# 05 Design Principles and Lessons Learned

> Fire Service Safety Management System, version 0.3.3 (2026-10-25). The Human Factor. Document FSSMS-FND-05.
>
> Canonical: https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned
>
> Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 with the Adopting Agency Grant (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)
>
> General information only, not legal, medical or other professional advice. Verify every requirement against the current official text of the law, standards and manufacturer instructions that apply to you. Obtain your own legal review and consult your joint health and safety committee before adopting anything. You adopt, adapt, implement and rely on this material entirely at your own risk and on your own responsibility. Full terms: Terms of Use, thehumanfactor.ca.

## Why this note exists

Every policy, program, procedure and checklist in this package was shaped by evidence about how firefighters are killed and injured, why the fire service already knows most of what would prevent it, and why safety programs so often fail to take hold anyway. This note is that evidence base in one place. Read it before adapting any part of the package, because when a department asks “do we really need this element,” the answer is usually here.

The note has four parts: what the harm looks like; what the sector’s own safety movement has asked for; why programs fail and what works; and the human factors ideas the package is built on. It ends with two tables, one that maps recurring causes to the package element that controls each, and one that states each design principle with its evidence, followed by a short account of how the evidence shaped every part of the package.

> **Information: Delivery note**
>
> Some figures here come from secondary or summary sources; check the primary report before quoting them.

## Definitions

- **Line-of-duty death (LODD):** a death arising from the performance of fire service duties, including a death from an occupational disease recognized by a workers’ compensation board (Canadian Fallen Firefighters Foundation, n.d.).
- **Near miss:** an event that did not cause harm but could have under slightly different conditions.
- **Leading indicator:** a measure of an activity or condition that precedes harm (training completed, inspections done, reports made). **Lagging indicator:** a measure of harm after it has happened (injuries, exposures, collisions).
- **Safety climate:** the shared perception, at a point in time, of how much safety is valued by management and supervisors [(Zohar, 2000)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-zohar-2000). **Safety culture:** the deeper, slower-changing shared assumptions that climate reflects [(USFA & IAFC, 2015)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015).
- **Psychological safety:** the shared belief within a team that it is safe to speak up, ask, admit error and challenge [(Edmondson, 1999)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-edmondson-1999).
- **Work-as-done / work-as-imagined:** how a task is actually performed under real conditions, as against how a procedure or a planner imagines it [(Hollnagel, 2014)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hollnagel-2014).
- **Just culture:** an approach that distinguishes human error, at-risk behaviour and reckless behaviour and responds to each differently, so that reporting is not suppressed by fear of blame ([Marx, 2001](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-marx-2001); [Reason, 1997](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-reason-1997); [Dekker, 2016](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dekker-2016)).
- **Normalization of deviance:** the gradual process through which unacceptable practice becomes acceptable because it is repeated without catastrophic result [(Vaughan, 1996)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-vaughan-1996).
- **Learning team:** a short facilitated conversation with the people who do the work, held to understand how it is really done before designing any change [(Conklin, 2012)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-conklin-2012).

## 1. What kills and injures firefighters

### 1.1 The United States evidence base

The NIOSH Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program has investigated line-of-duty deaths since 1998. It is a public-health program: it does not enforce standards, find fault or assign blame, participation is voluntary, and each report records the event, the contributing factors and the prevention recommendations. It has investigated more than 750 deaths, roughly 40 percent of all US firefighter deaths in the period, and since the late 2010s some serious injuries as well (NIOSH, n.d.-b). Its reports are the largest open body of structured fire-service failure analysis anywhere, and nearly all Canadian lessons-learned material draws on them.

The most useful single analysis is the NIOSH summary of 282 investigations opened between 2006 and 2014, covering 306 deaths [(Hard et al., 2019)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hard-2019). Those investigations produced 1,067 recommendations, and 73 percent of them fit one of 12 categories. In rank order, the top ten were:

1.  Medical screening
2.  Fitness and wellness program
3.  Training
4.  Medical clearance for duty
5.  Standard operating procedures and guidelines
6.  Incident command
7.  Strategy and tactics
8.  Communications
9.  Personal protective equipment
10. Staffing

Set beside the earlier 1998 to 2005 analysis, the list barely moved. For cardiac deaths, the leading recommendations were the same in both periods except for the addition of medical clearance. For traumatic deaths, training moved to first place [(Hard et al., 2019)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hard-2019). The stability of the list across 16 years is the finding that matters most for this package: the fire service already knows what to do. The problem is uptake, and a program that only restates the recommendations will not change the outcome.

A NIOSH program evaluation in 2010 confirmed this from the other side. Most departments surveyed knew the investigation program and said they followed its recommendations, yet shortfalls persisted in cardiovascular health, vehicle safety and fireground procedures, and the largest shortfalls were in small and volunteer departments with limited money for equipment and preparation [(RTI International, 2010)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-rti-international-2010).

### 1.2 Cardiac events

Stress and overexertion, which in practice means sudden cardiac and cerebrovascular events, has been the leading cause of on-duty death in the United States every year on record except the pandemic year of 2020. In 2024 it accounted for 42 of 72 deaths, 58 percent, and 41 of those 42 were cardiovascular. Half of the cardiac deaths were volunteers. Almost half, 43 percent, occurred after the stressful activity had ended, within 24 hours. Across 2015 to 2024, two-thirds of fireground cardiac deaths were volunteers, although volunteers were 42 percent of fireground deaths overall [(USFA, 2025)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025).

NIOSH cardiac investigations find the same pattern again and again: underlying coronary artery disease, often undiagnosed or diagnosed and not acted on, with the event triggered by exertion during suppression, training, or response. The recommendations recur: annual medical evaluations to the occupational medical standard, exercise stress testing for members at elevated risk, physician clearance for return to duty, a mandatory wellness and fitness program, on-scene rehabilitation, and AEDs with trained members ([Hard et al., 2019](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hard-2019); NIOSH, n.d.-b). NIOSH often adds that the recommendations might not have prevented the particular death. That is the point. A medical and fitness program is a population intervention; it lowers the rate across the department rather than fixing one case. An earlier NIOSH alert put the cardiac share of on-duty deaths at roughly 45 percent and noted that most of those who died had known risk factors or prior diagnosed heart disease [(NIOSH, 2007)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-niosh-2007).

### 1.3 Vehicle collisions

Vehicle collisions were the third leading cause of US on-duty death in 2024, with eight deaths, 11 percent, and the second or third cause in every year of the preceding decade. Six of the eight responding and returning deaths in 2024 were volunteers. Across 2015 to 2024, almost a quarter of vehicle-collision deaths were in a privately owned vehicle [(USFA, 2025)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025). NIOSH vehicle reports recur on unused seat belts, speed for conditions, tanker and tender rollover on rural roads with high centres of gravity and partial loads, inadequate driver training, no private-vehicle response policy, intersection control, and maintenance (NIOSH, n.d.-b; [USFA, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025)).

The design consequence is clear. The vehicle element is the one place where the leading indicators are cheap (seat-belt observation, driver training currency, a private-vehicle response policy, speed telematics), the lagging outcome is catastrophic, and the burden falls hardest on volunteer departments.

### 1.4 Training deaths

Roughly 11 percent of US line-of-duty deaths between 2001 and 2014 were training-related. Of the 81 training deaths NIOSH investigated between 2001 and 2015, 81 percent were cardiac and 13 percent traumatic, and ten of the traumatic deaths were in live-burn exercises (NIOSH, n.d.-b). In 2024, 12 of 72 deaths were in training, two-thirds of them cardiovascular and a sixth from heat exhaustion [(USFA, 2025)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025).

The live-fire findings repeat: fuels with unknown burning characteristics, no inspection of the structure, instructors not trained to the live-fire standard, live “victims” inside, no instructor-to-student ratio, no safety officer, no rehabilitation. The reports say, almost in the same words each time, that strict compliance with the live-fire training standard would have avoided the exposure (NIOSH, n.d.-b). One recruit fatality in an acquired structure, analyzed in The Human Factor’s conference presentation on the normalization of deviance, listed more than 50 best-practice violations in a single evolution: no physical ability test, retired front-line gear used as training gear, adjunct instructors without instructor training, too few radios, no walk-through, nine simultaneous fires, furniture and tires as fuel, a rapid intervention crew staffed by a light-duty member, no safety officer, and no knowledge of fire locations [(The Human Factor, 2025b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-the-human-factor-2025b).

Training is a controlled environment. The package treats training deaths as the clearest test of whether a department’s system works. Zero tolerance for deviation from the live-fire standard is defensible in training in a way it cannot be on the fireground.

### 1.5 Occupational disease: the Canadian picture

In Canada the biggest category of line-of-duty death, by an order of magnitude, is not on the fireground. A 2025 peer-reviewed analysis of 1,509 accepted Canadian workers’ compensation firefighter fatality claims between 2007 and 2021 found that cancer accounted for 84.6 percent. The authors caution that the figure describes compensated events, not individual risk, because rejected and unclaimed events are excluded [(Al-Hajj et al., 2025)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-al-hajj-2025). One large western Canadian city’s memorial lists 84 fallen since 1885, of whom 71 died of presumptive occupational illness and nine of trauma, with no traumatic workplace death since 1992 [(DiscoverAirdrie, 2026)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-discoverairdrie-2026). The Canadian Fallen Firefighters Foundation added 141 names in 2026, most from occupational cancer, and has discussed expanding its monument; its line-of-duty death definition includes occupational illness recognized by a compensation board (Canadian Fallen Firefighters Foundation, n.d.).

