U.S. Department of Homeland Security • U.S. Fire Administration

National Fire Data Center • Emmitsburg, Maryland 21727

www.usfa.fema.gov/statistics/reports/index.shtm

Topical Fire reporT SerieS Volume 10, Issue 1 / June 2010

University Housing Fires

These topical reports are designed to 

explore facets of the U.S. fire problem as 

depicted through data collected in the U.S. 

Fire Administration’s (USFA’s) National 

Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS). 

Each topical report briefly addresses the 

nature of the specific fire or fire-related 

topic, highlights important findings from 

the data, and may suggest other resources 

to consider for further information. Also 

included are recent examples of fire incidents that demonstrate some of the issues 

addressed in the report or that put the 

report topic in context.

Findings

■ An estimated 3,800 university housing fires occur each year in the United States.

■ Eighty-three percent of university housing fires are cooking fires. Small, confined 

cooking fires account for 77 percent of university housing fires. Cooking fires 

account for 6 percent of all nonconfined university housing fires.

■ University housing fires peak in September and October; this peak accounts for 

23 percent of fires.

■ The three main causes of nonconfined university housing fires are intentionally 

set fires (17 percent), open flames (15 percent), and other unintentional causes 

(12 percent).

■ One-fifth of nonconfined university housing fires in bedrooms are started by 

candles. 

From 2005 to 2007, an estimated 3,800 university housing fires occurred annually in the United States. These 

fires accounted for less than one percent of residential 

building fires responded to by fire departments across the 

Nation.1,2,3 These fires resulted in an average of approximately 5 deaths, 50 injuries, and $26 million in property 

loss each year. This topical report addresses the characteristics of university housing fires reported to the National 

Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) between 2005 and 

2007. In NFIRS, university housing fires are considered to 

be fires in college and university residential buildings that 

include dormitories and fraternity and sorority houses.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) 

reports an increase in dormitory and university housing fires 

in recent years. Students bring more items from home to 

make their college stays more comfortable, including highpowered electronic equipment and appliances. However, 

the equipment can be dangerous when used improperly or 

left unsupervised, especially in dormitory rooms. The CPSC 

reported that fires are more common during the evening 

hours and weekends when most students are in the residence 

halls. Most of the fires are cooking-related (hot plates, microwaves, portable grills, etc.), but the majority of deaths occur 

in bedrooms. In August 2007, the CPSC, the United States 

Fire Administration (USFA), the National Fire Protection 

Association (NFPA), and the University of Maryland’s Fire 

Marshal urged students, families, and school administrators to 

be aware of the fire hazards and to take precautions.4

Types of Fires

Building fires consist of two major categories of incidents: 

fires that are confined to specific types of equipment or 

objects (confined fires) and those that are not (nonconfined 

fires). Confined building fires are small fire incidents that 

are limited in scope, confined to noncombustible containers, rarely result in serious injury or large content losses, 

and expected to have no significant accompanying property 

losses due to flame damage.5

 Eighty-four percent of university housing fires are confined fires as shown in Table 1. 

Table 1. University Housing Fires by 

Type of Incident (2005–2007) 

Incident Type Percent

Nonconfined fires 16.4

Confined fires 83.6

Cooking fire, confined to container 76.5

Chimney or flue fire, confined to chimney or flue 0.3

Incinerator overload or malfunction, fire confined 0.2

Fuel burner/boiler malfunction, fire confined 0.9

Commercial compactor fire, confined to rubbish 0.2

Trash or rubbish fire, contained 5.4

Total 100.0

Source: NFIRS 5.0
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 2

Loss Measures

Table 2 presents losses, averaged over this 3-year period, for residential building fires and university housing fires reported to 

NFIRS.6

Table 2. Loss Measures for University Housing Fires (3-year average, 2005–2007)

Measure Residential 

Building Fires

University 

Housing Fires

Confined 

University Housing Fires

Nonconfined

 University Housing Fires

Average Loss:

Fatalities/1,000 Fires 5.4 0.7 0.0 4.4

Injuries/1,000 Fires 28.1 9.5 2.1 47.2

Dollar Loss/Fire $14,560 $5,730 $80 $34,420

Source: NFIRS 5.0 

Note: Average loss for fatalities and injuries is computed per 1,000 fires; average dollar loss is computed per fire and is rounded to the nearest $10.

