For 25 years, Coral Gables residents have been able to point to their fire department’s national accreditation as a mark of excellence. Issued by the Commission on Fire Accreditation International, the designation has long served as shorthand for professional rigor: not just in emergency response, but in strategic planning, training and risk management. So when CFAI recently deferred reaccreditation for the Coral Gables Fire Department, it raised a signal—one that merits closer scrutiny of the systems behind it.

Deferred does not mean decertified. The department remains operational, and the deferral allows 12 months to resolve outstanding issues before returning to the CFAI commission for review next spring. But that grace period also raises questions: Why was reaccreditation deferred in the first place? What does the process measure? And what does it tell residents about how Coral Gables is managing the complexities of modern fire service?

More than a symbol

CFAI accreditation is hard to earn. The process begins with an internal self-assessment measuring performance across more than 250 criteria. Those include governance, training programs, strategic planning, risk reduction initiatives, and data analysis. Peer reviewers then visit in person, evaluating how closely the department meets established benchmarks. The final step is a hearing before a commission of fire service experts, who vote on whether to accredit, defer or deny.

As of last year, only 323 fire agencies in the world held active CFAI accreditation. That list includes the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue Department, Miami Beach Fire Department, and Key Biscayne’s department—but not Coral Gables. That absence is recent. Coral Gables first received accreditation in 2000, well before most peer agencies in the region. For a quarter-century, it held that designation without interruption. Until now.

Jim White, the CFAI’s program manager, characterized the deferral as routine. “It’s not a very big deal,” he said. “It happens periodically.” In his view, the department is “bringing some things up to speed” and remains on track for reaccreditation. But White declined to say what issues led to the deferral, referring inquiries to the department itself.

Deputy Fire Chief Gilberto Hernandez confirmed the department had requested the deferral but offered no explanation for why it was necessary. “The department has been accredited for 25 years and is currently working on renewing,” he said in a written response to the Gazette. He declined to release the CFAI’s findings or specify what needed to be corrected.

Quarter century of credibility

Accreditation is a public covenant. It tells the community that a department holds itself to national best practices, undergoes independent review and adapts as standards evolve. When that status changes, the public deserves to know why.

Especially in Coral Gables, where the fire department plays a central role in public life. Its response times are among the best in the region. It maintains a visible presence at city events. And like many accredited departments, it uses that status as leverage when applying for federal grants or seeking favorable insurance ratings.

Indeed, CFAI accreditation can influence the city’s ISO rating—a key factor in determining homeowners’ insurance premiums. It also reflects the department’s ability to plan, document and continuously improve. That may not affect the speed of a 911 response, but it does shape how well the department prepares for large-scale emergencies or adapts to new threats.

In this context, a deferral—even a temporary one—raises red flags. Has the city kept pace with the demands of modern accreditation? Is the department receiving the data, training, and administrative support it needs? Or are there deeper structural weaknesses that this deferral merely reveals?

Systems vs. sirens

Officials have emphasized that the deferral will not affect emergency operations. And they are likely right in the narrowest sense. Trucks will still roll. Paramedics will still arrive. Firefighters will still respond.

But CFAI is about what happens before a crisis—and after. It measures whether departments have strategic plans rooted in community risk assessments. Whether they review performance data to find gaps. Whether they engage in succession planning, inter-agency coordination, and public education. These are systems, not sirens. And they are harder to see from the outside.

They are also harder to maintain. Accreditation standards have grown more rigorous over time. What qualified in 2000 may not be sufficient in 2025. Departments must evolve in kind—requiring not just heroic fieldwork but robust administrative infrastructure.

That shift requires investment. Not only in trucks and stations, but in analysts, trainers, data systems and cross-department collaboration. If Coral Gables has fallen short, the root cause may not be firehouse performance—it may be City Hall’s.

Accountability and trust

That’s why transparency matters. The department says the deferral doesn’t compromise safety. But trust isn’t built on assurances alone. Residents deserve a clear, factual explanation of what went wrong, what is being fixed, and when accreditation is expected to be restored.

To date, that explanation has not come. Neither the CFAI report nor any internal memo has been made public. Nor has the department scheduled any community briefings or appeared before the city commission to discuss the issue. Without transparency, confidence gives way to speculation.

More concerning is the precedent. If a department with a 25-year record can quietly slip off the CFAI rolls, what other institutional standards might be eroding behind the scenes? And will residents find out only after the fact?

A city’s reflection

This is more than a fire department story. It’s a mirror on how Coral Gables governs itself. Accreditation is, at its core, a test of self-awareness and adaptation. It asks whether an agency knows its weaknesses and is willing to correct them—publicly, methodically and transparently.

If Coral Gables resolves this deferral quickly, the episode may fade. But the questions it raises will remain. In a city that prides itself on excellence, the systems behind that excellence matter. Residents have a right to ask if those systems are still in place—and whether they are being protected with the same urgency as lives on the line.