The design consequence is the most important one in this note. A Canadian fire service safety program cannot be a fireground-only system. Exposure control (SCBA discipline through overhaul, preliminary exposure reduction on scene, hood and PPE cleaning, clean cab, diesel exhaust capture, exposure logging, cancer screening and presumptive-coverage literacy) carries equal weight with incident risk in this package, and psychological health, including suicide prevention, is inside the scope.

### 1.6 Canadian investigations and inquests

Canada has no equivalent of the NIOSH program. What exists is a scatter of coroner’s inquests, public inquiries, workers’ compensation board and provincial regulator investigations, and a handful of after-action reviews. Described generically, the ones this note draws on are:

| Year, province | Type of event | What the published findings said about the system | Source |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| 2005, Northwest Territories | Roof collapse at a small commercial fire; two firefighters killed, one with ten days’ service | Territorial compensation board laid safety charges against the municipality and senior officers for failing to take reasonable precautions and failing to ensure adequate instruction. No inquest was called and the investigation report was never released. | [(Firefighter Close Calls, 2009, 2010)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighter-close-calls-2009) |
| 2010 and 2015, Ontario | Two separate deaths during ice and swiftwater rescue training, one on a municipal course, one with a private provider | A joint coroner’s inquest in 2017 made recommendations on training-provider qualification, OHS coverage of students, instructor competence, safety officer and rescue-swimmer requirements. The provincial fire-service advisory committee turned them into guidance notes and a technical rescue curriculum. | [(Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee, 2017)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ontario-section-21-advisory-committee-2017) |
| 2011, Ontario | Roof collapse at a retail store fire; two firefighters killed | Crews believed the roof was steel joist; it was lightweight wood truss. Size-up and pre-plan knowledge gap; collapse about 71 minutes after ignition. The regulator investigated without charges and the report was not published. Outcomes: a fire code change on roofing torches, lightweight-construction identification carried into the building code, stronger mayday practice, realistic lightweight-construction training. | ([Firefighting in Canada, 2014b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014b); [CTV News London, 2015](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ctv-news-london-2015)) |
| 2012, Ontario | Mall structural collapse with civilian deaths; the rescue response became a public inquiry | The inquiry found the incident management system mandated but not understood or respected, no written incident action plan, agency silos and incompatible radios, delayed heavy equipment, a hasty termination of rescue, confusion over the regulator’s role, and poor or absent after-action reports across agencies, some apparently to avoid criticism. It recommended mandatory IMS, simplified to increase acceptance and actual use, and mandatory after-action reports. | [(Firefighting in Canada, 2014a, 2015)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a) |
| 2013, Quebec | Crude-oil train derailment and fire; 47 civilian deaths; multi-department volunteer response | The federal transportation safety investigation placed the causes with the railway. Responder lessons drawn afterward: pre-planning for high-hazard rail corridors, emergency response assistance plans for crude, foam logistics, mutual-aid scale, long-duration operations, and psychological support for volunteers. | [(Transportation Safety Board of Canada, 2014)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-transportation-safety-board-of-canada-2014) |
| 2018, Ontario | Volunteer firefighter line-of-duty death | The regulator presented its findings to the provincial fire-service advisory committee, which revised its guidance notes on the buddy system, radio communications, accountability and entry control, and hazardous fire conditions. | [(Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee, 2021)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ontario-section-21-advisory-committee-2021) |
| 2021, Quebec | Firefighter drowned during a nautical rescue in rapids | Provincial regulator: incomplete information before launching the rescue; notice of offence to the city. | [(Gouvernement du Québec, 2023)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2023) |
| 2021, Quebec | Collapse during a structure fire; firefighter killed | Provincial regulator: construction defect plus fire-induced deterioration; recommended clearer command structures and training on collapse-prone structures. | [(L’actualité, 2023)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-lactualite-2023) |
| 2022, Quebec | Barn fire, interior attack, collapse; firefighter killed | Provincial regulator: “deficient analysis of available information before choosing the strategy”; members sent inside a farm building with a known collapse hazard. The regulator required 360-degree size-up, risk-benefit analysis before interior attack, time-since-ignition reasoning and a thermal imaging camera, and prohibited the service from interior attack until it proved a compliant process and training. Findings were sent to the fire school and to the committee revising the provincial operations guide. | [(Gouvernement du Québec, 2022)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2022) |
| 2023, Quebec | Two volunteer firefighters drowned during a spring-flood rescue in an amphibious vehicle | Provincial regulator found four causes: the vehicle swept against a tree; improper use of a tracked amphibious vehicle in a flooded field with current; no prevention planning for floods although the area floods every year; no training for work near or over water, because basic firefighter training contains none. Personal flotation devices were on board and not worn. Recommendations went to the ministry, the fire school, the education ministry and the municipal associations, with the finding that municipalities own the duty to train and equip whether or not the task is in their fire-safety plan. | [(CNESST, 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024) |
| 2023, British Columbia | Contract wildland firefighter killed in a utility-vehicle rollover; separately, five firefighters entrapped overnight after a planned ignition | The provincial regulator levied its statutory maximum penalty against the provincial employer: no helmets, seat belt and retention netting unused or damaged, inadequate supervision, no safe-work procedures, training or pre-use inspection for the vehicle; for the entrapment, a lack of planning, training and communication, described as a repeated, high-risk failure to provide information, instruction, training and supervision. | [(Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025) |
| 2023, Atlantic Canada | The largest wildfire in provincial history and a separate interface fire in the same weeks; no responder deaths | An independent after-action review made about 50 recommendations. Strengths in the provincial incident management team and volunteer integration. Gaps in staffing capacity (about a third of agencies lacked it), uneven training (recommend ICS-100 for all staff within a month of hire and a regional strategy for volunteers), core incident command and emergency operations centre functions not applied, radio and air operations procedures, equipment (about a third of responders lacked adequate equipment), and responder health: dedicated rest space, showers, meals and laundry, mental-health supports communicated in advance, regular check-ins, sustainable rotation over multi-day events, counsellor support, clean-air recovery areas, respiratory protection in interface smoke, and a five-to-14-day deployment commitment to regulate hours. | [(Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024) |

Across those findings seven themes recur, and each one has a home in this package:

1.  **Information before commitment.** Size-up, 360-degree walk, pre-plan knowledge, building construction, time since ignition ([Gouvernement du Québec, 2022](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2022); [Firefighting in Canada, 2014b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014b)).
2.  **Task outside trained scope.** Water, flood and ice work by firefighters trained only for structural fire; utility vehicles and wildland by seasonal staff ([CNESST, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024); [Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025); [Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee, 2017](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ontario-section-21-advisory-committee-2017)).
3.  **No plan for a foreseeable event.** Floods that happen every year; wildfire-season staffing; no incident action plan ([CNESST, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024); [Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024); [Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a)).
4.  **Command and accountability.** An incident management system mandated but not actually used; entry control; the buddy system; radio ([Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); [Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee, 2021](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ontario-section-21-advisory-committee-2021)).
5.  **The employer’s duty is non-delegable and procedural.** Regulators frame the failure as absent procedures, training, supervision and inspection, the elements of a management system, rather than individual error. Their remedy is to prohibit the activity until the system exists ([Gouvernement du Québec, 2022](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2022); [Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025)).
6.  **Learning is not happening.** After-action reports skipped, investigation reports unpublished, no mandatory inquest for fire-service deaths in the largest province ([Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); [Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee, 2020](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ontario-section-21-advisory-committee-2020)).
7.  **Guidance notes as codification.** Ontario’s fire-service advisory committee under its OHS statute turns inquest and regulator findings into guidance notes that inspectors use as the reference for reasonable precautions (Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs, n.d.). No other province has the equivalent ([J12 Fire Service OHS Rules and Fireground Operations](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j12-fire-service-ohs-rules-and-fireground-operations)). The package carries a lessons library for that reason.

## 2. The five NIOSH key factors

Across NIOSH structural-fire fatality reports, five contributing factors recur so consistently that the fire service has given them a name [(Fire Engineering, 2023)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023). They are:

1.  Improper or absent risk assessment
2.  Lack of incident command
3.  Lack of personnel accountability
4.  Inadequate communications
5.  Lack of, or failure to follow, standard operating procedures or guidelines

Some writers substitute or add loss of situational awareness. The 2023 analysis argued that the same five factors explain near misses, injuries, missed victims and avoidable fire loss, not only deaths, and coined the phrase that good luck reinforces bad habits [(Fire Engineering, 2023)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023). The practical design consequence is that the package measures the positive counterpart of each factor on routine incidents: risk assessment done, command established, accountability tracked, communications working, procedure followed. A department that only counts the five factors after harm has a coroner’s list, not a safety program.

## 3. What the Firefighter Life Safety Initiatives ask

The 16 Firefighter Life Safety Initiatives came out of the first national life safety summit in 2004 and are delivered through the Everyone Goes Home program (NFFF, n.d.). They asked the sector to change its culture, hold itself accountable, integrate risk management into every activity, empower every member to stop unsafe practice, set national training standards, require medical and fitness standards, invest in research and technology, investigate every death and serious injury, fund safety, adopt response policies, address violent incidents, provide counselling, educate the public, promote codes and sprinklers, and design safer apparatus and equipment.