Table 3 presents the percentage distribution of property use 

for all university housing fires, confined university housing fires, and nonconfined university housing fires. Fires 

in dormitories and dormitory-type residences account for 

94 percent of all university housing fires. These fires also 

account for 96 percent of confined university housing fires 

and 88 percent of nonconfined university housing fires. 

While a substantially smaller portion of university fires in 

general, fires in sorority and fraternity houses play a larger 

role in the bigger fires, accounting for 13 percent of nonconfined fires compared to 4 percent of confined fires.

Table 3. Percentage Distribution of Property Use for University Housing Fires 

(3-year average, 2005–2007)

 

Property Use All University Housing Fires Confined University Housing Fires Nonconfined 

University Housing Fires

Dormitory and Dormitory-type 

residence 94.3% 95.6% 87.5%

Sorority House, Fraternity House 5.7% 4.4% 12.5%

Source NFIRS 5.0

When University Housing Fires Occur

As shown in Figure 1, university housing fires occur mainly 

in the early evening hours from 5 p.m. to 10 p.m., peaking 

from 8 p.m. to 9 p.m., and then declining throughout the 

night and early morning reaching the lowest point during 

the morning hours (5 a.m. to 6 a.m.).7

 The distribution 

of fires during the day is much like that of residential fires 

overall with the evening peak longer and later. Most likely, 

the timing corresponds to when students prepare snacks or 

cook their evening meals.

University housing fires peak in September and October as 

shown in Figure 2. This peak of fire activity corresponds to 

the beginning of the traditional academic year. September 

and October account for approximately 23 percent of all 

university housing fires. From November through April, 

fires fluctuate between 8 and 10 percent, accounting for 

54 percent of all university housing fires. Fires begin to 

decline in May when the academic year winds down. Fire 

incidence is lowest during the months of June through 

August, corresponding to lower student attendance during 

summer sessions.
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 3

Figure 1. University Housing Fires by Time of Alarm (2005–2007)

Source: NFIRS 5.0 

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

Mid-1am

1am - 2am2am - 3am3am - 4am4am - 5am5am - 6am6am - 7am7am - 8am8am - 9am

9am -10am

10am - 11am

11am -12pm

12pm - 1pm

1pm - 2pm2pm - 3pm3pm - 4pm4pm - 5pm5pm - 6pm6pm - 7pm7pm - 8pm8pm - 9pm

9pm - 10pm

10pm - 11pm

11pm - Mid

4.4

3.2

2.3

1.2 1.4 1.5

2.5 2.4

3.0

4.2 4.2 4.5

4.1

4.5

7.2 7.3 7.4

4.3

2.7

5.8

7.9

6.7

Percent of Fires

5.6

1.6

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

8.7

Figure 2. University Housing Fires by Month (2005–2007)

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

8.4

4.8

11.2

8.2

9.8

11.5

5.5

7.6

9.6 9.4

5.3

Percent of Fires Source: NFIRS 5.0

Causes of University Housing Fires

Eighty-three percent of all university housing fires are 

cooking fires as shown in Table 4. The next four causes 

combined account for 9 percent of university housing fires: 

intentionally set fires (3 percent), open flame fires (2 percent), heating fires (2 percent), and other unintentional 

or careless fires (2 percent). Candle fires, a subset of openflame fires, account for 1 percent of all university housing 

fires. Candle fires have been of much concern in university 

housing. Only a small number of these fires are reported to 

NFIRS. This lack of reporting could be due to campus regulations banning candles combined with the lack of data from 

confined fires.
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 4

Table 4. Leading Causes of University 

Housing Fires (2005–2007)

