Date: |
April 10, 2002 |
To: |
All DCs, ACs, BCs, and Captains |
From: |
T. J. Kiesewetter, Director of Training |
Subject: |
FEEDBACK FOR PROBATIONARY FIREFIGHTER MONTHLY EVALUATIONS #1 |
We have completed the third month of evaluations for Academy 2001B. Each month I have read all the “Probationary Firefighter Monthly Evaluation” forms and would like to provide feedback so that everyone becomes more consistent in evaluation methods. Prior to getting to the “meat of the subject”, some initial thoughts are appropriate to establish the educational value in this report.
First, having spent most of my career at Stations 3, 7 and 10, I can empathize with the time management demands placed on Station Captains. I still struggle with time management! Having supervised many probationary firefighters, I also realize the development of probationary fighters is one of the most important responsibilities of Captains. Integral to this development are the on-going evaluations.
Second, the “Probationary Firefighter Monthly Evaluation” instrument is an important part of a process that ties the Recruit Academy, the “Floor” and Chief Officers together. Since I read and take notes on each probationary evaluation, I can empathize with the work and time that is required to be thorough and complete.
Third, the City Attorney is concerned about the quality and content of evaluations performed within the department. Inaccurate evaluations, used as evidence, have created a tactical disadvantage for the City Attorney in lawsuits brought against the department. (For those of you that don’t know, Training has established a close relationship with the City Attorneys office).
Finally, as Director of Training, I have received feedback from outside raters, that the writing skills within the Long Beach Fire Department are weak. I have to work toward making improvements. Without giving feedback we will never improve our performance (the evaluation chain includes the probationary firefighter through the Deputy Chief of Operations).
The probationary period requires a commitment by the probationary firefighter, their Captain(s), the Training Staff (including myself) and the Chief Officers. The probationary firefighter must be committed to become a competent firefighter, Captains(s) must be committed to managing the probationary firefighter’s development, the Training Staff must be committed to supporting training needs and plans for improvement, and Chief Officers must be committed to the process as a quality improvement tool.
The evaluation should be given in a straightforward manner emphasizing the acceptable as well as the unacceptable aspects of performance and behavior.
Evaluations must be written with the reader in mind. I don’t advocate the mindless statement that “you have to put something in every comment section”, but in order to paint a clear picture and really capture the progress of the probationary firefighter, Captain(s) must provide specific descriptions of observed and/or demonstrated behaviors on incidents (provide incident number), during drills and interactions with others.
One of the comments on a monthly evaluation was, “(Probationary Firefighter’s name) works very hard at attempting to learn the Rookie firefighter role which does not come easy for him”. One of the aspects that is critical during the probationary period is the developing sound work habits. Other evaluations have used the term “rookie game”. Being a “rookie” should not be considered a “game” or a “role” to play for the probationary period.
Evaluations should be written for the reader. The readers include BCs, ACs, the Director of Training, the Training Captains and possibly the Deputy Chief of Operations. In a worse case scenario the City Attorney would also read the document. The “Probationary Firefighter Monthly Evaluation” instrument is a Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS). In other words, it uses descriptions based on behaviors to evaluate the Probationary Firefighter. Likewise, the person completing the evaluation should include observed behaviors to paint a clear picture of the Probationary Firefighter for the reader.
Evaluation is defined as the systematic process of gathering data so a judgments can be made about something’s worth or value. In many cases, Probationary Firefighters are receiving very high marks (judgment about the worth or value of the probationary firefighter) without any comments (data) establishing the activities or actions that were done to earn the marks. The only way the readers will appreciate how well someone is doing (or not doing) is through comments.
Excellent Comments
Ladders
“On 02-02, 02-28 and 02-30-02 (Probationary Firefighter’s name) performed ladder drills. He was able to throw ladders and call out all commands clearly and with no deficiencies.” (Rated in box #3)
Ability to Learn, Retain, and Apply Information
“(Probationary Firefighter’s name) exhibits good recall on equipment specifications as noted during nozzle and chain saw drills conducted this month. He showed a good amount of working knowledge in the areas of auto extrication and heavy lifting operations during drills held on (date) and (date) of this month.” (rated in box #3)
Effort to improve
“In an effort to improve his station drills, (Probationary Firefighter’s name) has spent his off duty time to take digital pictures, insert them into documents and provide them as handouts for drills. He has also contacted manufacturers to obtain information that is not available within our department.” (rated in box #4).
In a disappointing contrast, another Probationary Firefighter was also rated in Box #4. But, there were no comments to support the “zeal that is above standard”.