In 2024, twenty years on, a second summit restructured them. The revised matrix released at the end of 2025 [(NFFF, 2025b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2025b) has four pillars (survival culture and leadership; health and wellness; training and competency; community and government) crossed with three perspectives (firefighter well-being; practices and standards; organizational capacity), producing 12 initiatives [(NFFF, n.d., 2025a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2025a). The stated reasons were new hazards (lithium-ion batteries, the wildland-urban interface, complex buildings), the science on mental health, stress and occupational exposure, and a wish for a framework a department can act on at firefighter, officer and chief level. The summit report asserts that the original 16 drove measurable improvement but gives no adoption data [(NFFF, 2025a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2025a).

The 2007 summit report remains the plainest statement of the culture problem: a culture that takes pride in confronting death with raw courage has difficulty adopting health and safety as organizational priorities; members struggle to reconcile “be bold and be brave” with “be careful, exercise and eat well”; departments should stop rewarding heroic acts that violated safety procedure; every position should have a defined safety role; and risk management belongs in every activity [(NFFF, 2007)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2007).

The package treats the initiatives as a statement of intent that needs a management system to deliver it. Every initiative maps to at least one program module in [01 Program Architecture](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/program-architecture), and the culture pillar is carried by [05 Safety Culture Baseline](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/safety-culture-baseline) and the learning program rather than by a separate chapter.

## 4. What UL FSRI research changed

Full-scale experiments by UL’s Fire Safety Research Institute changed the tactical doctrine of structural firefighting in ways that a safety program must carry ([FSRI, 2020](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fsri-2020); FireRescue1, n.d.):

- **Flow path.** Fires in modern, ventilation-limited structures are governed by flow paths. Every opening, including the entry door, creates a new path. Crews operating in the exhaust side of a flow path between the fire and an opening are in the lethal zone. Size-up has to identify the fire location, the intake and exhaust points, and the entry point relative to them.
- **Ventilation without water makes it worse.** Added ventilation to a ventilation-limited fire increases heat release, and the window between ventilation and flashover is often under two minutes. Ventilation is coordinated with water or it is not done.
- **Water on the fire.** Large-volume application to what is burning; a short burst cannot cool a hot gas layer.
- **Transitional attack.** An exterior stream to the ceiling through an opening before interior entry did not push fire or steam onto occupants, did not increase burn potential, and improved tenability. The adages “don’t put water on smoke” and “you’ll steam the victims” were tested and not supported.
- **Door control.** Closing the door of the room of entry isolates it from the flow path and increases tenability for occupants and searchers.

The design consequence is that tactical doctrine in this package is cited to evidence, version-controlled, and revisable through a management-of-change trigger. It is not frozen in tradition. The combination of FSRI tactics and the five NIOSH factors is the content of the Emergency Operations Safety program.

## 5. Why safety programs fail to take hold in fire services

### 5.1 The NFPA 1500 lesson

NFPA 1500, first published in 1987 and consolidated into NFPA 1550 in 2024 along with NFPA 1521 and 1561 [(NFPA 1550, 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfpa-1550), is the sector’s occupational safety and health standard. It is also the sector’s best evidence of how a safety standard fails to land. Four years after publication, a trade-press survey of 99 departments recruited at national academy classes and safety seminars, which is to say the progressive end of the sector, found that 40 percent had adopted it and that 60 percent of adopters did not fully comply. The weak areas were fitness, medical and wellness, and cost was the stated reason [(Fire Engineering, 1991)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-1991). Thirty years later the NFPA’s own needs assessment found 72 percent of departments with no program to maintain basic fitness and health, 61 percent not providing medical evaluations to all firefighters, and 73 percent with no behavioural health program, on an 11 percent response rate skewed toward large departments, so the true figures are worse [(NFPA, 2021)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfpa-2021).

The reasons are structural, not a lack of good intent:

- It is voluntary unless the authority having jurisdiction adopts it, and few do.
- It is a long prescriptive list of “shall” requirements spanning apparatus, PPE, medical, fitness, facilities and operations, so the cost lands all at once on departments that are mostly small and volunteer.
- Its compliance mechanism is a self-assessment worksheet on which the department records its percentage compliance, the cost to comply and a target date [(NFPA 1550, 2024, Annex H)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfpa-1550). The phase-in became the permanent state.
- Nobody audits it from outside. It is enforced only after a death, when NIOSH cites it.
- Safety sits with a staff position, the health and safety officer, rather than with line command.
- It carries no learning loop and no measurement, so a department cannot tell whether compliance changed any outcome.

Accreditation through the Commission on Fire Accreditation International is the counter-example and shows the limit: peer assessment, periodic, with a category on health and safety, and it works where it is used [(CPSE, 2019)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cpse-2019). Only a few hundred agencies are accredited on a continent with tens of thousands of departments, because it costs years of staff time and the self-assessment manual is itself a checklist.

### 5.2 The documented barriers

| Barrier | Evidence |
|:---|:---|
| Cost | Half of surveyed departments in 1991 lacked a physician because of cost [(Fire Engineering, 1991)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-1991); the national volunteer council told the US regulator in 2024 that full NFPA 1500 compliance is economically infeasible for volunteers [(NVFC, 2024a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nvfc-2024a); the national culture-change initiative names cost and the fear that many members would fail as the two inhibitors of medical and fitness standards [(USFA & IAFC, 2015)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015). |
| Volunteer capacity | Paperwork aversion (“we are volunteers”); reporting delayed because members are not seen for weeks [(NZFS, 2016b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b); limited time for pre-planning and inspection [(Firefighting in Canada, 2014b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014b); training not uniformly available [(Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024). |
| No audit, no consequence | Voluntary standard; no Canadian jurisdiction audits fire departments against it; the largest province has no fire-specific OHS regulation beyond protective equipment, so reasonable precautions are argued case by case; inquests are not mandatory for fire-service deaths there [(Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee, 2020)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ontario-section-21-advisory-committee-2020). |
| Culture | Hero identity; tradition; training that reinforces risk; awards for acts that violated procedure; crew-level climate overriding department-level documents ([NFFF, 2007](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2007); [USFA & IAFC, 2015](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015)). |
| Prescriptive overload | Hundreds of requirements with no stated starting point; the 2012 public inquiry recommended the incident management system be simplified to increase acceptance and actual use [(Firefighting in Canada, 2014a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a). |
| Staff-owned safety | The safety officer owns the program; line officers comply or do not; nobody with command authority is accountable for the outcome. The 2007 summit asked for a defined safety role in every position [(NFFF, 2007)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2007). |
| No learning loop | Reports unpublished; after-action reports skipped to avoid criticism [(Firefighting in Canada, 2014a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); posting a report does not produce learning (Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center, n.d.). |
| No measurement | Lagging indicators only; managers trust numbers over assessments and are given none that lead [(NZFS, 2016a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a). |

### 5.3 What works

| What works | Evidence |
|:---|:---|
| Line ownership | The national culture-change initiative and both life safety summits name leadership of labour, management and informal leaders ([USFA & IAFC, 2015](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015); [NFFF, 2007](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2007)). Safety-climate data from a large US fire-service survey finds supervisor support and management commitment associated with lower injury odds (odds ratios of about 0.90 to 0.98 per unit of climate score) and better organizational outcomes [(Geczik et al., 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-geczik-2024). Staff engagement increases ownership [(NZFS, 2016a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a). |
| Staged implementation | “Slight shifts are more successful than large, sudden change” [(USFA & IAFC, 2015)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015); a maturity-continuum step-change approach for volunteer brigades [(NZFS, 2016b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b); the aviation safety management framework’s scalability clause [(ICAO, 2016)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-icao-2016); start with the elements that match the local injury profile. |
| Leading indicators that managers accept | Training completed, medicals and fitness assessments completed, inspections and audits done, hazard-to-injury ratio, seat-belt and SCBA observations; pair each with one lagging outcome so sceptical managers see the link ([NZFS, 2016a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a); [DCLG, 2013](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dclg-2013)). |
| Peer assessment | Peer challenge in the United Kingdom [(NZFS, 2016a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a); accreditation in North America [(CPSE, 2019)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cpse-2019); a provincial peer-audit pool is realistic and cheap. |
| Measurement and re-measurement | A validated safety-climate survey at baseline and repeat (Drexel University, n.d.); results segmented by career and volunteer [(NZFS, 2016a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a); an annual external audit. |
| A visible learning loop | Volunteers report “when it is simple and they know what happens as a result” [(NZFS, 2016b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b); mandatory after-action reports [(Firefighting in Canada, 2014a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); the Quebec regulator’s practice of routing findings to the fire school and the provincial operations guide [(Gouvernement du Québec, 2022)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2022). |
| A regulator-aligned structure | Regulator findings are always expressed as missing procedures, training, supervision, inspection and planning ([CNESST, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024); [Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025)). A system built on those nouns is also the due-diligence defence. |
| A business case | Cost was the reason departments gave for their gaps in NFPA 1500 compliance four years after it was published [(Fire Engineering, 1991)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-1991), and the standard never came with a learning loop or a business case. A chief who can show the cost of the status quo and the cost of the fix can get a budget line; one who can only cite a standard cannot. |

## 6. Human factors foundations the package builds on

The package does not treat human factors as a chapter at the end. The ideas below shape the controls, the procedures, the investigation method and the culture measure. Each entry says what the idea is, what the fire-service evidence shows, and where it lands in the package.

