Review and Assessment of Data 

Quality in the National Fire Incident 

Reporting System

National Fire Data Center

May 2017

Mission Statement

We provide national leadership to foster a solid foundation for 

our fi re and emergency services stakeholders in prevention, 

preparedness and response.

Review and Assessment of 

Data Quality in the National 

Fire Incident Reporting System

National Fire Data Center

May 20171

1

This publication was originally submitted to the Office of Management and Budget in September 2014 and 

approved in February 2016 as per the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

Table of Contents i

Table of Contents

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1

About the National Fire Incident Reporting System ...................................................... 3

National Fire Incident Reporting System Enhancements ....................................... 7

National Fire Incident Reporting System Training ................................................... 8

Uses of the National Fire Incident Reporting System.............................................. 9

The National Fire Incident Reporting System and the National Fire Protection 

Association Survey................................................................................................. 10

Incident Reporting and Submission Process ................................................................... 12

Incident Reporting........................................................................................................ 12

Submission to the National Production Database................................................... 13

Public Data Release and Data Review........................................................................ 13

Data Quality and U.S. Fire Administration Interaction With States ...................... 15

Data Quality Checks by the National Fire Data Center ........................................... 15

Key Data Considerations for the User .............................................................................. 17

Unknown Entries........................................................................................................... 17

Fires Versus National Fire Incident Reporting System Record Counts.................. 17

Counting Fires Versus Counting Fire-Related Statistics .......................................... 17

Confined Versus Nonconfined Fires........................................................................... 17

Mutual Aid...................................................................................................................... 18

Types of Fires................................................................................................................. 18

Property Definitions..................................................................................................... 18

Multiyear and Trend Analyses..................................................................................... 18

Cause .............................................................................................................................. 19

Smoke Alarms and Smoke Alarm Performance ....................................................... 22

Dollar Loss Data ............................................................................................................ 22

Structures, Buildings and Nonbuildings.................................................................... 22

The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality .......................................... 23

State-Based Data Quality ............................................................................................ 23

Data Quality of Key Data Elements ............................................................................ 26

The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Element Quality .................... 30

National Fire Protection Association Survey................................................................... 78

Sample Selection........................................................................................................... 78

Data Collection.............................................................................................................. 79

Estimation Methodology ............................................................................................. 79

Fire Experience of Nonrespondents .......................................................................... 80

Resources ............................................................................................................................. 82

Acronyms.............................................................................................................................. 84
ii Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

List of Figures

Figure 1. NFIRS Fire Department Participation 1980 to 2011, Fire Incidents Only ..... 4

Figure 2. Total Reported Fire Incidents, NFIRS Public Data Release 2003 to 2011 ..... 7

Figure 3. NFIRS Incident Reporting, Submission and Dissemination Process ............ 14

Figure 4. Three-Year NFIRS Data Quality by State Relative to National Average Data 

Quality Measure, 2009 to 2011 ................................................................................... 24

Figure 5. Annual NFIRS Data Quality by State Relative to National Average Data 

Quality Measure, 2009 to 2011 ................................................................................... 25

List of Tables

Table 1. NFIRS Modules....................................................................................................... 5

Table 2. NFIRS Fire Incident Data Reporting by Version (Percent) ............................... 6

Table 3. Midlevel Structure Fire Cause Groupings.......................................................... 19

Table 4. NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses (Fires) ....................................... 27

Table 5. NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses (Civilian Casualties)................ 30

Table 6. Data Element Quality and Usability Summary for Common NFIRS Data 

Elements Type of Fire, 2009 to 2011........................................................................... 32

Table 7. Data Element Quality and Usability Summary for Common NFIRS Data 

Elements Type of Fire With Deaths or Injuries, 2009 to 2011 ................................. 33

Table 8. Data Element Quality and Usability Summary for Common NFIRS Data 

Elements Type of Casualty With Deaths or Injuries, 2009 to 2011......................... 34

Table 9. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Nonbuilding Structure Fires, 2009 to 2011 ..... 36

Table 10. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Buildings and Mobile Property Structure 

Fires, 2009 to 2011 ........................................................................................................ 38

Table 11. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Vehicle Fires, 2009 to 2011 ................................ 42

Table 12. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Outside Fires, 2009 to 2011............................... 44

Table 13. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011 .................................... 46

Table 14. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses

Distribution of Fatal Fires by Reported Deaths, 2009 to 2011................................ 49
List of Figures and Tables iii

Table 15. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Buildings and Mobile Property Structure 

Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011............................................................................................... 50

Table 16. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses 

Distribution of Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fatal Fires by 

Reported Deaths, 2009 to 2011................................................................................... 54

Table 17. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011 ...................... 54

Table 18. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses 

Distribution of Reported Fires With Injuries by Reported Injuries, 2009 to 2011 .. 58

Table 19. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Buildings and Mobile Property Structures 

Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011................................................................................. 58

Table 20. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses 

Distribution of Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fires With Injuries by 

Reported Injuries, 2009 to 2011.................................................................................. 62

Table 21. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Distribution of Fires With Reported Property Dollar 

Loss, 2009 to 2011......................................................................................................... 63

Table 22. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses 

Distribution of Fires With Reported Contents Dollar Loss in Buildings and 

Mobile Property Structure Fires, 2009 to 2011......................................................... 65

Table 23. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire Deaths, 2009 to 2011 .................................. 66

Table 24. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire Deaths in Buildings and Mobile 

Property Structures, 2009 to 2011.............................................................................. 69

Table 25. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire Injuries, 2009 to 2011 ................................. 72

Table 26. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements 

Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire Injuries in Buildings and Mobile 

Property Structures, 2009 to 2011.............................................................................. 75
iv Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System
Introduction 1

Introduction

Federal agencies conduct or sponsor a wide variety of information collections to 

gather data from businesses, individuals, schools, hospitals, and state, local and tribal 

governments. Information collections that employ surveys are frequently used for 

general-purpose statistics, as well as for program evaluations or research studies that 

answer more specific research questions. Data collected by federal agencies are widely 

used to make informed decisions and to provide necessary information for policymakers 

and planners. The collection of this information can take many forms and is accomplished 

in a variety of ways.

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) requires agencies to submit requests to collect 

information from the public to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. 

These requests, variously known as Information Collection Requests, PRA submissions, or 

“OMB clearance packages,” are required for any survey used for general purpose statistics, 

program evaluations or research studies. The purpose of the PRA is to ensure that the 

public is not overburdened by the federal data collection. In a given period, the OMB may 

focus on the design, methodology and practical utility of data to the federal government 

and other issues. In 2013, the OMB requested that the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) 

assess and document the quality of the information from the National Fire Incident 

Reporting System (NFIRS) and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and make 

it more accessible and useable for NFIRS users. This document was originally completed 

and submitted to the OMB in September 2014 to fulfill the aforementioned request.

Although NFIRS is by design a voluntary incident reporting system, and not a survey, the 

OMB considers the system to fall under the PRA. In the past, the OMB has questioned 

why the NFIRS is a voluntary census of incidents for all departments rather than a 

statistical sample. The USFA has investigated the possibility of sampling and the issues 

surrounding it. While there are certain advantages to a statistical sampling methodology, 

the USFA has not undertaken a sampling approach to fire incident reporting for several 

reasons. First and foremost, Public Law 93-498, the Federal Fire Prevention and Control 

Act of 1974, directed the then newly created USFA to develop a standardized incident 

data reporting method and to assist local and state agencies in reporting incident 

data to this system.2 Because the NFIRS is used at the local, state and federal levels, 

abandoning it for a statistical sampling method would adversely impact state and local fire 

department incident reporting and the NFIRS standard, which is also used internationally. 

Additionally, much of the cost burden of the current NFIRS reporting is carried by the state 

in conducting NFIRS operations. The USFA has relied heavily on states as cooperative 

partners in bearing the costs and resources of maintaining the system, and the states 

have relied on the USFA to shoulder the development costs. Switching to a sampling 

method would mean the USFA would need to acquire additional funding and personnel to 

design and maintain a new sampling system, leaving the state and local entities to wholly 

cover the cost of an incident reporting system.

2http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=%28%22national+fire+data+center%22%29&f=treesort&fq=true&

num=1&hl=true&edition=prelim&granuleId=USC-prelim-title15-section2208
2 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

In addition to completing two separate studies showing that there is no evident systematic 

nonresponse bias to the NFIRS system, under the PRA process, the USFA has also made 

good progress working with our state and local partners in addressing previous OMB PRA 

terms of clearance instructions to increase the use of the voluntary NFIRS system:

“The agency is instructed to continue efforts to improve response rates to NFIRS. 

The agency should also investigate the possibility of using additional studies to 

determine what characteristics of a fire department might make it less willing to 

participate in NFIRS and determine whether there is a systematic nonresponse 

bias to the system that should be disclosed in the published reports based on this 

system” (2003).

“The agency is instructed to continue efforts to increase the utilization of 

NFIRS. The agency must provide a report to OMB on the bias in NFIRS due to 

nonresponse. This report is a condition of future OMB approvals” (2006).

“The agency is instructed to continue efforts to increase the utilization of 

NFIRS. The agency must provide a report to OMB on the bias in NFIRS due to 

nonresponse. This report is a condition of future OMB approvals” (2009).

The current terms of clearance require that:

“... FEMA will engage in efforts over the clearance period to assess and document 

the quality of the information from NFPA and NFIRS and make this more accessible 

and useable for NFIRS users” (2013).

The following is a response, originally given in September 2014, to the 2013 Terms of 

Clearance. The response was made public in 2017. It is a review of the NFIRS system, 

the many robust data quality checks and mechanisms which are an integral part of the 

system, and an assessment of the data quality both at the state level and at the data 

element level. The data element assessment is of the most commonly used data elements 

in the NFIRS data analyses. The NFIRS data from the three most recent years available at 

the time of this document’s production (2009 to 2011) are reviewed. Although the USFA 

has no authority over the NFPA survey, a section drawn from published NFPA documents 

covering the NFPA survey methodology is also included.
About the National Fire Incident Reporting System 3

About the National Fire Incident 

Reporting System

The NFIRS was established in 1975 as one of the first programs of the National Fire 

Prevention and Control Administration, which later became the USFA. The basic concept of 

the NFIRS has not changed since the system’s inception. All states and all fire departments 

within them have been invited to participate on a voluntary basis. Participating fire 

departments report a common core of information on an incident and any casualties that 

ensue by using a common set of definitions. Detailed incident data are reported locally. 

Local agencies forward the completed NFIRS modules to the state agency responsible 

for the NFIRS data. The state agency combines the information with data from other fire 

departments into a statewide database and then transmits the data to the National Fire 

Data Center (NFDC) at the USFA. Data on individual incidents and casualties are preserved 

incident by incident at local, state and national levels.

From an initial six states in 1976, the NFIRS has grown in both participation and use. Over 

the life of the system, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and more than 40 major 

metropolitan areas have reported to the NFIRS. More than 30,000 fire departments have 

been assigned participating NFIRS fire department identification numbers by their states. 

Once limited to fire incidents only, the NFIRS now encompasses all incidents to which the 

fire department responds: fire, Emergency Medical Services (EMS), hazardous materials 

(hazmat), and others.

Approximately one million fire incident records and 22 million nonfire incident records are 

added to the database each year. The NFIRS is the world’s largest collection of incidents 

to which fire departments have responded.

Between 1985 and 1999, the level of participation remained relatively constant: A few 

states came in or left the system each year, and at least 39 states reported to the NFIRS. 

Most years also included participation from the District of Columbia. The number of fire 

departments participating within the states remained relatively constant as well, with 

a slight dip in participation during the system migration from version 4.1 to 5.0 in 1999. 

In 2000, the number of states increased to 43. The Department of Defense adopted the 

NFIRS reporting, and fire department participation began to bounce back from the version 

5.0 transition low. Since 2000, state and fire department participation has been steadily 

increasing. In 2003, the NFIRS reached a milestone with participation by all 50 states. The 

following year, the NFIRS achieved another significant goal: The NFIRS not only achieved 

the national goal of 100 percent state participation, including the District of Columbia, but 

also for the first time, the Native American Tribal Authorities submitted data.

The NFIRS continues to grow and mature. As of 2007, a new level of participation had 

been achieved: all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Native American Tribal Authorities, 

Northern Mariana Islands, and Puerto Rico all participated in the NFIRS for a total of 

54 state, district, tribal authority, and commonwealth entities. However, the Northern 

Mariana Islands and Puerto Rico are no longer reporting incident data to NFIRS. Fire 

departments reporting fire incidents grew to 20,680 in 2011 (Figure 1). Across participating 

entities, 69 percent of U.S. fire departments reported fire incidents to the NFIRS in 2011.3

The percentage of fire departments participating in the NFIRS varies from state to state, 

3For 2011, NFPA estimated that there were 30,145 fire departments in the United States. NFPA, U.S. Fire 

Department Profile — 2014, http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/files/news-and-research/fire-statistics/fire-service/

osfdprofile.pdf?la=en, January 2016.
4 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

with some states not participating at all in some years. With over two-thirds of all fire 

departments nationwide reporting fire incidents to NFIRS 5.0, the reporting departments 

represent a very large dataset that enables the USFA to make reasonable estimates of 

various facets of the fire problem. Although some states do require their departments to 

participate in the state system, participation in the NFIRS is voluntary. Additionally, if a 

fire department is a recipient of a Fire Act Grant, participation is required.4

Figure 1. NFIRS Fire Department Participation 1980 to 2011, Fire Incidents Only

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

19801981198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011

Number of Participating

Fire Departments

Source: NFIRS.

Note: 1999 to 2008 includes participation from the NFIRS 4.1 and NFIRS 5.0 versions; 2009 and later includes participation only 

from the NFIRS 5.0.

Corresponding to increased participation, the numbers of fires, deaths and injuries, as well 

as estimates of dollar loss reported to the NFIRS, have also grown; an estimated 71 percent 

of all U.S. fires to which fire departments responded in 2011 were captured in the NFIRS.

There are, of course, many problems in assembling a real-world database, and the 

NFIRS is no exception. Although the NFIRS does not represent 100 percent of incidents 

reported to fire departments each year, the enormous dataset and good efforts by the fire 

service result in a huge amount of useful information. Because of advances in computer 

technology and data reporting techniques over the past 35 years, as well as improvements 

suggested by participants, the NFIRS has been revised periodically. The newest revision, 

NFIRS 5.0, became operational in January 1999.

The NFIRS 5.0 version captures information on all incidents, not just fires, to which a 

fire department responds. In addition to many data coding improvements, version 5.0 

provides 11 modules that recognize the increasingly diverse activities of fire departments 

today. These modules, together, contain 567 data elements or fields.

4From the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Guidance and Application Kit (June 2012), if the applicant is a fire 

department, the department must agree to provide information, through established reporting channels, to 

the NFIRS for the period covered by the assistance. If a fire department does not currently participate in the 

incident reporting system and does not have the capacity to report at the time of the award, the department 

must agree to provide information to the system for a 12-month period that begins as soon as the department 

develops the capacity to report. See http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6007 (fy_2012_afg_

program_guidance.pdf).
About the National Fire Incident Reporting System 5

The Basic Module is the main module, which is completed for every incident. The other 

modules are filled out, when appropriate, to provide additional information on an incident. 

All 11 modules are listed in Table 1:

Table 1. NFIRS Modules

Module Description

Basic Module General information for each incident

Fire Module Fire incident information

Structure Fire Module Information on structure fires

Civilian Fire Casualty Module Fire-related injuries or deaths to civilians

Fire Service Casualty Module Injuries or deaths to firefighters

EMS Module Medical incidents

Hazardous Materials Module Hazardous materials incidents

Wildland Fire Module Wildland or vegetation fires

Apparatus/Resources Module Apparatus-specific information

Personnel Module Personnel associated with apparatus

Arson Module Intentionally set fire information

Source: NFIRS.

Data from the modules are grouped together each calendar year to create the Public Data 

Release (PDR) files in delimited text format (.txt) that are then released annually into the 

public domain. For the NFIRS data submitted prior to 2012, the PDR files were released 

in dBase format (.dbf). The Apparatus/Resources and Personnel Modules are excluded 

from the PDR because they are intended for local fire department use only, and the PDR 

dataset’s main utility is intended for national analyses. The PDR files consist of a subset 

of the data fields contained within the NFIRS national production database. For example, 

data elements with sensitive or identifying information are removed, as are data elements 

that are wholly used for maintenance or production purposes. The PDR data structure 

has been considerably simplified from the production database’s schema for ease of use. 

The PDR files from 2004 to the present only include fire and hazmat incidents and their 

related data tables. Prior to 2004, all incidents were included in the PDR files.

In its basic form, the NFIRS PDR files have a relational data structure where data from 

each incident module is represented by a row in a data table. The primary tables (basic 

incident and incident address) contain most of the Basic Module data. There is exactly 

one record in the basic incident table for every incident reported to the NFIRS. All other 

modules, represented by data tables with similar names (such as fire incident or civilian 

casualties), have records that are linked to the basic incident table through unique incident 

identification key fields (state, fire department ID, incident date, incident number and 

exposure number). Some module data are split across several tables (e.g., basic incident, 

incident address, and basic aid tables); one table (fire incident) combines data from two 

modules (Fire Module and Structure Fire Module). Some tables, such as fire incident, will 

only have one record for each relevant incident in the basic incident table, while tables 

such as civilian casualty may have several records linked to a single incident in the case 

where multiple injuries or deaths occur in the same incident. 
6 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

NFIRS 5.0, the current version of the NFIRS, is the result of a collaborative effort between 

the USFA and state and local users. This version incorporates many improvements. 

The design of NFIRS 5.0 makes the system easier to use than previous NFIRS versions 

because it captures only the data required to profile the extent of the incident. Some 

fires, for example, require just basic information to be recorded, whereas others require 

considerably more detail.

State participation is voluntary, and each state specifies the NFIRS reporting requirements 

for its fire departments. States have the flexibility to adapt their state reporting systems 

to their specific needs. As a result, the design of a state’s incident reporting system varies 

from state to state. The NFIRS 5.0 version was designed so that data from state systems 

can be converted to a single format that is used at the national level to aggregate and 

store the NFIRS data.

The proportion of 5.0 data has steadily increased since the introduction of NFIRS 5.0 in 

1999 (Table 2). The proportion of 5.0 data rose to 99 percent by the 2008 dataset. Prior to 

2009, the NFIRS 4.1 data in its converted form had been accepted by the system; however, 

the USFA only uses native 5.0 data in its NFIRS-based analyses and quality checks.5 For 

this reason, the USFA multiyear analyses do not include NFIRS 5.0 data prior to 2003, as 

prior to 2003 the proportion of 5.0 data in the NFIRS PDR was less than 80 percent. Since 

Jan. 1, 2009, NFIRS 4.1 data are no longer accepted by the system. 