Cause Percent 

(Unknowns Apportioned)

Cooking 83.1

Intentional 3.1

Open Flame 2.3

Heating 1.8

Other Unintentional, Careless 1.8

Source: NFIRS 5.0

Confined Fires

Confined fires are allowed abbreviated NFIRS reporting 

and many reporting details of the fire are not required 

and not reported. The three major areas where data are 

available—time of day, month, and cause—confined fires 

dominate the overall university housing fire profile. Thirtynine percent of confined fires occur between 5 p.m. and 

10 p.m., peaking between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m. Confined fires 

in university housing fires peak in September and October, 

decline through May and are lowest during the months of 

June through August. Cooking is the cause of 96 percent of 

these confined fires.

Nonconfined Fires

The next sections of this Topical Report address nonconfined university housing fires, where detailed fire data are 

available.

Causes of Nonconfined University Housing 

Fires

While cooking is the leading cause of university housing 

fires overall, it only represents 6 percent of all nonconfined 

university housing fires. Intentionally set fires (17 percent), fires caused by open flames (15 percent), and other 

unintentional causes (12 percent) are the leading causes of 

nonconfined university housing fires (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Causes of Nonconfined University Housing Fires (2005–2007)

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0

Intentional

Playing with Heat Source

Smoking

Heating

Cooking

Electrical Malfunction

Appliances

Open Flame

Other Heat

Other Equipment

Natural

Exposure

Equipment Misoperation, Failure

Other Unintentional, Careless

Investigation with Arson Module

Unknown

17.2

0.8

0.6

6.4

5.1

3.1

2.4

6.4

5.1

7.2

6.3

5.0

14.9

11.9

7.3

0.8

0.6

2.0

1.6

2.9

2.3

7.3

5.9

12.3

9.8

1.6

1.3

20.2

Unknowns Apportioned

Reported

9.2

Percent of Nonconfined University Housing Fires

9.0

13.7

Source: NFIRS 5.0
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 5

Where Nonconfined University Housing 

Fires Start (Area of Fire Origin)

Most nonconfined university housing fires begin in the 

bedroom (23 percent) or cooking areas and kitchens 

(20 percent). Fires that start in bathrooms and locker 

rooms (7 percent), hallways (6 percent), common rooms 

or lounge areas (5 percent), and laundry areas (5 percent) 

account for an additional 23 percent (Table 5). 

Table 5. Leading Areas of Fire Origin in Nonconfined University Housing Fires (2005-2007)

Area of Origin Percent 

(Unknowns Apportioned)

Bedrooms 22.7

Cooking area, kitchen 19.9

Bathroom, checkroom, lavatory, locker room 7.2

Hallway corridor 6.1

Common room, den, family room, living room, lounge 5.1

Laundry area 4.9

Source: NFIRS 5.0

For intentionally set nonconfined fires, 31 percent are set 

in hallways or corridors of the building. Fires set in bathrooms account for an additional 12 percent of intentionally set nonconfined fires. Eleven percent of intentionally 

set nonconfined fires start in bedrooms, 8 percent occur in 

lounges or common rooms, and 3 percent start in kitchens 

or cooking areas. 

Fires involving open flame in bedrooms account for 42 

percent of all nonconfined university housing open-flame 

fires. Nonconfined university housing open-flame fires start 

in lounges or common rooms (9 percent) and bathrooms 

(9 percent), accounting for an additional 18 percent.

Fires in kitchens and cooking areas account for the vast 

majority of other unintentional nonconfined fires (49 percent). Fires in bedrooms account for 26 percent of other 

unintentional nonconfined fires. 

