Villella Sees National Academy Doing More to Fulfill Fire Service Needs
With the advent of the Reagan administration, the rumor mill began to grind out prophesies regarding the future of the National Fire Academy at Emmitsburg, Md. The designation of the Emmitsburg campus (shared by the National Fire Academy and the Emergency Management Institute) as the National Emergency Training Center fostered more predictions mostly unfettered by facts.
To find out where the National Fire Academy is really headed, Fire Engineering’s editor, Dick Sylvia, talked with Fred J. Villella, Federal Emergency Management Administration associate director of training and education, who is in charge of the National Emergency Training Center and is taking an active role in National Fire Academy affairs.
Villella came to FEMA from the California Specialized Training Institute, which had been headed by Louis O. Giuffrida, now director of FEMA. Villella not only voiced his own interest in the fire service, but also said that Giuffrida had a strong commitment to the fire service.
Q. Are you planning any policy changes you feel are needed in the operation of the National Fire Academy?
A. Well, it’s easy to say no policy changes, but I’m not sure what that encompasses. I think some of the changes that will take place will be related to the delivery mechanisms. We’re trying to examine how we can take the limited resources we have and deliver more in the field programs area or through the states. There certainly is a policy change in the organizational setting which will be more efficient, and while it’s efficient, it will also be more responsive. So I think that there will be some improvements.
It would be easy for me to say no policy changes, but I think, for example, we’re going to approach the evaluation system differently so that it’s more responsive. We’re examining how we can produce better curriculum cheaply—and I mean better. So there may be a policy change in how curriculum is developed.
Q. In this area, do you feel that you will give more or less emphasis to the Academy’s outreach programs?
A. Oh, more not an unequal—amount of emphasis. We’re going to emphasize both the resident and outreach areas. The director (FEMA Director Louis O. Giuffrida) said to enhance and improve the quality of resident training and, in the field programs, to increase the outreach training. We are now looking at some policy recommendations.
There’s no question that Giuffrida’s decision, which was supported by the White House, to create this center (National Emergency Training Center) is absolutely the right thing to do. W’e are seeing things already.
Q. What would you cite as an example of this improvement?
A. There are several things of a small nature in a short period of time. We’ve seen dollar savings in using some of the resources of the Emergency Management Institute. For example, they have some equipment that had come from Battle Creek that the Fire Academy did not have. So by centralizing that, there are more sophisticated resources available to the Fire Academy. Conversely, the Fire Academy is providing some assistance to the Emergency Management Institute.
We know that we’re going to be able to produce more and get higher quality by consolidating some services. We’ve already consolidated student services, administration, and facility operations.
Q. You bring up one of the areas that has been a sensitive point in the fire service for a long time. The fire service feels that the civil defense people, who outnumber the fire service, may eventually dominate the fire service programs.
A. Now that’s funny, civil defense people feel the same way about the fire service.
Q. Well, that’s probably healthy then.
A. I think that with this establishment the way it is and the sensitivity that the director has for the fire service’s training, 1 think what you’ll see is training. You’re not going to see turf battles. Our approach will be equal representation in raising the state of emergency preparedness.
Q. One of the problems that arose between the states and the Academy was the relationship with the state directors of training. What is your view on cooperation between the Academy and the state directors?
A. Well, as a matter of fact, we’ve already opened up dialogues. We have a good dialogue—and it works—with fire service instructors because after all that’s our purpose—to propagate training and professional development.
We’re now looking to greater dialogue with the state directors. 1 was aware before I came here—because educating and training has been my business for years and years—that there are different needs for different states. There are different facilities available. It’s not consistent across the states. You cannot absolutely say that the National Fire Academy should not do this training, that it should be done in the states, because some of the states have no academies. We’re sensitive to that. That’s been a part of the discussions we’ve had with the state directors.
Q. How are you going to do as far as your budget is concerned under the new administration?
A. We will have no dimunition of budget of any significance under the new administration.
Q. Do you feel that’s adequate for what you’re going to do?
A. Sure. Oh, we could have twice as much, but we have only a certain capacity. I’m not sure that the states would want us to do much more.
Q. Which sometimes makes for a good long cooperation if they’re sensible about it.
A. It’s a love-hate relationship. I think it’s important for you to repeat categorically, unequivocably if you will, this administration does support the National Academy effort and that my being here is a signal of that. I think you will see some other very clear signals in the future.
Q. There have been some comments from the fire service that things here were going to diminish.
A. You know that’s unfortunate that people react to rumbles and rumors. I think I’ve said a thousand times—to the fire service especially—if you hear a rumor, call me and let me tell you if there’s any substance to it. There should be no anxiety about the future of the National Fire Academy.