Table 2. NFIRS Fire Incident Data Reporting by Version (Percent)

Year NFIRS 4.1, 5.0 format NFIRS 5.0

1999 92 8

2000 77 23

2001 48 52

2002 31 69

2003 19 81

2004 11 89

2005 5 95

2006 5 95

2007 2 98

2008 1 99

2009 — current 0 100

Source: NFIRS.

Incidents submitted to the national database and reflected in the PDR declined initially 

as the NFIRS 4.1 acceptance was phased out, but increased as departments fully adopted 

NFIRS 5.0. It is important to remember that the PDR is a one-time snapshot of the incident 

data submitted by the July 1 deadline. Additional data may be submitted to the national 

database after this deadline.

5Although, beginning in 2009, the NFIRS does not accept version 4.1 data, a few future-dated NFIRS Version 4.1 

records from past years do appear in the database from user entry error; these records do not belong in the 

data year in which they were submitted and should not be included in analyses.
About the National Fire Incident Reporting System 7

Figure 2. Total Reported Fire Incidents, NFIRS Public Data Release 2003 to 2011 Reported Fire Incidents

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

4.1 NFIRS Data

5.0 NFIRS Data

Total Reported

Fire Incidents 

in NFIRS Public 

Data Release

Source: NFIRS.

Note: Includes all incident records in the NFIRS PDR except those incidents with fatal data quality errors.

National Fire Incident Reporting System Enhancements

Under the USFA Reauthorization Act of 2008, the U.S. Congress authorized and funded 

the USFA to develop a web-based data entry tool enhancement to the NFIRS. This upgrade 

to the system began in October 2008. In 2010, a data warehouse for generating output 

reports for use in analyses was developed with additional funding provided by Congress 

for the NFIRS enhancements. These improvements make reporting and accessing the 

NFIRS data much easier for fire departments.

In July 2010, the USFA completed and deployed the new web-based data entry tool. The 

Data Entry Browser Interface (DEBI) is a one-purpose tool for use by the fire service to 

document incident information within the NFIRS. While the functionality is the same as 

the NFIRS client Data Entry Tool that has been available for many years, DEBI allows entry 

of incidents using a standard web browser, eliminating the need to download, install and 

configure client software.

The development of a flexible NFIRS data warehouse with comprehensive data mining 

capabilities was completed in July 2011, but technical problems with the data and 

environment led to extensive delays. Deployment to national, state and fire department 

NFIRS users in three phases began in the summer of 2015, starting with users at the 

national level. Deployment to state and fire department users is forthcoming. The data 

warehouse allows NFIRS users to access and report on nationally reported data with 

significantly increased functionality over the current report-generation tool. The data 

have been transformed into a custom schema that greatly increases the speed of report 

generation and data access. NFIRS users will be able to generate reports using data from 

other departments and states, which was not previously possible.
8 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

The data warehouse includes a suite of 30 NFIRS data quality reports. The reports include 

functionality to:

ĵ Track and assign data quality measures for critical data elements in each module and 

to provide overall data quality ratings by state and department.

ĵ Identify incidents which, though valid, have serious data quality issues and list the 

problems found with the incidents.

ĵ Identify incidents with outlier dates and times for incident response and duration.

ĵ Identify incidents with dollar loss data quality issues.

ĵ Identify incidents that should have been marked as invalid.

ĵ Track departments and incidents with an abnormally high rate of fires under 

investigation.

ĵ Identify incidents with mutual-aid field data quality issues.

ĵ Identify near duplicate incidents.

ĵ Identify incidents with missing casualty modules.

National Fire Incident Reporting System Training

To promote best practices, the USFA offers several NFIRS training courses for fire 

departments and state-level departments that manage the NFIRS. The courses are 

available at the National Fire Academy (NFA), online and within localities (i.e., field 

deliveries). These training courses include the “National Fire Incident Reporting System: 

Program Management” (NFIRS: PM) course (six-day NFA course), the “NFIRS 5.0 Self-Study” 

course (online), the “Introduction to NFIRS 5.0” course (two-day NFA course or field 

delivery course), and the “NFIRS Data Analysis and Problem Solving Techniques” course 

(two-day NFA course or field delivery course).

ĵ The “NFIRS: PM” course teaches the participants the full duties of the NFIRS program 

management and enables participants to promote, support and manage NFIRS incident 

reporting successfully. This six-day course is offered as a resident course at the NFA 

and as a field delivery course. The foundation of the training is built on the use of the 

participants’ own data in the national database. This allows the participants to see the 

quality of their data and the impact it has on analysis and decision-making. The course 

teaches the participants the five roles of NFIRS program management: communicating, 

administrating, planning, training and operating. The participants learn:

Ý The NFIRS rules to ensure that data are coded according to the NFIRS standard.

Ý To use tools (e.g., web-based reports, queries, Excel, and PivotTables) to identify 

data quality issues (e.g., invalid incidents, incomplete incidents, outdated incidents).

Ý How to use the data to recognize problems in their communities.

Ý How to effectively present the data to decision-makers and other users of fire data.

Ý How to administer different training methods (e.g., train-the-trainer, initial and 

refresher) to ensure that accurate, complete and timely data are available.

Ý How to develop a local analytical tool from the data in the national database by:

f Exporting data from the national database.
About the National Fire Incident Reporting System 9

f Importing the data to a local database.

f Building a local interactive tool to display, troubleshoot, query and analyze 

the data.

ĵ The “NFIRS 5.0 Self-Study” (online) course provides an overview of the incident reporting 

system, its modules, and its rules for documenting incidents.

ĵ The “Introduction to NFIRS 5.0” course emphasizes how to properly document incidents 

using standardized NFIRS data elements and codes for achieving uniformity in incident 

reporting.

ĵ The “NFIRS Data Analysis and Problem Solving Techniques” course teaches the 

participants how to better evaluate the reported data, as well as how to use the data 

to identify problems, evaluate resources and measure services provided. By using 

their own data in the national database, participants gain a direct correlation to the 

training and its immediate value to their departments and communities.

This training program is designed specifically to support local fire service organizations 

and assists them in providing data both to management and decision-makers, to the state 

uniform fire reporting system, and to the NFIRS nationwide. Additional information on the 

NFIRS training courses can be found at https://www.usfa.fema.gov/data/nfirs/support/

training.html.

To assist fire departments who use NFIRS to improve data quality and reliability, the USFA 

publishes short, informative notices called NFIRSGrams. By addressing frequently asked 

questions and common mistakes made when completing incident forms, these bulletins 

provide coding help to fire department personnel using the NFIRS. NFIRSGrams also help 

NFIRS users to better understand their impact on the quality of the information from the 

NFIRS at the local, state and national levels.

The USFA’s NFIRS Support Center also offers a consolidated national help desk to provide 

technical support to fire departments and NFIRS state program managers regarding all 

aspects of the NFIRS.

Uses of the National Fire Incident Reporting System

NFIRS data are used extensively at all levels of government for major fire protection 

decisions. At the local level, incident and casualty information is used for setting priorities 

and targeting resources. The reported data are particularly useful for designing fire 

prevention and educational programs, as well as EMS-related activities specifically suited 

to the real emergency problems local communities face.

At the state level, the NFIRS is used in many capacities. One valuable contribution is that 

some state legislatures use these data to justify budgets and to pass important bills on 

fire-related issues, such as sprinklers, fireworks and arson.

Many federal agencies, in addition to the USFA, make use of NFIRS data. NFIRS data 

are used, for example, by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to identify 

problem products and to monitor corrective actions. The Department of Transportation 

uses NFIRS data to identify fire problems in automobiles, which has resulted in mandated 

recalls. The Department of Housing and Urban Development uses the NFIRS to evaluate 

safety of manufactured housing (mobile homes).
10 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

The USFA uses the data to design prevention programs, to order firefighter safety 

priorities, to assist in the development of training courses at the NFA, and for a host 

of other purposes. Thousands of fire departments, scores of states, and hundreds of 

industries have used the data. The potential for even greater use remains. The USFA 

report “Uses of NFIRS: The Many Uses of the National Fire Incident Reporting System” 

further describes the uses of the data and is available online at http://usfa.kohalibrary.

com/app/work/159371.

The National Fire Incident Reporting System and the National Fire 

Protection Association Survey

There are two major sources of data about the U.S. fire problem: the USFA’s NFIRS and the 

NFPA Survey of Fire Departments for U.S. Fire Experience. The NFPA is an international 

nonprofit organization whose mission is to reduce the burden of fire and other hazards.

While the USFA provides fire departments with the NFIRS as a method to report fire data 

to understand the details of the U.S. fire problem — how fires start, where they occur, 

when they occur, what (if any) equipment is involved, and other associated elements of 

information — the NFPA surveys fire departments each year to determine the nature 

and characteristics of fire departments across the U.S. and uses the data collected in 

the survey to estimate the magnitude of the fire problem. The NFPA’s Survey of Fire 

Departments for U.S. Fire Experience is based on a stratified random sample of U.S. fire 

departments.6 The sample of departments is stratified by size of community protected, 

and a ratio estimation methodology is used to develop national-level summary estimates 

on fire loss statistics (the total numbers of reported fires, fire deaths, fire injuries and 

direct dollar loss), as well as summary estimates of fires and losses by major incident types 

(i.e., structure, vehicle, outside and other).

Thus, overall estimates of the fire problem come from the NFPA’s annual Survey of Fire 

Departments for U.S. Fire Experience. As noted, this survey produces national level 

summary estimates on fire loss statistics, as well as summary estimates of fires and losses 

by major incident types (i.e., structure, vehicle, outside and other). The summary estimates 

by major incident type are further broken down to the next tier — e.g. residential 

structures, highway vehicles, etc. The raw NFPA survey data are of a proprietary nature 

and are not available to the public, the USFA, or various other national fire data analysts. 

More information regarding the NFPA survey is provided in a later section of this report.

All nationally-based estimates on subsets of fire data, however, are derived by using the 

NFPA estimates to scale up the raw NFIRS subset data, which is a standard statistical 

technique. These “national estimates” are not the raw totals from the NFIRS. The 

estimates are based on a method of apportioning the NFPA estimates for total fires, 

structure, vehicle, outside and other fires.7 Generally, these national estimates are 

derived by computing a percentage of fires, deaths, injuries or dollar loss in a particular 

NFIRS category and multiplying it by the corresponding total estimate from the NFPA 

6For detailed information regarding the NFPA’s survey methodology, see the NFPA’s annual report on Fire 

Loss in the U.S.: http://www.nfpa.org//~/media/files/news-and-research/fire-statistics/overall-fire-statistics/

osfireloss.pdf.

7The foundation of computing national estimates is based on “The National Estimates Approach to U.S. Fire 

Statistics” by Hall, J. and Harwood, B.: http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/files/news-and-research/fire-statistics/

latest-estimates/nationalestimatesapproach.pdf?la=en.
About the National Fire Incident Reporting System 11

annual survey.8 In analyses, the unknown and missing data values should not be ignored. 

The approach taken by the USFA in presenting the data is to provide not only the “raw” 

percentages of each category, but also the “adjusted” percentages computed using only 

those incidents for which data were provided.

One problem with this approach is that the proportions of fires and fire losses differ 

between the large NFIRS dataset and the NFPA survey sample.9 Nonetheless, to be 

consistent with approaches being used by other fire data analysts, the NFPA estimates 

of fires, deaths, injuries and dollar loss are used as a starting point. The details of the fire 

problem below the national level are based on proportions from the NFIRS. Because the 

proportions of fires and fire losses differ between the NFIRS and the NFPA estimates, from 

time to time, this approach leads to inconsistencies. These inconsistencies will remain until 

all estimates can be derived from NFIRS data alone.

Ideally, one would like to have all of the data for the various components come from 

one consistent data source — the NFIRS. One of the critical pieces of data necessary 

to do so is missing: the overall population protected by all reporting fire departments. 

This “residential population protected” is not reported to the NFIRS, nor are the data 

easy to come by, especially where a county or other jurisdiction is served by several fire 

departments that each report their fires independently.

Other issues — such as full reporting because of reporting deadlines, data access, 

budgetary considerations, and the like — add a layer of complexity to using the NFIRS data 

to create estimates. Through the years, a number of ad hoc studies have been undertaken 

to identify NFIRS nonresponse bias, but none have identified major reporting issues. Most 

of the NFIRS data exhibit stability from one year to the next. Results based on the full 

dataset are generally similar to those based on part of the data, another indication of data 

reliability. The dataset is so large — on average, over the past five years, about 67 percent 

of reported fires10 — and reasonably distributed geographically and by size of community 

that it is used as input to developing national estimates.11

8The NFPA summary estimates are used for the overall U.S. fire losses; fire losses from structure, vehicle, 

outside and other fires; and as the basis for USFA’s estimates of residential and nonresidential building fires 

and losses. The alternative approach for these summary numbers is to use the relative percentage of fires (or 

other loss measures) from the NFIRS and scale up to (multiply by) the NFPA estimate of total fires.

9For additional information regarding the differences in proportions of fires and losses between NFIRS data 

and the NFPA survey, see the section entitled Differences Between NFIRS Data and NFPA Survey Data in “USFA’s 

Data Sources and Methodology Documentation,” March 2014, http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/

statistics/data_sources_methodology.pdf.

10The data reported in the NFIRS is continually growing: Between 2007 and 2011, NFIRS data represented 

67, 61, 57 and 59 percent of reported fires, fire deaths, fire injuries and direct dollar loss when compared to 

the statistical estimates from the NFPA’s Annual Survey of Fire Departments. Between 2009 and 2011 these 

percentages rose to 70, 64, 58 and 62 respectively.

11USFA’s NFIRS Representativeness Study (October 2008) previously submitted to the OMB.
12 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Incident Reporting and Submission 

Process

Over 20,000 fire departments12 and state governments actively work on improving the 

information they enter into the NFIRS. Their data, based on their own needs for high 

quality fire and other incident data, is used to plan, fund and implement effective local, 

state and regional fire and emergency services programs.

At the same time, the NFDC engages in efforts to both document and communicate to 

users the content and quality of fire information products resulting from NFIRS data. 

The NFDC accomplishes these efforts through an ongoing and robust data quality 

assessment process, detailed analysis of the NFIRS data and production of reports, 

training and informational bulletins, data analysis tools, and a congressionally funded 

NFIRS enhancement project.

In addition to the suite of data quality reports that will be available to NFIRS data users 

beginning summer 2014, the NFIRS data are quality-checked during data entry, data 

submission to the national database, and prior to the creation of the PDR. The reporting, 

submission and subsequent dissemination process is shown in Figure 3.

Incident Reporting

The NFIRS reporting format is mostly consistent with the NFPA Standard 901, Standard 

Classifications for Incident Reporting and Fire Protection Data, “Uniform Coding for Fire 

Protection” 2001 version. The current version of the NFIRS, version 5.0, expands the 

reporting of data beyond fires to include the full range of fire department activity on a 

national scale. It is an all-incident reporting system.

Within the NFIRS’s participating states, participating local fire departments fill out incident, 

casualty and optional reports for fires and other incident types as they occur. The majority 

of the data are reported electronically through third-party software, the NFIRS data entry 

tools, or the reporting department’s own system. In very few departments, the data may 

be written by hand on paper forms and entered electronically at a later time. They forward 

the completed incidents electronically (or via paper forms if the department has no other 

means) to their state office where the data are validated and consolidated into a single 

electronic database. Each fire department is responsible for the data they report, and 

each department is encouraged to ensure that their data are complete and accurate. The 

extent of data quality checks varies from department to department.

At the state level, the data from the participating fire departments are validated. Data 

are validated automatically by the application on import into the NFIRS database. Data 

are checked to make sure required fields are present and that field values are within 

acceptable ranges. Log files are generated with validation results which are available to 

the user via either email (Bulk Import Utility) or access to the logs stored on their local 

computer (Data Entry Tool client software). The extent of data quality checks varies from 

state to state. Incident data that cause critical errors and fail validation checks are sent 

back to the local fire department for correction and resubmission.

12NFIRS; see also Figure 1.
Incident Reporting and Submission Process 13

Submission to the National Production Database

Periodically, the aggregated statewide data are sent to the NFDC to be released and 

included in the national production database. When and how states send their data 

depends on the individual state — some states (and their departments) use the USFA’s data 

entry tool to enter, store and manage their data on the USFA’s federal server warehouse. 

Other states, typically the larger states, keep their data locally and report their incident 

data en masse, quarterly or yearly, just prior to the annual federal reporting deadline. 

Submission guidelines13 call for quarterly reporting at a minimum during the year and an 

annual deadline for states on July 1. Regardless of the submission or entry method, all 

state data submitted to the federal servers are stored in individual state partitions. From 

the state partitions, the states manage their final datasets prior to releasing their data to 

the national production database. All state data belongs to the individual states, with the 

state having the sole responsibility for its content. The NFDC is the custodian of the data 

and does not have the authority to make changes to the state data in the state partitions.

Public Data Release and Data Review

After the data submission deadline, a “snapshot” of the national production database 

is taken. It is from this snapshot that the PDR is created. During the PDR process, the 

released incident data are checked for fire death and reported dollar loss consistency. 

Because deaths and total dollar loss are important metrics of the U.S. fire problem, 

incidents with more than 20 million in dollar loss or more than five deaths are sent 

back to the state for verification.14 Once the PDR is finalized, it is packaged on a CD with 

documentation and made available to the public, other government agencies, and outside 

organizations by request.

Internally, once the annual PDR is completed, the USFA assigns data quality ratings based 

on a calculated formula to each individual department, each state, and nationally overall. 

The data quality rating is calculated using quality measures of the fields used in the 

creation of annual fire causes and is intended to help track the quality of the data used 

by the USFA to assign these causes each year.

13NFIRS Reporting Guidelines: https://www.nfirs.fema.gov/system/guidelines.shtm.

14Injuries are also an important metric; however, injuries totals are not checked, as it is possible to have a large 

number of injuries at an incident, making checking this field at a national level difficult.
14 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Figure 3. NFIRS Incident Reporting, Submission and Dissemination Process

U.S. Fire Administration

National Fire Data Center

Database

NFIRS Data Warehouse

State Incident Reporting

Authority

Local Fire

Department

Incident

Reports Local Fire Department Data

NFPA CPSC

General Public

Public Data Release

(PDR)
Incident Reporting and Submission Process 15

Data Quality and U.S. Fire Administration Interaction With States

Three criteria are used in the monitoring of data in the NFIRS during the year: the data are 

complete, the data are accurate, and the data are current. These criteria are monitored by 

creating reports from the database that show the number of reporting fire departments, 

the number of incidents by state, the number of invalid incidents, and the number of 

unreleased incidents. The USFA provides the reports to the state NFIRS program managers 

and works with them to resolve any data issues. Technical assistance (e.g., telephone 

support or site visits) is provided to states to help address any data quality and data 

reporting needs.

