The 2026 Fire Safety Readiness Benchmark Report

From assumed compliance to evidence-based readiness

75survey respondents across 8 industries

34%spend 11+ hours a week on compliance tasks

47%aren't fully confident they can produce training completion evidence

64%manage six or more sites

79%are likely or very likely to invest in safety and compliance improvement over the next 12–24 months

Fire safety is important… but is it ready?

Fire safety is rarely dismissed as unimportant. The challenge is that it often becomes urgent only when an audit, incident, building change or regulatory shift forces action.

This benchmark report explores the gap between assumed compliance and evidence-based readiness, drawing on survey findings, customer conversation insights and Locatrix's experience working with organisations managing complex buildings, workforces and compliance obligations.

Why we listened – A message from our CEO

At Locatrix, our purpose has always been simple: to help organisations protect people by making fire safety and emergency readiness easier to understand, manage and maintain.

Every day, we work with people who carry significant responsibility. Safety, compliance, facilities and emergency management teams are expected to keep plans current, train staff, manage records, support audits and make sure people know what to do when it matters. Often, they're doing this across complex buildings, multiple sites, changing workforces and competing operational priorities.

What we hear from customers is clear: fire safety isn't seen as unimportant. The challenge is that it can be difficult to prioritise until something creates urgency, such as an audit, a building change, a regulatory update or an incident.

That's one of the reasons we created this inaugural report. It brings together survey findings, customer conversation insights and the real-world experience Locatrix has gained working with organisations across sectors including healthcare, aged care, retail, government, education and service providers.

Our aim is to provide useful evidence that helps people see where fire safety readiness is strong, where gaps may exist, and where practical improvements can make the biggest difference.

We believe good decisions need good information. For safety and compliance leaders, that means having facts, insights and examples they can use to explain risk, build internal support and make informed choices about where to invest time, effort and budget.

We hope this report helps start those conversations.

Most importantly, we hope it supports the people doing this work every day – the people responsible for keeping buildings ready, records current and people safe.

Thank you to everyone who shared their experience, insight and perspective. Your input helps the whole industry learn.

Scott Jackson, CEO, LocatrixAugust 2026

The readiness reality check

Confidence is high. Evidence is harder to prove.

Many organisations feel confident in their fire safety processes. That confidence is often well earned: safety, compliance and facilities teams are doing the work, managing competing priorities and keeping fire safety moving across complex environments.

But confidence can also hide risk.

8.2

In the benchmark survey, respondents rated their confidence in floor plan accuracy at an average of 8.2 out of 10.

Yet 22% said plans are updated three months or more after a building change, rarely, or only before audits.

That gap matters.

Fire safety readiness isn't just about whether plans, diagrams, training and records exist. It's whether they're current, visible and ready to prove when pressure arrives.

This is the confidence–reality gap. It appears when organisations believe they're ready, but the systems, evidence or information behind that readiness are harder to access, update or verify than expected.

It also sits behind the five readiness gaps explored in this report: proof, knowledge, currency, visibility and priority.

Ask yourself

If an auditor, executive or emergency services team asked tomorrow, could we quickly show:

which plans and diagrams are current?
who has completed training?
where gaps still exist?
what changed after the last building update?
who is responsible for keeping this information up to date?

If the answer is unclear, confidence may be higher than readiness.

Survey dashboard: who we heard from

A cross-section of people managing fire safety across complex environments.

By role: 80% of respondents work in safety, compliance, facilities, property or emergency management roles, with WHS/Safety the largest single group at 40%
By industry: Respondents came from 8 industries, with Government/Council the largest segment at 23%
By complexity: 64% manage six or more sites, while 48% oversee 50–499 staff and 24% oversee 500+ staff

Together, this gives the benchmark a practical view of the people responsible for keeping fire safety current, visible and ready to prove across real-world environments.

Survey dashboard: what the benchmark survey really tells us

The benchmark shows fire safety is valued, but readiness is uneven – especially when organisations need current information, clear evidence and practical confidence across multiple sites.

