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.