# Iso/bcegs



## fatboy (Dec 6, 2010)

Just got a call and email from my "agent", letting me know it's been over five years since our last evaluation. After doing it five years ago I swore that I wouldn't do it again.

Who's opted out and what repercussions came about as a result?


----------



## jpranch (Dec 6, 2010)

fatboy, we just did our first one this year. Still waiting for all the good results touted by the ISO! I do know that your rating can become a political football.


----------



## Alias (Dec 6, 2010)

I've  done a few of these.  Last one scored better than past years.

Possible repercussions are higher insurance rates per ISO statements.  I really couldn't tell you one way or the other.

Sue, lost on the frontier


----------



## High Desert (Dec 6, 2010)

A waste of time. I've heard all of the debate over insurance rates, but it really hasn't had any effect that I know of.


----------



## fatboy (Dec 6, 2010)

The first time we did it we came in at a 7, mostly because we were a couple code cycles behind. When I did it we came down to a 4, they beat me up becuse of our inspection and plan review workload. Their parameters were ridiculous, I would have had to about triple my staff. Anyway, going from a 7 to a 4, I didn't ever hear anything one way or another, so I'm thinking what's the use?

I'll talk it over with my boss tomorrow, see what she thinks, she's the one with the finger on the pulse of Council.


----------



## jpranch (Dec 6, 2010)

High Desert said:
			
		

> A waste of time. I've heard all of the debate over insurance rates, but it really hasn't had any effect that I know of.


I beleive you are correct. Our rating prior to last year was 11. I.e. Non-participant. We now have a rating of 4. Didn't mean squat!


----------



## mtlogcabin (Dec 6, 2010)

I did mine back in August. Took about 2 hours to put it together and 1 hour with ISO. The field rep was a former BO and was very helpful. He agreed to sit on ours till we had the 09 codes adopted in November so we did not get penalized for not having the current codes adopted. I expect to stay the same (3) My boss uses the ISO numbers as a reason the council should fund training and so far even in these tight times we have a budget for education. Remember the importance of the FD ISO rating (real or not) has probably been drilled into the councils heads for years now just tell them it the same for the BD


----------



## pyrguy (Dec 6, 2010)

The first time a former jurisdiction did it we got a 10.

4 MCP's on staff but we did not have a PE or Architect that was licensed by the state in staff, automatic 10. Of course that was a long time ago they never came back after the BO had words with them.


----------



## Code Neophyte (Dec 7, 2010)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> My boss uses the ISO numbers as a reason the council should fund training and so far even in these tight times we have a budget for education. Remember the importance of the FD ISO rating (real or not) has probably been drilled into the councils heads for years now just tell them it the same for the BD


This is the only value to the exercise that I can see.  It has the effect of an independent audit of the department, for those of us who couldn't begin to pass an IAS Accreditation, and "shames" administrations into providing staff, training, and updating codes when they are possibly resistant to doing so.

I agree that it doesn't affect insurance rates one way or the other, but if they didn't come around here, we probably wouldn't even exist at this point!


----------



## Code Neophyte (Dec 7, 2010)

Duplicate post


----------



## RJJ (Dec 7, 2010)

Just had my first one in a new ahj. My first impression is a waste of time. The previous score was a 9. I am interested to see how we fair on the report. Total time in the review was about 4 hrs. 1 1/2hr for the actual interview. The rest was prep and various emails on questions raised by ISO. On the flip side here is what comes out of the ISO review and this comes from some friends in the insurance rate business.

One of the first levels of setting rates for an area starts with the Insurance people reviewing the ISO reports. It is only a tool for them to set premiums. It allows the insurance industry to view a community and how well codes are being applied, reviewed and enforcement.

There are other factors that play into the mix. From these factors the insurance companies can set a rate per thousand of expected loss. This in the end becomes the rate per thousand dollar of value on property that is insured. This is the same as insurance for cars. Like NJ has one of the highest rates in the country base on the amount of loss.

We in the building departments may never see anything as a result of the review. It will only show up in the premiums property owners pay. The end result could be nothing or an improved rate for each property owner.

JP a #4 is a pretty good rating. I hope to drop the current 9 to around a 5. I will post what the outcome is and I should have a review back by years end.


----------



## Min&Max (Dec 7, 2010)

ISO is a joke. First your score falls in a range. The ranges are 1-3, 4-6, 7-10 and over 10. If you score a 1 your community is rated the same as the community that scored a 3. They claim that homeowner insurance rates are based on ISO scores but not all insurance companies even use ISO as a means to calculate premiums. Only the structures built in the reporting period receive the benefit of your last rating. About the only good thing ISO does is help get local funding for education.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Dec 7, 2010)

> About the only good thing ISO does is help get local funding for education.


So play the game for a couple of hours it may help you get educational funding for your department for the next 5 years.

I don't recieve anything for the department from filling out the dodge and census reports every month which over 5 years takes a lot more time and energy than an ISO audit.

Look at it as an indirect benefit to your department and as your number comes down make sure the council knows about it.


----------



## jim baird (Dec 7, 2010)

Min&Max said:
			
		

> ISO is a joke.


Well said.  If your AHJ is small you don't get any bennies.

I am convinced that all insurance companies gather all data only in a quest to justify increases in premiums.

They really don't compete very much against each other.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Dec 9, 2010)

It will be interesting how future ratings will turn out given the reduction in the number of employees and economic impact on construction.

Know of one B.O who had to do it but didn't want to be bothered so he said "there are the files, help yourself."

Can check yours out here; http://www.isomitigation.com/bcegs/1000/graphs/CO.html

This will vary from state to state on insurance; search the web; "iso no more advisory rates"


----------



## fatboy (Dec 9, 2010)

Oh, I'm going to suck it up and do it, but I'm not going to go through a lot of anxiety about it though.


----------