Fire safety matters to the people responsible for itSurvey respondents recognise the importance of fire safety and emergency preparedness. The challenge is keeping it visible when other operational demands compete for time, budget and attention.
Multi-site complexity is the everyday realityMany respondents are managing fire safety across multiple buildings, public-facing environments and changing workforces. That makes consistency harder to maintain manually.
Evidence is becoming just as important as activityTraining may be happening, but organisations still need to prove completion, track records and show compliance quickly when asked.
Current information is a practical challengeFloor plans, evacuation diagrams and emergency information can quickly fall behind when buildings change, sites move, or responsibilities are split across teams and providers.
Investment is coming, but it needs a clearer caseMany organisations are looking to improve fire safety and compliance over the next 12–24 months. The opportunity is to help safety leaders explain where investment will make the biggest difference.

The hidden cost of manual compliance

34%

of respondents spend 11+ hours a week on fire safety compliance tasks.

For many teams, that time isn't spent improving readiness. It's spent chasing records, checking spreadsheets, updating static documents and preparing reports.

Manual processes can work when things are stable. They become harder to rely on when buildings change, staff move, contractors rotate or evidence needs to be produced quickly.

The risk: work may be happening, but the evidence is harder to find, trust and act on.

How do you compare?

The benchmark isn't designed to rank organisations. It's designed to help safety, compliance and facilities teams ask better questions about their own readiness.

Across the survey:

34% of respondents spend 11+ hours a week on fire safety compliance tasks
47% aren't fully confident they can produce training completion evidence
64% manage six or more sites
79% are likely or very likely to invest in safety and compliance improvement over the next 12–24 months

Ask yourself:

Are we spending more or less time than the benchmark on compliance administration?
Are we more or less confident in our ability to produce evidence quickly?
Are our sites easier or harder to manage consistently?
Are we planning improvement before pressure arrives – or waiting for an audit, incident or regulatory change?

These questions are a starting point. The sections that follow explore the five readiness gaps behind the numbers and where practical improvements can make the biggest difference.

What changed when we listened more deeply

The survey showed what organisations are managing. Customer conversations helped explain why fire safety readiness can be so hard to maintain in practice.

29%

One signal stood out: 29% of respondents gave a confidence score of 6 out of 10 or below when asked whether evacuation diagrams displayed across their organisation are accurate and current. Customer conversations helped explain why these gaps appear, with organisations describing manual updates, scattered documentation and uncertainty over who owns the latest version.

The conversations added important context to the benchmark survey findings:

Confidence can hide effortMany organisations feel reasonably confident in their fire safety processes, but that confidence often depends on manual work behind the scenes: chasing records, checking documents, updating spreadsheets and preparing for audits
Manual processes are carrying too much riskPDFs, shared drives, spreadsheets and disconnected systems can work when things are stable. They become harder to rely on when buildings change, staff move, contractors rotate or evidence needs to be produced quickly
Responsibility is often spread across too many placesFire safety can sit across safety, facilities, property, operations, site managers and external providers. Without clear visibility, it's easy for gaps to appear between who owns the task and who can prove it's been done
Training completion isn't the same as readinessCustomer conversations reinforced a clear point: completing training doesn't always mean people understand what to do in their own building, their own zone or their own role during an emergency
Investment needs a clearer caseFire safety is important, but it often competes with other operational priorities. To secure time, budget and attention, safety leaders need practical evidence that shows where improvements will reduce risk, save time and strengthen readiness

Together, the survey findings and customer conversations point to five readiness gaps shaping fire safety across Australian organisations.

The five readiness gaps

Together, the survey findings and customer conversations point to five readiness gaps shaping fire safety across Australian organisations:

1 The proof gap Can organisations quickly produce the records, training evidence and compliance information they need when asked?

2 The knowledge gap Do staff, contractors and wardens know what to do in their own building, role or emergency scenario?

3 The currency gap Are floor plans, evacuation diagrams and emergency procedures current as buildings, teams and risks change?

4 The visibility gap Can leaders see fire safety readiness clearly across sites, systems, teams and responsibilities?

5 The priority gap How can safety teams help fire safety move up the priority list before an audit, incident or regulatory change forces action?

Insight 1: The proof gap

Can you prove what's been done when it matters?