How Nonconfined University Housing Fires 

Start (Heat Source)

Figure 4 shows sources of heat in nonconfined university 

housing fires. Heat from powered equipment accounts for 

49 percent of nonconfined university housing fires. Within 

this category, radiated or conducted heat from operating 

equipment accounts for 19 percent of all fires and heat 

from other powered equipment accounts for 16 percent of 

all nonconfined university housing fires. Heat from open 

flame or smoking materials accounts for 28 percent of nonconfined university housing fires. This category includes 

candles, cigarettes, lighters, and matches. The third largest 

category pertains to hot or smoldering objects (14 percent). 

This category includes hot embers or ashes, molten, hot 

material, and heat sparked from friction. 
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 6

Figure 4. Sources of Heat in Nonconfined University Housing Fires (2005–2007)

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Heat from powered equipment

Heat from open flame or

smoking materials

Hot or smoldering object

Other heat source

Heat spread from another fire

Chemical, natural heat source

Explosive, fireworks

Multiple heat sources including

multiple ignitions

Undetermined

Percent of nonconfined university housing fires with 

heat source determined

Percent of all nonconfined university housing fires

20.9

13.5

10.2

4.4

3.3

3.0

2.3

1.7

1.3

1.0

0.8

0.2

0.2

24.1

48.6

27.6

Percent of Nonconfined University Housing Fires

36.8

Source: NFIRS 5.0 

As a third of the causes of nonconfined university housing 

fires specifically include equipment, it is not surprising that 

the leading heat source for those fires is heat from powered 

equipment (92 percent).8

 Of the 23 percent of the fires 

that occur in bedrooms (Table 5), 10 percent are started by 

heat from powered equipment, 19 percent are started by 

radiated or conducted heat from operating equipment, and 

12 percent are started by electrical arcing. Interestingly, 20 

percent of nonconfined university housing fires in bedrooms are started by candles (these data are not available for 

confined fires). This finding supports the policies enforced 

by several universities to prohibit candle usage in dormitories and other campus housing. 

For the 20 percent of nonconfined university housing fires 

that occur in kitchens or cooking areas, 37 percent are 

started by radiated or conducted heat from operating equipment, 27 percent are started by heat from powered equipment, and 5 percent are started by electrical arcing.

Fire Spread in Nonconfined University 

Housing

Fire spread in nonconfined university housing is generally 

contained to the object of fire origin (50 percent) or to the 

room of fire origin (33 percent) as shown in Figure 5. 

When these statistics are combined with the implied fire 

spread for confined fires (that is, confined fires are implied 

to be confined to the object of origin), over 90 percent of 

all university housing fires are confined to the object of 

origin.
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 7

Figure 5. Extent of Fire Spread in Nonconfined University Housing Fires (2005–2007)

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Confined to object of origin 49.9

Confined to room of origin 33.3

Confined to building of origin 8.6

Confined to floor of origin 5.8

Beyond building of origin 2.4

Percent of Nonconfined University Housing Fires Source: NFIRS 5.0 

Factors Contributing to Ignition

Table 6 shows the leading factors contributing to ignition of 

nonconfined university housing fires. Placing a heat source 

too close to combustible objects is the leading contributing 

factor (17 percent). Abandoned or discarded materials are a 

contributing factor in 16 percent of nonconfined university 

housing fires and the general misuse of materials or products is a contributing factor in 13 percent of the fires. These 

3 contributing factors play a role in 45 percent of nonconfined university housing fires.9

Table 6. Leading Factors Contributing to Ignition for Nonconfined University Housing Fires 

(Where Factor Contributing Specified, 2005–2007)

Factors Contributing to Ignition Percent of Nonconfined University Housing 

(Unknowns Apportioned)

Fires

Heat source too close to combustibles 16.8

Abandoned or discarded materials or products 15.5

Unspecified misuse of material or product 12.9

Source: NFIRS 5.0 

Notes: Includes only incidents where factors that contributed to the ignition of the fire were specified. Multiple factors contributing to fire ignition may be noted 

for each incident. 
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 8

Smoke Alarms 

Smoke alarm data are available for both confined and nonconfined fires although for confined fires, the data are very 

limited in scope.