Q. The more the federal government puts into this property, the more likely the National Fire Academy will stay.
A. You say that with some trepidation. There’s no fear that during the Reagan administration the National Fire Academy will diminish in any respect. I think you already know about the accredidation (by the American Council on Education) for 50 credit semester hours.
Q. Mr. Giuffrida has said that the National Fire Academy will retain its identity. Do you feel that the Academy will increase its influence on the fire service as a separate entity?
A. Yes, I’m convinced that the National Fire Academy will increase its influence in the training area and in professional development—no question about that. And it will definitely maintain its identity. I guess the way we view it here, we have sort of a university with two schools, if you will. It’s no different, designwise, from a university school of humanities or a school of economics or school of engineering.
We think we have the potential for saving several hundred thousand dollars—$200,000 to $300,000—just by consolidating our people here. That seems like a small figure, but that’s just what we see right now. We say, tongue in cheek, that we will get a million dollars worth more out of it by the savings.
Q. Actually, your travel costs are a major item in your operating budget.
A. What Bill (William F. Seifried, deputy superintendent for administrative services) has done is to get people into the special savings flights. What normally cost $600 to $900 to come from the West Coast is now costing right under $300. That alone is going to save a bunch of money and increase the capability of people on the West Coast to come.
Seifried made a study of air fare costs from November 1980 to May 1981 and found that the inflation rate for air fares was 11 percent for that period of time. He reported that while inflation rose 11 percent, the Academy’s air fare cost through the average stipend for travel dropped 28 percent.
That’s quite a turnaround. You might call that the Reagan administration respect for costs. Of course, that also applies when we sent people out to deliver field programs.
Q. How are you progressing in getting volunteers to the Academy?
Seifried fielded this question and said:
“We’re getting an increasing number of people. I think the last student profile we developed covering the second cycle of instruction at the Academy showed the highest number of volunteer fire personnel participating in the resident program and that was 14 percent. To further expand on that, we run a weekend learning opportunity program and that attracts approximately 53 percent volunteers. The latest figure tends to bear out your observation that it’s hard for them to come during the business week. At times we schedule resident courses so that a five-day course includes a weekend and only three business days. We start some 10-day courses on a weekend and end it on a weekend, so to include only five business days.”
Q. Have you considered any changes in the role of the Academy’s board of visitors?
A. Giuffrida has directed me to enhance the participation of the board of visitors. We’re having a meeting next week, Monday, and I think that’s the first meet ing we’ll have in six months. I’m sure that will make them feel closer to us. We are giving greater attention to the board of visitor’s role and we are expanding the l)oard of visitors to give them an advisory committee, which permits greater participation among a variety of professions related to the fire service. We have some nationally respected university professionals deans, presidents of colleges—and people from volunteer fire service and paid service.
Q. That should make the Academy more responsive to the fire service.
A. Absolutely, in what you have identified as the administrative area, I suppose I call it the professional management area, some of the latest capabilities, the most contemporary resources and advances within the training and education area will be available here at the National Fire Academy to fire service management professionals. Rather than just float through and do just a token job, I try to gather a good group with rapport and then I put them to work.
I think it needs to be said that this is a young institution. It’s embryonic, and what has been accomplished here by a dedicated staff, and I don’t use that term loosely —I mean truly dedicated—and by dedicated people throughout the country who had a piece of the action in molding the growth of this institution is a very significant factor.
There’s a lot of people who contributed to it—blood, sweat and tears, if you will. I think that to me, its significance is one whale of a lot of stuff that’s gotten accomplished here for a few dollars. I think you have to say categorically that this is the best thing for the federal buck I’ve seen in a long time. The people who helped put this thing together deserve a lot of credit. And they need to get that.
Q. I think that’s one of the great assets of this institution, that it does have access to a lot out in the field.
A. There’s a lot of things that need improvement. I think the fact that there are 18 courses in the resident program on line right now in less than two years is something close to phenomenal. It’s an awful lot of work. I’m sure some need improvement—need a little more massaging—but they’re getting that.
The growth has been so fantastic in such a short period of time. You just don’t do that kind of thing in government every day. This thing spurted up, and some seeds took and some seeds didn’t take. From what I’ve seen in my professional training career, there is a tremendous, tremendous potential that has yet to be seen—especially with the support from Washington.
I told the first class that graduated after I’d been here just a couple of weeks that for me it was very professionally rewarding and a good personal experience to share the humanity of the fire service professional. They truly are a good bunch of people to be around, and I know I will continue to enjoy it.