Benchmark signal

47% of survey respondents aren't fully confident they can produce training completion evidence. Customer conversations also showed that 57% cited manual compliance tracking as a pain point.

Fire safety training and compliance activity may be happening across an organisation. The harder question is whether it can be proven quickly and confidently when someone asks.

Records may exist, but if they sit across spreadsheets, shared drives, manual files or disconnected systems, they can be difficult to produce when audits, reporting or leadership questions create pressure.

What this gap looks like

The proof gap often appears when:

training records exist, but are difficult to access quickly
completion data sits separately from site-specific emergency information
reports have to be manually compiled before audits or reviews
teams know work has been done, but can't easily show the evidence
leaders can't see completion, gaps or follow-up actions clearly

The issue isn't usually a lack of effort. It's that the effort is hard to see.

Why it matters

When evidence is hard to produce, fire safety becomes harder to explain, prioritise and manage proactively.

Teams spend time chasing records and preparing reports, instead of improving readiness.

The proof gap: what good looks like

Organisations closing the proof gap are moving towards systems that make training and compliance evidence:

current: updated as people, buildings and roles change
visible: easy to see across sites, teams and responsibilities
reportable: ready for audits, leadership updates and internal reviews
site-specific: connected to the actual building, procedures and risks people need to understand
easy to act on: highlighting gaps before they become urgent.

Queensland Children's Health

Proof in practice

Improving training visibility, completion and reporting at scale

With around 6,500 permanent staff and up to 10,000 contractors and volunteers across 85 sites, all working different shifts, this hospital environment is complex and fast paced.

By moving emergency training online through PlanSafe®, Queensland Children's Health increased training compliance from 30–40% to approximately 86%, reduced training time from 90 minutes face-to-face to around 20–30 minutes online, and made reporting that previously took at least six hours almost instantly accessible.

“Reporting used to take six or seven hours to pull together. Now we can access what we need almost instantly.”

Tony Dagan, Manager, Fire Safety Advisory & Assurance Unit, Queensland Children's Health

Using PlanSafe®, reporting has been transformed to deliver better training visibility, completion and reporting at scale.

Read the full case study

A question to ask internally:

If someone asked tomorrow, how quickly could we show who has completed fire safety training, where gaps remain and whether our records are current?

Insight 2: The knowledge gap

Do people know what to do in their own building?

Benchmark signal

31% of survey respondents weren't highly confident that staff and contractors know what to do in an emergency. Customer conversations also showed that staff emergency response and warden role knowledge gaps remain a common issue.

Completing training matters, but readiness depends on whether people understand what to do in their own building, role and emergency scenario.

Training completion can show that a module has been finished. It doesn't always show whether someone is ready to act.

What this gap looks like

The knowledge gap often appears when:

training is generic rather than site-specific
staff complete induction modules but don't understand local procedures
contractors, casuals or new starters move through sites without consistent training
wardens are unclear on their zones, roles or responsibilities
different sites use different training content, providers or processes
completion is tracked, but understanding isn't tested or reinforced

The issue isn't whether people care. It's whether training is practical enough to guide action when it matters.

Why it matters

In an emergency, people need to know what to do, where to go, who to listen to and how their role fits into the response.

When training isn't site-specific, organisations can end up with a false sense of readiness. Records may show completion, but that doesn't always mean people feel confident or capable in the moment.

The knowledge gap: what good looks like

Organisations closing the knowledge gap are moving towards training that is:

site-specific: connected to the actual building, diagrams, exits and emergency procedures
role-aware: helping staff, contractors and wardens understand what's expected of them
consistent: delivered in a standard way across sites, teams and locations
accessible: easy to complete for shift workers, contractors, new starters and distributed teams
practical: focused on what people need to know and do, not just what they need to complete.

Central Queensland University

Knowledge in practice

Site-specific training across 20 campuses

Central Queensland University is the largest regional university in Australia, with more than 20 locations and students from over 85 countries. More than 16,000 students study on campus, and a team of six oversees safety processes across all 20 campuses.

PlanSafe® delivers site-specific online training — general and first response, ECO, contractors, students and practical workspace inductions — and helps the team keep building records current and communicated to all occupants.