### 6.1 Safety-I and Safety-II

Safety-I counts what goes wrong and tries to remove the causes. Safety-II studies how work usually goes right and builds the capacity to adjust: to respond, monitor, anticipate and learn [(Hollnagel, 2014)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hollnagel-2014). Fire-service lessons systems are overwhelmingly Safety-I, because they are built on fatality reports; the wildland community’s learning reviews and the New Zealand evidence brief move toward studying normal work (Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center, n.d.; [FENZ, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fenz-2023)). The package keeps the fatality evidence and adds the other half: every debrief asks what went well and why; routine incidents are sampled for the positive counterparts of the five NIOSH factors; learning teams describe normal work before any change is designed.

### 6.2 Work-as-imagined and work-as-done

Procedures describe imagined work; real work adapts to conditions. The gap between them is where risk lives and where blame is born ([Hollnagel, 2014](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hollnagel-2014); [Dekker, 2014](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dekker-2014)). The 2012 inquiry found an incident management system mandated on paper and not understood in practice [(Firefighting in Canada, 2014a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a). The 1991 survey found a standard adopted on paper by 40 percent of departments and not complied with by 60 percent of those [(Fire Engineering, 1991)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-1991). The package audits against observed practice, not document existence; writes safe work procedures with the crews who do the work ([06 Program Improvement Teams](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/program-improvement-teams) section 5); and treats routine deviation from a procedure as data about the procedure.

### 6.3 Just culture

A just culture distinguishes human error, at-risk behaviour and reckless behaviour, and responds with consoling, coaching or sanction accordingly ([Reason, 1997](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-reason-1997); [Marx, 2001](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-marx-2001); [Dekker, 2016](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dekker-2016)). A culture of blame suppresses reporting. Research with rural volunteer brigades found non-reporting driven by fear of a telling-off, not wanting to inform on mates, the blame game, paperwork, not knowing what a near miss is, and never hearing what happened to a report [(NZFS, 2016b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b). One large metropolitan service uses blame-free behavioural interviews in a high-trust setting when a procedure was not followed [(NZFS, 2016a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a). The UK regulator’s heroism policy declines to act against an individual for a heroic act on their own initiative that did not endanger others (HSE, n.d.). The package writes the learning firewall into policy, separates the learning review from any accountability process, and closes the loop on every report ([Policy - Incident, Injury, Exposure and Near-Miss Reporting and Investigation](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/policy-incident-injury-exposure-and-near-miss-reporting-and-investigation) clause 8).

### 6.4 High reliability organizations

Organizations that run hazardous operations with very few failures share five habits: preoccupation with failure, reluctance to simplify, sensitivity to operations, commitment to resilience, and deference to expertise [(Weick & Sutcliffe, 2015)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-weick-2015). The ideas have been applied in wildland fire management, where the evidence is practitioner and qualitative rather than controlled [(Weick & Sutcliffe, 2015)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-weick-2015). The package uses the five habits as the lens for the culture self-assessment and as the design brief for company-officer development. Deference to expertise is what legitimizes a junior member’s stop-work call.

### 6.5 Normalization of deviance

The gradual process through which unacceptable practice becomes acceptable: as the deviant behaviour is repeated without catastrophic result, it becomes the social norm [(Vaughan, 1996)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-vaughan-1996). Tolerance for deviation grows through repeated exposure without consequence. The progression is predictable [(The Human Factor, 2025b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-the-human-factor-2025b):

1.  A shortcut is taken without negative consequence.
2.  The shortcut is repeated and becomes normal.
3.  The consequence arrives as a “predictable surprise.”

The warning phrases are worth posting on a wall: “This is the way we’ve always done it.” “This is the department way.” “Nothing bad has happened yet.” “Saw that coming.” The causes are familiar: not knowing the procedure, considering a policy stupid, laziness, peer pressure (unsafe see, unsafe do), complacency, and riding as a passenger [(The Human Factor, 2025b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-the-human-factor-2025b). Normalized deviance is knowingly doing something wrong or dangerous as a shortcut; it is not the same as evidence-based change to a rule, which the package provides a route for.

The fire-service list of normalized deviations reads like an audit checklist: improper decontamination and gear cleaning; running crews of three; tolerated PASS alarms and accidental mayday activations; working while tired; no backer when reversing; seat belts; no 360-degree walk on automatic alarms; not on air during overhaul; emergency response speeds; SCBA not checked every morning; no eye protection on medical calls; not clearing intersections; and, in training, continuing an evolution past the low-air warning because of pressure to finish the drill [(The Human Factor, 2025b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-the-human-factor-2025b). The countermeasures are to read the fatality reports and recognize the vulnerabilities, teach the procedure and why it exists, change a rule that needs changing rather than ignoring it, expect people to speak up, lead by example, and remember that what you get away with today catches up with you tomorrow ([The Human Factor, 2025b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-the-human-factor-2025b); [Fire Engineering, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023)). The package turns the list into leading indicators on the known drift points and into a self-check in [05 Safety Culture Baseline](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/safety-culture-baseline).

### 6.6 Recognition-primed decision making and decisions under stress

Experienced commanders do not compare options; they recognize a situation as typical and mentally run the first workable option [(Klein, 1998)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-klein-1998). It works when experience is deep and feedback is good. It fails when the environment has changed and the patterns in the commander’s head no longer match it, which is precisely what the FSRI research says about the modern fire environment [(FSRI, 2020)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fsri-2020). The 2012 inquiry found no written action plan because the plan was in the commanders’ minds [(Firefighting in Canada, 2014a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a). Related biases are documented in the fire-service literature: plan continuation (an offensive plan continued after conditions change) and goal fixation (committing to a rescue with no survivability); the rules of engagement answer both with the instruction to seriously consider a defensive strategy when the primary search is done and little progress has been made toward fire control [(IAFC, 2010)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-iafc-2010). The package builds pattern libraries deliberately through simulation, case review and FSRI material; requires a written or whiteboard action plan beyond initial attack; writes decision triggers into procedures (time, progress, collapse indicators); gives the incident safety officer authority to call it; and judges decisions by their quality, not their outcome (NFCC, n.d.-a).

### 6.7 Crew resource management

Error-chain breaking through communication, situational awareness, decision making, teamwork, leadership and followership, assertiveness (inquiry, advocacy, assertion), task allocation and critique, with four decades of aviation evidence behind it and a fire-service manual now in its fourth edition [(IAFC & NFFF, 2025)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-iafc-2025). CRM is the human-factors curriculum of the package. Assertive challenge scripts are taught to every member and included in officer certification.

### 6.8 Situational awareness

Perception of what is happening, comprehension of what it means, and projection of what will happen next [(Endsley, 1995)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-endsley-1995). Most fireground loss follows a loss of comprehension or projection under task saturation; the national culture-change initiative adopts the same definition and the US fire administration’s 2024 report makes situational-awareness training at all levels its second recommendation ([USFA & IAFC, 2015](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015); [USFA, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025)). The package names situational awareness as a competency for firefighters and officers and uses timed benchmarks (progress reports at fixed intervals, conditions-actions-needs reports) to force projection.

### 6.9 Fatigue

Fatigue degrades situational awareness and decision quality. Volunteers often respond after a full working day; campaign deployments run for weeks. The 2023 wildfire after-action review recommended sustainable rotation, deployment commitments and rest space [(Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024); the Australasian fatigue guideline for emergency response [(AFAC, 2022)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-afac-2022) and the British Columbia regulator’s 2025 findings [(Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025) point the same way. The package sets fatigue-risk rules for deployments and back-to-back calls, tracks hours, and treats fatigue as a hazard in the risk register. Where an hours-of-work or rest rule in the applicable law reaches firefighters, the department’s rules meet it ([J33 Return to Work, Accommodation and Hours of Work](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j33-return-to-work-accommodation-and-hours-of-work)).

### 6.10 Psychological safety

Teams whose members feel safe to speak up, ask, admit error and dissent learn more and have fewer unreported errors [(Edmondson, 1999)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-edmondson-1999). The rules of engagement for structural firefighting require every firefighter to report unsafe practice [(IAFC, 2010)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-iafc-2010). The volunteer research found members who did not report to avoid being seen as a stirrer [(NZFS, 2016b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b). Safety-climate data shows supervisor support rated higher than management commitment and more within a department’s control [(Geczik et al., 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-geczik-2024). The package measures psychological safety at the crew level and treats the company officer as the unit of intervention.

### 6.11 Psychological safety as an organizational condition, distinct from psychological health

Two ideas with similar names do different work in this package, and they are kept apart on purpose.

**Psychological health** is the member’s wellbeing: the 13 workplace factors in the national standard for psychological health and safety (CSA Z1003-13), the peer support program, clinical access, post-traumatic stress injury, suicide prevention. It lives in [Psychological Health and Safety and Peer Support Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/psychological-health-and-safety-and-peer-support-program).

**Psychological safety** is an organizational condition: the shared belief within a crew that it is safe to speak up, ask a question, admit an error, and challenge a decision [(Edmondson, 1999)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-edmondson-1999). It is created or destroyed by three things leaders control: their own behaviour (do they ask before they tell; do they admit their own errors), the norms of the crew’s meetings and debriefs (does the junior member speak first; is the dissenting view invited), and the response to reports (what happened the last time someone spoke up; the response decides the next report, as Conklin (2019) puts it). It is linked to psychological health, because a crew where people cannot speak is a crew where distress is hidden, but it is measured and managed differently. A department can have an excellent peer support team and crews in which nobody will say the roof looks wrong.