In 9 percent of nonconfined university housing fires there 

were no smoke alarms present (Table 7). In another 9 

percent of these fires, firefighters were unable to determine 

if a smoke alarm was present. Smoke alarms were present in 82 percent of nonconfined university housing fires. 

Smoke alarms are known to have operated in 63 percent 

of nonconfined university housing fires. In 6 percent of 

nonconfined university housing fires where smoke alarms 

were present, the alarms failed to operate. 

In 13 percent of confined university housing fires, the 

smoke alarm effectiveness was unknown (Table 8). Smoke 

alarms operated and alerted occupants in 83 percent of 

these confined fires. In 4 percent of confined university 

housing fires, the occupants were not alerted by the smoke 

alarm.10 Note that the data presented in Table 7 and Table 8 

are the raw counts from the NFIRS data set and not scaled 

to national estimates of smoke alarms in university housing 

fires.

Table 7. NFIRS Smoke Alarm Data for Nonconfined University Housing Fires 

(NFIRS, 2005-2007)

 

Presence of 

Smoke Alarms Smoke Alarm Operational Status Smoke Alarm Effectiveness Count Percent

Present

Fire too small to activate smoke alarm 107 9.4

Smoke alarm operated

Smoke alarm alerted occupants, occupants responded

Smoke alarm alerted occupants, occupants failed to respond

No occupants

617

36

37

54.0

3.1

3.2

Smoke alarm failed to alert occupants 6 0.5

Undetermined 20 1.7

Smoke alarm failed to operate 53 4.6

Undetermined 60 5.2

None present 99 8.7

Undetermined 108 9.4

Total Incidents 1,143 100.0

Source: NFIRS 5.0

Notes: The data presented in Table 7 are raw data counts from the NFIRS data set. They do not represent national estimates of smoke alarms in university housing fires. They are presented for informational purposes. 

Total may not add to 100 percent due to rounding.

Table 8. NFIRS Smoke Alarm Data for Confined University Housing Fires 

(NFIRS, 2005-2007)

Smoke Alarm Effectiveness Count Percent

Smoke alarm alerted occupants 4,828 83.1

Smoke alarm did not alert occupants 209 3.6

Unknown 772 13.3

Total Incidents 5,809 100.0

Source: NFIRS 5.0

Notes: The data presented in Table 8 are raw data counts from the NFIRS data set. They do not represent national estimates of smoke alarms in university housing fires. They are 

presented for informational purposes. Total may not add to 100 percent due to rounding.
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 9

Automatic Extinguishing Systems

Automatic extinguishing system (AES) data—primarily 

sprinkler systems in residential buildings—are also available 

for both confined and nonconfined fires, but for confined 

fires, an AES was present in less than 1 percent of reported 

incidents.11 Note that the data presented in Table 9 are the 

raw counts from the NFIRS data set and are not scaled to 

national estimates of AESs in university housing fires.

In 39 percent of nonconfined university housing fires, full 

or partial AESs were present (Table 9). The presence of 

suppression systems—sprinkler systems most likely—was 

higher in nonconfined university housing fires than in any 

other residential property type except for hotels and motels 

(41 percent), possibly as a result of code requirements. 

Fifty-seven percent of university housing fires had no AES 

present, and the presence of an AES was undetermined in 4 

percent of the fires.

Table 9. NFIRS Automatic Extinguishing System (AES) Data for 

Nonconfined University Housing Fires

AES Presence Count Percent

AES present 446 39.0

Partial system present 3 0.3

AES not present 649 56.8

Unknown 45 3.9

Total 1,143 100.0

Source: NFIRS 5.0.

Notes: The data presented in this table are raw data counts from the NFIRS data set. They do not represent national estimates of AESs in nonconfined university housing fires. They are presented for informational 

purposes. 