“I use Locatrix PlanSafe because my compliance percentage went from under 50% to over 90% compliant.”

Dana O'Brien, Safety and Wellbeing Manager, Central Queensland University

For a team overseeing campuses nationwide, being able to update and communicate building or emergency changes through the online training platform keeps training aligned to each site as buildings change.

Read the full case study

A question to ask internally:

If an emergency happened today, would our staff, contractors and wardens know what to do in their specific building – not just in theory, but in practice?

Insight 3: The currency gap

Are your plans and diagrams keeping up with change?

Benchmark signal

Respondents rated confidence in floor plan accuracy at 8.2 out of 10, but 22% said plans are updated three months or more after a building change, rarely, or only before audits.

The survey also found 29% gave a confidence score of 6 out of 10 or below when asked whether evacuation diagrams displayed across their organisation are accurate and current.

Fire safety information is only useful if it reflects the building as it is today. Floor plans, evacuation diagrams and emergency procedures can quickly fall out of date as rooms are reconfigured, tenants move, equipment is added, or responsibilities shift between teams and providers.

This is where confidence and reality can start to separate. Plans may exist. Diagrams may be displayed. But if they don't reflect the current building, they may create a false sense of readiness.

What this gap looks like

The currency gap often appears when:

floor plans are stored as PDFs, printed diagrams or static files
updates depend on external providers or manual drafting processes
evacuation diagrams don't reflect recent building changes
fire safety assets move, but diagrams and records aren't updated quickly
different sites hold different versions of plans, diagrams or procedures

The issue isn't always that information is missing. It's that no one can be fully confident it's still current.

Why it matters

Outdated information can weaken training, compliance evidence and emergency response.

If plans, diagrams or procedures no longer reflect the real environment, people may be trained on the wrong information — and teams may not discover the gap until an audit, inspection or incident creates pressure.

Keeping information current isn't just a documentation task. It's part of maintaining readiness.

The currency gap: what good looks like

Organisations closing the currency gap are moving towards systems and processes that make fire safety information:

live: updated as buildings, layouts and assets change
centralised: managed from one reliable source of truth
easy to update: reducing reliance on slow or costly external processes for routine changes
connected: linking floor plans, evacuation diagrams, training and compliance information
trusted: giving teams confidence that what people see, use and report on reflects the current building.

James Cook University

Currency in practice

Reducing floor plan updates from months to as little as one hour

Before adopting PlanStudio®, James Cook University's floor plan and evacuation diagram updates could take up to six months, with plans physically checked, marked up, sent to external providers and reviewed through multiple rounds of revisions.

With PlanStudio®, the university can now update building diagrams directly. Simple updates can be completed in under an hour, while more complex additions can be completed in around a week rather than months.

“What once took months can now be completed in a week — and simple updates can be done in under an hour.”

Zac Holland, WHS Support Officer (Fire & Emergency), James Cook University

Because PlanStudio® integrates with PlanSafe®, updated plans and building information can flow into training content, helping ensure staff training remains accurate and site-specific.

Read the full case study

A question to ask internally:

When our buildings change, how quickly can we update the plans, diagrams and training information people rely on?

Insight 4: The visibility gap

Can you see readiness across every site?

Benchmark signal

64% of survey respondents manage six or more sites. Customer conversations also showed fragmented ownership, scattered documentation and manual compliance tracking can make readiness harder to see across locations.

Fire safety work is often happening across an organisation. The challenge is knowing what's current, what's missing and what needs attention.

For many safety, compliance and facilities teams, information sits across training systems, shared drives, spreadsheets, contractor reports, evacuation diagrams, floor plans and site-based records.

Each part may be managed carefully. But without a central view, it becomes harder to compare readiness across sites.

What this gap looks like

The visibility gap often appears when:

different sites manage fire safety in different ways
training records, diagrams and compliance documents sit in separate systems
leaders can't easily see completion, gaps or risk areas across locations
teams rely on manual reports to understand readiness
contractors or external providers hold important information outside the organisation
compliance status only becomes clear during audits, reviews or incidents

The issue isn't always that work isn't happening. It's that the work is difficult to see, compare and manage across the organisation.