Data quality is an area of great importance. Audits of the data are performed during the 

year to identify any inconsistences in the data. The audits focus on three criteria: gaps 

in reporting, critical errors in the data, and outliers in the data. In particular, the USFA 

works closely with states to monitor the quality of data coming from third-party vendor 

software. Each state is responsible for enforcing that the NFIRS third-party software sold 

by vendors in their state is compliant with NFIRS standards. The USFA will assist states in 

monitoring vendor data quality issues or will contact vendors directly to discuss an issue 

at a state’s request. Other data quality issues are questionable high dollar-loss incidents 

and questionable high numbers of fire deaths. Annually, the USFA queries the database for 

questionable values (i.e., outliers) and verifies the values with state-level NFIRS program 

managers and local-level NFIRS program managers. The data quality steps are important 

to ensure that the data meet the USFA’s three criteria before the data are released in the 

NFIRS PDR format.

Data Quality Checks by the National Fire Data Center

The PDR is further quality checked by the NFDC staff and statisticians upon receipt and 

prior to release to the general public. The NFDC staff and statisticians double-check for 

items such as:

ĵ Missing required modules.

ĵ Null values in required data elements.

ĵ Invalid values or codes that are not in the current NFIRS Complete Reference Guide (CRG).

ĵ Large outliers.

ĵ Duplicates in multientry data elements.

Any issues are reported to the NFIRS program manager, who in turn reports them to 

the NFIRS support contractor. The support contractor investigates and incorporates 

any needed changes and updates into the NFIRS validation rules or the PDR generation 

procedures. If the record clearly contains outliers, it is generally the USFA’s practice to 

recommend excluding it from analyses. Before excluding such records as a data quality 

check, a quick internet search is conducted to see if some unusual fire did occur. As 

described above, the USFA follows up with the fire department that submitted the incident 

record for data verification.

Although invalid values and duplicates in multientry fields are reviewed, these values are 

not necessarily changed on the PDR as each major data user (e.g., the NFDC itself, CPSC, 

the NFPA and others) has its own method of analyzing the fire data in the PDR.
16 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Additionally, the NFDC staff and statisticians, in their analytical database based on the 

PDR data, check the following:

ĵ That all incidents are version 5.0.

ĵ For null or missing values in property use when:

Ý Mutual or automatic aid is received.

Ý Other aid is given.

Ý No aid is given or received.

If null values occur, the incidents are deleted from the analytic database.

ĵ For fires, check for null values in the AID field. If null/missing values occur, the incidents 

are also deleted from the analytic database.

The USFA’s analytic contractor performs additional data quality checks as it loads the PDR 

data into its NFIRS database. The analytic contractor checks for:

ĵ Potential duplicate entries: Entries whose unique, identifying information is identical — 

save for a leading or trailing blank or zero.

ĵ Orphan records: Records in the secondary files that do not have a parent record in 

the main data file.

Any potential duplicate entries and orphan records are reported back to the NFDC and 

to the NFIRS program manager. The NFDC recommends that if records under either of 

these instances occur, they should be deleted from the NFDC analytic database. Major 

data users are notified of the NFDC decisions and may or may not implement them in 

their own datasets.
Key Data Considerations for the User 17

Key Data Considerations for the User

Unknown Entries

In a small number of incident or casualty reports sent to the NFIRS, many data items 

are either not reported (i.e., null, blank or missing values) or are reported as “unknown.” 

For most coded fields, “U,” “UU” and “UUU” are codes available in NFIRS 5.0 to indicate 

“unknown.” In some cases, even after the best attempts by fire investigators to document 

the fire, the information is truly unknown. In other cases, the information reported as 

unknown in the initial NFIRS report is not updated after the fire investigation is completed.

In analyses, the unknowns should not be ignored. The approach taken by the USFA in 

presenting the data is to provide not only the “raw” percentages of each category, but 

also the “adjusted” percentages computed using only those incidents for which data 

were provided.

Null and blank values differ from entries coded as unknown. Null and blank values are 

considered unreported data and differ in meaning and substance from “unknown” data. In 

data elements where information is required, a null or blank value may invalidate the record.

Unknown entries are of the highest concern for data quality. For some data elements, the 

number of incidents with null, blank or unknown entries can be larger than the number 

of incidents for which data were provided. Through the various USFA and NFDC training 

initiatives and efforts by various fire organizations (e.g., the National Association of 

State Fire Marshals (NASFM)), fire departments are encouraged to reduce the number of 

unknown entries by fully documenting the fire incident.

Fires Versus National Fire Incident Reporting System Record Counts

It is important to underscore that the raw NFIRS record counts are not the total number 

of fires reported by fire departments each year. The NFIRS is a large but not randomly 

selected sample of fires reported to fire departments, and as such, analyses address 

the relative proportions (percentages) or apply the national estimates methodology to 

produce estimates of the aspect of the fire problem that is under analysis.

Counting Fires Versus Counting Fire-Related Statistics

When the data element in question is a fire-related data element (i.e., captured under the 

fire modules — fire, structure fire, wildland, etc.), fires are counted. When the data element 

in question is in the casualty modules, casualties are counted. Even the most seasoned 

fire data analyst may overlook this distinction from time to time. The proper phrasing of 

analysis for casualties counted from fire data elements is “fires with casualties/injuries/

deaths” or an equivalent statement.

Confined Versus Nonconfined Fires

Confined fires are generally small, low-loss fires and are allowed abbreviated reporting. This 

limited reporting can result in an increase in the proportion of null or missing values. The 

USFA generally separates the analyses into a confined fires version and a nonconfined fires 

version and recommends that others do the same. The resulting analysis can be very generic, 

but there are instances where this is reasonable. While the NFPA survey includes a category 

for confined fires, the NFPA does not publish estimates of confined fires. It is unclear what 

the effect of this has on estimates derived from NFIRS datasets that include confined fires.
18 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Mutual Aid

Some records in the NFIRS refer to aid provided to another fire department — either 

mutual aid given to an outside fire service entity upon request of the outside entity, or 

automatic aid given through mutual-aid agreements. To isolate individual fire incidents, 

only records of the primary fire department are included. This is achieved by excluding 

records reflecting aid provided, as in essence, not excluding aid incidents when analyzing 

incidents may result in the double counting of those incidents where both the giving and 

receiving departments report to the NFIRS.

This exclusion is also a data quality consideration. The fire department receiving aid is 

considered the “owner” of the incident, and this fire department is responsible for providing 

the incident data. The aid-giving department’s incident record is generally only a record of 

having given aid and most, if not all, data elements are not required or submitted. Including 

these records would result in an unacceptably large number of unknown entries.

Mutual-aid given incidents are excluded from all analyses with one major exception: when 

counting firefighter casualties.

Types of Fires

The general categories of fire incidents are broadly defined by the type of incident, with 

the four major incident types of structure, vehicle/mobile properties, outside, and other. 

Structure fires are further broken down into residential and nonresidential structure fires 

based on the property definitions (see below), as well as by type of structure — building 

and nonbuilding fires. Type of incident, property use, and type of structure (for structure 

fires) are required elements with near 100 percent compliance.

Property Definitions

The general categories of property use are defined by the property use data element. 

Property use is a required field; blank and null values are not expected (but do occur 

occasionally under specific rare circumstances15). Null values in property use receive 

special treatment as the requirements for certain types of incidents changed in 2006. 

These specifications are discussed more fully in the USFA’s “National Fire Incident Reporting 

System Version 5.0 Fire Data Analysis Guidelines and Issues.” These guidelines discuss 

specific data elements and how the USFA analyzes and interprets the results of the analyses.

Multiyear and Trend Analyses

It is important to note that NFIRS data may fluctuate from year to year, resulting in 

variability. It is possible that any given year may be an anomalous year for a subset of 

fire data or for the data overall. Statistically rare, but real-world incidents do occur. Large 

conflagrations, such as the various California wildfires; large petrochemical plant fires, 

such as the 1989 Houston Ship Channel fire; and large multifatality, multi-injury fires, 

such as the 1980 MGM Grand Hotel fire or the 2003 fire at The Station Nightclub, can have 

one-time effects on fire analyses for that year.

For these reasons — yearly fluctuation and single-event spikes — it is often preferable 

to aggregate several years of data for analyses. The USFA uses three-year averaged data 

and, where possible, analyzes trends of five or more years of data. Trends are usually 

described by the change in the linear best fit. Moving averages are another type of trend 

analyses available.

15The entry rules that allow blank and null property types to occur were eliminated as of January 2015.
Key Data Considerations for the User 19

Cause

The cause of a fire is often a complex chain of events. To make it easier to grasp the 

“big picture,” the USFA originally developed a cause hierarchy for structure fires, where 

the majority of fire losses occur.16 The cause for other incident types is based on the 

distributions of the NFIRS cause of ignition data element. This data element captures a 

very broad sense of the cause of the fire.

The hierarchy schema provides three levels of cause descriptions: a set of more detailed 

causes, a set of midlevel causes, and a set of high-level causes. The midlevel categories 

of fire causes, such as heating, cooking and playing with heat source, are used by the 

USFA. Fires are assigned to one of the 16 midlevel cause groupings using a hierarchy of 

definitions, as shown in Table 3. A fire is included in the highest category into which it fits 

on the list. If it does not fit the top category, then the second one is considered, and if not 

that one, the third and so on.

In principle, it is the cause of the fire which results in deaths, injuries and dollar loss that 

should be analyzed, not numbers of deaths and injuries associated with fire causes.

Table 3. Midlevel Structure Fire Cause Groupings

Cause Category Definition

Exposure Caused by heat spreading from another hostile fire.

Intentional Cause of ignition is intentional, or fire is deliberately 

set.

Cause under investigation Cause is under investigation, and a valid NFIRS 

Arson Module is present.

Playing with heat source Includes all fires caused by individuals playing with 

any materials contained in the categories below, 

as well as fires where the factors contributing to 

ignition include playing with a heat source. Children 

playing with fire are included in this category.

Natural Caused by the sun’s heat, spontaneous ignition, 

chemicals, lightning, static discharge, high winds, 

storms, high water including floods, earthquakes, 

volcanic action, and animals.

Other heat Includes fireworks; explosives; flame/torch used 

for lighting; heat or spark from friction; molten 

material; hot material; heat from hot, or smoldering 

objects.

Smoking Cigarettes, cigars, pipes and heat from 

undetermined smoking materials.

16The structure fire cause hierarchy and specific definitions in terms of the NFIRS 5.0 codes may be found in 

the “National Fire Incident Reporting System Version 5.0 Fire Data Analysis Guidelines and Issues,” USFA, July 

2011, http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/nfirs/nfirs_data_analysis_guidelines_issues.pdf. The hierarchy 

involves a large number of subcategories that are later grouped into the 16 mid-level cause categories, then 

the eight high-level cause groupings.
20 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 3. Midlevel Structure Fire Cause Groupings — continued

Cause Category Definition

Heating Includes confined chimney or flue fire, fire confined 

to fuel burner/boiler malfunction, central heating, 

fixed and portable local heating units, fireplaces 

and chimneys, furnaces, boilers, water heaters as 

sources of heat.

Cooking Includes confined cooking fires, stoves, ovens, fixed 

and portable warming units, deep fat fryers, open 

grills as sources of heat.

Appliances Includes televisions, radios, video equipment, 

phonographs, dryers, washing machines, 

dishwashers, garbage disposals, vacuum cleaners, 

hand tools, electric blankets, irons, hairdryers, 

electric razors, can openers, dehumidifiers, heat 

pumps, water cooling devices, air conditioners, 

freezers, and refrigeration equipment as sources of 

heat.

Electrical malfunction Includes electrical distribution, wiring, 

transformers, meter boxes, power switching gear, 

outlets, cords, plugs, surge protectors, electric 

fences, lighting fixtures, electrical arcing as sources 

of heat.

Other equipment Includes special equipment (radar, x-ray, computer, 

telephone, transmitters, vending machine, office 

machine, pumps, printing press, gardening tools, 

agricultural equipment), processing equipment 

(furnace, kiln, other industrial machines), service, 

maintenance equipment (incinerator, elevator), 

separate motor or generator, vehicle in a structure, 

unspecified equipment.

Open flame, spark (heat from) Includes torches, candles, matches, lighters, open 

fire, ember, ash, rekindled fire, backfire from 

internal combustion engine as sources of heat.

Other unintentional, careless Includes misuse of material or product, abandoned 

or discarded materials or products, heat source 

too close to combustibles, other unintentional 

(mechanical failure/malfunction, backfire).

Equipment misoperation, failure Includes equipment operation deficiency, 

equipment malfunction.

Unknown Cause of fire undetermined or not reported.

Source: USFA.

The percentage of unknown fire causes has seen a steady increase since the introduction 

of the NFIRS Version 5.0. This increase may be due, in part, to the fact that the original 

cause hierarchy does not apply as well to NFIRS 5.0 data.17 While the cause hierarchy 

17See the full description of the cause hierarchy in “Fire in the United States 1995-2004, 14th edition.”
Key Data Considerations for the User 21

was revised to incorporate the 5.0 data as best possible, the result is that, where the fit is 

imperfect, many incidents are assigned to the unknown cause category.

Further, with the current NFPA 921, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, there 

may be reluctance on the part of some fire departments to enter anything but 

“unknown” in causal fields, unless these elements can be determined with certainty.18

NFPA 921 sets guidelines for scientific-based investigation and analysis of fire and 

explosion incidents and is considered the foremost guide for rendering accurate opinions 

as to incident origin, cause, responsibility and prevention. The issues surrounding NFPA 

921’s role in fire departments’ willingness to determine fire cause are complex, but if the 

investigation does not or cannot meet these guidelines, often the preliminary cause of 

“under investigation” remains in the NFIRS, and under the cause hierarchy, those fires are 

assigned to the unknown cause category.

The NASFM recently studied the problem of the large numbers of unknown data in the 

causal data elements.19 This report identified five recommendations that have resonance 

for data quality in general to solve the issue of unreported fire causal information:

ĵ Whether a cause is determined or remains undetermined after investigation, fire 

departments must “Close the Loop” by updating the codes in the NFIRS incident 

report. Codes need to be updated in the system once a cause is determined. “Under 

Investigation” reports should always be revisited and updated after the investigation.

ĵ Clear the “Litigation Cloud” by addressing the liability concerns for cause determination 

through a multipronged approach. Several approaches to this area are suggested.

ĵ Improve training for chiefs, officers and front-line personnel on the concepts and 

reasons behind the need for reporting, as well as how fire incident data can be used 

to advance fire prevention and suppression goals.

ĵ Improve the NFIRS by developing and implementing the next generation of the NFIRS — 

what is commonly referred to as NFIRS Version 6 — with input from stakeholders who 

are tasked with inputting the data at the local level, as well as those who analyze and 

use the data at all levels.

ĵ Improve quality assurance and quality control in fire incident reporting throughout the 

system. Specific systemic changes to improve quality assurance and quality control 

include designating a “Data Champion” to be responsible for NFIRS quality control/ 

quality assurance at the local level; providing a mechanism for departments to report 

“no incidents” periodically; emphasizing the importance of dedicated state NFIRS 

program managers to work with departments in their state; adopting a standard 

18National Association of State Fire Marshals Fire Research & Education Foundation, “Conquering the “Unknowns” 

Research and Recommendations on the Chronic Problem of Undetermined and Missing Data in the Causal 

Factors Sections of the National Fire Incident Reporting System,” final report for Award No. EMW-2011-

FP-00356 Assistance to Firefighters Fire Prevention & Safety Grant Program Federal Emergency Management 

Agency. Undated. http://www.firemarshals.org/resources/Documents/Fire%20Incident%20Data%20Collectin/

NASFMFoundationFinalReportConqueringtheUnknowns.pdf.

19National Association of State Fire Marshals Fire Research & Education Foundation, “Conquering the “Unknowns” 

Research and Recommendations on the Chronic Problem of Undetermined and Missing Data in the Causal 

Factors Sections of the National Fire Incident Reporting System,” final report for Award No. EMW-2011-

FP-00356 Assistance to Firefighters Fire Prevention & Safety Grant Program Federal Emergency Management 

Agency. Undated. http://www.firemarshals.org/resources/Documents/Fire%20Incident%20Data%20Collectin/

NASFMFoundationFinalReportConqueringtheUnknowns.pdf.
22 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

operating procedure or standard operating guideline on completing incident reports; 

and revitalizing the National Fire Information Council with a focus on developing 

strategies and training to improve the quality of the nation’s NFIRS data.

The NASFM report notes that there will always be fires whose cause cannot legitimately be 

determined, even after investigation. For many incidents, however, definite steps can be 

taken toward reducing the level of “undetermined” or unreported responses in the causal 

factors section of the NFIRS. “To achieve this will require confronting some difficult, thorny 

issues that do not have clear solutions. But, if you don’t write it down, it didn’t happen, 

and we may never be able to quantify what has been lost by not having sufficient data on 

the causes of fires.”20

Smoke Alarms and Smoke Alarm Performance

Smoke alarm data are reported at the fire-incident level (not the casualty level). Smoke 

alarm data are analyzed for presence, operation, and effectiveness; other smoke alarm 

data elements are not analyzed at this time. Smoke alarm performance is analyzed for 

nonconfined fires only. Confined fires have abbreviated reporting, and the various smoke 

alarm data are not required. From a data quality perspective, including confined fire 

smoke alarm data (which is mostly null) with the more robust nonconfined fire smoke 

alarm data degrades the data quality.

Dollar Loss Data

It is difficult to estimate dollar loss. Insurance claim data are generally not available to 

the public, and fire departments rarely have the time to research the actual value of a 

property. It is not unusual for the property or content loss to be unreported. Even when 

reported, there are often inconsistencies. For example, there are many reported fires 

where the fire spread suggests damage, but property loss is not reported or seems low 

(or high) for the extent of reported fire spread.

Structures, Buildings and Nonbuildings

The NFIRS 5.0 allows for the differentiation of structures between buildings and 

nonbuildings. In the NFIRS, a structure is a built object and can include nonbuildings, 

such as platforms and tents; connective structures, such as bridges or fences; telephone 

poles; and various other structures in addition to buildings.

Structures are split into building and nonbuilding structures for purposes of data quality. 

While most structures are buildings (analyses of NFIRS structure fires between 2009 and 

2011 show that 93 percent of structure fires occur in buildings), the distinction between 

buildings and nonbuildings is particularly important when determining the effectiveness 

of nonbehavior-based fire safety mechanisms, such as smoke alarms and residential 

sprinklers. These important components of early fire detection apply to buildings and 

not necessarily to these other types of structures.

