Rationale and research aims

1. Feeling Safe is a qualitative study investigating perceptions of fire safety amongst residents of high-rise buildings, commissioned by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG). Following the Grenfell Tower fire in June 2017, MHCLG is committed to ensuring that people are safe and feel safe from fire^{[footnote 1]}. Specifically, the Building Safety Programme has been established to ensure that residents of high-rise buildings are safe – and feel safe – now, and in the future^{[footnote 2]}.

2. The Building Safety Programme is working with a range of stakeholders on new proposals for building safety. This includes residents, building owners, housing providers, schools, hospitals and the construction industry, including an Industry Response Group.

3. The department is measuring perceptions of fire safety using the English Housing Survey, our flagship survey of people’s housing circumstances and the condition and energy efficiency of housing in England. Due to the survey’s data collection and reporting schedule, the findings on perceptions fire safety are not yet available^{[footnote 3]}. In the wider literature, to our knowledge there is a paucity of evidence examining high-rise residents’ attitudes and perceptions of fire safety^{[footnote 4]}. To address this gap, the Feeling Safe project has been commissioned to understand more fully residents’ perceptions and feelings with reference to fire safety in high-rise buildings.

4. Throughout this report, fire safety refers to ‘the prevention of and protection from fire’.

5. The objectives of the Feeling Safe study are therefore to understand

• perceptions of fire safety amongst residents of high-rise buildings;
• the drivers behind perceptions of fire safety and whether views differ between residents with different characteristics;
• the impact of the Grenfell Tower fire on perceptions of fire safety; and
• how particular policy responses might influence perceptions of fire safety.

Report structure

6. Chapter 1 begins by briefly describing participants’ perceptions of fire safety, highlighting the groups who feel most vulnerable. It then considers how these perceptions have been affected by the Grenfell Tower fire and other high-rise building fires.

7. Chapters 2 and 3 examine the two key drivers of perceptions of fire safety. First, the levels of trust residents must have in those responsible for their building’s design and management, along with other residents in the building. Second, how feelings of confidence and a sense of control impact on perceptions of fire safety. Each of these chapters summarises actions which participants suggested would improve perceptions of fire safety in their high-rise building.

8. Chapter 4 presents participants’ responses to three pre-formulated policy responses raised in each group discussion, ranging from running resident consultations on refurbishment, to providing training courses or producing information packs.

Overview of method

9. Full details of the sampling, recruitment, fieldwork, analysis and ethics are in the technical note at the end of this report. Briefly, Feeling Safe is a qualitative study designed to gather in-depth data on experiences and views of high-rise residents and to understand perceptions of fire safety from their own perspectives. Focus groups were used to produce rich data in an efficient way, by bringing together a diverse range of residents in a way that deepened participants’ reflections on the topic.

10. Rigour in qualitative research is achieved through a systematic approach to sampling, recruitment and analysis. Qualitative samples tend to be modest and are not designed to be representative at a population level, but to generate a range of diverse views. A purposive sampling approach, in which participants are selected based on pre-defined criteria, is a marker of quality and was used in Feeling Safe. A ‘blended’ recruitment approach was used, drawing on a list of respondents who had agreed to be re-contacted for further research from the English Housing Survey and boosting this sample using an experienced recruitment agency^{[footnote 5]}.

11. Nine focus groups were conducted, with between three and eight high-rise residents per group, totalling 50 participants. For the purpose of this study, a high-rise-building was defined as a residential building with at least six floors. The number of groups enabled data collection from each of the three housing tenures (owner occupiers, social renters and private renters) in three regions of England with a high concentration of high-rise buildings (London, North West, West Midlands). As far as possible, participants were diverse with respect to their floor level, gender, ethnicity, age and presence of children and/or someone with a medical condition in the household. Experienced researchers facilitated the focus groups, using a discussion guide which was designed to introduce fire safety, map and understand participant concerns and explore solutions, including testing pre-formulated policy solutions^{[footnote 6]}. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim.

12. The Framework approach was used to analyse transcripts. This systematic analysis of the data involved understanding views within each focus group as well as comparing views across the sample. The findings are therefore grounded in participants’ accounts and quotes are used throughout the report to illustrate findings^{[footnote 7]}.

Main findings

Participants from all tenures expressed concerns about fire safety in high-rise residential buildings. People living in older buildings, on higher floors or in vulnerable groups had greater concerns.

• Residents were concerned about how to prevent a fire and what would happen if a fire occurred. These concerns were expressed spontaneously or as the discussion prompted consideration of the issues.

• Residents living on higher floors had particular concerns about their ability to escape in the event of a fire. This concern was shared by residents of older buildings or those with a single fire exit, which residents were not confident could be used for safe evacuation, especially of residents with cognitive or physical impairments.