Why it matters

Without visibility, fire safety becomes harder to manage proactively.

Teams spend time chasing information instead of improving readiness. Leaders may miss emerging gaps or underestimate the effort involved. And when information is spread across too many places, it becomes harder to make confident decisions about where to focus time, budget and support.

Visibility helps turn fire safety from a collection of site-level tasks into a clearer picture of organisational readiness.

The visibility gap: what good looks like

Organisations closing the visibility gap are moving towards systems and processes that make fire safety readiness:

centralised: bringing key information together across sites and teams
consistent: reducing local variation in how training, records and procedures are managed
easy to monitor: showing completion, gaps and follow-up actions clearly
accessible: helping the right people find the right information when they need it
useful for decision-making: giving leaders the evidence they need to prioritise improvements.

National Storage

Visibility in practice

Creating consistent building data across 200+ sites

National Storage needed a more scalable way to manage building floor plans across more than 200 facilities in Australia and New Zealand. Before adopting PlanStudio®, the organisation faced inconsistent floor plans, difficulty maintaining accurate records of building layouts and storage units, and no centralised system for managing interactive site maps and building data.

With PlanStudio®, National Storage can now maintain accurate digital floor plans across 200+ facilities, provide interactive maps for customers and staff, manage building data centrally, and use spatial data for asset management, evacuation planning and facility navigation.

“Not only do we get maps of all 200+ of National Storage's sites, but these maps are interactive, accurate and easily accessed and maintained by National Storage. This gives us control over our own building data and allows us to use the information for many purposes, including asset unit management, fire and evacuation maps and way finding to storage units.”

Aimeé Sibbald, Operations Projects Manager, National Storage

For National Storage, better visibility of building data supported more than compliance. It created a clearer, more consistent foundation for safety, customer navigation and operational planning across a large multi-site portfolio.

Read the full case study

A question to ask internally:

Can we see fire safety readiness clearly across every site, or are we relying on people to manually piece the picture together?

Insight 5: The priority gap

How do you make fire safety easier to prioritise before pressure arrives?

Benchmark signal

79% of respondents are likely or very likely to invest in safety and compliance improvement over the next 12–24 months. But customer conversations showed that budget approval, competing priorities and the need for clearer business cases can still slow action.

Fire safety is rarely ignored because people don't care. More often, it competes with urgent operational priorities, limited budgets and stretched teams.

That makes it harder to secure investment before an audit, incident, building change or regulatory update creates pressure.

What this gap looks like

The priority gap often appears when:

fire safety is recognised as important, but sits behind other operational projects
investment is delayed until an audit, incident or compliance change creates urgency
safety teams know where the gaps are, but struggle to build the internal case
leaders underestimate the time spent on manual compliance work
familiar systems continue, even when they're inefficient

The issue isn't usually awareness. It's turning awareness into action.

Why it matters

When fire safety only becomes urgent under pressure, teams are forced into reactive mode.

That can mean scrambling for records, rushing updates, chasing training completion or trying to explain risk without the evidence needed to support investment.

The organisations making progress are often the ones that can show the practical value of improvement: less manual work, faster updates, stronger evidence, clearer reporting and more confidence across sites.

The priority gap: what good looks like

Organisations closing the priority gap are finding ways to make fire safety:

easier to explain: using clear evidence, not just compliance language
easier to quantify: showing time saved, costs reduced and risks made visible
easier to compare: understanding gaps across sites, teams and systems
easier to act on: identifying practical next steps, not just broad obligations
easier to fund: linking investment to efficiency, confidence and readiness.

Locatrix insight: ‘Readiness washing’

Readiness washing is the appearance of preparedness without the systems, evidence or visibility needed to prove readiness in practice.

Ozcare

Priority in practice

Keeping fire safety visible across 50+ aged care and community sites

Ozcare is a leading not-for-profit provider of aged care, home care, disability support, retirement living and hospital services, with more than 4,000 staff across 50+ sites.

For more than 15 years, Ozcare has used PlanSafe® to deliver site and role-specific fire evacuation training across its locations. Training is accessible through the organisation's intranet, making it easier for shift workers, agency staff, volunteers and day staff to complete when needed.