20National Association of State Fire Marshals Fire Research & Education Foundation, “Conquering the “Unknowns” 

Research and Recommendations on the Chronic Problem of Undetermined and Missing Data in the Causal 

Factors Sections of the National Fire Incident Reporting System,” final report for Award No. EMW-2011-

FP-00356 Assistance to Firefighters Fire Prevention & Safety Grant Program Federal Emergency Management 

Agency. Undated. http://www.firemarshals.org/resources/Documents/Fire%20Incident%20Data%20Collectin/

NASFMFoundationFinalReportConqueringtheUnknowns.pdf.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 23

The National Fire Incident Reporting 

System Data Quality

Two major assessments are used by the USFA when monitoring the quality of the incident 

data reported by the participating states: the overall quality of the data submitted by the 

state as a unit and the overall quality of key data elements across all participating states 

and fire departments.

State-Based Data Quality

Based on the USFA’s state data quality rating, 12 states — Nebraska, Massachusetts, Alaska, 

North Dakota, Montana, Idaho, South Dakota, Utah, Colorado, California, Florida and 

Washington — as well as the District of Columbia, have demonstrated consistent, highquality data (Figure 4). Nebraska and the District of Columbia have vied for the top-ranked 

state for data quality over the 2009 to 2011 period.

As a group, the states with the best data quality ratings relative to the national average 

are those in the central Midwest, throughout the Northwest, and California, with the 

mid-Atlantic and southeastern states (with the exception of Florida) having the lowest 

ratings (Figure 5). The reasons for this consistent pattern are not clear.
24 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Figure 4. Three-Year NFIRS Data Quality by State Relative to National Average 

Data Quality Measure, 2009 to 2011

-9.0 -6.0 -3.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0

District of Columbia

Nebraska

North Dakota

Massachusetts

Alaska

Montana

Idaho

South Dakota

Utah

Colorado

California

Florida

Washington

Kansas

Michigan

Maine

Wyoming

Vermont

Illinois

Virginia

Iowa

Oregon

Minnesota

Wisconsin

Tennessee

New York

New Mexico

Oklahoma

Native American Tribal Authority

North Carolina

West Virginia

New Hampshire

Nevada

Arkansas

Ohio

Georgia

South Carolina

Missouri

Texas

Mississippi

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

Indiana

Kentucky

Alabama

Connecticut

Arizona

Hawaii

Louisiana

Maryland

New Jersey

Delaware

Relative Data Quality
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 25

Figure 5. Annual NFIRS Data Quality by State Relative to National Average Data 

Quality Measure, 2009 to 2011

2009

Good Average Poor

2010

Good Average Poor
26 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Figure 5. Annual NFIRS Data Quality by State Relative to National Average Data 

Quality Measure, 2009 to 2011 — continued

2011

Good Average Poor

Data Quality of Key Data Elements

Although the NFIRS contains hundreds of data elements, only a few are used in producing 

the USFA’s topical and analytic reports. Most of the elements used in the USFA’s analyses 

are required to be completed for each fire incident type. For small confined fires, outside 

rubbish fires with no value, and other unclassified fires, however, only the most basic 

incident information is required.

A complete list of NFIRS data elements is documented in the “NFIRS 5.0 Complete Reference 

Guide.”21 Table 4 identifies the NFIRS data elements that are used most often in fire data 

analyses produced by the USFA. Not all types of fires require the same data elements. Table 4

displays the data elements and the data element’s required completion by type of fire. Table 

5 identifies the NFIRS data elements that are used most often in the analyses of casualties 

produced by the USFA. Because of the limited reporting required of confined fires and other 

unclassified fires, these fires are not included here or in the data quality tables that follow.

Incident type, incident date and alarm time are integral elements of the incident and are 

not subject to quality review: either these elements exist and are within valid ranges or 

the incident record is not accepted into the national fire database. Similarly, deaths, 

injuries, contents and property loss can only be “sanity checked” as there are not specific 

and definable correct entries, only “reasonable” ones. These elements are shown in the 

detailed tables as distributions. Content loss is only shown for buildings and mobile property 

structure fires.

21“NFIRS 5.0 Complete Reference Guide,” USFA, January 2013: http://www.nfirs.fema.gov/documentation/

reference/.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 27

Four types of fires are defined for the purposes of data quality analysis. These fire types 

are largely based on the NFIRS modules that departments are required to complete.

ĵ Nonbuilding structure fires (also called “special structure” fires) — Fires in or of structures 

that are not buildings or used as buildings, e.g. bridges or fences. For nonbuilding structure 

fires, the Fire Module and the first element in the Structure Fire Module are required.

ĵ Buildings and mobile property structures — Fires in structures that are buildings or 

are in mobile properties that are used as structures, e.g. manufactured or mobile 

homes. For buildings and mobile property structure fires, both the Fire and Structure 

Fire Modules are required.

ĵ Vehicle fires — Fires in vehicles or other mobile property, e.g., trucks, planes, trains. 

For vehicle fires, the Fire Module is required.

ĵ Outside fires — Fires that occur outdoors that may be open, e.g., grass fires, crop fires, 

other vegetation fires, and the like. For outside fires, the Fire Module or the Wildland 

Fire Module is required.

Table 4. NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses (Fires)

Data 

Element Description

Required Data Element

All Firesa

Nonbuilding

Structures

Buildings 

and Mobile 

Property 

Structuresb

Vehicles

Outsidec

Incident Type The actual situation found on scene 

when emergency personnel arrived. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Property Use

The actual use of the property where 

the incident occurred, not the overall 

use of mixed-use properties of which 

the property is part.

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Incident Date The month, day and year of incident. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Alarm Time

The actual month, day, year and time 

of day (hour, minute and seconds) 

when the alarm was received by the 

fire department.

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Deaths

A civilian fire death resulting from 

the incident, or during the mitigation 

of the incident (includes emergency 

personnel who are not part of the fire 

department, such as police officers or 

utility workers).

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
28 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 4. NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses (Fires) — continued

Data 

Element Description

Required Data Element

All Firesa

Nonbuilding

Structures

Buildings 

and Mobile 

Property 

Structuresb

Vehicles

Outsidec

Injuries

A civilian fire injury resulting from 

the incident, or during the mitigation 

of the incident (includes emergency 

personnel who are not part of the fire 

department, such as police officers or 

utility workers).

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Property Loss The total property dollar loss. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Contents Loss The total property contents dollar loss. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Area of Fire 

Origin

The primary use of the area where the 

fire started within the property. Nod Yes Yes Yes Yes

Heat Source The source of heat that ignited the 

first-ignited item to cause the fire. Nod Yes Yes Yes Yes

Item First 

Ignited

The use or configuration of the item 

or material first ignited by the heat 

source. The item that had sufficient 

volume or heat intensity to extend to 

uncontrolled or self-perpetuating fire.

Nod Yes Yes Yes Yes

Cause of 

Ignition

General description of why the heat 

source and the combustible material 

were able to combine to initiate the 

fire. This is the best determination of 

the firefighter at the scene and may 

be changed later as a result of further 

investigation or other information.

Nod Yes Yes Yes Yes

Factors 

Contributing 

to Ignition

The contributing factors that allowed 

the heat source and combustible 

material to combine to ignite the fire.

Nod Yes Yes Yes Yes

Equipment 

Involved in 

Ignition

The piece of equipment that 

provided the principal heat source to 

cause the ignition if the equipment 

malfunctioned or was used improperly.

No No No No No

Fire Spread The extent of fire spread in terms of 

how far the flame damage extended. No No Yes No No

Presence of 

Detectors

The existence of fire detection 

equipment within its designed range 

of the fire.

No No Yes No No

Detector 

Operation

The operation and effectiveness of 

the detector relative to the area of fire 

origin.

No No No No No
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 29

Table 4. NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses (Fires) — continued

Data 

Element Description

Required Data Element

All Firesa

Nonbuilding

Structures

Buildings 

and Mobile 

Property 

Structuresb

Vehicles

Outsidec

Detector 

Effectiveness

The effectiveness of the fire detection 

equipment in alerting occupants. No No No No No

Presence of 

Automatic 

Extinguishing 

System (AES)

The existence of an AES within the 

AES’s designed range of a fire. No No Yes No No

Source: “NFIRS 5.0 Complete Reference Guide,” USFA, January 2013.

Notes:	 a. “All fires” includes small confined fires, outside rubbish fires with no value, and other unclassified fires which have less

stringent reporting requirements.

b. “Buildings and mobile property structures” does not include confined building fires (small fires confined to the object

of origin), as for these fires, only the most basic information about the incident is required.

	 c. “Outside” does not include outside rubbish fires (fires with no value) or other, unspecified fires, as for these fires, only

the most basic information about the incident is required.

	 d. Area of fire origin, heat source, item first ignited, cause of ignition, and factors contributing to ignition are not required

for small confined fires, outside rubbish fires with no value, and other unclassified fires, as these types of fires have

less stringent reporting requirements.
30 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 5. NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses (Civilian Casualties)

Data Element Description Required 

Data

Gender The gender of the injured person. Yes

Age or Date of Birth The casualty’s age in years or, if the casualty is an 

infant, the age in months OR the month, day and 

year of birth of the casualty.

Yes

Race The identification of the race of the casualty based 

on U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

designations.

No

Ethnicity Identifies the ethnicity of the casualty. Ethnicity 

is an ethnic classification or affiliation. Ethnicity 

designates a population subgroup having a common 

cultural heritage, as distinguished by customs, 

characteristics, language or common history, 

amongst other attributes. Currently, Hispanic/Latino 

is the only OMB designation for ethnicity.

No

Severity The relative severity or seriousness of the injury 

on a scale from “least serious” (minor) to “most 

serious” (death).

Yes

Cause of Injury The physical event that caused the injury. No

Human Factors 

Contributing to 

Injury

The physical or mental state of the person before 

becoming a casualty. No

Factors Contributing 

to Injury

The most significant factors contributing to the 

injury of the casualty. No

Activity When 

Injured

The action or activity in which the person was 

engaged at the time of the injury. No

Primary Apparent 

Symptom

The casualty’s most serious apparent injury. No

Primary Area of 

Body Injured

The part of the body that sustained the most 

serious injury.

No

Source: “NFIRS 5.0 Complete Reference Guide,” USFA, January 2013.

Note:	 In the NFIRS paper forms and the NFIRS CRG, the full data element name is Age or Date of Birth; in the civilian fire casualty

file in the PDR, the data element is Age. All other data elements retain their names in the PDR.

The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Element Quality

In the sections that follow, data elements typically used in USFA analyses are assessed 

for overall data quality and usefulness for the period of 2009 to 2011. The first section 

is an overall summary of key data elements. The second section presents the detailed 

assessment by year, type of fire, and data element of the data quality and data usability 

of data elements commonly used in the USFA’s NFIRS data analyses.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 31

Summary Tables

In the summary tables that follow, data elements typically used in USFA analyses are 

assessed for overall data quality and usefulness for the period of 2009 to 2011. The 

summary tables are organized as follows:

ĵ Table 6, by type of fire — nonbuilding structures, buildings and mobile property 

structures, vehicles, and outside fires. Detailed breakouts of these summary tables 

by type of fire and year are found in Table 9 through Table 12.

ĵ Table 7, fires with casualties — by type of casualty (deaths, injuries) and general type of 

fire (all fires or building and mobile property fire where the majority of fire casualties 

occur). Detailed breakouts of these summary tables by type of fire and year are found 

in Table 13, Table 15, Table 17 and Table 19.

ĵ Table 8, by type of casualty and general type of fire (all fires or building and mobile 

property fire where the majority of fire casualties occur). Detailed breakouts of these 

summary tables by type of fire and year are found in Table 23 through Table 26.

Data quality for each data element is indexed on the total proportion of valid entries for 

that element. Data usability for each data element is indexed on the proportion of valid 

known entries for that element. Both have a maximum value of 100. Ranges of these 

indices are shown rather than averages. It is possible that a data element has a high data 

element quality index but a moderate data element usability index — while entries are valid 

and complete, the difference in the indices reflects the amount of data coded as unknown.

Required data elements, shown in Table 4, have an overall data quality index that is either 

a perfect value of 100 or very near. The exceptions are outside fires, all fires with injuries, 

and the presence of detectors and automatic extinguishing systems in fires other than 

buildings and mobile property structures. Incident data for many types of outside fires 

can be reported via the Wildland Module in lieu of the Fire Module. The Wildland Module 

does not have the full set of required data elements contained in the Fire Module. As a 

result, many required Fire Module data elements have no entries. The overall result is a 

lower data quality index.

A similar situation occurs with the data quality for fires with injuries. Fire injuries occur 

frequently and across all types of fires. The data quality index is in the low 90s because 

of the number of injuries that occur in outside and other fires where alternate reporting 

methods are allowed and reporting requirements are somewhat less stringent. In addition, 

determining many of the fire-related data elements for outside fires is difficult because 

of the nature of the fires.

The lower data quality index for the presence of detectors and AESs in fires other than 

buildings and mobile property structures is a result of deaths and injuries in incidents, 

such as vehicle and outside fires, where the Structure Module is not required (these data 

variables only apply to buildings and mobile structures).
32 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 6. Data Element Quality and Usability Summary for Common NFIRS Data Elements Type of Fire, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Type of Fire

Nonbuilding Structure Buildings and Mobile 

Property Structure Vehicle Outside

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Property Use 100.0 99.2 - 99.5 100.0 99.3 - 99.4 100.0 98.4 - 98.6 100.0 98.1 - 98.5

Area of Fire Origin 100.0 84.6 - 84.9 100.0 86.3 - 86.5 100.0 86.2 - 86.3 77.4 - 79.8 63.4 - 65.7

Heat Source 100.0 64.6 - 65.0 100.0 62.8 - 63.7 100.0 49.4 - 49.6 90.1 - 91.1 45.2 - 47.7

Item First Ignited 100.0 64.1 - 64.6 100.0 62.6 - 63.3 100.0 41.6 - 43.5 77.4 - 79.7 50.7 - 53.8

Cause of Ignition 100.0 82.7 - 84.2 100.0 86.4 - 86.6 100.0 77.7 - 78.0 99.9 - 100.0 68.6 - 69.6

Factors Contributing 

to Ignition 100.0 73.6 - 74.4 100.0 73.0 - 73.4 100.0 70.1 - 70.2 87.5 - 88.6 64.7 - 65.5

Equipment Involved 

in Ignition 36.1 - 40.9 35.4 - 40.2 41.6 - 42.7 40.3 - 41.4 27.9 - 29.3 27.6 - 28.9 26.4 - 27.2 25.3 - 26.3

Fire Spread – – 94.7 - 95.4 94.7 - 95.4 – – – –

Presence of Detectors – – 95.4 - 95.6 68.7 - 69.2 – – – –

Detector Operation – – 100.0 81.3 - 83.2 – – – –

Detector 

Effectiveness – – 100.0 90.2 - 90.5 – – – –

Presence of AES – – 95.1 - 95.2 86.6 - 86.8 – – – –
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 33

Table 7. Data Element Quality and Usability Summary for Common NFIRS Data Elements Type of Fire With Deaths or 

Injuries, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Type of Fire

Fatal Fires

Fatal Fires in Buildings 

and Mobile Property 

Structure

Fires with Injuries

Buildings and Mobile 

Property Structure 

Fires with Injuries

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Property Use 100.0 99.4 - 99.8 100.0 99.8 - 99.8 100.0 99.5 - 99.6 100.0 99.4 - 99.6

Area of Fire Origin 99.2 - 99.5 79.1 - 79.5 100.0 79.9 - 80.4 90.6 - 91.9 85.9 - 86.8 100.0 94.0 - 94.4

Heat Source 99.1 - 99.5 43.3 - 44.3 100.0 42.9 - 43.3 90.6 - 91.9 66.2 - 67.7 100.0 71.4 - 72.4

Item First Ignited 99.1 - 99.5 43.1 - 45.3 100.0 42.3 - 45.2 90.6 - 91.9 65.4 - 66.1 99.9 - 100.0 70.6 - 71.6

Cause of Ignition 99.1 - 99.5 85.6 - 87.0 100.0 86.1 - 86.8 90.6 - 92.0 83.2 - 84.8 100.0 91.9 - 92.0

Factors Contributing 

to Ignition 99.2 - 99.5 54.5 - 56.4 100.0 51.4 - 54.9 90.6 - 91.9 70.2 - 71.4 100.0 75.4 - 77.1

Equipment Involved 

in Ignition 36.5 - 38.8 34.0 - 36.6 38.8 - 42.0 35.9 - 39.3 43.3 - 44.5 42.1 - 43.6 48.3 - 49.4 46.8 - 48

Fire Spread 78.5 - 79.2 78.5 - 79.2 97.9 - 98.2 97.9 - 98.2 71.0 - 74.6 71.0 - 74.6 98.6 - 98.7 98.6 - 98.7

Presence of Detectors 78.7 - 79.5 46.6 - 48.7 98.2 - 98.4 58.3 - 60.1 71.3 - 74.7 54.5 - 58.2 98.7 - 98.8 75.3 - 77.1

Detector Operation 100.0 61.3 - 65.5 100.0 61.4 - 65.5 100.0 81.0 - 85.5 100.0 80.3 - 85.0

Detector 

Effectiveness 100.0 65.8 - 68.4 62.0 - 71.2 42.3 - 46.8 100.0 87.8 - 88.9 100.0 87.3 - 88.5

Presence of AES 78.5 - 79.2 71.6 - 72.3 97.8 - 98.3 89.4 - 90.1 71.0 - 74.3 68.7 - 71.4 98.1 - 98.5 94.4 - 95.5
34 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 8. Data Element Quality and Usability Summary for Common NFIRS Data Elements Type of Casualty With 

Deaths or Injuries, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Type of Casualty

Deaths in All Fires

Deaths in Buildings 

and Mobile Property 

Structures

Injuries in All Fires

Injuries in Buildings 

and Mobile Property 

Structures

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Quality 

Index 

Range

Usability 

Index 

Range

Gender 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Age or Date of Birth 97.7 - 98.5 97.7 - 98.5 98.4 - 98.8 98.4 - 98.8 97.7 - 98.2 97.7 - 98.2 97.6 - 98.0 97.6 - 98.0

Race 62.3 - 64.6 58.4 - 60.6 64.8 - 66.5 61.8 - 63.4 57.2 - 60.0 53.7 - 56.4 56.7 - 60.0 53.1 - 56.4

Ethnicity 39.4 - 42.9 39.4 - 42.9 41.0 - 44.5 41.0 - 44.5 39.6 - 42.0 39.6 - 42.0 39.5 - 42.1 39.5 - 42.1

Severity 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 95.9 - 96.3 100.0 95.7 - 96.3

Cause of Injury 70.1 - 72.3 57.3 - 60.2 70.4 - 73.1 57.9 - 60.9 74.4 - 75.7 71.7 - 73.5 73.6 - 75.8 70.8 - 73.4

Human Factors 

Contributing to Injury 53.4 - 55.4 53.4 - 55.4 53.4 - 57.6 53.4 - 57.6 59.5 - 60.8 59.5 - 60.8 58.5 - 60.2 58.5 - 60.2

Factors Contributing 

to Injury 43.1 - 48.0 43.1 - 48.0 41.2 - 47.7 41.2 - 47.7 49.4 - 52.3 49.4 - 52.2 48.6 - 51.5 48.6 - 51.4

Activity When Injured 53.7 - 54.4 31.1 - 32.8 55.0 - 56.2 31.7 - 34.4 65.8 - 67.4 58.1 - 59.9 65.0 - 67.8 57.6 - 60.5

Primary Apparent 

Symptom 53.3 - 54.9 45.0 - 45.7 54.1 - 57.2 46.3 - 48.1 64.8 - 68.8 63.7 - 67.6 64.9 - 69.6 63.7 - 68.2

Primary Area of Body 

Injured 47.8 - 50.1 47.8 - 50.1 47.3 - 51.7 47.3 - 51.7 58.1 - 60.6 58.1 - 60.6 57.9 - 60.7 57.9 - 60.6

Note: In the NFIRS paper forms and the NFIRS CRG, the full data element name is Age or Date of Birth; in the civilian fire casualty file in the PDR, the data element is Age.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 35

Detailed Data Quality and Usability of Commonly Used Data Elements in Analyses

The following tables present the detailed assessment of data quality and data usability 

of data elements commonly used in the USFA’s NFIRS data analyses. For coded data 

elements, four data quality measures are assessed based on the proportion of fires that 

fall under the measure for the data element in question. These measures are:

ĵ Valid known — The number/percent of data element entries that are valid according 

to the NFIRS CRG.

