My Indiana code proposals connect emergency alerts with understandable instructions and the staff assistance people may need to act on them.
Status: public comment proposals. Revised September 13, 2026, these packets address the June 1, 2026 Building Code and Fire Prevention Code drafts. They are not adopted requirements. Official published materials and adopted rules control.
What I’m proposing
Emergency communication needs to account for both the message and the person receiving it.
I prepared two coordinated packets. One focuses on building design and construction; the other focuses on emergency response plans and staff responsibilities.
Coordinate required voice systems with emergency plans.
Check that spoken instructions can be understood.
Identify who will help occupants who need prompting, direction, or physical assistance.
Assess notification needs in qualifying residential support settings before requiring an additional system.
The proposals do not require voice systems in every building. A mass notification system would be required under the proposed risk analysis provisions only when the analysis identifies a need.
Free research downloads
Read the two packets
Each four page PDF contains proposed wording, reasons, fiscal review, and 13 source entries. The two bibliographies contain 26 entries in total, which may include shared sources.
Building Code
Emergency communication design and construction
Addresses new Class 1 construction and applicable work on existing buildings, including how required voice systems are designed and verified.
Coordinates required emergency voice systems with emergency plans and documents message content and intelligibility verification.
Proposes risk analysis for qualifying Residential Habilitation and Support (RHS) or Supervised Group Living (SGL) construction where documented occupant needs require staff assistance.
Requires a mass notification system only where the risk analysis identifies a need, while retaining Sections 917.1 and 917.2.
Applies the existing building trigger through Section 113 and Chapter 34; Class 2 structures remain under the Indiana Residential Code.
Addresses emergency response procedures, assigned staff assistance, and qualifying residential services when they first begin at a site.
Coordinates required voice systems and verifies clear, intelligible protective action messages.
Adds emergency communication and assistance procedures, including assigned personnel, to required fire safety, evacuation, and lockdown plans.
Proposes risk analysis before qualifying RHS or SGL services first begin in Class 1 or Class 2 structures where documented occupant needs require staff assistance.
Applies prospectively to qualifying service starts in existing structures, whether or not occupancy classification changes; a system is required only if the analysis finds a need.
The summaries on this page provide context. Read each packet for exact wording, qualifications, and citations. PDF accessibility has not been fully verified.
Where the proposals draw the line
Coordination between codes
The Building Code packet addresses design and construction. The Fire Prevention Code packet addresses response planning, staff assistance, and qualifying service starts. Both retain Sections 917.1 and 917.2.
Documented assistance needs
The proposed RHS and SGL triggers depend on documented needs for prompting, cueing, redirection, instruction, or physical assistance. Receipt of services or a diagnosis alone does not meet the assistance condition. Exceptions address private residences without RHS or SGL services and intermittent or visiting services alone.
Accessible emergency communication
An alert should connect people with the protective action they need to take. The packets propose clear instructions, intelligibility verification, and coordination with emergency plans where voice systems are required; they do not require voice in every building.
Regulatory and fiscal review
The packets assert no statewide dollar estimate or cost neutrality. They request review of incremental costs and benefits, existing duties, provider and housing effects, and overlapping systems under the companion codes.
A few terms explained
Mass notification
Communication that gives a group of people emergency information or instructions. A risk analysis assesses whether a system is needed for the setting.
Intelligibility
Whether people can understand a spoken message, rather than simply hear that a sound is present.
RHS and SGL
Residential Habilitation and Support and Supervised Group Living. These are the residential support service categories named in the proposals. The triggers also depend on documented assistance needs; a diagnosis or receipt of services alone is not enough.
Class 1 and Class 2 structures
Indiana building classifications used to define scope. The Building Code proposal addresses Class 1 work; Class 2 structures remain under the Indiana Residential Code. The Fire Prevention Code proposal includes qualifying service starts in either class.
NFPA 72
The National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code from the National Fire Protection Association. The packets refer to the edition incorporated by the applicable code.
How I built the research
Compared Indiana’s draft language with the 2024 model codes and existing state rules.
Coordinated shared wording while keeping construction requirements separate from operational responsibilities.
Distinguished new construction and applicable building work from the first provision of qualifying residential services.
Used the incorporated NFPA 72 edition and functional summaries of assistance needs, without unnecessary personal records.
Requested review of incremental costs and benefits, without claiming cost neutrality or a statewide dollar estimate.
Linked the proposals to original sources so readers can check the record.
Original sources
Selected references are linked below. Each packet contains the full bibliography and research notes.