EMS - CPR
“(Probationary Firefighter’s name) gave a good CPR drill on (date). On a full arrest on (date) (Probationary Firefighter’s name) opened the airway, checked for breathing and pulses. He also performed both chest compressions and ventilations. All operations were conducted without problems.” (Rated in box #4)
Bland Comments
Quality of Work
“Way above average”
What is average? A better way to describe the quality of work would be to give an example of how a specific project was done with quality. (e.g., “not only does Joe mop the floor, but he uses a small brush to get into the “hard to get “corners)
Study Habits - Didactic
“(Probationary Firefighter’s name) has taken study time seriously.”
What is “serious” study time? A better way to paint the picture of a serious student is to give specific examples. (e.g., Joe set a goal of writing 40 flash cards each shift. He then asks the crew to quiz him on the information.)
Comments that make us scratch our heads
Tools and Equipment
In the example below, the Probationary Firefighter was rated in box #2 or “inconsistent” but the specific description paints a different picture.
“(Probationary Firefighter’s name) had his Truck walk-thru on (date) and he was well prepared. (Rated in box #2)”
We have also read apparently conflicting descriptions without sufficient clarification. As readers we do not have enough information to understand how two opposing observations about the same person are arrived at. Within one evaluation, a Probationary Firefighter was described as a “self starter who stays busy and always seeks additional duties” (rated high) and as someone who “needed to be reminded on several occasions to follow through on daily duties” (rated low).
Inappropriate comments:
Ability to Learn, Retain, and Apply Information
“I’m certain that (Probationary Firefighter’s name) has an IQ way above 140.”
EMS - Obtains relevant and accurate patient history, chief complaint etc.
“Very anal and organized”
EMS - CPR
“No full arrests yet, just (name of a frequent patient).”
EMS - Obtains vital signs quickly and accurately when indicated.
“(Probationary Firefighter’s name) is accurate and timely, even with the inherent limp wrists which P/M’s have.”
Just plain incorrect
Strength and Stamina
Compare the two specific descriptions below. The first example has nothing to do with “strength and stamina”. The second example paints a clear picture. Both were rated in “box #3”.
Example #1: “Has a calming demeanor in emergency situations”.
Example #2: “(Probationary Firefighter’s name) spent several hours (3/18) at the Training Center preparing for his Truck test with little fatigue.”
Decisiveness
Compare the three specific descriptions below. In each case the Probationary firefighter was rated in “box #3”. In the first example, even though the Probationary Firefighter delivered incorrect information, the Captain seems to want him to stand firm. The second example paints the picture of someone who knows when to accept they were wrong. The third example paints a clear picture of when a Captain can check a Probationary Firefighter’s decision making.
Example 1: “Needs to stand firm on questions when challenged. (Probationary Firefighter’s name) stated there were 5 cribbing and when challenged agreed that there were only 4.”
Example 2: “(Probationary Firefighter’s name) stood firm in his belief regarding a zone drill question, and when corrected, he graciously conceded the point in question.”
Example 3: “When asked for a patient disposition on EMS calls (Probationary Firefighter’s name) usually is able to provide the appropriate answer. If not, he as always open to ideas and suggestions.”
Hose lays
“No hose lays this month. We have been focusing on Truck operations.”
This comment has been on the monthly evaluation for two months. It is imperative that probationary firefighters are exposed to hose lays each month. Without practice, the probationary firefighter has a high likelihood of making mistakes while pulling hose to a fire.
Plans for improvement
Ideally, at the end of the month, the Captain is doing both the Probationary Firefighter Monthly evaluation and the monthly training calendar for the Station. The training plan for the Probationary Firefighter can be integrated into the Station training. As a guide, Captains should have the list of topics covered in the Recruit Academy. The list was given out during the Captain workshops at the end of the last two academies. The list of topics combined with the needs of the specific station should become the basis of the Probationary Firefighter’s monthly training plan.
Excellent Plan
Utilizing didactic study and simulations we will work on improving the primary and secondary assessments. Emphases will be placed on performing the evaluation in a timely manner, relaying the information to the Captain or Paramedic, and deciding on an appropriate disposition for the patient.
Engine Company operations will be emphasized during the first part of the month. A nozzle drill will be given on (date). An Engine Company “walk thru” will be performed on (date).
Truck Company operations will be highlighted during the latter part of the month, including but not limited to:
Ram fan / electric blower drill on (date)
Hurst tool drill on (date)
Truck walk-thru on (date)
High lift jack drill on (date)
To reinforce (Probationary Firefighter’s name) knowledge of our first in area, an area drill will be given on (date)
No plan
(Probationary Firefighter’s name) will continue to maintain his performance level and finish his probationary period, after which he will probably start to prepare for the position as a paramedic.
Training will revisit these issues monthly in an effort to improve the department’s writing skills, follow the progress of the probationary firefighters and further integrate the “floor” into the development of our future fighters.
I will be making personal phone calls to follow up on many of the evaluations but, if you have any questions or comments, contact me at 570-3352.