ĵ Valid unknown — The number/percent of data element entries that are coded as unknown 

(“U,” “UU” or “UUU”), where unknown is a valid entry according to the NFIRS CRG.

ĵ Invalid — The number/percent of data element entries whose entries are not valid 

according to the NFIRS CRG.

ĵ Null or no entry — The number of entries where no data has been entered whether 

or not the data element is required to be completed.

The two quality indices, data element quality and data element usability, are also included 

in each of these tables. As noted earlier, it is possible that a data element with a high data 

quality index may have a moderate, or even low, usability index. For example, in Table 

9 the data element “heat source” has a data quality index of 100.0 — all entries in heat 

source for nonbuilding fires are valid entries, whether the actual heat source is explicitly 

specified or it is coded as “unknown.” The usability index, however, is 64.6 because a very 

large proportion of those entries are coded as “unknown,” making definitive analyses 

using this data element problematic.

For data elements that have direct entry, specifically dollar losses and numbers of 

casualties, distributions of entries are shown.

Table 9 through Table 12 are detailed breakouts by year of common NFIRS data elements 

by the four major types of fire. These tables are also summarized in Table 6.

Table 13 through Table 20 are paired tables of detailed breakouts by year of common 

NFIRS data elements for fires with casualties by type of casualty (deaths, injuries) and 

general type of fire (all fires or building and mobile property fire). Each detailed table is 

followed by a distribution of the number of casualties (e.g., reported deaths or injuries) 

by year. The detailed tables are also summarized in Table 7.

Table 21 is the distribution of reported property loss by year for each of the four major 

fire types.

Table 22 is the distribution of reported content loss by year for building and mobile 

property structure fires, where content losses are typically found.

Table 23 through Table 26 are detailed breakouts by year of common NFIRS data elements 

for reported casualties (deaths, injuries) by general type of fire (all fires or building and 

mobile property fire). These tables are also summarized in Table 8.
36 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 9. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Nonbuilding Structure Fires, 2009 to 2011

Data 

Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires

Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or 

No Entry

2009

Property Use 8,254 8,213 41 0 0

100.0 99.5

Percent 100.0 99.5 0.5 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 8,254 6,979 1,275 0 0

100.0 84.6

Percent 100.0 84.6 15.4 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 8,254 5,334 2,920 0 0

100.0 64.6

Percent 100.0 64.6 35.4 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 8,254 5,330 2,924 0 0

100.0 64.6

Percent 100.0 64.6 35.4 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 8,254 6,825 1,429 0 0

100.0 82.7

Percent 100.0 82.7 17.3 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 8,254 6,072 2,179 0 3

100.0 73.6

Percent 100.0 73.6 26.4 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 8,254 3,320 60 0 4,874 40.9 40.2

Percent 100.0 40.2 0.7 0.0 59.1

2010

Property Use 9,381 9,311 70 0 0

100.0 99.3

Percent 100.0 99.3 0.7 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 9,381 7,947 1,434 0 0

100.0 84.7

Percent 100.0 84.7 15.3 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 9,381 6,100 3,281 0 0

100.0 65.0

Percent 100.0 65.0 35.0 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 9,381 6,010 3,371 0 0

100.0 64.1

Percent 100.0 64.1 35.9 0.0 0.0
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 37

Table 9. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Nonbuilding Structure Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data 

Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires

Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or 

No Entry

Cause of Ignition 9,381 7,841 1,540 0 0

100.0 83.6

Percent 100.0 83.6 16.4 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 9,381 6,984 2,397 0 0

100.0 74.4

Percent 100.0 74.4 25.6 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 9,381 3,454 88 0 5,839 37.7 36.8

Percent 100.0 36.8 0.9 0.0 62.2

2011

Property Use 9,996 9,918 78 0 0

100.0 99.5

Percent 100.0 99.2 0.8 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 9,996 8,486 1,510 0 0

100.0 84.6

Percent 100.0 84.9 15.1 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 9,996 6,479 3,517 0 0

100.0 64.6

Percent 100.0 64.8 35.2 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 9,996 6,422 3,574 0 0

100.0 64.6

Percent 100.0 64.2 35.8 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 9,996 8,413 1,583 0 0

100.0 82.7

Percent 100.0 84.2 15.8 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 9,996 7,361 2,635 0 0

100.0 73.6

Percent 100.0 73.6 26.4 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 9,996 3,541 73 0 6,382 36.1 40.2

Percent 100.0 35.4 0.7 0.0 63.8

Source: NFIRS.

Note:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”
38 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 10. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fires22, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires

Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or 

No Entry

2009

Property Use 167,249 166,258 991 0 0

100.0 99.4

Percent 100.0 99.4 0.6 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 167,249 144,258 22,986 0 5

100.0 86.3

Percent 100.0 86.3 13.7 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 167,249 104,991 62,253 0 5

100.0 62.8

Percent 100.0 62.8 37.2 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 167,249 105,813 61,431 0 5

100.0 63.3

Percent 100.0 63.3 36.7 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 167,249 144,432 22,812 0 5

100.0 86.4

Percent 100.0 86.4 13.6 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 167,249 122,202 45,036 0 11

100.0 73.1

Percent 100.0 73.1 26.9 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 167,249 69,307 2,216 0 95,726 42.7 41.4

Percent 100.0 41.4 1.3 0.0 57.2

Fire Spread 167,249 158,389 0 0 8,860 94.7 94.7

Percent 100.0 94.7 0.0 0.0 5.3

Presence of Detectors 167,249 114,842 44,631 0 7,776 95.4 68.7

Percent 100.0 68.7 26.7 0.0 4.6

Detector Operation (when present) 59,248 48,140 11,108 0 0

100.0 81.3

Percent 100.0 81.3 18.7 0.0 .00

22Does not include confined building fires (small fires confined to the object of origin), as for these fires, only the most basic information about the incident 

is required.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 39

Table 10. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires

Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Detector Effectiveness 

(when present and operating) 34,059 30,726 3,333 0 0

100.0 90.2

Percent 100.0 90.2 9.8 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 167,249 144,790 14,134 0 8,325 95.1 86.6

Percent 100.0 86.6 8.5 0.0 5.0

2010

Property Use 187,711 186,469 1,242 0 0

100.0 99.3

Percent 100.0 99.3 0.7 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 187,711 162,375 25,327 0 9

100.0 86.5

Percent 100.0 86.5 13.5 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 187,711 119,575 68,127 0 9

100.0 63.7

Percent 100.0 63.7 36.3 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 187,711 118,632 69,062 0 17

100.0 63.2

Percent 100.0 63.2 36.8 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 187,711 162,602 25,092 0 17

100.0 86.6

Percent 100.0 86.6 13.4 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 187,711 137,805 49,893 0 13

100.0 73.4

Percent 100.0 73.4 26.6 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 187,711 75,692 2,382 0 109,637 41.6 40.3

Percent 100.0 40.3 1.3 0.0 58.4

Fire Spread 187,711 178,380 0 0 9,331 95.0 95.0

Percent 100.0 95.0 0.0 0.0 5.0

Presence of Detectors 187,711 129,825 49,128 0 8,758 95.4 69.2

Percent 100.0 69.2 26.2 0.0 4.7
40 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 10. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires

Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or 

No Entry

Detector Operation (when present) 68,466 56,956 11,507 0 3

100.0 83.2

Percent 100.0 83.2 16.8 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness 

(when present and operating) 39,608 35,836 3,770 0 2

100.0 90.5

Percent 100.0 90.5 9.5 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 187,711 162,868 15,551 0 9,292 95.1 86.8

Percent 100.0 86.8 8.3 0.0 5.0

2011

Property Use 188,976 187,852 1,123 1 0

100.0 99.4

Percent 100.0 99.4 0.6 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 188,976 163,235 25,740 0 1

100.0 86.4

Percent 100.0 86.4 13.6 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 188,976 119,536 69,439 0 1

100.0 63.3

Percent 100.0 63.3 36.7 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 188,976 118,283 70,692 0 1

100.0 62.6

Percent 100.0 62.6 37.4 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 188,976 163,557 25,418 0 1

100.0 86.5

Percent 100.0 86.5 13.5 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 188,976 137,993 50,979 0 4

100.0 73.0

Percent 100.0 73.0 27.0 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 188,976 76,291 2,267 0 110,418 41.6 40.4

Percent 100.0 40.4 1.2 0.0 58.4

Fire Spread 188,976 180,321 0 0 8,655 95.4 95.4

Percent 100.0 95.4 0.0 0.0 4.6
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 41

Table 10. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires

Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or 

No Entry

Presence of Detectors 188,976 130,179 50,391 0 8,406 95.6 68.9

Percent 100.0 68.9 26.7 0.0 4.4

Detector Operation (when present) 69,324 57,689 11,634 0 1

100.0 83.2

Percent 100.0 83.2 16.8 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness 

(when present and operating) 40,302 36,380 3,922 0 0

100.0 90.3

Percent 100.0 90.3 9.7 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 188,976 163,858 16,131 0 8,987 95.2 86.7

Percent 100.0 86.7 8.5 0.0 4.8

Source: NFIRS.

Note:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are entries coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the

lack of information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”
42 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 11. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Vehicle Fires, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2009

Property Use 149,471 147,006 2,465 0 0

100.0 98.4

Percent 100.0 98.4 1.6 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 149,471 128,922 20,548 0 1

100.0 86.3

Percent 100.0 86.3 13.7 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 149,471 74,076 75,394 0 1

100.0 49.6

Percent 100.0 49.6 50.4 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 149,471 64,987 84,483 0 1

100.0 43.5

Percent 100.0 43.5 56.5 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 149,471 116,136 33,334 0 1

100.0 77.7

Percent 100.0 77.7 22.3 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 149,471 104,722 44,744 0 5

100.0 70.1

Percent 100.0 70.1 29.9 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 149,471 43,260 585 0 105,626 29.3 28.9

Percent 100.0 28.9 0.4 0.0 70.7

2010

Property Use 155,267 152,854 2,412 1 0

100.0 98.4

Percent 100.0 98.4 1.6 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 155,267 133,863 21,400 0 4

100.0 86.2

Percent 100.0 86.2 13.8 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 155,267 76,749 78,514 0 4

100.0 49.4

Percent 100.0 49.4 50.6 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 155,267 65,395 89,859 0 13

100.0 42.1

Percent 100.0 42.1 57.9 0.0 0.0
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 43

Table 11. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Vehicle Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Cause of Ignition 155,267 120,795 34,457 2 13

100.0 77.8

Percent 100.0 77.8 22.2 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 155,267 109,026 46,231 0 10

100.0 70.2

Percent 100.0 70.2 29.8 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 155,267 42,792 508 0 111,967 27.9 27.6

Percent 100.0 27.6 0.3 0.0 72.1

2011

Property Use 149,333 147,178 2,155 0 0

100.0 98.6

Percent 100.0 98.6 1.4 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 149,333 128,838 20,495 0 0

100.0 86.3

Percent 100.0 86.3 13.7 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 149,333 73,884 75,449 0 0

100.0 49.5

Percent 100.0 49.5 50.5 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 149,333 62,185 87,148 0 0

100.0 41.6

Percent 100.0 41.6 58.4 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 149,333 116,504 32,829 0 0

100.0 78.0

Percent 100.0 78.0 22.0 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 149,333 104,707 44,625 0 1

100.0 70.1

Percent 100.0 70.1 29.9 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 149,333 42,343 456 0 106,534 28.7 28.4

Percent 100.0 28.4 0.3 0.0 71.3

Source: NFIRS.

Note:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”
44 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 12. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Outside23 Fires, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires

Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or 

No Entry

2009

Property Use 234,258 229,872 4,386 0 0 100.0 98.1 Percent 100.0 98.1 1.9 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Originb 234,258 153,255 30,992 0 50,011 78.6 65.4 Percent 100.0 65.4 13.2 0.0 21.3

Heat Source 234,258 111,835 100,183 0 22,240 90.5 47.7 Percent 100.0 47.7 42.8 0.0 9.5

Item First Ignitedb 234,258 125,985 58,262 0 50,011 78.7 53.8 Percent 100.0 53.8 24.9 0.0 21.3

Cause of Ignitionc 234,258 163,149 71,081 0 28 99.9 69.6 Percent 100.0 69.6 30.3 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 234,258 153,410 51,566 0 29,282 87.5 65.5 Percent 100.0 65.5 22.0 0.0 12.5

Equipment Involved in Ignition 234,258 59,328 2,684 3 172,243 26.4 25.3

Percent 100.0 25.3 1.1 0.0 73.5

2010

Property Use 257,951 253,969 3,982 0 0

100.0 98.5 Percent 100.0 98.5 1.5 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Originb 257,951 169,366 36,261 0 52,324 79.8 65.7 Percent 100.0 65.7 14.1 0.0 20.3

Heat Source 257,951 116,539 118,306 0 23,106 91.1 45.2 Percent 100.0 45.2 45.9 0.0 9.0

Item First Ignitedb 257,951 135,430 70,187 0 52,334 79.7 52.5 Percent 100.0 52.5 27.2 0.0 20.3

23Does not include outside rubbish fires (fires with no value) or other, unspecified fires, as for these fires, only the most basic information about the incident 

is required.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 45

Table 12. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Outside Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires

Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or 

No Entry

Cause of Ignitionc 257,951 176,886 81,018 1 46 100.0 68.6 Percent 100.0 68.6 31.4 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 257,951 168,525 60,224 0 29,202 88.6 65.3 Percent 100.0 65.3 23.3 0.0 11.3

Equipment Involved in Ignition 257,951 67,968 2,225 4 187,754 27.2 26.3

Percent 100.0 26.3 0.9 0.0 72.8

2011

Property Use 274,379 269,651 4,727 1 0

100.0 98.3 Percent 100.0 98.3 1.7 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Originb 274,379 174,031 38,319 0 62,029 77.4 63.4 Percent 100.0 63.4 14.0 0.0 22.6

Heat Source 274,379 124,467 122,550 0 27,362 90.1 45.4 Percent 100.0 45.4 44.7 0.0 10.0

Item First Ignitedb 274,379 139,019 73,331 0 62,029 77.4 50.7 Percent 100.0 50.7 26.7 0.0 22.6

Cause of Ignitionc 274,379 188,816 85,562 0 1

100.0 68.8 Percent 100.0 68.8 31.2 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 274,379 177,608 62,812 0 33,959 87.6 64.7 Percent 100.0 64.7 22.9 0.0 12.4

Equipment Involved in Ignition 274,379 71,994 2,007 4 200,374 26.9 26.2 Percent 100.0 26.2 0.7 0.0 73

Source: NFIRS.

Notes:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”

	 b.	For vegetation, crop and other specific types of outside fires, data can be reported via the Fire or Wildland Fire Modules. Area of fire origin and item first ignited are found in

the Fire Module only.

	 c.	For vegetation, crop and other specific types of outside fires, data can be reported via the Fire or Wildland Fire Modules. The general cause data element is cause of ignition

in the Fire Module and wildland fire cause in the Wildland Fire Module.
46 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 13. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2009

Property Use 1,512 1,508 4 0 0

100.0 99.7

Percent 100.0 99.7 0.3 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 1,512 1,199 306 0 7

99.5 79.3

Percent 100.0 79.3 20.2 0.0 0.5

Heat Source 1,512 670 835 0 7

99.5 44.3

Percent 100.0 44.3 55.2 0.0 0.5

Item First Ignited 1,512 685 820 0 7

99.5 45.3

Percent 100.0 45.3 54.2 0.0 0.5

Cause of Ignition 1,512 1,316 189 0 7

99.5 87

Percent 100.0 87.0 12.5 0.0 0.5

Factors Contributing to Ignition 1,512 853 652 0 7

99.5 56.4

Percent 100.0 56.4 43.1 0.0 0.5

Equipment Involved in Ignition 1,512 554 33 0 925

38.8 36.6

Percent 100.0 36.6 2.2 0.0 61.2

Fire Spread 1,512 1,189 0 0 323

78.6 78.6

Percent 100.0 78.6 0.0 0.0 21.4

Presence of Detectors 1,512 708 486 0 318

78.9 46.8

Percent 100.0 46.8 32.1 0.0 21

Detector Operation (when 

present) 424 275 149 0 0

100.0 64.9

Percent 100.0 64.9 35.1 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 170 116 54 0 0

100.0 68.2

Percent 100.0 68.2 31.8 0.0 0.0
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 47

Table 13. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Presence of AES 1,512 1,083 105 0 324

78.5 71.6

Percent 100.0 71.6 6.9 0.0 21.4

2010

Property Use 1,637 1,627 10 0 0

100.0 99.4

Percent 100.0 99.4 0.6 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 1,637 1,301 322 0 14

99.2 79.5

Percent 100.0 79.5 19.7 0.0 0.9

Heat Source 1,637 726 897 0 14

99.1 44.3

Percent 100.0 44.3 54.8 0.0 0.9

Item First Ignited 1,637 706 917 0 14

99.1 43.1

Percent 100.0 43.1 56.0 0.0 0.9

Cause of Ignition 1,637 1,402 221 0 14

99.1 85.6

Percent 100.0 85.6 13.5 0.0 0.9

Factors Contributing to Ignition 1,637 892 731 0 14

99.2 54.5

Percent 100.0 54.5 44.7 0.0 0.9

Equipment Involved in Ignition 1,637 557 41 0 1,039 36.5 34.0

Percent 100.0 34.0 2.5 0.0 63.5

Fire Spread 1,637 1,296 0 0 341

79.2 79.2

Percent 100.0 79.2 0.0 0.0 20.8

Presence of Detectors 1,637 798 505 0 334

79.5 48.7

Percent 100.0 48.7 30.8 0.0 20.4

Detector Operation (when 

present) 481 295 186 0 0

100.0 61.3

Percent 100.0 61.3 38.7 0.0 0.0
48 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 13. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 193 132 61 0 0

100.0 68.4

Percent 100.0 68.4 31.6 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 1,637 1,183 113 0 341

79.2 72.3

Percent 100.0 72.3 6.9 0.0 20.8

2011

Property Use 1,690 1,686 4 0 0

100.0 99.8

Percent 100.0 99.8 0.2 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 1,690 1,337 342 0 11

99.3 79.1

Percent 100.0 79.1 20.2 0.0 0.7

Heat Source 1,690 731 948 0 11

99.4 43.3

Percent 100.0 43.3 56.1 0.0 0.7

Item First Ignited 1,690 728 951 0 11

99.4 43.1

Percent 100.0 43.1 56.3 0.0 0.7

Cause of Ignition 1,690 1,458 221 0 11

99.4 86.3

Percent 100.0 86.3 13.1 0.0 0.7

Factors Contributing to Ignition 1,690 929 750 0 11

99.4 55.0

Percent 100.0 55.0 44.4 0.0 0.7

Equipment Involved in Ignition 1,690 606 35 0 1,049 38.0 35.9

Percent 100.0 35.9 2.1 0.0 62.1

Fire Spread 1,690 1,327 0 0 363

78.5 78.5

Percent 100.0 78.5 0.0 0.0 21.5

Presence of Detectors 1,690 788 542 0 360

78.7 46.6

Percent 100.0 46.6 32.1 0.0 21.3
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 49

Table 13. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Detector Operation (when 

present) 478 313 165 0 0

100.0 65.5

Percent 100.0 65.5 34.5 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 222 146 76 0 0

100.0 65.8

Percent 100.0 65.8 34.2 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 1,690 1,217 112 0 361

78.6 72.0

Percent 100.0 72.0 6.6 0.0 21.4

Source: NFIRS.