The package weaves psychological safety through every program rather than treating it in one place:

- **Every program note** carries a “Safety Differently in this program” section whose fourth part states how a member speaks up, challenges or stops work in that area, what the officer is expected to do in reply, and how leaders show it is safe to report.
- **Every program’s indicator set** includes at least one psychological-safety measure: near-miss and good-catch reports per working fire, stop-work calls made and reviewed without reprisal, learning-team participation, or the survey item “I can raise a concern with my officer.”
- **Every program’s accountability table** names the route by which a concern raised by a member gets an answer back to that member, with a time.
- **Every safe work procedure** opens with a “Speak up” callout: anyone can stop the task; say the hazard and the action; the officer acknowledges, acts, and reviews later for learning.
- **Every policy’s principles** state that psychological safety is a condition of safety, so speaking up is expected and protected.
- **The culture baseline** measures it at the crew level and treats the company officer as the unit of intervention ([05 Safety Culture Baseline](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/safety-culture-baseline)).
- **The learning program** protects it with the learning firewall and closes the loop on every report, because the response to the last report decides whether there is a next one [(Conklin, 2019)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-conklin-2019).

### 6.12 SEIPS 2.0 as the work-system model

The Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model [(Holden et al., 2013)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-holden-2013) describes a work system of person, tasks, tools and technology, organization, internal environment and external environment, which produces processes, which produce outcomes, with adaptation and feedback throughout. It comes from healthcare and no fire-service application was found. The package adopts it as the organizing model for the investigation method and for the hazard register: every contributing factor is classified into a work-system element, which gives the regulators’ vocabulary (procedures, training, supervision, equipment) a human-factors structure.

### 6.13 Learning teams

A learning team is a short, facilitated conversation with the people who do the work, held to understand how the work actually gets done, where it is hard, where people adapt, and where the margins are thin [(Conklin, 2012, 2017)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-conklin-2012). It is not an investigation and does not look for fault. The package makes it the standard method for designing any change ([06 Program Improvement Teams](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/program-improvement-teams) section 5), and uses it after near misses and good catches.

### 6.14 After-action reviews and learning reviews

The wildland fire community built the most mature learning system in the fire service after the 1994 season: rapid lesson sharing, incident review summaries, facilitated learning analyses and organizational learning reviews that are non-punitive, that look for conditions rather than causes, and that reconstruct the participants’ perspective at the time (Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center, n.d.). Its staff observe that posting a report does not produce learning (Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center, n.d.). The package separates three loops: the hot debrief (crew, minutes), the after-action review (incident, days, mandatory and short), and the learning review (serious events, weeks, independent facilitation) [(The Human Factor, 2026a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-the-human-factor-2026a).

### 6.15 The individual-organization contract

The UK fire-service framework’s Safe Person Concept describes what the organization owes the individual (selection, training, competence assessment, safe systems of work, equipment, risk information, welfare, learning from events) and what the individual owes the organization (competence, self-awareness of limits, observation, decisiveness about hazard and risk, communication) [(DCLG, 2013)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dclg-2013). The UK regulator’s joint statement with the fire service adds that firefighters are not expected to take unreasonable risks even when public expectations are unrealistic [(HSE, 2010)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hse-2010). The national operational guidance adds two decision principles the package adopts: willingness to decide under uncertainty is core to command, and risk-critical decisions are judged by the quality of the decision making, not the outcome (NFCC, n.d.-a).

## 7. Recurring causal factors mapped to the package element that controls each

| \# | Recurring causal factor (source) | Weight | Package element | Leading indicator |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|:---|
| 1 | Sudden cardiac event, often undiagnosed coronary disease, triggered by exertion ([Hard et al., 2019](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hard-2019); [USFA, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025)) | Largest single cause of on-duty death in the US; 43 percent after the event | [Medical, Fitness and Wellness Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/medical-fitness-and-wellness-program): annual medicals, fitness, clearance, rehab, AEDs | Percent of members with a current medical; percent with a fitness assessment; rehab deployed at working fires |
| 2 | Occupational cancer and exposure [(Al-Hajj et al., 2025)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-al-hajj-2025) | Dominant Canadian cause | [Decontamination and Contamination Control Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/decontamination-and-contamination-control-program); [Occupational Cancer Prevention, Exposure Tracking and Screening Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/occupational-cancer-prevention-exposure-tracking-and-screening-program); [Protective Clothing and Equipment Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/protective-clothing-and-equipment-program) | SCBA-on-overhaul observation; PPE cleaning cycles; exhaust capture in service; exposure reports per fire |
| 3 | Improper or absent risk assessment; no 360; construction unknown ([Fire Engineering, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023); [Firefighting in Canada, 2014b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014b); [Gouvernement du Québec, 2022](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2022)) | Top trauma factor | [Emergency Operations Safety Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/emergency-operations-safety-program): rules of engagement, 360 size-up, pre-plans with lightweight construction, survival profile, defensive triggers | Percent of structure fires with documented 360 and action plan; pre-plan coverage of target hazards |
| 4 | Lack of incident command; IMS not actually used ([Fire Engineering, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023); [Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); [Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024)) | Top trauma factor; multi-agency events | Command: adoption with competence assessment, written action plan threshold, unified command | Percent of incident commanders with current qualification; action plan present beyond initial attack |
| 5 | Lack of personnel accountability ([Fire Engineering, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023); [Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee, 2021](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ontario-section-21-advisory-committee-2021)) | Top trauma factor | Accountability and entry control procedure; PAR intervals; RIT at working fires | PAR at benchmarks; RIT established |
| 6 | Inadequate communications ([Fire Engineering, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023); [Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); [Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024)) | Top trauma factor | Radio discipline, mayday procedure, interoperability plan, conditions-actions-needs reports | Mayday drills per member per year; coverage tests |
| 7 | Lack of, or failure to follow, procedures [(Fire Engineering, 2023)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023) | Top trauma factor | Versioned, evidence-cited procedure library plus work-as-done audits | Percent of procedures reviewed within cycle; audit findings closed |
| 8 | Loss of situational awareness; rapid fire progression; flow path ([FSRI, 2020](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fsri-2020); [USFA, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025)) | Pervasive | Training: the fire dynamics, situational awareness and CRM curricula in [Emergency Operations Safety Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/emergency-operations-safety-program) and [Training Safety and Live Fire Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/training-safety-and-live-fire-program) | Members trained in fire dynamics; module currency |
| 9 | Structural collapse (NIOSH, n.d.-a; [Firefighter Close Calls, 2009](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighter-close-calls-2009); [Firefighting in Canada, 2014b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014b); [Gouvernement du Québec, 2022](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2022); [L’actualité, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-lactualite-2023)) | Leading structural trauma mechanism | Collapse-zone procedure; time-since-ignition reasoning; construction identification; defensive triggers | Collapse zone established at defensive fires |
| 10 | Vehicle collisions, seat belts, tanker rollover, private-vehicle response ([USFA, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025); [Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025)) | Second or third cause every year; volunteer-weighted | [Apparatus, Driving and Roadway Operations Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/apparatus-driving-and-roadway-operations-program): driver training, seat-belt policy, private-vehicle policy, tender driving, telematics, maintenance | Seat-belt observation; driver training currency; harsh-event rate |
| 11 | Training deaths (NIOSH, n.d.-b; [USFA, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025)) | Controlled-environment failure | [Training Safety and Live Fire Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/training-safety-and-live-fire-program): live-fire standard compliance, instructor qualification, safety officer, fitness before exertion, rehab | Live burns with completed pre-burn checklist; instructor qualification currency |
| 12 | Task outside trained scope ([Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee, 2017](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ontario-section-21-advisory-committee-2017); [Gouvernement du Québec, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2023); [CNESST, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024); [Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025)) | Recurring Canadian theme | Service-level declaration and capability matrix in [01 Program Profile Worksheet](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/program-profile-worksheet); “not trained, not deployed” rule | Percent certified for each declared service; declared-service gaps |
| 13 | No plan for a foreseeable event ([Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); [CNESST, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024); [Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024)) | Regulator focus | Pre-incident planning; [03 Hazard Profile and Risk Register Method](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/hazard-profile-and-risk-register-method); seasonal readiness reviews | Risk register reviewed annually; plans exercised |
| 14 | Inadequate supervision, procedures, inspection ([Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025); [CNESST, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024); [Firefighter Close Calls, 2009](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighter-close-calls-2009)) | How regulators frame every case | Safe work procedures; pre-use inspections; supervisor competency ([01 Roles and Responsibilities](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/roles-and-responsibilities) section 7) | Inspections completed; supervisor training currency |
| 15 | Fatigue and welfare on protracted incidents ([Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024); [Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025); [AFAC, 2022](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-afac-2022)) | Campaign events; after-work volunteer response | [Policy - Fatigue and Hours of Work](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/policy-fatigue-and-hours-of-work); [Firefighter Rehabilitation Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/firefighter-rehabilitation-program) | Hours per deployment; rotation compliance |
| 16 | Hero culture; rewarding violations; freelancing ([NFFF, 2007](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2007); [USFA & IAFC, 2015](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015)) | Cultural root | OHS policy and leadership; awards criteria; just culture; recognition of good withdrawals | Culture survey scores; recognition events for risk decisions |
| 17 | Near misses unreported; learning not happening; no after-action review ([NZFS, 2016b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b); [FENZ, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fenz-2023); [Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); [Fire Engineering, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023)) | Systemic | [Incident Investigation and Learning Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/incident-investigation-and-learning-program): near-miss path, three tiers, feedback loop, bulletins | Near-miss reports per 100 calls (rising); AAR completion; days to feedback |
| 18 | Mental health, post-traumatic stress injury, suicide ([NFFF, 2025a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2025a); [Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024); [FENZ, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fenz-2023)) | Rising; presumptive coverage in most provinces | [Psychological Health and Safety and Peer Support Program](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/psychological-health-and-safety-and-peer-support-program) | Peer-support contacts; assistance program use; post-event check-ins done |
| 19 | Staffing insufficient for the strategy chosen ([Hard et al., 2019](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hard-2019); [USFA & IAFC, 2015](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015); [Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024)) | Volunteer daytime gap | Deployment standard; defensive default when under-resourced | Effective response force achieved |
| 20 | No management of change; new hazards outrun procedures [(NFFF, 2025a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2025a) | Emerging | Management of change element in [01 Program Architecture](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/program-architecture); hazard scan; procedure update trigger | New-hazard procedures issued within target; training delivered |