With PlanSafe®, Ozcare can manage training at site level, access real-time dashboard reporting, receive alerts when training is due, and keep current and historical records available in one place.

“I can then see via the dashboard who has completed the training and receive alerts when training is due, and every record, current and historical is available whenever I need it.”

Tyson Fitzpatrick, Project Manager, Major Works & Fire and Safety, Ozcare

PlanSafe® also acts as a central repository for site-specific fire compliance documentation, including Occupier Statements, Condition Reports and Annual Evacuation Outcomes. For Ozcare, this helps keep fire safety visible, current and measurable across a large, distributed care environment.

Ozcare has now trained more than 68,000 people through PlanSafe®, showing how fire safety can become part of everyday operations rather than something that only becomes urgent when an audit, inspection or incident creates pressure.

Read the full case study

A question to ask internally:

What would help us keep fire safety visible, current and measurable all year – not just when an audit or incident creates urgency?

Regulatory landscape: obligations made practical

Understanding what needs to stay current, visible and ready to prove

Fire safety obligations vary by state, territory, building type and use. Depending on the organisation, relevant requirements may include workplace health and safety duties, state-based fire safety regulations, building requirements, emergency planning standards and sector-specific obligations.

This benchmarking report isn't intended to replace formal compliance advice. Instead, it focuses on the practical challenge many organisations face: understanding what needs to be managed, keeping information current and being able to produce evidence when it matters.

Across the regulatory landscape, obligations often come back to a few connected areas:

Plans and procedures: emergency information should reflect the workplace and help people understand what to do
Evacuation diagrams and signs: diagrams should be accurate, visible and aligned to the current building
Training and instruction: staff, contractors and wardens need to understand their roles and responsibilities
Records and evidence: training, evacuation practice, maintenance and review records should be available when required
Maintenance and review: plans, diagrams, systems and information need to keep pace with change
Emerging risks: new hazards, including lithium-ion batteries and EV charging, are changing the fire safety profile of many buildings.

Our message is simple: compliance is easier to manage when obligations are understood, information is current, records are visible and people know what to do.

Locatrix insight:

“It's not about whether a plan exists. It's about whether people can actually carry it out when it matters.”

Kimberley Probert, Fire Safety Assessor, Locatrix

Read our blog: The Gap No Audit Can Close: What a Fire Safety Assessor looks for in aged care facilities

Examples of relevant laws, regulations, standards and frameworks

Depending on state, territory, building type and use, organisations may need to consider:

Model Work Health and Safety laws – Safe Work Australia states that, under model WHS laws, all workplaces must have an emergency plan in place, and that emergency plans should be easy to access, reviewed and updated regularly
State and territory fire safety regulations – for example, Queensland's Building Fire Safety Regulation 2008 includes requirements relating to fire and evacuation plans, fire safety management procedures and prescribed fire safety installations
AS 1851-2012 – Routine service of fire protection systems and equipment – the Australian Standard that sets requirements for the routine servicing of fire protection systems and equipment. In NSW, AS 1851-2012 became mandatory for relevant buildings from 13 February 2026
AS 3745:2010 – Planning for emergencies in facilities – the Australian Standard for emergency planning in facilities. Fire and Rescue NSW notes that, in most cases, a workplace should prepare, maintain and implement its emergency plan in accordance with AS 3745–2010
AS 4083-2010 – Planning for emergencies in healthcare facilities – the Australian Standard that sets out procedures for healthcare facilities in planning for, and responding to, internal and external emergencies, including emergency colour codes
National Construction Code / Building Code requirements – relevant to building design, construction, fire safety systems and ongoing building compliance, depending on building type and jurisdiction
Sector-specific obligations – including requirements that may apply in healthcare, aged care, education, government, high-occupancy, public-facing or complex facilities.

Timely example

From 13 February 2026, AS 1851-2012 became mandatory for relevant NSW buildings, creating clearer expectations around routine service, inspection, testing, maintenance and records for essential fire safety measures. As our NSW guide explains, the reforms don't create these gaps; they make them more visible.