Examples

The following are some recent examples of university housing fires that were reported by the media:

• May 2009: Two Central Connecticut State University 

students were accused of setting off the fire alarms 

with burning popcorn after they tied the doors shut to 

several dorm rooms. Their intent was to pull a prank 

in the residence hall. Police and firefighters secured the 

scene. No one was injured during the incident.12

• May 2009: Several Northern Illinois University students were displaced after a fire broke out in their 

fraternity house. One person was taken to a hospital 

with non-life-threatening injuries. The cause of the fire 

is unknown, but it started on a sofa on the front porch 

of the house. Smoking materials have not been ruled 

out as the cause of ignition.13

• April 2009: Beaumont firefighters determined that a 

Lamar University residence hall fire was caused by a 

bathroom vent fan that was left running while no one 

was in the room. It appears that the motor had shorted 

or overheated, caught on fire, and burned a portion of 

the bathroom. The fire was confined to the bathroom, 

and the residence hall’s sprinkler system activated, putting out the flames. The fire alarms alerted students and 

staff, and everyone evacuated the residence hall.14

• May 2009: Quick responses by the local fire department and employees of the University of the 

Cumberlands attributed to containing a small fire in 

a residence hall caused by a burning stove and microwave oven. No one was hurt during the fire, and the 

building sustained only minor damage.15

Conclusion

University housing fires have become the focus of increased 

attention within the State and Federal governments, local 

and State fire departments, affected neighborhoods and 

communities, and the criminal justice system. This is 

largely because they account for and cause injuries and 

deaths as well as property damage. An estimated 3,800 

university housing fires occur each year in the United States. 

The challenge for communities and the fire service is to 

pinpoint the reasons why university housing fires occur and 

to address these issues to prevent future fires, deaths, injuries, and severe property damage. Providing students with 

fire safety education upon their arrival to the universities 

may help increase awareness and prevent fires.
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 10

NFIRS Data Specifications for University 

Housing Fires

Data for this report were extracted from the NFIRS annual 

Public Data Release (PDR) files for 2005, 2006, and 2007. 

Only version 5.0 data were extracted.

University housing fires were defined as:

• Incident types 111 to 123:

Incident 

Type Description

111 Building fire

112 Fires in structure other than in a building

113 Cooking fire, confined to container

114 Chimney or flue fire, confined to chimney or flue

115 Incinerator overload or malfunction, fire confined

116 Fuel burner/boiler malfunction, fire confined

117 Commercial compactor fire, confined to rubbish

118 Trash or rubbish fire, contained

120 Fire in mobile property used as a fixed structure, other

121 Fire in mobile home used as fixed residence

122 Fire in motor home, camper, recreational vehicle

123 Fire in portable building, fixed location

Note that incident types 113 to 118 do not specify if 

the structure is a building.

Incident type 112 is included as previous analyses 

have shown that incident types 111 and 112 are used 

interchangeably.

• Aid types 3 (Mutual aid given) and 4 (Automatic aid 

given) were excluded to avoid double counting of 

incidents.

• Property use 400 to 464:

Property Use Description

460 Dormitory-type residence, other

462 Sorority house, fraternity house

464 Barracks, dormitory

and,

• Structure type:

o 1 - Enclosed building;

o 2 - Fixed portable or mobile structure; and

o Structure type not specified (null entry).

The USFA cause hierarchy was used to determine the cause of 

university housing fire incidents:16 http://www.usfa.fema.

gov/fireservice/nfirs/tools/fire_cause_category_matrix.shtm

To request additional information or to comment on this 

report, visit http://www.usfa.fema.gov/applications/ 

feedback/index.jsp

Notes: 

1

 National estimates are based on 2005-2007 native version 5.0 data from the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) and residential structure fire loss estimates from the National Fire Protection Association’s (NFPA’s) annual surveys of fire loss. Fires are rounded 

to the nearest 100, deaths to the nearest 5, injuries to the nearest 25, and loss to the nearest $million.

