It is estimated that in the United States, 10% of fire-department responses are due to unnecessary alarms, e.g., those activated because of alarm maintenance, malfunction or cooking smoke.

Last month, the U.S. Fire Administration, International Association of Fire Chiefs and the National Fire Protection Association co-hosted a first-ever summit to begin the discussion on how to reduce that number.

It’s difficult in these economic times for fire departments to justify that one of every 10 calls to which they respond actually does not require a response. Corollary to this is the risk to responders and civilians that is present each time departments put apparatus and manpower into respond mode.

The IAFC is dedicated to finding a solution for fire-service leaders and responders and is advocating code changes to NFPA 72. The proposed changes concern water-flow device changes, alarm verification and system maintenance.

But these issues impact a wide variety of stakeholders and only through engaging with them can we find the best solutions. Indeed, building a common perspective is critical to facing a shared challenge. Therefore, those with responsibility for solving the problem of unnecessary alarms were brought together for meaningful discussion and to map out strategies for finding a solution to this dilemma.

The IAFC, the NFPA and the USFA each provided its perspective on the issues surrounding unwanted alarms, including the risks associated with them.

Alex Furr, USFA’s director of national fire programs, referred to the issue as a “complex puzzle” encompassing resources, technology, politics, standards, business models and response protocols that will require all stakeholders to contribute to the solution.

In addition, three separate panels of subject-matter experts presented to approximately 70 stakeholders from the alarm design and manufacturing industry, to members of the installation and maintenance industry, and to a wide range of fire department chief-level officers, fire marshals and fire-prevention officers. Each provided an in-depth look at how the unwanted alarm issue relates to the respective sectors and was followed by both large and small group discussions.

The design and manufacturing panel felt that while the maintenance challenges seem to have many sources, financial issues presented the biggest obstacle. Given the market forces at play, industry often needs to direct its energy and resources on identifying ways to “band-aid” old systems to meet new needs, slowing the speed at which new technological solutions can be developed.

The installation and maintenance panel cited examples of jurisdictions that clearly have demonstrated that testing and maintenance requirements make a difference in reducing false alarms.

The emergency response panel featured three different working models that ranged from a full response to each call, to no response unless there is a second indicator or the call is emanating from a high-risk facility.

Panelists agreed that some positions may seem high-risk and that changing community expectations was a significant hurtle. But they also agreed that fire department leaders need to do something in order to create a safer and more efficient response environment.

Those present exhibited more consensus than I personally expected. It was widely felt that the summit had better prepared each of us for more substantive participation in the solution process, as it provided a greater appreciation of each stakeholder’s role and a better understanding of each other’s needs.

Jack Parow is the president of the International Association of Fire Chiefs. The retired fire chief in Chelmsford, Mass., Parow is a 33-year veteran of the fire service.