Read our blog: NSW Fire Safety Reforms: The who's who
Complete our checklist: NSW Fire Safety Reforms 2026 compliance checklist

This report doesn't replace formal compliance advice. Its focus is practical: helping organisations understand what needs to stay current, visible and ready to prove when required.

Industry signals

The same readiness gaps appear across sectors, but they don't always look the same.

Across the benchmark survey, customer conversations and Locatrix's work with organisations, several sector-specific pressure points stood out. These signals are directional rather than exhaustive, but they show how fire safety readiness is shaped by the buildings, people, operating models and obligations each sector manages.

Industry	What we're seeing	What matters most
Aged care and community services	High vulnerability, complex evacuation needs, staff turnover and after-hours risk	Practical training, realistic procedures, clear roles and confidence that plans can be carried out
Healthcare and hospitals	Complex sites, vulnerable people, shift work, high onboarding volumes and limited tolerance for disruption	Site-specific training, fast evidence, clear reporting and readiness across changing teams
Education	Large public-facing campuses, frequent space changes and a mix of staff, students, contractors and visitors	Current floor plans, accurate evacuation diagrams, scalable training and cost-effective updates
Government and councils	Dispersed sites, public accountability, changing buildings and broad internal stakeholder groups	Clear ownership, audit-ready evidence, consistent processes and visibility across locations
Commercial and multi-site portfolios	Large footprints, multiple buildings, customer or tenant movement and inconsistent building data	Centralised information, accurate maps, portfolio visibility and practical site-level control
Retail and public-facing environments	High customer traffic, casual or rotating teams, contractors, changing store layouts and busy trading periods can make consistent emergency readiness harder to sustain	Practical site-specific training, clear evacuation roles, current diagrams and confidence that staff can respond when customers are present
Service providers and fire contractors	Clients asking for clearer reporting, stronger digital records and help interpreting changing obligations	Accurate information, better evidence, digital workflows and stronger client visibility

Across sectors, the direction is consistent: fire safety readiness is becoming harder to manage through static documents, scattered records and manual processes alone.

Industry signals – trends to watch

Across the benchmark and customer conversations, several themes point to where fire safety readiness is heading next:

Digital compliance and real-time visibility – teams want clearer evidence and a better view across sites
Keeping documentation current – building changes, staff movements and scattered records continue to make currency hard to maintain
Training consistency – organisations need site-specific training that works across permanent staff, contractors, casuals and volunteers
Fragmented ownership – fire safety often sits across multiple teams, providers and systems
Emerging risks – lithium-ion batteries, EV charging and changing building use are adding new layers of complexity

“The biggest trend is the gradual shift toward centralised compliance systems that allow better oversight across multiple buildings and campuses.”

Paul Mike, Safety/Operation, Downer Group, survey respondent

“Fire safety and compliance is increasingly shifting toward digital integration and real-time visibility of compliance data across complex environments.”

James Gary, Facilities and Safety Manager, JLL, survey respondent

Note: These industry signals combine survey findings, customer conversation themes and Locatrix's experience working with organisations across different sectors. They're intended to highlight practical patterns, not rank industries or provide a statistically representative sector comparison.

What this means for your sector

Same readiness gaps, different pressure points

The five readiness gaps appear across different sectors, but they don't always look the same. A hospital, aged care provider, university, government agency, commercial property group or service provider may face similar challenges around training, records, plans and visibility – but the pressure points are shaped by the people, buildings and obligations they manage.

The below sector lenses combine benchmark findings, customer conversations and Locatrix's work with organisations across safety-critical environments. They're intended to help readers reflect on what readiness may look like in their own context, not to rank industries.