## 8. Design principles with their evidence

| \# | Principle | Evidence |
|:---|:---|:---|
| 1 | Build on a management-system frame (policy and accountability; risk management; assurance through indicators, audit and change; promotion), not a checklist | ([ICAO, 2016](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-icao-2016); [HSE, 2013](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hse-2013); [DCLG, 2013](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dclg-2013); [NZFS, 2016a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a); [Fire Engineering, 1991](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-1991)) |
| 2 | Start from the local harm profile and the regulator’s nouns: cancer, cardiac, vehicle, scope-creep, collapse; procedures, training, supervision, inspection, planning | ([Hard et al., 2019](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hard-2019); [Al-Hajj et al., 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-al-hajj-2025); [Gouvernement du Québec, 2022](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2022); [CNESST, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024); [Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025); [USFA, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025)) |
| 3 | Adopt the rules of engagement and the Safe Person Concept as the risk-acceptance and individual-organization contract; they are fire-native, endorsed and free | ([IAFC, 2010](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-iafc-2010); [DCLG, 2013](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dclg-2013); NFCC, n.d.-a; HSE, n.d.) |
| 4 | Judge decisions by their quality, not the outcome, and say so in policy | (NFCC, n.d.-a; [Klein, 1998](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-klein-1998); [Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); [NFFF, 2007](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2007)) |
| 5 | The company officer is the unit of change; supervisor support is the strongest controllable climate variable | ([Geczik et al., 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-geczik-2024); [USFA & IAFC, 2015](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015); [Edmondson, 1999](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-edmondson-1999)) |
| 6 | Stage implementation on a maturity ladder, one station at a time, first stage matched to the biggest local risk | ([USFA & IAFC, 2015](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015); [NZFS, 2016b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b); [Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); [ICAO, 2016](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-icao-2016)) |
| 7 | Leading indicators that sceptical managers accept, each paired with one lagging outcome | ([NZFS, 2016a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a); [DCLG, 2013](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dclg-2013)) |
| 8 | A 60-second near-miss path, a definition with examples on the wall, feedback within days; rising near-miss counts are the first success metric | ([NZFS, 2016b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b); [FENZ, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fenz-2023); [Fire Engineering, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-2023)) |
| 9 | Three separate learning loops: hot debrief, after-action review (mandatory, templated, short), learning review (serious events, non-punitive, independent) | ([Firefighting in Canada, 2014a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firefighting-in-canada-2014a); Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center, n.d.; [Gouvernement du Québec, 2022](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2022); [The Human Factor, 2026a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-the-human-factor-2026a)) |
| 10 | Just culture in writing, with learning separated from any accountability process; heroism defined narrowly | ([Reason, 1997](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-reason-1997); [Dekker, 2016](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dekker-2016); [Marx, 2001](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-marx-2001); HSE, n.d.; [NZFS, 2016a, 2016b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a)) |
| 11 | Measure culture before, at 12 and at 24 months, segmented career and volunteer, and publish the results to the stations | (Drexel University, n.d.; [NZFS, 2016a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a); [DCLG, 2013](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-dclg-2013)) |
| 12 | Peer audit, not self-declaration | ([Fire Engineering, 1991](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-1991); [NZFS, 2016a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a); [Hollnagel, 2014](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hollnagel-2014)) |
| 13 | Declare scope explicitly and make “not trained, not deployed” a rule, with a go/no-go card for water, ice, wildland, utility vehicles and technical rescue | ([Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee, 2017](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-ontario-section-21-advisory-committee-2017); [Gouvernement du Québec, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-gouvernement-du-quebec-2023); [CNESST, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024); [Canadian Occupational Safety, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-canadian-occupational-safety-2025)) |
| 14 | Versioned, evidence-cited procedures with a management-of-change trigger | ([FSRI, 2020](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fsri-2020); [NFFF, 2025a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2025a); [ICAO, 2016](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-icao-2016)) |
| 15 | Make the volunteer cost problem explicit and design for it: paper and oral reporting, medicals bundled at musters, e-learning, pooled physicians, grant templates | ([NVFC, 2024a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nvfc-2024a); [NZFS, 2016b](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b); [Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024)) |
| 16 | Carry the lessons library inside the product, because the US federal feed is fragile and no Canadian national system exists | (NIOSH, n.d.-b; [FireRescue1, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-firerescue1-2025); Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs, n.d.) |
| 17 | Equal weight to exposure control and behavioural health, because that is where Canadian deaths are | ([Al-Hajj et al., 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-al-hajj-2025); [NFFF, 2025a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2025a); [Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024); [FENZ, 2023](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fenz-2023)) |
| 18 | Own the human-factors vocabulary (situational awareness, recognition-primed decision making, CRM, high reliability, Safety-II) in officer development, not as a bolt-on course | ([NFFF, 2026](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfff-2026); [IAFC & NFFF, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-iafc-2025); [USFA, 2025](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025)) |

## 9. How the evidence shaped each part of the package

**Foundations.** The architecture is plan-do-check-act with NFPA and the specialty standards as content inside it, because the checklist model has 35 years of partial uptake behind it ([Fire Engineering, 1991](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-1991); [NFPA, 2021](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nfpa-2021)). The law sits apart from the core, in the topic pages of Part 10 ([00 Jurisdiction Index](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/jurisdiction-index)), because regulators are the ones whose nouns decide a case and their rules differ by province and territory.

**Governance.** Program Improvement Teams exist because staff-owned safety fails and because procedures designed without the crews describe imagined work [(Hollnagel, 2014)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-hollnagel-2014). The JOHSC is wired in because labour-management partnership is one of the six learning-system constructs [(The Human Factor, 2026c)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-the-human-factor-2026c) and because the committee is where a safety concern becomes a labour dispute when governance is undocumented. Supervisor competency is specified because the company officer is the unit of change [(Geczik et al., 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-geczik-2024).

**Assessment.** The profile worksheet forces a service-level declaration because scope creep kills Canadian firefighters [(CNESST, 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-cnesst-2024). The hazard register uses the work-system model so findings land on controllable elements [(Holden et al., 2013)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-holden-2013). The indicator set pairs every leading measure with a lagging one [(NZFS, 2016a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a). The culture baseline measures psychological safety at the crew level and re-measures ([Edmondson, 1999](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-edmondson-1999); Drexel University, n.d.).

**Policies.** Every policy is complete text with a named accountable role because a shell with “insert here” is a self-assessment worksheet by another name. The reporting policy carries a learning firewall because fear of blame is the documented reason people do not report [(NZFS, 2016b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b). The right-to-refuse policy carries stop-work authority for every member because deference to expertise is what makes the junior member’s call legitimate [(Weick & Sutcliffe, 2015)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-weick-2015).

**Programs.** Exposure control, medical and fitness, vehicle operations and training safety are the first four programs stood up because they match the harm profile. Emergency operations carry the rules of engagement and FSRI doctrine ([IAFC, 2010](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-iafc-2010); [FSRI, 2020](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fsri-2020)). The learning program has three tiers because the three loops operate at different speeds with different people [(The Human Factor, 2026a)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-the-human-factor-2026a).

**Safe work procedures.** Written for the member, drafted with the crews, versioned, with stop-work triggers in a callout, because a procedure a crew does not recognize is not followed [(Conklin, 2017)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-conklin-2017).

**Audit.** Scores implementation and effectiveness, not documentation, with three questions per category that cannot be answered from paper, and an external peer review on a cycle, because self-declaration overstates ([Fire Engineering, 1991](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-fire-engineering-1991); [NZFS, 2016a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016a)).

**Implementation.** Staged in three stages, with a Stage 1 cost note on every program, because cost is the first stated barrier and small, sure steps are what the evidence says takes ([NVFC, 2024a](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nvfc-2024a); [USFA & IAFC, 2015](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2015)).

> **Note: Customize**
>
> Add the department’s own evidence to section 1: its injury and exposure history for the last five years, any regulator orders, any inquest or review findings that named it, and its mutual-aid partners’ events. Then check the mapping table in section 7 against that history. A factor the department has lived through should carry a Stage 1 tag on its controlling element whatever the default says.