For some, the Grenfell Tower fire raised or confirmed existing concerns about fire safety in their high-rise building. However, it was also felt that fire safety is being taken more seriously following the Grenfell Tower fire.

• High-rise residents whose feelings of safety were least affected by the Grenfell Tower fire felt their building was significantly different from Grenfell Tower in terms of age, design, materials and safety features. These tended to be owner occupiers or private renters living in privately owned buildings.

• Participants spoke positively that they felt fire safety was being taken more seriously since the Grenfell Tower fire. In particular, those living in buildings managed by social landlords felt reassured by actions their landlords had taken.

Fire safety in high-rise buildings is a shared concern and feelings of safety depend on residents having trust in those responsible for the design and management of the building, as well as trust in their neighbours. There was some mistrust in these relationships, negatively affecting how safe high-rise residents felt.

• There were consistent concerns across tenures that those responsible for the design and management of high-rise buildings prioritise cost saving and do not prioritise fire safety.

• Concerns were expressed about a lack of resident engagement in building management, by social housing tenants in particular.

• Residents were also concerned about the extent to which they could trust their neighbours to behave safely to prevent fires and to respond appropriately in the event of a fire.

Residents of high-rise buildings were not confident that they knew enough about whether the design of their building would help to prevent a fire from spreading or that fire safety equipment and evacuation procedures would work in the event of a fire. Such confidence would provide residents with a greater sense of control over their own safety.

• Residents reported that independent verification of the quality of building work and the installation and maintenance of fire safety equipment would be reassuring.

• In particular, residents wanted to understand the fire alarm systems in their building and be familiar with the evacuation procedures including when to stay put and when and how to evacuate, ensuring provision for evacuating vulnerable residents.

• Residents living in buildings managed by private landlords were uncertain who was responsible for maintaining the fire safety equipment and more widely who has responsibility for ensuring a building has fire measures in place. Residents living in buildings managed by social landlords did not raise such concerns.

High-rise residents made clear the need for those with responsibility for managing high-rise buildings to inform, to consult, to listen and to check, in order to make residents feel safer from fire.

• This was apparent when residents were discussing their concerns, as a factor influencing greater concern was poor building management. Residents wanted those responsible for managing the building to engage with them on fire safety, to provide information on the current safety assessment of their building and advice on what to do in the event of a fire. Such actions would provide a sense of reassurance.

• Residents also reported it was important for those responsible for building management to maintain regular contact with residents on fire safety, to listen to their concerns and to consult them. This would help to build a sense of community and shared responsibility for fire safety.

• Residents also wanted management and regulation of short-term sub-letting, as they perceived this to pose a risk to fire safety.

An information pack describing the design and fire safety features of a high-rise residential building was one measure that would reassure residents that building managers take safety seriously, that their building is safe and that they know what to do in the event of a fire.

• Information packs should be provided as a matter of course to all residents and include information on the building design, its safety measures, procedures in the event of a fire and a named point of contact responsible for fire safety.

• Residents felt that the person responsible for the building should also be responsible for producing and distributing information packs, ensuring they stand out from everyday correspondence, to encourage residents to read the pack, which could also be available online.

Residents liked proposals for a training course covering fire prevention and protection, as it would give them confidence in coping in the event of a fire and increase trust in their neighbours to prevent and respond appropriately to a fire.

• Residents suggested the course should include raising awareness of behaviours that increase fire risks, even those which seem obvious such as smoking. It would also need to include tailored, building specific information on what to do in the event of a fire.

• Given the cost of a comprehensive training programme, delivered by experts, which could helpfully be supplemented with media campaigns, it was suggested that government funding would need to be made available to support training delivery.

High-rise residents would value being consulted on proposed building improvements as this encourages a view that fire safety is everyone’s responsibility and could foster trust between residents and building managers.

• Involving residents in decision making meaningfully requires information on the proposed work, its compliance with safety regulations, the timing and cost to be made accessible through a variety of channels, including an opportunity to discuss with fire safety professionals.

• However, residents did not want to be tasked with the final decision on refurbishment due to their lack of technical knowledge and the need for decisions to be in the best interest of all residents, not only those most vocal in a consultation.

Acknowledgements and further queries

13. The authors would like to thank the residents who gave up their time to participate in the focus groups. The research also benefited from the expertise of members of a steering group, including an independent expert Professor Anne Power, London School of Economics.

14. This report was produced by Mehul Kotecha, Jonah Bury, Shivonne Gates, Emma Forsyth, Ceri Davies and Sarah Cheesbrough at NatCen Social Research, in collaboration with MHCLG.

15. If you have any queries about this report or would like any further information, please contact ehs@communities.gov.uk.