Sector	Sector specific pain points	Questions to ask
Aged care (and community services)	Residents may need assistance to evacuate, while rosters, contractors and after-hours teams change	Knowledge gap: If your most experienced warden wasn't on shift, could the next person step in confidently?
Healthcare and hospitals	Complex sites, clinical disruption and large workforces make evidence hard to pull together quickly	Proof gap: If an auditor asked tomorrow, could you show training completion without hours of manual work?
Education	Classrooms, labs, offices and shared spaces can change use, while diagrams and training may lag behind	Currency gap: When was the last time you checked your evacuation route against the current floor plan?
Government and councils	Dispersed sites, public accountability, varied building types and multiple internal stakeholders	Visibility gap: Can leaders see readiness across all locations, or only site by site?
Commercial and multi-site portfolios	Owners, property managers, tenants and contractors may each hold part of the fire safety picture	Visibility gap: Who is accountable for keeping building information current across the portfolio?
Retail and public-facing environments	Casual teams, contractors, customers and high-traffic trading periods make practical training hard to sustain	Knowledge gap: If the most experienced manager was away, could casual staff manage an evacuation?
Service providers and fire contractors	Clients want clearer evidence, better reporting and help navigating changing expectations	Priority gap: Can you help clients move from reactive compliance to planned improvement?

What good looks like: fire safety readiness maturity checklist

Moving from reactive compliance to everyday readiness

Fire safety readiness isn't 'all or nothing'. Most organisations are doing some things well, while also managing gaps across records, training, plans, visibility or prioritisation.

Use this self-assessment to reflect on where your organisation sits today – and where practical improvements could make the biggest difference.

Score your organisation

For each statement, score your organisation from 1 to 5.

1 = not confident
3 = partly confident
5 = confident and evidence-ready

Readiness area	Statement	Score
Proof	We can quickly produce training completion evidence, compliance records and key documentation when asked	/5
Knowledge	Staff, contractors and wardens understand what to do in their own building, role or emergency scenario	/5
Currency	Our floor plans, evacuation diagrams and emergency procedures are current and reflect recent changes	/5
Visibility	Leaders can see readiness, gaps and follow-up actions across sites, systems and responsibilities	/5
Priority	Fire safety improvements are prioritised before an audit, incident or regulatory change creates pressure	/5
Total score		/25

What your score may indicate

Score	Readiness level	What it often means
5–9	Reactive	Fire safety activity often happens before audits, after incidents or when someone raises an issue. Records, plans and responsibilities may be difficult to locate.
10–14	Compliant, but manual	Core obligations may be managed, but processes often rely on spreadsheets, static documents, site-based knowledge or specific people.
15–19	Coordinated	Training, plans, diagrams and records are managed more consistently, but visibility across sites or teams may still be limited.
20–22	Visible	Leaders and teams can see completion, gaps, records and key information across sites. Fire safety becomes easier to manage proactively.
23–25	Evidence-ready	Plans, diagrams, training, records and responsibilities are current, accessible and ready to use. Readiness is maintained as part of everyday operations.

What to focus on next

Your lowest score is often the best place to start.

A low proof score means evidence may be hard to produce when pressure arrives
A low knowledge score means training completion may not equal practical readiness
A low currency score means plans, diagrams or procedures may not reflect the current building
A low visibility score means leaders may not have a clear picture across sites
A low priority score means fire safety may only become urgent when something forces action

The goal isn't perfection. It's progress: making fire safety readiness easier to understand, easier to manage and easier to prove before pressure arrives.

Ready to check your gaps?

Locatrix has updated its Fire Safety Compliance Gap Checklist for organisations across all sectors.

Use it to identify where your fire safety information, training, records and responsibilities may need attention – and where practical improvements could make the biggest difference.

Complete the checklist

Conclusion

Fire safety readiness is rarely a question of whether people care. Across the benchmark, customer conversations and case study evidence, the stronger pattern is that safety, compliance and facilities teams are often working hard inside systems that make readiness difficult to see, maintain and prove.

The opportunity now is to close the gap between confidence and evidence.

That means making records easier to access, training more practical and site-specific, plans and diagrams easier to keep current, and readiness more visible across buildings, teams and responsibilities.

The organisations making progress aren't waiting for audits, incidents or regulatory change to create urgency. They're building fire safety readiness into everyday operations – so when pressure arrives, they can respond with confidence.

Keep reading the 2026 benchmark

Enter your details below

The readiness reality check
Survey dashboard: what the benchmark survey tells us
The five readiness gaps: proof, knowledge, currency, visibility and priority
Regulatory landscape: obligations made practical
Industry signals and what this means for your sector
Fire safety readiness self-assessment
The full report as a downloadable PDF

Unlock the full report

Takes about 15 seconds.