> **Tip: Volunteer and composite departments The evidence is clear that cardiac and vehicle deaths fall disproportionately on volunteers [(USFA, 2025)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-usfa-2025), that training is unevenly available to them [(Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, 2024)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nova-scotia-department-of-natural-resources-and-renewables-2024), and that reporting is delayed because they are not seen for weeks [(NZFS, 2016b)](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/design-principles-and-lessons-learned#ref-nzfs-2016b). Design for it: medicals at musters, a paper and phone near-miss path, driver training by video with a practical check at the station, and learning-team sessions on training nights.**

## Jurisdiction requirements

This chapter relies on the following legal requirements, which differ by province and territory. Check your jurisdiction’s section on each topic page before adopting it.

| Topic | What to check in your jurisdiction | Page |
|:---|:---|:---|
| Duties of Employers, Supervisors, Workers and Contractors | The employer’s general duty to take every reasonable precaution, including information, instruction, training and supervision, which is the duty regulators enforce where no fire-specific rule exists | [J02 Duties of Employers, Supervisors, Workers and Contractors](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j02-duties-of-employers-supervisors-workers-and-contractors) |
| Joint Committee and Health and Safety Representative | The deadline for the employer’s written response to a committee recommendation, which governs wherever it is shorter than the department’s own decision period | [J05 Joint Committee and Health and Safety Representative](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j05-joint-committee-and-health-and-safety-representative) |
| Written Procedures and Committee Consultation | When written safe work procedures are required, and the rules on their adequacy, availability at the work site, review with workers and updating | [J06 Written Procedures and Committee Consultation](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j06-written-procedures-and-committee-consultation) |
| Right to Refuse and Reprisal Protection | Whether the right to refuse unsafe work applies on the fireground or is limited by an emergency-services carve-out, and the steps after a refusal; the stop-work authority builds on it | [J07 Right to Refuse and Reprisal Protection](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j07-right-to-refuse-and-reprisal-protection) |
| Incident Reporting and Investigation | Which deaths, serious injuries and no-injury dangerous occurrences (such as a structural collapse) must be reported to the regulator, and how fast; the learning program’s triage clock must match | [J08 Incident Reporting and Investigation](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j08-incident-reporting-and-investigation) |
| Fire Service OHS Rules and Fireground Operations | Whether a fire-service OHS regulation, fire-specific guidance notes or a fire-service advisory committee exists; where none does, the department’s lessons library carries the codified lessons | [J12 Fire Service OHS Rules and Fireground Operations](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j12-fire-service-ohs-rules-and-fireground-operations) |
| Return to Work, Accommodation and Hours of Work | Any statutory hours-of-work, rest or fatigue rule that reaches firefighters, and any firefighter exception, before the deployment and back-to-back call rules are set | [J33 Return to Work, Accommodation and Hours of Work](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j33-return-to-work-accommodation-and-hours-of-work) |
| Wildland and Interface Fire | The provincial or territorial wildland fire agency, its interface and deployment arrangements with municipal departments, and the wildland qualification it expects | [J35 Wildland and Interface Fire](https://thehumanfactor.ca/library/fire-service-safety/j35-wildland-and-interface-fire) |

## References

Al-Hajj, S., Thomas, L., Garis, L., El-Asmar, K., El-Hajj, F., & Pike, I. (2025). Occupational injury among firefighters in Canada: A trends analysis of fatality and time-loss injury claims (2007–2021). *Injury Epidemiology, 12*. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40621-025-00639-0

Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council \[AFAC\]. (2022). *Managing fatigue in emergency response* (Version 2). <https://www.afac.com.au/resources/managing-fatigue-in-emergency-response>

Canadian Fallen Firefighters Foundation. (n.d.). *Line of duty death definition* \[Web page\]. <https://www.cfff.ca/lodd-definition>

Canadian Occupational Safety. (2025). *BC government fined \$759,000 following death of wildfire firefighter*. <https://www.thesafetymag.com/ca/topics/ohs-law-and-legislation/bc-government-fined-759000-following-death-of-wildfire-firefighter/547089>

Center for Public Safety Excellence \[CPSE\]. (2019). *Fire and emergency service self-assessment manual* (10th ed.). Commission on Fire Accreditation International. <https://cpse.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/10th-Edition-FESSAM-Strikethrough-Underline-v.4.pdf>

Commission des normes, de l’équité, de la santé et de la sécurité du travail \[CNESST\]. (2024). *Décès de deux pompiers volontaires lors des inondations à Saint-Urbain: la CNESST dévoile les conclusions de son enquête* \[Communiqué de presse\]. <https://www.cnesst.gouv.qc.ca/fr/salle-presse/communiques/deces-inondations-st-urbain>

Conklin, T. (2012). *Pre-accident investigations: An introduction to organizational safety*. Ashgate.

Conklin, T. (2017). *Workplace fatalities: Failure to predict*. Pre-Accident Media.

Conklin, T. (2019). *The 5 principles of human performance*. Pre-Accident Media.

CSA Group. (2013). *CAN/CSA-Z1003-13/BNQ 9700-803/2013 (R2022), Psychological health and safety in the workplace: Prevention, promotion, and guidance to staged implementation* (free to read from CSA Group and the Mental Health Commission of Canada). <https://www.csagroup.org/store/product/CAN-CSA-Z1003-13-BNQ%209700-803-2013/>

CTV News London. (2015). *Ontario fire code changed in light of firefighter deaths in Listowel*. <https://london.ctvnews.ca/ontario-fire-code-changed-in-light-of-firefighter-deaths-in-listowel-1.2279148>

Dekker, S. (2014). *The field guide to understanding “human error”* (3rd ed.). Ashgate.

Dekker, S. (2016). *Just culture: Restoring trust and accountability in your organization* (3rd ed.). CRC Press.

Department for Communities and Local Government \[DCLG\]. (2013). *Health, safety and welfare framework for the operational environment* (withdrawn; the Safe Person Concept). <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c8b8240f0b62aff6c26b7/HSFrameworkJunecombined.pdf>

DiscoverAirdrie. (2026). *A living memorial: How occupational illness changes firefighter remembrance*. <https://discoverairdrie.com/articles/a-living-memorial-how-occupational-illness-changes-firefighter-remembrance>

Drexel University. (n.d.). *FOCUS: Fire service organizational culture of safety* \[Web page\]. FIRST Center, Dornsife School of Public Health. <https://drexel.edu/dornsife/research/centers-programs-projects/FIRST/our-projects/focus>

Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. *Administrative Science Quarterly, 44*(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999

Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. *Human Factors, 37*(1), 32–64. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872095779049543

Fire and Emergency New Zealand \[FENZ\]. (2023). *Report 210: Safety, health and wellbeing evidence brief 2023*. <https://fireandemergency.nz/assets/Documents/Research-and-reports/Report-210-Safety-Health-and-Wellbeing-Evidence-Brief-2023.pdf>

Fire Engineering. (1991). *Compliance with NFPA 1500: Room for improvement* (survey of 99 departments). <https://www.fireengineering.com/firefighting/compliance-with-nfpa-1500-room-for-improvement/>

Fire Engineering. (2023). *The NIOSH 5: Beyond firefighter LODDs*. <https://www.fireengineering.com/?p=571739>

Fire Safety Research Institute \[FSRI\]. (2020). *Fire attack study: Full-scale experiments and tactical considerations* \[Firehouse supplement\]. <https://fsri.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/Firehouse_Supplement_Final_09232020_1.pdf>

Firefighter Close Calls. (2009). *Charges re Canadian double LODD: Follow-up*. <https://www.firefighterclosecalls.com/charges-re-canadian-double-lodd-followup/>

Firefighter Close Calls. (2010). *Update: Yellowknife; no further inquest into firefighters’ deaths*. <https://www.firefighterclosecalls.com/update-yellowknife-cn-no-further-inquest-into-firefighters-deaths-2/>

Firefighting in Canada. (2014a). *Elliot Lake: Commissioner lambastes emergency response*. <https://www.firefightingincanada.com/elliot-lake-commissioner-lambastes-emergency-response-19581/>

Firefighting in Canada. (2014b). *Lessons from Listowel*. <https://www.firefightingincanada.com/lessons-from-listowel-12395/>

Firefighting in Canada. (2015). *Government slow to implement Elliot Lake recommendations*. <https://firefightingincanada.com/government-slow-to-implement-elliot-lake-recommendations-21900>

FireRescue1. (n.d.). *Fireground ventilation: Tactical considerations from UL’s FSRI research*. <https://www.firerescue1.com/ventilation/fireground-ventilation-tactical-considerations-from-uls-fsri-research>

FireRescue1. (2025). *Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program once again accepting investigation requests*. <https://www.firerescue1.com/niosh/fire-fighter-fatality-investigation-and-prevention-program-once-again-accepting-investigation-requests>

Geczik, A. M., Lee, J., Allen, J. A., Raposa, M., Robinson, L., Quistberg, D. A., Davis, A. L., & Taylor, J. A. (2024). An updated analysis of safety climate and downstream outcomes in two convenience samples of U.S. fire departments (FOCUS 1.0 and 2.0 survey waves). *Injury Epidemiology, 11*. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40621-024-00502-8

