Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Training Standards topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission debates new instructor pathways and an evaluator credential to meet accreditor expectations
Summary
A guest presentation and lengthy staff discussion examined whether fire prevention staff and non-fire roles should be eligible for Fire Instructor 1 without a firefighting prerequisite, and staff proposed a standardized evaluator training to credential people who may assess practical JPRs across the state.
A guest from Metro Fire sought permission for prevention-track staff to earn a Fire Instructor 1 credential without first holding a basic firefighting certification, saying prevention personnel and subject-matter experts (for example, swift-water or life-safety educators) want a recognized credential for teaching and credibility.
Commissioners and staff debated practical consequences for officer progression and how an alternate "non-fire" instructional pathway might be anchored (examples proposed: use the certification date of Firefighter 1, Fire Life Safety Educator 1, or a technical-rescue credential as a 3-year anchor before a candidate could advance). Staff cautioned that opening prevention-track pathways without careful anchor points could enable candidates to hold Instructor 1 while lacking other prerequisites used later for officer certifications.
Separately, staff presented a proposed evaluator-training course (a PowerPoint and pilot-class plan) intended to standardize who may evaluate the commission's practical JPRs. Staff said the training is urgent: an accreditation site visit next June makes standardizing evaluator practices a top priority. The proposed rollout is a pilot class for staff and nearby evaluators followed by a statewide schedule; staff discussed course-delivery formats (in-person, limited online, pilot class sizes), required reporting windows for course submissions, and integration with the course-request process in the commission's systems.
Commissioners expressed concern about the burden on smaller departments, the practicality of requiring separate evaluators for every skill, and the interplay between classroom instructors and evaluators during recruit academies. Staff and several commissioners said a staged approach (pilot classes and gradual rollout) and clearer course-request/reporting requirements should limit disruption while addressing accreditor expectations.
