1. Chief Fire Officers’ Association
Review of Assessment Centres
May 2009

2. Warning
Nothing in this presentation has been agreed or approved by anyone, at any time!
The conclusions and recommendations are offered as discussion topics only!
Please don’t change anything you do as a result of this presentation!

3. The Review Questionnaire Document Review Focus Groups
ADC Practitioners Forum
10 Conclusions
19 Recommendations
CFOA Considering the Report

4. Conclusion 1
During this review we have heard overwhelming support for the principle of identifying potential through competencies and consequently widespread support for the concept of ADCs. No contributor has indicated a view that ADCs should be withdrawn and there is evidence of a growing community of Learning & Development professionals within the Fire & Rescue Service who recognise this approach as normal good practice

5. Conclusion 2
The ADC “product” has been designed in a comprehensive way and supporting documentation has provided a package capable of meeting the statement of requirements set out. It was never intended to act as a tool to select people into specific posts and the issue of technical competence belongs in an important, but separate, debate.

6. Conclusion 3
There is evidence to suggest that the ADC package is not fully integrated as a part of Integrated Personal Development System (IPDS). As an example, Firefighter Development programmes do not commonly encompass development around the PQAs and so the ADC often represents the first exposure to a concept that is not very familiar to personnel.

7. Conclusion 4
The ADC package has provided a structure that set out to achieve objectives defined by the statement of requirements e.g. a national system, facilitating transferability etc. To achieve these objectives, key elements of the package were regarded as mandatory. Adopting this approach inevitably means that implementation will be difficult as resources, together with the quality and quantity of candidates available to Fire & Rescue Services will vary significantly.

8. Conclusion 5
The majority of UK Fire & Rescue Services have had to step outside of the national processes to ensure they are able to continue delivering their service.

9. Conclusion 6
The ADC is regarded as a passport to advancement within the Service, where the process is modified or absent, personnel can be disadvantaged when seeking appointment in Services other than their own. This results in inconsistencies and potential vulnerability to claims against Authorities regarding equality of opportunity.

10. Conclusion 7
Further development and maintenance of the components will be necessary to facilitate continued use by Fire & Rescue Services.

11. Conclusion 8
Where Services have collaborated effectively, implementation seems to have improved as a result.

12. Conclusion 9
The guidance as it stands is unlikely to deliver the intended benefits defined in the original statement of requirements.

13. Conclusion 10
There is substantial evidence to suggest that overall the mean level of achievement for candidates at the ADC process is significantly below the nationally prescribed standards set. It appears that the workforce finds the ADC process disproportionately difficult.

14. Recommendations
ADC Principles
ADC Processes
ADC Components
ADC Governance

15. Overview Mandatory Optional Use of NOS & PQAs Assessment of PQAs
Use of Framework – QA principles
Optional
IToP
Pass Marks
Post ADC Process - L&D Policy