Note:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”

Table 14. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Distribution of Fatal Fires by 

Reported Deaths, 2009 to 2011

Deaths per 

Incident

2009 2010 2011

Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent

1 1,284 84.9 1,409 86.1 1,480 87.6

2 172 11.4 164 10.0 148 8.8

3 36 2.4 37 2.3 36 2.1

4 10 0.7 13 0.8 13 0.8

5 8 0.5 9 0.5 7 0.4

More than 5 2 0.1 5 0.3 6 0.4

Total fires 1,512 100.0 1,637 100.0 1,690 100.0

Source: NFIRS. 

Note: Total for 2011 does not add up to 100 percent due to rounding.
50 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 15. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings24 and Mobile Property Structure Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2009

Property Use 1,206 1,203 3 0 0

100.0 99.8

Percent 100.0 99.8 0.2 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 1,206 966 240 0 0

100.0 80.1

Percent 100.0 80.1 19.9 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 1,206 522 684 0 0

100.0 43.3

Percent 100.0 43.3 56.7 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 1,206 545 661 0 0

100.0 45.2

Percent 100.0 45.2 54.8 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 1,206 1,047 159 0 0

100.0 86.8

Percent 100.0 86.8 13.2 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 1,206 662 544 0 0

100.0 54.9

Percent 100.0 54.9 45.1 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 1,206 474 32 0 700

42.0 39.3

Percent 100.0 39.3 2.7 0.0 58.0

Fire Spread 1,206 1,183 0 0 23

98.1 98.1

Percent 100.0 98.1 0.0 0.0 1.9

Presence of Detectors 1,206 705 481 0 20

98.4 58.5

Percent 100.0 58.5 39.9 0.0 1.7

Detector Operation (when 

present) 423 274 149 0 0

100.0 64.8

Percent 100.0 64.8 35.2 0.0 0.0

24Does not include confined building fires (small fires confined to the object of origin) or outside rubbish fires (fires with no value), as for these fires, only the 

most basic information about the incident is required.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 51

Table 15. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 274 116 54 0 104

62.0 42.3

Percent 100.0 42.3 19.7 0.0 38.0

Presence of AES 1,206 1,078 103 0 25

97.9 89.4

Percent 100.0 89.4 8.5 0.0 2.1

2010

Property Use 1,316 1,313 3 0 0

100.0 99.8

Percent 100.0 99.8 0.2 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 1,316 1,058 258 0 0

100.0 80.4

Percent 100.0 80.4 19.6 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 1,316 567 749 0 0

100.0 43.1

Percent 100.0 43.1 56.9 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 1,316 557 759 0 0

100.0 42.3

Percent 100.0 42.3 57.7 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 1,316 1,133 183 0 0

100.0 86.1

Percent 100.0 86.1 13.9 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 1,316 677 639 0 0

100.0 51.4

Percent 100.0 51.4 48.6 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 1,316 473 38 0 805

38.8 35.9

Percent 100.0 35.9 2.9 0.0 61.2

Fire Spread 1,316 1,289 0 0 27

97.9 97.9

Percent 100.0 97.9 0.0 0.0 2.1

Presence of Detectors 1,316 791 501 0 24

98.2 60.1

Percent 100.0 60.1 38.1 0.0 1.8
52 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 15. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Detector Operation (when 

present) 479 294 185 0 0

100.0 61.4

Percent 100.0 61.4 38.6 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 294 132 61 0 101

65.6 44.9

Percent 100.0 44.9 20.7 0.0 34.4

Presence of AES 1,316 1,177 110 0 29

97.8 89.4

Percent 100.0 89.4 8.4 0.0 2.2

2011

Property Use 1,338 1,335 3 0 0

100.0 99.8

Percent 100.0 99.8 0.2 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 1,338 1,069 269 0 0

100.0 79.9

Percent 100.0 79.9 20.1 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 1,338 574 764 0 0

100.0 42.9

Percent 100.0 42.9 57.1 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 1,338 587 751 0 0

100.0 43.9

Percent 100.0 43.9 56.1 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 1,338 1,157 181 0 0

100.0 86.5

Percent 100.0 86.5 13.5 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 1,338 700 638 0 0

100.0 52.3

Percent 100.0 52.3 47.7 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 1,338 493 35 0 810

39.4 36.8

Percent 100.0 36.8 2.6 0.0 60.5

Fire Spread 1,338 1,314 0 0 24

98.2 98.2

Percent 100.0 98.2 0 0.0 1.8
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 53

Table 15. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fatal Fires, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Presence of Detectors 1,338 780 536 0 22

98.4 58.3

Percent 100.0 58.3 40.1 0.0 1.6

Detector Operation (when 

present) 476 312 164 0 0

100.0 65.5

Percent 100.0 65.5 34.5 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 312 146 76 0 90

71.2 46.8

Percent 100.0 46.8 24.4 0.0 28.8

Presence of AES 1,338 1,205 110 0 23

98.3 90.1

Percent 100.0 90.1 8.2 0.0 1.7

Source: NFIRS.

Note:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”
54 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 16. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Distribution of Buildings25 and 

Mobile Property Structure Fatal Fires by Reported Deaths, 2009 to 2011

Deaths per 

Incident

2009 2010 2011

Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent

1 1,015 84.2 1,127 85.6 1,168 87.3

2 141 11.7 134 10.2 120 9.0

3 33 2.7 31 2.4 30 2.2

4 10 0.8 11 0.8 10 0.7

5 5 0.4 8 0.6 5 0.4

More than 5 2 0.2 5 0.4 5 0.4

Total fires 1,206 100.0 1,316 100.0 1,338 100.0

Source: NFIRS.

Table 17. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2009

Property Use 7,599 7,571 28 0 0

100.0 99.6

Percent 100.0 99.6 0.4 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 7,599 6,526 356 0 717

90.6 85.9

Percent 100.0 85.9 4.7 0.0 9.4

Heat Source 7,599 5,046 1,836 0 717

90.6 66.4

Percent 100.0 66.4 24.2 0.0 9.4

25Does not include confined building fires (small fires confined to the object of origin) or outside rubbish fires (fires with no value), as for these fires, only the 

most basic information about the incident is required.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 55

Table 17. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Item First Ignited 7,599 5,014 1,868 0 717

90.6 66.0

Percent 100.0 66.0 24.6 0.0 9.4

Cause of Ignition 7,599 6,322 560 0 717

90.6 83.2

Percent 100.0 83.2 7.4 0.0 9.4

Factors Contributing to Ignition 7,599 5,419 1,463 0 717

90.6 71.3

Percent 100.0 71.3 19.3 0.0 9.4

Equipment Involved in Ignition 7,599 3,228 99 0 4,272 43.8 42.5

Percent 100.0 42.5 1.3 0.0 56.2

Fire Spread 7,599 5,393 0 0 2,206 71.0 71.0

Percent 100.0 71.0 0.0 0.0 29.0

Presence of Detectors 7,599 4,139 1,279 0 2,181 71.3 54.5

Percent 100.0 54.5 16.8 0.0 28.7

Detector Operation (when 

present) 2,722 2,187 535 0 0

100.0 80.3

Percent 100.0 80.3 19.7 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 1,631 1,424 207 0 0

100.0 87.3

Percent 100.0 87.3 12.7 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 7,599 5,219 174 0 2,206 71.0 68.7

Percent 100.0 68.7 2.3 0.0 29.0

2010

Property Use 8,164 8,126 38 0 0

100.0 99.5

Percent 100.0 99.5 0.5 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 8,164 7,012 426 0 726 91.1 85.9

Percent 100.0 85.9 5.2 0.0 8.9
56 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 17. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Heat Source 8,164 5,407 2,031 0 726 91.1 66.2

Percent 100.0 66.2 24.9 0.0 8.9

Item First Ignited 8,164 5,336 2,100 0 728 91.1 65.4

Percent 100.0 65.4 25.7 0.0 8.9

Cause of Ignition 8,164 6,843 593 0 728 91.1 83.8

Percent 100.0 83.8 7.3 0.0 8.9

Factors Contributing to Ignition 8,164 5,733 1,705 0 726 91.1 70.2

Percent 100.0 70.2 20.9 0.0 8.9

Equipment Involved in Ignition 8,164 3,436 99 0 4,629 43.3 42.1

Percent 100.0 42.1 1.2 0.0 56.7

Fire Spread 8,164 5,959 0 0 2,205 73.0 73.0

Percent 100.0 73.0 0.0 0.0 27.0

Presence of Detectors 8,164 4,688 1,284 0 2,192 73.1 57.4

Percent 100.0 57.4 15.7 0.0 26.8

Detector Operation (when 

present) 3,321 2,841 480 0 0

100.0 85.5

Percent 100.0 85.5 14.5 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 2,091 1,859 232 0 0

100.0 88.9

Percent 100.0 88.9 11.1 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 8,164 5,701 225 0 2,238 72.6 69.8

Percent 100.0 69.8 2.8 0.0 27.4

2011

Property Use 8,121 8,083 38 0 0

100.0 99.5

Percent 100.0 99.5 0.5 0.0 0.0
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 57

Table 17. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

Area of Fire Origin 8,121 7,052 412 0 657 91.9 86.8

Percent 100.0 86.8 5.1 0.0 8.1

Heat Source 8,121 5,498 1,966 0 657 91.9 67.7

Percent 100.0 67.7 24.2 0.0 8.1

Item First Ignited 8,121 5,371 2,093 0 657 91.9 66.1

Percent 100.0 66.1 25.8 0.0 8.1

Cause of Ignition 8,121 6,883 581 0 657 92.0 84.8

Percent 100.0 84.8 7.2 0.0 8.1

Factors Contributing to Ignition 8,121 5,802 1,662 0 657 91.9 71.4

Percent 100.0 71.4 20.5 0.0 8.1

Equipment Involved in Ignition 8,121 3,540 72 0 4,509 44.5 43.6

Percent 100.0 43.6 0.9 0.0 55.5

Fire Spread 8,121 6,056 0 0 2,065 74.6 74.6

Percent 100.0 74.6 0.0 0.0 25.4

Presence of Detectors 8,121 4,724 1,342 0 2,055 74.7 58.2

Percent 100.0 58.2 16.5 0.0 25.3

Detector Operation (when 

present) 3,347 2,853 494 0 0

100.0 85.2

Percent 100.0 85.2 14.8 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 2,105 1,871 234 0 0

100.0 88.9

Percent 100.0 88.9 11.1 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 8,121 5,802 236 0 2,083 74.3 71.4

Percent 100.0 71.4 2.9 0.0 25.6

Source: NFIRS.

Note:	 a.	Valid unknown are entries coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”
58 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 18. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Distribution of Reported Fires With 

Injuries by Reported Injuries, 2009 to 2011

Injuries per 

Incident

2009 2010 2011

Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent

1 6,378 83.9 6,763 82.8 6,738 83.0

2 832 10.9 973 11.9 942 11.6

3 212 2.8 263 3.2 254 3.1

4 84 1.1 76 0.9 97 1.2

5 50 0.7 37 0.5 26 0.3

More than 5 43 0.6 52 0.6 64 0.8

Total fires 7,599 100.0 8,164 100.0 8,121 100.0

Source: NFIRS. 

Note: Total for 2010 does not add up to 100 percent due to rounding.

Table 19. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings26 and Mobile Property Structures Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No 

Entry

2009

Property Use 5,287 5,268 19 0 0

100.0 99.6

Percent 100.0 99.6 0.4 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 5,287 4,992 295 0 0

100.0 94.4

Percent 100.0 94.4 5.6 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 5,287 3,795 1,492 0 0

100.0 71.8

Percent 100.0 71.8 28.2 0.0 0.0

26Does not include confined building fires (small fires confined to the object of origin) or outside rubbish fires (fires with no value), as for these fires, only the 

most basic information about the incident is required.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 59

Table 19. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structures Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No 

Entry

Item First Ignited 5,287 3,787 1,500 0 0

100.0 71.6

Percent 100.0 71.6 28.4 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 5,287 4,860 427 0 0

100.0 91.9

Percent 100.0 91.9 8.1 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 5,287 4,076 1,211 0 0

100.0 77.1

Percent 100.0 77.1 22.9 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 5,287 2,528 87 0 2,672 49.4 47.8

Percent 100.0 47.8 1.6 0.0 50.5

Fire Spread 5,287 5,215 0 0 72

98.6 98.6

Percent 100.0 98.6 0.0 0.0 1.4

Presence of Detectors 5,287 3,983 1,242 0 62 98.8 75.3

Percent 100.0 75.3 23.5 0.0 1.2

Detector Operation (when 

present)

2,722 2,187 535 0 0

100.0 80.3

Percent 100.0 80.3 19.7 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 1,631 1,424 207 0 0

100.0 87.3

Percent 100.0 87.3 12.7 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 5,287 5,047 161 0 79 98.5 95.5

Percent 100.0 95.5 3.0 0.0 1.5

2010

Property Use 5,759 5,729 30 0 0

100.0 99.5

Percent 100.0 99.5 0.5 0.0 0.0

Area of Fire Origin 5,759 5,412 347 0 0

100.0 94.0

Percent 100.0 94.0 6.0 0.0 0.0
60 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 19. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structures Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No 

Entry

Heat Source 5,759 4,112 1,647 0 0

100.0 71.4

Percent 100.0 71.4 28.6 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 5,759 4,068 1,690 0 1

99.9 70.6

Percent 100.0 70.6 29.3 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 5,759 5,297 461 0 1

100.0 92.0

Percent 100.0 92.0 8.0 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 5,759 4,342 1,417 0 0

100.0 75.4

Percent 100.0 75.4 24.6 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 5,759 2,696 89 0 2,974 48.3 46.8

Percent 100.0 46.8 1.5 0.0 51.6

Fire Spread 5,759 5,680 0 0 79 98.6 98.6

Percent 100.0 98.6 0.0 0.0 1.4

Presence of Detectors 5,759 4,443 1,246 0 70 98.7 77.1

Percent 100.0 77.1 21.6 0.0 1.2

Detector Operation (when 

present) 3,123 2,656 467 0 0

100.0 85.0

Percent 100.0 85.0 15.0 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 1,946 1,718 228 0 0

100.0 88.3

Percent 100.0 88.3 11.7 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 5,759 5,439 213 0 107 98.1 94.4

Percent 100.0 94.4 3.7 0.0 1.9

2011

Property Use 5,852 5,818 34 0 0

100.0 99.4

Percent 100.0 99.4 0.6 0.0 0.0
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 61

Table 19. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported 

Buildings and Mobile Property Structures Fires With Injuries, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Fires

Number and Percent of Reported Fires Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No 

Entry

Area of Fire Origin 5,852 5,518 334 0 0

100.0 94.3

Percent 100.0 94.3 5.7 0.0 0.0

Heat Source 5,852 4,237 1,615 0 0

100.0 72.4

Percent 100.0 72.4 27.6 0.0 0.0

Item First Ignited 5,852 4,164 1,688 0 0

100.0 71.2

Percent 100.0 71.2 28.8 0.0 0.0

Cause of Ignition 5,852 5,382 470 0 0

100.0 92.0

Percent 100.0 92.0 8.0 0.0 0.0

Factors Contributing to Ignition 5,852 4,448 1,404 0 0

100.0 76.0

Percent 100.0 76.0 24.0 0.0 0.0

Equipment Involved in Ignition 5,852 2,808 69 0 2,975 49.2 48.0

Percent 100.0 48.0 1.2 0.0 50.8

Fire Spread 5,852 5,778 0 0 74

98.7 98.7

Percent 100.0 98.7 0.0 0.0 1.3

Presence of Detectors 5,852 4,492 1,285 0 75 98.8 76.8

Percent 100.0 76.8 22.0 0.0 1.3

Detector Operation (when 

present) 3,154 2,672 482 0 0

100.0 84.7

Percent 100.0 84.7 15.3 0.0 0.0

Detector Effectiveness (when 

present and operating) 1,977 1,750 227 0 0

100.0 88.5

Percent 100.0 88.5 11.5 0.0 0.0

Presence of AES 5,852 5,539 216 0 97 98.4 94.7

Percent 100.0 94.7 3.7 0.0 1.7

Source: NFIRS.

