service has strengthened its staff awards ceremony to recognise positive examples.

An external peer review focused on values and culture has also been commissioned.

HMICFRS found that most staff interviewed understood and demonstrated the expected values and behaviours.

Inspectors also found a small number of staff whose behaviour did not align with expectations, including one staff member who used inappropriate language when criticising values and culture training.

The inspectorate advised the service to evaluate whether current actions are achieving their intended impact and to consider further steps to build trust and confidence across the workforce.

As a result, the recommendation on demonstrating values and behaviours throughout the organisation remains work in progress and stays open.

On leadership, HMICFRS reported that most senior leaders are now seen as role models and are more visible following workplace visits and engagement on the inspection findings.

The Chief Fire Officer has accepted the inspection findings, taken personal responsibility for the response and commissioned an external organisation to support senior leadership development.

Senior leaders have attended team-building workshops on leadership and culture and completed National Fire Chiefs Council dignity at work training.

An external organisation has carried out 360-degree feedback for all senior leaders and most middle managers, although follow-up actions and sharing of feedback with teams have been inconsistent.

Some staff reported that certain senior leaders still appeared dismissive of the inspection findings or used clumsy language that left staff feeling undervalued.

HMICFRS concluded that leadership behaviour is improving but remains an area of ongoing work, so the recommendation on senior leaders acting as role models also remains open.

Communication workload and staff confidence issues

The letter records that Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service has introduced a programme of senior leader visits to every team at least once a year.

Staff told HMICFRS that these visits were not always structured and that messages could vary depending on which senior leader attended.

Senior leaders are expected to respond to issues raised during visits, and HMICFRS saw evidence of this happening in some cases.

Staff in at least one team reported that they had not received any response to several points raised with senior leaders.

The inspectorate advised the service to ensure that feedback from visits is handled consistently and that responses are routinely provided.

Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service uses staff bulletins on an app, direct email and instant messaging to communicate with its workforce.

Many staff told HMICFRS that they were overwhelmed by the volume of messages and found it hard to keep up, particularly after periods of leave.

Some staff said they did not have enough time during work to read all the information on every channel and were concerned that important messages could be missed.

The service is reviewing communication methods with staff groups, but HMICFRS reported that more work is needed to simplify channels and make communication more effective.

Firefighters and managers also referred to high turnover in management roles and heavy workload pressures, with some leaders responsible for too many areas.

As part of the £1.6 million investment, the service has created nine additional posts and is recruiting for a further eight roles.

Some staff felt their feedback on which posts to create had not been acted on, and HMICFRS advised the service to explain recruitment decisions more clearly so staff can understand how feedback has been considered.

The staff engagement network and equality, diversity and inclusion groups have been reviewed to ensure they can be used to provide feedback and propose improvements.

A staff survey has recently closed, with 43% of the workforce responding, and communication plans have been developed to share results and set out the response.

HMICFRS concluded that communication has improved but still needs further attention, so the recommendation on communication and feedback remains open.

Confidence to raise concerns and future monitoring

According to the letter, Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service has introduced an open chair policy for senior leadership board meetings.

This allows staff to attend and raise issues directly, and HMICFRS reported at least one example where a firefighter’s recommendation led to a change in organisational policy.

The service has also maintained an independent reporting line, run by an external organisation, which allows staff to report issues anonymously or confidentially.

There were 18 independent reports in 2024 and five reports in 2025 at the time of the revisit.

Some staff told HMICFRS they lacked confidence in the reporting process, were unsure what happened to their information and were aware of a negative experience.

The inspectorate noted that the service has improved its tracking of reports and appointed professional standards officers to manage grievances, disciplinaries and whistleblowing cases.

To increase transparency, HMICFRS suggested that Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service consider publishing information about grievances and disciplinaries for its workforce.

Overall, HMICFRS recognised that improving organisational culture will take time and that new initiatives may not yet be fully understood or accepted by all staff.

The inspectorate stated that Suffolk Fire and Rescue Service should review and evaluate how effective its initiatives have been so far, assess whether they are having the intended impact and ensure that improvements can be sustained beyond the current funding period.

HMICFRS will continue to monitor progress through updates from the service and will review developments in more detail at the next scheduled inspection.

Cultural oversight and governance lessons for other services

The letter gives fire and rescue chiefs and senior officers detailed examples of how an inspectorate is assessing culture, governance and leadership behaviour within a county fire and rescue service.

It shows how a formal action plan with defined goals, senior responsible officers and additional council funding is being used to respond to a cause of concern over values and culture.

For government departments and oversight bodies, the letter outlines how issues such as staff confidence in reporting, communication overload and leadership visibility are being examined alongside formal governance structures and risk registers.

Training officers and organisational development leads can draw on the described use of e-learning packages, performance development reviews, dignity at work training and 360-degree feedback as tools being scrutinised by HMICFRS during follow-up visits.

Professional standards teams and HR leads can see how independent reporting lines, professional standards officers and grievance data are being considered as part of assurance on whether staff feel able to raise concerns.