2

 University housing consists of college and university residential buildings that include dormitories and barracks (a combined category), sorority houses, and fraternity houses. 

3

 In the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS), version 5.0, a structure is a constructed item of which a building is one type. 

In previous versions of NFIRS, the term “residential structure” commonly referred to buildings where people live. To coincide with 

this concept, the definition of a residential structure fire for NFIRS 5.0 has, therefore, changed to include only those fires where the 

NFIRS 5.0 structure type is 1 or 2 (enclosed building and fixed portable or mobile structure) with a residential property use. Such fires 

are referred to as “residential buildings” to distinguish these buildings from other structures on residential properties that may include 

fences, sheds, and other uninhabitable structures. In addition, incidents that have a residential property use, but do not have a structure 

type specified are presumed to be buildings.

4

 “News from CPSC, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission: Increase in College Dorm Fire Prompts Officials to Issue Warning,” cpsc.

gov, August 21, 2007. http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml07/07279.html (accessed June 10, 2009).

5

 NFIRS distinguishes between “content” and “property” loss. Content loss includes loss to the contents of a structure due to damage by 

fire, smoke, water, and overhaul. Property loss includes losses to the structure itself or to the property itself. Total loss is the sum of the 

content loss and the property loss. For confined fires, the expectation is that the fire did not spread beyond the container (or rubbish for 

incident type 118) and hence, there was no property damage (damage to the structure itself) from the flames. There could be, however, 

property damage as a result of smoke, water, and overhaul.
TFRS Volume 10, Issue 1/ University Housing Fires Page 11

6

 The average fire death and fire injury loss rates computed from the national estimates above will not agree with average fire 

death and fire injury loss rates computed from NFIRS data alone. The fire death rate computed from national estimates would be 

(1000*(5/3,800)) = 1.3 deaths per 1,000 university housing fires and the fire injury rate would be (1000*(50/3,800)) =13.2 injuries 

per 1,000 university housing fires. 

7

 For the purposes of this report, the time of the fire alarm is used as an approximation for the general time the fire started. However, in 

NFIRS, it is the time the fire was reported to the fire department. 

8

 These causes are: heating, cooking, electrical malfunction, appliances, other equipment, and equipment misoperation. Other causes 

may also have had equipment involved.

9

 Percentages cited in the text may not add to 100 due to rounding.

10 In confined fires, the entry “smoke alarm did not alert occupants” can mean: no smoke alarm was present, the smoke alarm was present but did not operate, or the smoke alarm was present and operated but the occupant was already aware of the fire.

 11 As confined fires codes are designed to capture fires contained to noncombustible containers, it is not recommended to code a fire 

incident as a small, low- or no-loss confined fire incident if an automatic extinguishing system (AES) operated and contained the fire as 

a result. The preferred method is to code the fire as a standard fire incident with fire spread confined to the object of origin and provide 

the relevant information on AES presence and operation. 

12 Lisa Backus, “CCSU athletes arrested for popcorn fire prank in dorm,” bristolpress.com, May 12, 2009. http://www.bristolpress.com/

articles/2009/05/12/news/doc4a08a5386398f485964256.prt (accessed May 28, 2009).

13 “Fire breaks out at NIU frat house,” chicagobreakingnews.com, May 6, 2009. http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/05/

fire-breaks-out-at-niu-frat-house.html (accessed May 28, 2009).

14 Scott Lawrence, “Investigators determine cause of LU residence hall fire,” kfdm.com, April 23, 2009. http://www.kfdm.com/

common/printer/view.php?db=kfdm&id=31329 (accessed May 28, 2009).

15 Mark White, “Fire damages University of the Cumberlands building, Quick response by local firefighters contain blaze,” 

thenewsjournal.net, May 12, 2009. http://www.thenewsjournal.net/details.cfm?id=2413 (accessed May 28, 2009).

16 USFA’s cause hierarchy is designed for structure fires of which buildings are a subset.