Note:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”
62 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 20. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Distribution of Buildings27 and 

Mobile Property Structure Fires With Injuries by Reported Injuries, 2009 to 2011

Injuries per 

Incident

2009 2010 2011

Injuries Percent Injuries Percent Injuries Percent

1 4,272 80.8 4,599 79.9 4,690 80.1

2 672 12.7 785 13.6 764 13.1

3 184 3.5 224 3.9 227 3.9

4 76 1.4 71 1.2 90 1.5

5 42 0.8 34 0.6 24 0.4

More than 5 41 0.8 46 0.8 57 1

Total injuries 5,287 100.0 5,759 100.0 5,852 100.0

Source: NFIRS.

27Does not include confined building fires (small fires confined to the object of origin) or outside rubbish fires (fires with no value), as for these fires, only the 

most basic information about the incident is required.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 63

Table 21. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Distribution 

of Fires With Reported Property Dollar Loss28, 2009 to 2011

Reported Property 

Dollar Loss

All Fires Nonbuilding 

Structure

Buildings and 

Mobile Property 

Structure

Vehicle Outside

Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent

2009

No Loss Reported 150,222 26.9 2,720 33.0 30,209 18.1 77,822 33.2 28,475 20.6

$0 212,895 38.1 2,289 27.7 33,791 20.2 141,220 60.3 35,595 25.7

$100 and under 13,207 2.4 261 3.2 3,777 2.3 6,284 2.7 2,885 2.1

$101 - $500 22,530 4.0 627 7.6 9,374 5.6 3,474 1.5 9,055 6.5

$501 - $1,000 20,650 3.7 420 5.1 8,620 5.2 1,759 0.8 9,851 7.1

$1,001 - $5,000 58,063 10.4 734 8.9 23,317 13.9 2,341 1.0 31,671 22.9

$5,001 - $10,000 23,833 4.3 344 4.2 12,772 7.6 554 0.2 10,163 7.3

$10,001 - $50,000 39,070 7.0 555 6.7 28,659 17.1 567 0.2 9,289 6.7

$50,001 - $100,000 10,560 1.9 187 2.3 9,339 5.6 111 0.0 923 0.7

$100,001 - $500,000 7,451 1.3 109 1.3 6,726 4.0 93 0.0 523 0.4

$500,001 - $1,000,000 479 0.1 5 0.1 431 0.3 17 0.0 26 0.0

Over $1,000,000 272 0.0 3 0.0 234 0.1 16 0.0 19 0.0

Total 559,232 100.0 8,254 100.0 167,249 100.0 234,258 100.0 138,475 100.0

2010

No Loss Reported 169,177 27.7 2,992 31.9 37,092 19.8 86,943 33.7 42,150 27.1

$0 233,837 38.3 2,728 29.1 37,750 20.1 156,731 60.8 36,628 23.6

$100 and under 12,776 2.1 315 3.4 4,352 2.3 5,408 2.1 2,701 1.7

$101 - $500 23,353 3.8 731 7.8 10,403 5.5 3,490 1.4 8,729 5.6

$501 - $1,000 21,971 3.6 508 5.4 9,906 5.3 1,665 0.6 9,892 6.4

$1,001 - $5,000 63,488 10.4 905 9.6 26,333 14.0 2,303 0.9 33,947 21.9

$5,001 - $10,000 25,562 4.2 330 3.5 13,973 7.4.0 607 0.2 10,652 6.9

$10,001 - $50,000 40,729 6.7 586 6.2 30,604 16.3 589 0.2 8,950 5.8

28Does not include confined building fires (small fires confined to the object of origin) or outside rubbish fires (fires with no value).
64 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 21. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Distribution 

of Fires With Reported Property Dollar Loss, 2009 to 2011 - continued

Reported Property 

Dollar Loss

All Fires Nonbuilding 

Structure

Buildings and 

Mobile Property 

Structure

Vehicle Outside

Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent

$50,001 - $100,000 11,003 1.8 174 1.9 9,765 5.2 95 0.0 969 0.6

$100,001 - $500,000 7,688 1.3 103 1.1 6,895 3.7 95 0.0 595 0.4

$500,001 - $1,000,000 507 0.1 4 0.0 461 0.2 15 0.0 27 0.0

Over $1,000,000 219 0.0 5 0.1 177 0.1 10 0.0 27 0.0

Total 610,310 100.0 9,381 100.0 187,711 100.0 257,951 100.0 155,267 100.0

2011

No Loss Reported 173,062 27.8 3,135 31.4 37,331 19.8 92,929 33.9 39,667 26.6

$0 244,170 39.2 2,910 29.1 38,763 20.5 166,270 60.6 36,227 24.3

$100 and under 12,635 2.0 359 3.6 4,324 2.3 5,497 2.0 2,455 1.6

$101 - $500 22,846 3.7 848 8.5 10,531 5.6 3,568 1.3 7,899 5.3

$501 - $1,000 21,427 3.4 534 5.3 9,876 5.2 1,909 0.7 9,108 6.1

$1,001 - $5,000 63,062 10.1 931 9.3 26,463 14.0 2,575 0.9 33,093 22.2

$5,001 - $10,000 25,573 4.1 362 3.6 14,087 7.5 693 0.3 10,431 7.0

$10,001 - $50,000 41,009 6.6 594 5.9 30,863 16.3 642 0.2 8,910 6.0

$50,001 - $100,000 10,744 1.7 209 2.1 9,486 5.0 140 0.1 909 0.6

$100,001 - $500,000 7,344 1.2 104 1.0 6,546 3.5 120 0.0 574 0.4

$500,001 - $1,000,000 563 0.1 7 0.1 498 0.3 17 0.0 41 0.0

Over $1,000,000 249 0.0 3 0.0 208 0.1 19 0.0 19 0.0

Total 622,684 100.0 9,996 100.0 188,976 100.0 274,379 100.0 149,333 100.0

Source: NFIRS. 

Note: Some totals do not add up to 100 percent due to rounding.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 65

Table 22. Data Quality for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Distribution of Fires With Reported 

Contents Dollar Loss in Buildings and Mobile Property Structure Fires, 2009 to 2011

Reported Contents 

Dollar Loss

2009 2010 2011

Fires Percent Fires Percent Fires Percent

No Loss Reported 30,209 21.2 43,804 23.3 43,576 23.1

$0 33,791 30.8 56,606 30.2 58,251 30.8

$100 and under 3,777 4.1 7,422 4.0 7,348 3.9

$101 - $500 9,374 6.5 12,076 6.4 12,300 6.5

$501 - $1,000 8,620 5.7 10,771 5.7 10,952 5.8

$1,001 - $5,000 23,317 12.6 23,262 12.4 23,496 12.4

$5,001 - $10,000 12,772 6.2 11,151 5.9 10,972 5.8

$10,001 - $50,000 28,659 9.9 17,365 9.3 16,918 9.0

$50,001 - $100,000 9,339 1.9 3,295 1.8 3,174 1.7

$100,001 - $500,000 6,726 1.0 1,703 0.9 1,737 0.9

$500,001 - $1,000,000 431 0.1 178 0.1 159 0.1

Over $1,000,000 234 0.0 78 0.0 93 0.0

Total 167,249 100.0 187,711 100.0 188,976 100.0

Source: NFIRS.
66 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 23. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Deaths, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Deaths

Number and Percent of Reported Deaths Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2009

Gender 1,831 1,831 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 1,831 1,788 0 42 1

97.7 97.7

Percent 100.0 97.7 0.0 2.3 0.1

Race 1,831 1,110 73 0 648 64.6 60.6

Percent 100.0 60.6 4.0 0.0 35.4

Ethnicity 1,831 786 0 0 1,045 42.9 42.9

Percent 100.0 42.9 0.0 0.0 57.1

Severity 1,831 1,831 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 1,831 1,090 234 0 507 72.3 59.5

Percent 100.0 59.5 12.8 0.0 27.7

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 1,831 994 0 0 837 54.3 54.3

Percent 100.0 54.3 0.0 0.0 45.7

Factors Contributing to Injury 1,831 849 2 0 980 46.5 46.4

Percent 100.0 46.4 0.1 0.0 53.5

Activity When Injured 1,831 601 395 0 835

54.4 32.8

Percent 100.0 32.8 21.6 0.0 45.6

Primary Apparent Symptom 1,831 837 169 0 825 54.9 45.7

Percent 100.0 45.7 9.2 0.0 45.1

Primary Area of Body Injured 1,831 918 0 0 913 50.1 50.1

Percent 100.0 50.1 0.0 0.0 49.9
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 67

Table 23. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Deaths, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Deaths

Number and Percent of Reported Deaths Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2010

Gender 1,978 1,978 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 1,978 1,949 0 29 0 98.5 98.5

Percent 100.0 98.5 0.0 1.5 0.0

Race 1,978 1,156 77 1 744

62.3 58.4

Percent 100.0 58.4 3.9 0.1 37.6

Ethnicity 1,978 779 0 0 1,199 39.4 39.4

Percent 100.0 39.4 0.0 0.0 60.6

Severity 1,978 1,978 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 1,978 1,133 253 0 592

70.1 57.3

Percent 100.0 57.3 12.8 0.0 29.9

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 1,978 1,096 0 0 882

55.4 55.4

Percent 100.0 55.4 0.0 0.0 44.6

Factors Contributing to Injury 1,978 949 0 0 1,029 48.0 48.0

Percent 100.0 48.0 0.0 0.0 52.0

Activity When Injured 1,978 616 453 0 909 54.0 31.1

Percent 100.0 31.1 22.9 0.0 46.0

Primary Apparent Symptom 1,978 904 162 0 912 53.9 45.7

Percent 100.0 45.7 8.2 0.0 46.1

Primary Area of Body Injured 1,978 975 0 0 1,003 49.3 49.3

Percent 100.0 49.3 0.0 0.0 50.7
68 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 23. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Deaths, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Deaths

Number and Percent of Reported Deaths Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2011

Gender 2,007 2,007 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 2,007 1,966 0 41 0 98.0 98.0

Percent 100.0 98.0 0.0 2.0 0.0

Race 2,007 1,182 83 1 741

63.0 58.9

Percent 100.0 58.9 4.1 0.0 36.9

Ethnicity 2,007 830 0 0 1,177 41.4 41.4

Percent 100.0 41.4 0.0 0.0 58.6

Severity 2,007 2,007 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 2,007 1,209 232 0 566 71.8 60.2

Percent 100.0 60.2 11.6 0.0 28.2

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 2,007 1,072 0 0 935 53.4 53.4

Percent 100.0 53.4 0.0 0.0 46.6

Factors Contributing to Injury 2,007 865 0 0 1,142 43.1 43.1

Percent 100.0 43.1 0.0 0.0 56.9

Activity When Injured 2,007 658 420 0 929 53.7 32.8

Percent 100.0 32.8 20.9 0.0 46.3

Primary Apparent Symptom 2,007 903 166 0 938 53.3 45.0

Percent 100.0 45.0 8.3 0.0 46.7

Primary Area of Body Injured 2,007 959 0 0 1,048 47.8 47.8

Percent 100.0 47.8 0.0 0.0 52.2

Source: NFIRS.

Notes:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”

	 b.	In the NFIRS paper forms and the NFIRS CRG, the full data element name is Age or Date of Birth; in the civilian fire casualty file in the PDR, the data element is Age.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 69

Table 24. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Deaths in Buildings29 and Mobile Property Structures, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Deaths

Number and Percent of Reported Deaths Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2009

Gender 1,476 1,476 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 1,476 1,452 0 23 1

98.4 98.4

Percent 100.0 98.4 0.0 1.6 0.1

Race 1,476 936 46 0 494 66.5 63.4

Percent 100.0 63.4 3.1 0.0 33.5

Ethnicity 1,476 657 0 0 819

44.5 44.5

Percent 100.0 44.5 0.0 0.0 55.5

Severity 1,476 1,476 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 1,476 896 183 0 397 73.1 60.7

Percent 100.0 60.7 12.4 0.0 26.9

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 1,476 822 0 0 654

55.7 55.7

Percent 100.0 55.7 0.0 0.0 44.3

Factors Contributing to Injury 1,476 682 2 0 792 46.3 46.2

Percent 100.0 46.2 0.1 0.0 53.7

Activity When Injured 1,476 508 322 0 646 56.2 34.4

Percent 100.0 34.4 21.8 0.0 43.8

Primary Apparent Symptom 1,476 710 135 0 631 57.2 48.1

Percent 100.0 48.1 9.1 0.0 42.8

Primary Area of Body Injured 1,476 763 0 0 713

51.7 51.7

Percent 100.0 51.7 0.0 0.0 48.3

29Does not include confined building fires (small fires confined to the object of origin) or outside rubbish fires (fires with no value), as for these fires, only the 

most basic information about the incident is required.
70 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 24. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Deaths in Buildings and Mobile Property Structures, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Deaths

Number and Percent of Reported Deaths Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2010

Gender 1,605 1,605 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 1,605 1,586 0 19 0 98.8 98.8

Percent 100.0 98.8 0.0 1.2 0.0

Race 1,605 992 48 1 564 64.8 61.8

Percent 100.0 61.8 3.0 0.1 35.1

Ethnicity 1,605 658 0 0 947 41.0 41.0

Percent 100.0 41.0 0.0 0.0 59.0

Severity 1,605 1,605 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 1,605 929 200 0 476 70.4 57.9

Percent 100.0 57.9 12.5 0.0 29.7

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 1,605 924 0 0 681 57.6 57.6

Percent 100.0 57.6 0.0 0.0 42.4

Factors Contributing to Injury 1,605 765 0 0 840

47.7 47.7

Percent 100.0 47.7 0.0 0.0 52.3

Activity When Injured 1,605 508 374 0 723 55.0 31.7

Percent 100.0 31.7 23.3 0.0 45.0

Primary Apparent Symptom 1,605 753 132 0 720

55.1 46.9

Percent 100.0 46.9 8.2 0.0 44.9

Primary Area of Body Injured 1,605 789 0 0 816 49.2 49.2

Percent 100.0 49.2 0.0 0.0 50.8
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 71

Table 24. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Deaths in Buildings and Mobile Property Structures, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Deaths

Number and Percent of Reported Deaths Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2011

Gender 1,593 1,593 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 1,593 1,569 0 24 0 98.5 98.5

Percent 100.0 98.5 0.0 1.5 0.0

Race 1,593 994 47 1 551 65.4 62.4

Percent 100.0 62.4 3.0 0.1 34.6

Ethnicity 1,593 673 0 0 920 42.2 42.2

Percent 100.0 42.2 0.0 0.0 57.8

Severity 1,593 1,593 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 1,593 970 189 0 434 72.8 60.9

Percent 100.0 60.9 11.9 0.0 27.2

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 1,593 850 0 0 743 53.4 53.4

Percent 100.0 53.4 0.0 0.0 46.6

Factors Contributing to Injury 1,593 656 0 0 937 41.2 41.2

Percent 100.0 41.2 0.0 0.0 58.8

Activity When Injured 1,593 548 330 0 715

55.1 34.4

Percent 100.0 34.4 20.7 0.0 44.9

Primary Apparent Symptom 1,593 738 125 0 730

54.1 46.3

Percent 100.0 46.3 7.8 0.0 45.8

Primary Area of Body Injured 1,593 754 0 0 839 47.3 47.3

Percent 100.0 47.3 0.0 0.0 52.7

Source: NFIRS.

Notes:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”

	 b.	In the NFIRS paper forms and the NFIRS CRG, the full data element name is Age or Date of Birth; in the civilian fire casualty file in the PDR, the data element is Age.
72 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 25. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Injuries, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Injuries

Number and Percent of Reported Injuries Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2009

Gender 9,582 9,582 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

 Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 9,582 9,357 0 215 10 97.7 97.7

 Percent 100.0 97.7 0.0 2.2 0.1

Race 9,582 5,241 329 13 3,999 58.1 54.7

 Percent 100.0 54.7 3.4 0.1 41.7

Ethnicity 9,582 3,792 0 0 5,790 39.6 39.6

 Percent 100.0 39.6 0.0 0.0 60.4

Severity 9,582 9,204 378 0 0

100.0 96.1

 Percent 100.0 96.1 3.9 0.0 00

Cause of Injury 9,582 6,955 224 0 2,403 74.9 72.6

 Percent 100.0 72.6 2.3 0.0 25.1

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 9,582 5,824 0 0 3,758 60.8 60.8

 Percent 100.0 60.8 0.0 0.0 39.2

Factors Contributing to Injury 9,582 5,003 5 0 4,574 52.3 52.2

 Percent 100.0 52.2 0.1 0.0 47.7

Activity When Injured 9,582 5,696 679 0 3,207 66.5 59.4

 Percent 100.0 59.4 7.1 0.0 33.5

Primary Apparent Symptom 9,582 6,101 104 0 3,377 64.8 63.7

 Percent 100.0 63.7 1.1 0.0 35.2

Primary Area of Body Injured 9,582 5,568 2 0 4,012 58.1 58.1

 Percent 100.0 58.1 0.0 0.0 41.9
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 73

Table 25. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Injuries, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Injuries

Number and Percent of Reported Injuries Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2010

Gender 10,376 10,376 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

 Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 10,376 10,193 0 183 0 98.2 98.2

 Percent 100.0 98.2 0.0 1.8 0.0

Race 10,376 5,852 373 7 4,144 60.0 56.4

 Percent 100.0 56.4 3.6 0.1 39.9

Ethnicity 10,376 4,355 0 0 6,021 42.0 42.0

 Percent 100.0 42.0 0.0 0.0 58.0

Severity 10,376 9,992 384 0 0

100.0 96.3

 Percent 100.0 96.3 3.7 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 10,376 7,624 227 0 2,525 75.7 73.5

 Percent 100.0 73.5 2.2 0.0 24.3

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 10,376 6,220 0 0 4,156 59.9 59.9

 Percent 100.0 59.9 0.0 0.0 40.1

Factors Contributing to Injury 10,376 5,204 2 1 5,169 50.2 50.2

 Percent 100.0 50.2 0.0 0.0 49.8

Activity When Injured 10,376 6,219 783 0 3,374 67.4 59.9

 Percent 100.0 59.9 7.5 0.0 32.5

Primary Apparent Symptom 10,376 7,018 124 0 3,234 68.8 67.6

 Percent 100.0 67.6 1.2 0.0 31.2

Primary Area of Body Injured 10,376 6,289 5 0 4,082 60.6 60.6

 Percent 100.0 60.6 0.0 0.0 39.3
74 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 25. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Injuries, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Injuries

Number and Percent of Reported Injuries Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2011

Gender 10,428 10,428 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

 Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 10,428 10,203 0 224 1

97.8 97.8

 Percent 100.0 97.8 0.0 2.1 0.0

Race 10,428 5,602 369 6 4,451 57.2 53.7

 Percent 100.0 53.7 3.5 0.1 42.7

Ethnicity 10,428 4,189 0 0 6,239 40.2 40.2

 Percent 100.0 40.2 0.0 0.0 59.8

Severity 10,428 10,004 424 0 0

100.0 95.9

 Percent 100.0 95.9 4.1 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 10,428 7,478 285 0 2,665 74.4 71.7

 Percent 100.0 71.7 2.7 0.0 25.6

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 10,428 6,206 0 0 4,222 59.5 59.5

 Percent 100.0 59.5 0.0 0.0 40.5

Factors Contributing to Injury 10,428 5,154 1 0 5,273 49.4 49.4

 Percent 100.0 49.4 0.0 0.0 50.6

Activity When Injured 10,428 6,059 804 0 3,565 65.8 58.1

 Percent 100.0 58.1 7.7 0.0 34.2

Primary Apparent Symptom 10,428 6,811 153 0 3,464 66.8 65.3

 Percent 100.0 65.3 1.5 0.0 33.2

Primary Area of Body Injured 10,428 6,195 5 0 4,228 59.4 59.4

 Percent 100.0 59.4 0.0 0.0 40.5

Source: NFIRS.

