Alarm Confirmation – What is it and why do we need it?

In the early part of  2000 the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) decided that response to intruder alarm systems was taking up too many police resources and that some remedial action was necessary – some 96% of all police response to intruder alarm activations was as a result of false alarms, a waste of resources that was simply unsustainable.
As a result of this waste of police resources it was decided that police would no longer attend where a single detector had caused an alarm activation and so with the introduction of regulations known as DD243 the position changed in such a way that police would only respond where there was some confirmation that an intruder was on the premises.

How would such confirmation be achieved?

There would be a number of possible scenarios:

• Visual verification – by the use of cameras the Alarm Receiving Centre (ARC) would be able to receive images of the site in an effort to establish the reason for the alarm activation, be it intruder, or other reasons
• Audio verification – by the use of microphones at strategic points within the premises the ARC would be able to listen-in to detect sounds of an intruder
• Sequential verification – the most popular and cost effective means was by means of a second detection device confirming the presence of someone on the premises. For example a first activation might be sent to the ARC as a result of a door being forced open and a 2nd or “confirmed” activation would be sent by a movement detector in an area inside of the opened door

The provision of acceptable verification would be dictated by regulation on what would be an acceptable form of additional detection, the following would be acceptable:

• Detectors of two different technologies could be used in the same area even if overlapping, e.g. a PIR and a dual-technology detector
• Two dual-technology detectors may be used in the same area even if overlapping
• A movement detector and another detector e.g. door contact, glassbreak detector, shock sensor

Unacceptable forms of confirmation would be:

• Two door contacts on a single door
• Two overlapping single technology PIR detectors

An alarm condition from the first detector should generate an unconfirmed activation, this would initiate a keyholder request to attend from the ARC. If there is a subsequent alarm within the confirmation time, (normally 30 minutes),  then an unambiguous sequentially confirmed activation should be signalled, initiating a police request to attend from the ARC

Following the success of DD243 confirmation in drastically reducing the waste of police time and resources, some manufacturers invested research and development costs into providing confirmation in a single detector casing. The first of these was the Optex Sequad, a PIR based movement detector that consisted of two PIR elements, one covering two zones to the sides of the detector and the other covering the centre field of view of the detector; an intruder crossing from either side of the detector into the centre area would create a confirmed alarm.
More recently the Pyronix TMD15 has been produced and it contains a PIR and a dual-technology detector within the same casing; being of different  independent technologies this has provided an effective and acceptable means of confirmation in a single detector. The unit can be set to provide “Tri-tech” cover, where both detectors work in unison to provide a single alarm activation – not a confirmed activation but highly resistant to false alarms in an unfriendly environment.

Alarm confirmation has dramatically reduced the waste of police time and has done a great deal to restore confidence in alarm technology. Although initially criticised by many within the security industry it would appear that alarm confirmation, where properly designed and put into practice, is a winner.

Written by Roger Byng - Visit Website
Roger Byng, owner of RJB Security Systems, has been active in the Security Industry for over 20 years. Being associated with the IAAI, NASS and SSA Trade Associations, Roger helped form the SSAIB in 1994 and served as its Vice-Chairman until retiring from the Board in 2004. RJB Security Systems is UKAS Certified for the installation of Intruder Alarm Systems, CCTV Installations and Access Control and holds the SSAIB "Certificate of Excellence". Operating throughout the South West, South and Mid Wales and the Thames Valley, the company has both domestic, public and high-end commercial amongst its customer portfolio.