Gouvernement du Québec. (2022). *Décès d’un pompier du service incendie de la Régie intermunicipale à Saint-Edmond-les-Plaines: la CNESST dévoile les conclusions de son enquête* \[Communiqué de presse\]. <https://www.quebec.ca/nouvelles/actualites/details/deces-dun-pompier-du-service-incendie-de-la-regie-intermunicipale-geant-a-saint-edmond-les-plaines-la-cnesst-devoile-les-conclusions-de-son-enquete-43656>

Gouvernement du Québec. (2023). *Décès d’un pompier du Service de sécurité incendie de Montréal lors d’une intervention de sauvetage nautique: la CNESST dévoile les conclusions de son enquête* \[Communiqué de presse\]. <https://www.quebec.ca/nouvelles/actualites/details/deces-dun-pompier-du-service-de-securite-incendie-de-montreal-lors-dune-intervention-de-sauvetage-nautique-la-cnesst-devoile-les-conclusions-de-son-enquete-43407>

Hard, D. L., Marsh, S. M., Merinar, T. R., Bowyer, M. E., Miles, S. T., Loflin, M. E., & Moore, P. W. (2019). Summary of recommendations from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program, 2006–2014. *Journal of Safety Research, 68*, 21–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2018.10.013

Health and Safety Executive \[HSE\]. (n.d.). *Heroism in the fire and rescue service* \[Web page\]. <https://www.hse.gov.uk/services/fire/heroism.htm>

Health and Safety Executive \[HSE\]. (2010). *Striking the balance between operational and health and safety duties in the fire and rescue service* (with the Chief Fire Officers Association and the Fire Brigades Union). <https://lga.moderngov.co.uk/Data/Fire%20Commission/20100618/Agenda/Item%204%20-%20HSE%20fire%20statement%2012.3.10.pdf>

Health and Safety Executive \[HSE\]. (2013). *Managing for health and safety* (HSG65, 3rd ed.). <https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/hsg65.htm>

Holden, R. J., Carayon, P., Gurses, A. P., Hoonakker, P., Hundt, A. S., Ozok, A. A., & Rivera-Rodriguez, A. J. (2013). SEIPS 2.0: A human factors framework for studying and improving the work of healthcare professionals and patients. *Ergonomics, 56*(11), 1669–1686. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2013.838643

Hollnagel, E. (2014). *Safety-I and Safety-II: The past and future of safety management*. Ashgate.

International Association of Fire Chiefs \[IAFC\], & National Fallen Firefighters Foundation \[NFFF\]. (2025). *Crew resource management* (4th ed.). <https://www.firehero.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/crew-resource-management-4th-edition-online.pdf>

International Association of Fire Chiefs \[IAFC\], Safety, Health and Survival Section. (2010). *Rules of engagement for structural firefighting* (summary consulted). <https://www.iafc.org/iCHIEFS/iCHIEFS-article/rules-of-engagement-can-save-firefighter-lives>

International Civil Aviation Organization \[ICAO\]. (2016). *Annex 19 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation: Safety management* (2nd ed.).

Klein, G. (1998). *Sources of power: How people make decisions*. MIT Press.

L’actualité. (2023). *La CNESST publie son rapport d’enquête sur le décès d’un pompier en 2021 à Québec*. <https://lactualite.com/actualites/la-cnesst-publie-son-rapport-denquete-sur-le-deces-dun-pompier-en-2021-a-quebec/>

Marx, D. (2001). *Patient safety and the “just culture”: A primer for health care executives*. Columbia University.

National Fallen Firefighters Foundation \[NFFF\]. (n.d.). *Until everyone goes home: Firefighter life safety initiatives* \[Web page\]. <https://www.firehero.org/fire-service-resources/until-everyone-goes-home/>

National Fallen Firefighters Foundation \[NFFF\]. (2007). *Firefighter life safety summit: Novato report*. <https://www.firehero.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/novato.pdf>

National Fallen Firefighters Foundation \[NFFF\]. (2025a). *2024 Firefighter Life Safety Summit: Final report*. <https://www.firehero.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/2024-life-safety-summit-final-report-web.pdf>

National Fallen Firefighters Foundation \[NFFF\]. (2025b). *The 2024 Firefighter Life Safety Initiatives matrix* \[Report announcement\]. <https://www.firehero.org/2025/12/02/firefighter-life-safety-initiatives/>

National Fallen Firefighters Foundation \[NFFF\]. (2026). *NIOSH firefighter LODD and serious injury survey*. <https://www.firehero.org/2026/10/15/niosh-firefighter-lodd-and-serious-injury-survey/>

National Fire Chiefs Council \[NFCC\]. (n.d.-a). *Control measure: Positive safety culture* (National Operational Guidance). <https://nfcc.org.uk/control-measure/control-measure-positive-safety-culture>

National Fire Protection Association. (2024). *NFPA 1550, Standard for emergency responder health and safety* (consolidates NFPA 1500, 1521 and 1561). <https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/nfpa-1550-standard-development/1550>

National Fire Protection Association \[NFPA\]. (2021). *Fifth needs assessment of the U.S. fire service*. <https://www.nfpa.org/education-and-research/research/nfpa-research/fire-statistical-reports/needs-assessment>

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health \[NIOSH\]. (n.d.-a). *Fire fighter deaths from structural fire-related events, 1998–2001*. <https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/196959>

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health \[NIOSH\]. (n.d.-b). *Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program* \[Program website and investigation reports\]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. <https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/firefighters/fffipp/index.html>

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health \[NIOSH\]. (2007). *NIOSH alert: Preventing fire fighter fatalities due to heart attacks and other sudden cardiovascular events* (DHHS \[NIOSH\] Publication No. 2007-133). <https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2007-133/>

National Volunteer Fire Council \[NVFC\]. (2024a). *Comments to OSHA on the proposed emergency response standard*. <https://nvfc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/NVFC-OSHA-Comments-071624.pdf>

New Zealand Fire Service \[NZFS\]. (2016a). *Report 153: International good practice in safety, health and wellbeing in fire and emergency services* (prepared by Litmus; case studies). Hosted by Fire and Emergency New Zealand. <https://www.fireandemergency.nz/assets/Documents/Files/Report-153-international-good-practice-in-safety-health-and-wellbeing-in-fire-and-emergency-services.pdf>

New Zealand Fire Service \[NZFS\]. (2016b). *Report 158: Improving the safety culture and practices of rural fire personnel in relation to near-miss reporting* (prepared by Heathrose Research). Hosted by Fire and Emergency New Zealand. <https://www.fireandemergency.nz/assets/Documents/Research-and-reports/Report-158-Improving-the-safety-culture-and-practices-of-Rural-Fire-Personnel-in-relation-to-near-miss-reporting.pdf>

Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Renewables. (2024). *2023 Nova Scotia wildfires after-action report* (prepared by Calian). <https://novascotia.ca/natr/forestprotection/wildfire/nova-scotia-wildfires-2023-after-action-report.pdf>

Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs. (n.d.). *Section 21 Advisory Committee: Mandate and guidance notes* \[Web page\]. <https://oafc.on.ca/node/108>

Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee. (2017). *Minutes, June 8, 2017*. <https://www.oafc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Section%2021/Meeting%20Minutes/2017/Section%2021%20Final%20Minutes%20June%208-17.pdf>

Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee. (2020). *Minutes, February 2020*. <https://www.oafc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Section%2021/Meeting%20Minutes/2020/Section%2021%20February%202020%20Final%20Minutes.pdf>

Ontario Section 21 Advisory Committee. (2021). *Minutes, June 4, 2021*. <https://www.oafc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Section%2021/Meeting%20Minutes/2021/2021.06.04%20Fire%20S21%20Minutes%20Final.pdf>

Reason, J. (1997). *Managing the risks of organizational accidents*. Ashgate.

RTI International. (2010). *Evaluation of the NIOSH Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program* (RTI Press RR-0007-1003). <https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/231568>

The Human Factor. (2025b). *Normalization of deviance in the fire service, parts 1 and 2* \[Conference presentation, CPSE Excellence Conference; generalized for this package\].

The Human Factor. (2026a). *After the Call, Manual 02: The three tiers and event triage* \[Unpublished manuscript\].

The Human Factor. (2026c). *After the Call: The learning-system maturity model* (construct definitions, bands and limits) \[Unpublished manuscript\].

Transportation Safety Board of Canada. (2014). *Lac-Mégantic runaway train and derailment investigation summary* (Railway Investigation Report R13D0054). <https://bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/medias-media/fiches-facts/r13d0054/r13d0054-20140819a.html>

United States Fire Administration \[USFA\]. (2025). *Firefighter fatalities in the United States in 2024*. Federal Emergency Management Agency. <https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/firefighter-fatalities-2024.pdf>

United States Fire Administration \[USFA\], & International Association of Fire Chiefs \[IAFC\]. (2015). *National Safety Culture Change Initiative: Study of behavioral motivation on reduction of risk-taking behaviors in the fire and emergency service* (FA-342). <https://apps.usfa.fema.gov/publications/display?id=994>

Vaughan, D. (1996). *The Challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA*. University of Chicago Press.

Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2015). *Managing the unexpected: Sustained performance in a complex world* (3rd ed.). Wiley.

Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center. (n.d.). *About us* \[Web page\]. <https://lessons.wildfire.gov/about-us>

Zohar, D. (2000). A group-level model of safety climate: Testing the effect of group climate on microaccidents in manufacturing jobs. *Journal of Applied Psychology, 85*(4), 587–596. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.4.587