Notes:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”

	 b.	In the NFIRS paper forms and the NFIRS CRG, the full data element name is Age or Date of Birth; in the civilian fire casualty file in the PDR, the data element is Age.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 75

Table 26. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Injuries in Buildings30 and Mobile Property Structures, 2009 to 2011

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Injuries

Number and Percent of Reported Injuries Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2009

Gender 6,988 6,988 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 6,988 6,818 0 165 5 97.6 97.6

Percent 100.0 97.6 0.0 2.4 0.1

Race 6,988 3,779 257 12 2,940 57.8 54.1

Percent 100.0 54.1 3.7 0.2 42.1

Ethnicity 6,988 2,760 0 0 4,228 39.5 39.5

Percent 100.0 39.5 0.0 0.0 60.5

Severity 6,988 6,705 283 0 0

100.0 96.0

Percent 100.0 96.0 4.0 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 6,988 5,027 189 0 1,772 74.6 71.9

Percent 100.0 71.9 2.7 0.0 25.4

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 6,988 4,205 0 0 2,783 60.2 60.2

Percent 100.0 60.2 0.0 0.0 39.8

Factors Contributing to Injury 6,988 3,591 5 0 3,392 51.5 51.4

Percent 100.0 51.4 0.1 0.0 48.5

Activity When Injured 6,988 4,138 506 0 2,344 66.4 59.2

Percent 100.0 59.2 7.2 0.0 33.5

Primary Apparent Symptom 6,988 4,451 84 0 2,453 64.9 63.7

Percent 100.0 63.7 1.2 0.0 35.1

Primary Area of Body Injured 6,988 4,046 2 0 2,940 57.9 57.9

Percent 100.0 57.9 0.0 0.0 42.1

30Does not include confined building fires (small fires confined to the object of origin) or outside rubbish fires (fires with no value), as for these fires, only the 

most basic information about the incident is required.
76 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Table 26. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Injuries in Buildings and Mobile Property Structures, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Injuries

Number and Percent of Reported Injuries Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2010

Gender 7,639 7,639 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 7,639 7,488 0 151 0 98.0 98.0

Percent 100.0 98.0 0.0 2.0 0.0

Race 7,639 4,311 274 4 3,050 60.0 56.4

Percent 100.0 56.4 3.6 0.1 39.9

Ethnicity 7,639 3,216 0 0 4,423 42.1 42.1

Percent 100.0 42.1 0.0 0.0 57.9

Severity 7,639 7,359 280 0 0

100.0 96.3

Percent 100.0 96.3 3.7 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 7,639 5,605 181 0 1,853 75.8 73.4

Percent 100.0 73.4 2.4 0.0 24.3

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 7,639 4,570 0 0 3,069 59.8 59.8

Percent 100.0 59.8 0.0 0.0 40.2

Factors Contributing to Injury 7,639 3,834 2 0 3,803 50.2 50.2

Percent 100.0 50.2 0.0 0.0 49.8

Activity When Injured 7,639 4,623 555 0 2,461 67.8 60.5

Percent 100.0 60.5 7.3 0.0 32.2

Primary Apparent Symptom 7,639 5,206 104 0 2,329 69.6 68.2

Percent 100.0 68.2 1.4 0.0 30.5

Primary Area of Body Injured 7,639 4,628 5 0 3,006 60.7 60.6

Percent 100.0 60.6 0.1 0.0 39.4
The National Fire Incident Reporting System Data Quality 77

Table 26. Data Element Quality and Usability for Common NFIRS Data Elements Used in USFA Analyses Reported Fire 

Injuries in Buildings and Mobile Property Structures, 2009 to 2011 — continued

Data Element

Number of 

Reported 

Injuries

Number and Percent of Reported Injuries Quality 

Index

Usability 

Index Valid 

Known

Valid 

Unknowna Invalid Null or No Entry

2011

Gender 7,853 7,853 0 0 0

100.0 100.0

Percent 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Age or Date of Birthb 7,853 7,682 0 170 1

97.8 97.8

Percent 100.0 97.8 0.0 2.2 0.0

Race 7,853 4,167 280 5 3,401 56.7 53.1

Percent 100.0 53.1 3.6 0.1 43.3

Ethnicity 7,853 3,116 0 0 4,737 39.7 39.7

Percent 100.0 39.7 0.0 0.0 60.3

Severity 7,853 7,514 339 0 0

100.0 95.7

Percent 100.0 95.7 4.3 0.0 0.0

Cause of Injury 7,853 5,561 217 0 2,075 73.6 70.8

Percent 100.0 70.8 2.8 0.0 26.4

Human Factors Contributing to 

Injury 7,853 4,597 0 0 3,256 58.5 58.5

Percent 100.0 58.5 0.0 0.0 41.5

Factors Contributing to Injury 7,853 3,815 1 0 4,037 48.6 48.6

Percent 100.0 48.6 0.0 0.0 51.4

Activity When Injured 7,853 4,524 582 0 2,747 65.0 57.6

Percent 100.0 57.6 7.4 0.0 35.0

Primary Apparent Symptom 7,853 5,061 125 0 2,667 66.0 64.4

Percent 100.0 64.4 1.6 0.0 34.0

Primary Area of Body Injured 7,853 4,571 5 0 3,277 58.3 58.2

Percent 100.0 58.2 0.1 0.0 41.7

Source: NFIRS.

Notes:	 a.	Valid unknown entries are coded as “U,” “UU” or “UUU” (depending on the field length). These coded values are distinctly different from blanks and no entries as the lack of

information only implies that the information was not given and does not imply that the element is truly “unknown.”

	 b.	In the NFIRS paper forms and the NFIRS CRG, the full data element name is Age or Date of Birth; in the civilian fire casualty file in the PDR, the data element is Age.
78 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

National Fire Protection Association 

Survey

The NFPA is a nongovernmental organization whose mission is “to reduce the worldwide 

burden of fire and other hazards on the quality of life by providing and advocating 

consensus codes and standards, research, training and education.” In support of their 

mission, the NFPA administers the annual National Fire Experience Survey, from which they 

calculate high-level national estimates of total fires, civilian deaths and injuries, and dollar 

loss. As described earlier in this report, estimates from the NFPA survey and percentages 

from the USFA’s NFIRS are combined to portray a richer, more detailed picture of the fire 

situation in the U.S. This section documents the survey methodology and quality control 

measures taken by the NFPA to ensure these estimates are as accurate as practicable.

The remainder of this section is drawn from the NFPA’s “Fire Loss in the United States 

During 2012,” published in September 2013.

Each year, based on a sample survey of fire departments across the country, the NFPA 

estimates the national fire problem as measured by the number of fires that public fire 

departments attend and the resulting deaths, injuries and property losses that occur. This 

section explains the major steps in conducting the 2012 survey.

Sample Selection

The NFPA currently has 30,145 public fire departments listed in the U.S. in its Fire Service 

Inventory (FSI) file. Based on desired levels of statistical precision for the survey results 

and the staff available to process, edit, and follow up on the individual questionnaires, 

the NFPA determined that 3,000 fire departments was a reasonable number for the 2011 

sample. Because of the variation in fire loss results by community size, fire departments 

were placed in one of the following 10 strata by size of community protected:

1,000,000 and up

500,000 to 999,999

250,0000 to 499,999

100,000 to 249,999

50,000 to 99,999

25,000 to 49,999

10,000 to 24,999

5,000 to 9,999

2,500 to 4,999

Under 2,500

Sample sizes for the individual strata were chosen to ensure the best estimate of civilian 

deaths in one- and two-family dwellings, the statistic that most aptly reflects the overall 

severity of the fire problem. All departments that protect 50,000 people or more were 

included. These 831 departments in the five highest strata protect 153,760,000 people.

A total sample of 2,592 was indicated for the remaining five population strata, assuming 

response rates similar to the past two years for the five highest strata. Sample sizes for 

individual strata were calculated using a methodology that assured optimum sample 
National Fire Protection Association Survey 79

allocations.31 Based on the average variation in civilian deaths in one- and two-family 

dwellings by stratum for the last two years and on the estimated number of fire departments, 

appropriate relative sample weights were determined. The corresponding sample sizes by 

stratum were then calculated. The sample size by stratum was then adjusted based on the 

response rates from the last two years’ returns. A sample size of 20,385 was found to be 

necessary to obtain the desired total response of 3,000 fire departments. For all strata, 

where a sample was necessary, departments were randomly selected.

Data Collection

The fire departments selected for the survey were sent the 2012 NFPA Fire Experience 

Questionnaire during the second week of January 2013. A second mailing was sent in 

mid-March to fire departments that had not responded to the first mailing. A total of 2,795 

departments responded to the questionnaire — 2,097 to the first mailing and 698 to the 

second. There were 676 departments (24 percent) that responded by using the online 

version of the survey form.

The overall response rate was 14 percent, although response rates were considerably 

higher for departments protecting larger communities than they were for departments 

protecting smaller communities. The response rate was 50 percent for departments 

protecting communities with a population of 50,000 or more, 23 percent for departments 

protecting communities of 10,000 to 24,999, and 10 percent for departments protecting 

communities with a population less than 10,000 (which are comprised of mostly 

volunteers). The 2,795 departments that did respond protect 120,282,500 people, or 39 

percent of the total U.S. population.

After the NFPA received the surveys, technical staff members of the Fire Analysis and 

Research Division reviewed them for completeness and consistency. When appropriate, 

they followed up on questions with a telephone call. After the review procedures were 

completed, the survey data were keyed to a computer file, where additional checks were 

made. The file was then ready for data analysis and estimation procedures.

Estimation Methodology

The estimation method used for the survey was ratio estimation with stratification 

by community size.32 For each fire statistic, a sample loss rate was computed for 

each stratum. This rate consisted of the total for that particular statistic from all fire 

departments reporting it, divided by the total population protected by the departments 

reporting the statistic. Note that this means that the departments used in calculating each 

statistic could be different, reflecting differences in unreported statistics. The sample fire 

loss rates by stratum were then multiplied by population weighting factors. The estimates 

were then combined to provide the overall national estimate.

If this method of estimation is to be effective, estimates of the total number of fire 

departments and the total population protected in each stratum must be accurate. The 

NFPA makes every effort to ensure that this is the case. The population weights used for 

the national estimates were developed using the NFPA FSI file and U.S. Census Bureau 

population estimates.

For each estimate, a corresponding standard error was also calculated. The standard 

error is a measure of the error caused by the fact that estimates are based on a sampling 

of fire losses rather than on a complete census of the fire problem. Due to the fact that 

31Steve K. Thompson, “Sampling,” John Wiley, New York, NY, 1992, pp. 107-111.

32William G. Cochran, “Sampling Techniques,” John Wiley, New York, NY, 1977, pp. 150-161.
80 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

the survey is based on a random sample, we can be very confident that the actual value 

falls within the percentage noted in parentheses for the overall national fire loss statistics: 

number of fires (2 percent), number of civilian deaths (11.3 percent), number of civilian 

injuries (5.5 percent), and property loss (3 percent).

The standard error helps in determining whether year-to-year differences are statistically 

significant. Differences that were found to be statistically significant were so noted in the 

tables. Property loss estimates are particularly prone to large standard errors because 

they are sensitive to unusually high losses, and as a result, large percentage differences 

from year to year may not always be statistically significant. In 2012, for instance, property 

damage in educational properties was estimated to be $64,000,000. This represented an 

increase of 35 percent from the year before, but was found not to be statistically significant.

In addition to sampling errors, there are nonsampling errors. These include biases of 

the survey methodology, incomplete or inaccurate reporting of data to the NFPA, or 

differences in data collection methods by the responding fire departments. As an example 

of a nonsampling error, most of the fires included in the survey took place in highly 

populated, residential areas, because the fire departments selected for the surveys are 

primarily public fire departments that protect sizable residential populations. Fires that 

occur in sparsely populated areas protected primarily by state and federal departments 

of forestry are not likely to be included in the survey results.

The NFPA Fire Incident Data Organization database was also used in conjunction with the 

annual survey to help identify any large loss fires or deaths that the survey might have 

missed. The editors of the survey data attempted to verify all reported civilian deaths 

in vehicle fires. They contacted most of the fire departments that reported fire-related 

deaths in vehicles and found that many of the deaths were indeed the results of fire. In 

some instances, however, impact was found to have been the cause of death. This effort 

can have a considerable impact on the estimates.

The results presented in this report are based on fire incidents attended by public fire 

departments. No adjustments were made for unreported fires and losses (e.g., fires 

extinguished by the occupant). Also, no adjustments were made for fires attended solely 

by private fire brigades (e.g., industry and military installations) or for fires extinguished 

by fixed suppression systems with no fire department response.

Fire Experience of Nonrespondents

A telephone follow-up was made to a sample of nonrespondents to determine whether fire 

departments that did not respond to the survey experienced fire loss rates similar to those 

that did respond. This would help the NFPA determine whether we received questionnaires 

only from departments that had experienced unusually high or low fire losses.

The sample of nonrespondents selected was proportional by state and population of 

community to the original sample selected for the survey. As a result of these efforts, 

155 fire departments were successfully contacted and answered some of the questions 

about their fire experience. 

For communities of 100,000 to 249,999, the rates for respondents and nonrespondents 

were similar for deaths — the respondent rate was 55 percent higher for civilian deaths, 

and 102 percent higher for property loss, while the nonrespondent rate was 12 percent 

higher for fires. The result for property loss was statistically significant.
National Fire Protection Association Survey 81

For communities of 50,000 to 99,999, the respondent rate was 61 percent higher for 

civilian deaths and 45 percent higher for property loss, while the nonrespondent rate 

was 18 percent higher for fires. The result for property loss was statistically significant.

For communities of 25,000 to 49,999, the respondent rate was 112 percent higher for 

civilian deaths and 10 percent higher for property loss, while the nonrespondent rate 

was 48 percent higher for fires. Results for fires and deaths were statistically significant.

For communities of 10,000 to 24,999, the respondent rate was 20 percent higher for 

civilian deaths and 11 percent higher for property loss, while the nonrespondent rate 

was 12 percent higher for fires. None of these results were statistically significant.

For communities of 5,000 to 9,999, the nonrespondent rate was 50 percent higher for 

fires, while the respondent rate was 21 percent higher for property loss. Neither of these 

results was statistically significant.
82 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Resources

Several resources are available that provide more detailed documentation on the NFIRS 

system and using the NFIRS data. The “National Fire Incident Reporting System Complete 

Reference Guide” provides instructions for reporting data to the NFIRS, as well as an 

understanding of the data elements collected by the system. It also serves as a reference 

for the coding of the data.

The “National Fire Incident Reporting System Version 5.0 Fire Data Analysis Guidelines 

and Issues” discusses analytic considerations and methods of analyzing fire incident data 

using the NFIRS data. The topics include the NFIRS 5.0 data structure, general quality 

assurance (QA) issues, and definitions and parameters of common fire analyses (e.g., 

residential structure fires or fires by a specific cause). The methods, techniques and 

considerations discussed are those used by USFA analysts and do not necessarily reflect 

methods, techniques and considerations used by fire data analysts from other agencies 

and organizations. NFIRS data partners may (and do) employ their own methods for 

analyzing the data and may make differing assumptions when encountering data issues.

The “National Estimates Approach to U.S. Fire Statistics” is the original methodology 

for creating estimates of the U.S. fire problem using the NFPA annual survey of fire 

departments and the NFIRS data. The authors present a detailed consensus procedure 

for such calculations and the supporting rationale. “National Estimates Methodology for 

Building Fires and Losses” is the USFA’s application of the national estimates approach to 

building fires and fire losses. It details USFA’s current fire data estimation methodology 

for all building fires (i.e., residential and nonresidential) and associated losses.

The “USFA Data Sources and Methodology Documentation” provides an in-depth 

discussion of the data sources and the methodologies used to incorporate this data into 

fire analyses. The “Fire Data Analysis Handbook” is a resource for those unfamiliar with 

basic data analysis techniques and their applicability to fire data based analyses.

Lastly, NFIRSGrams, short bulletins that provide coding help to fire department personnel 

using the NFIRS, address frequently asked questions and common mistakes made when 

completing incident forms. NFIRSGrams also help NFIRS users to better understand their 

impact on the quality of the information from the NFIRS at the local, state and national levels.

These resources are listed below:

ĵ Hall, J. & Harwood, B. (1989). The national estimates approach to U.S. fire statistics. 

Fire Technology, 25(2), 99–113. Retrieved from http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/files/newsand-research/fire-statistics/latest-estimates/nationalestimatesapproach.pdf?la=en

ĵ NFIRSGrams. Retrieved from https://www.usfa.fema.gov/data/nfirs/support/training.html

ĵ USFA. (2004). Fire data analysis handbook, (2nd ed.). Retrieved from https://www.usfa.

fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/fa-266.pdf

ĵ USFA. (2011). National fire incident reporting system version 5.0 fire data analysis 

guidelines and issues. Retrieved from https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/

nfirs/ nfirs_data_analysis_guidelines_issues.pdf
Resources 83

ĵ USFA. (2012). National estimates methodology for building fires and losses. Retrieved from 

https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/national_estimate_ methodology.pdf

ĵ USFA. (2013). National fire incident reporting system complete reference guide. Retrieved 

from http://www.nfirs.fema.gov/documentation/reference/

ĵ USFA. (2014). USFA data sources and methodology documentation. Retrieved from https://

www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/data_sources_methodology.pdf
84 Review and Assessment of Data Quality in the National Fire Incident Reporting System

Acronyms

AES Automatic Extinguishing System

CPSC Consumer Product Safety Commission

CRG Complete Reference Guide

DEBI Data Entry Browser Interface

EMS Emergency Medical Services

FSI Fire Service Inventory

NASFM National Association of State Fire Marshals

NFA National Fire Academy

NFDC National Fire Data Center

NFIRS National Fire Incident Reporting System

NFPA National Fire Protection Association

OMB Office of Management and Budget

PDR Public Data Release

PRA Paperwork Reduction Act

USFA U.S. Fire Administration