Trending Topics

Everyone goes home — except some recruits and applicants

Fatalities that occur during agility tests and academy drills underscore the need for tougher medical screening, heat-stress limits and on-site EMS

Every firefighter recalls the physical and psychological testing they endured at the start of their service. Yet some don’t make it, not because of a fire incident, but because they never got that far. Throughout the nation, there have been fatalities during pre-employment testing or recruit training, before individuals are even sworn in. These incidents underscore a central argument: Our vetting process must prioritize both safety and thoroughness.

These tragedies occur at different stages of the pathway: pre-employment testing or academy training. But whether they’re counted in official line-of-duty statistics can depend solely on the candidate’s formal status.

On May 16, 2025, Symeon Williams, a 39-year-old fire cadet in his fifth week of training at the Cleveland Fire Academy, collapsed during physical training and later died at MetroHealth Medical Center. Although not yet a firefighter, he had already served Cleveland as an EMS member, Port Control officer and sanitation worker (Remington, 2025; Vadaj, 2025).

On Aug. 22, 2025, Fendrick Gabaud, a 40-year-old firefighter/EMT candidate, collapsed after completing the standard pre-employment physical agility test with Flagler County Fire Rescue in Bunnell, Florida. He had climbed three stories, lifted hoses, advanced charged hoselines, dragged a 150-pound mannequin, finishing within the time limit, and only then complained of shortness of breath. Paramedics on the scene began immediate aid, but he became unresponsive and later died at the hospital. Authorities, including the Bunnell Police Department, the State Fire Marshal and the Seventh District Medical Examiner’s Office, are investigating.

Gabaud’s case is far from isolated, but it illustrates that sometimes applicants and candidates who die during testing are typically not counted in the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) on-duty death statistics. In contrast, recruits — members who have already been hired and enrolled in academy training — are counted and often trigger formal investigations.

Applicant, candidate and recruit

Each fire department uses its own terminology for individuals in the testing and selection process. While many of these terms are commonly recognized nationwide, department-specific variations exist. For example, with the Cleveland fatality, the department refers to its recruits as “cadets,” even though the term “cadet” is more widely associated with youth not yet old enough to participate in interior or specific fireground operations. For this article, the terms below are used only as general classifications of the victims.

  • Applicants: Individuals filling applications or attending orientations — low physical risk, but part of the vetting pipeline.
  • Candidates: Those undergoing pre-employment testing, such as CPAT or agency-specific agility assessments. Not yet employees.
  • Recruits (probationary firefighters): Hired personnel in formal academy or in-service training, on-duty and recorded by agency LODD metrics.

Tragedies before the badge: Applicant and candidate fatalities

While most firefighter fatalities occur on the fireground or during active duty, a smaller number occur in the earliest stages of service. Applicants and candidates, those still proving themselves through physical tests or training, have died before ever wearing the badge. These cases highlight the hidden risks of the selection process and the need for stronger safeguards. The common causes in these fatalities are:

  • Sudden cardiac events
  • Undiagnosed medical conditions
  • Exertional collapse under high stress

Prevention recommendations:

  • Pre-test medical clearance following NFPA 1582
  • Orientation sessions ahead of physical tests (IAFF/IAFC CPAT Guidance, 2014)
  • On-site EMS support, including defibrillators and ALS capabilities

Academy fatalities: Training that turns fatal

The fire academy is meant to transform civilians into firefighters, but for some, it becomes the final chapter. Recruits and cadets have collapsed during physical training, suffered heat stroke in early drills, and even lost their lives in live-fire exercises. Each tragedy underscores the razor-thin line between tough training and preventable loss, reminding us that the academy is one of the most dangerous places in the fire service.

  • Cleveland (2025): Symeon Williams, a fire cadet, collapsed during physical training in his fifth week and later died. His previous service to the city highlights that even candidates and recruits are part of our service family. His loss is being formally investigated (Remington, 2025; Vadaj, 2025).
  • FDNY (2021): Vincent Malveaux collapsed during PT and died. The USFA recorded this as a training-duty LODD (USFA, 2021).
  • New York State (2021): Peyton Morse collapsed during SCBA training and died. A grand jury found no criminal wrongdoing, but the case spurred litigation and debate over training safety (Times Union, 2023).
  • Virginia (2021): Acute exertional heat stroke on first day of academy; NIOSH recommended heat-stress safeguards (NIOSH, 2022a).
  • Florida (2018): A recruit died during live-fire training. NIOSH cited poor fuel control and trainer-to-student ratios, urging NFPA 1403 compliance (NIOSH, 2019).
  • Baltimore (2007): Recruit Racheal Wilson died in a rowhouse burn; staging deficiencies and inadequate oversight were noted (NIOSH, 2007).

Common causes of fire recruit deaths

  • Sudden cardiac events during intense PT
  • Exertional heat illness/heatstroke in unacclimatized recruits
  • Thermal injury or asphyxiation from live-fire evolutions without strict NFPA 1403 adherence

What investigations consistently recommend

Years of investigations into firefighter and recruit fatalities have revealed clear patterns: many deaths are preventable when best practices are followed. Agencies such as NIOSH and NFPA consistently emphasize a combination of medical readiness, structured training, heat-stress management, strict live-fire protocols and immediate EMS support. Implementing these measures is key to reducing risk and protecting those striving to serve:

  • Medical screening (NFPA 1582), including age and risk-based EKGs
  • Progressive fitness programming (NFPA 1583) with monitoring
  • Heat stress management: hydration, weather monitoring, rest cycles and emergency cooling
  • Live-fire safety: NFPA 1403 compliance with controlled fuel use, RIT support and instructor-to-student ratios
  • On-site EMS readiness during all high-risk activities

Training to serve, training to survive

The fire service often draws comparisons to elite military units, citing grit, discipline and mission focus. But these comparisons can be misguided when they overlook the fundamental differences in health standards and safety practices between the two professions.

Stress and overexertion are not only leading causes of on-duty firefighter fatalities nationwide, but they are also major risks during pre-employment testing and academy training. USFA data show that these factors contribute to deaths year after year. Compounding the risks, some firefighters hesitate to report health issues, fearing they will be deemed unfit for duty. This silent deception puts individuals at risk long before they face a fireground, underscoring the urgent need for proactive medical screening, monitoring and safety measures throughout the pathway into the fire service.

To protect those in the testing process, we must adjust the toughness narrative to include safety without compromising the process. This means adopting rigorous medical screening, implementing progressive fitness programs, managing heat stress, adhering to live-fire safety protocols and ensuring on-site EMS readiness. These measures are not optional; they are essential to reducing preventable deaths and sustaining the health of our service members.

The deaths of applicants, candidates and recruits are not just statistics. They remind us that the testing process should not be deadly.

Critical questions for every chief

Every chief should ask the following five questions before their next recruit class.

1. Are our candidates medically ready?

  • Have we required NFPA 1582-compliant medical evaluations?
  • Do we have a process for reviewing medications, cardiac history, or heat-risk factors before testing or training begins?

2. Do we treat candidate testing with the same safety seriousness as recruit training?

  • Is EMS present during CPAT or agility testing?
  • Do we offer orientation and practice sessions to reduce sudden exertion risks?

3. How are we managing heat and environmental stress?

  • Are work/rest cycles and hydration breaks enforced?
  • Do we monitor heat index and temperature?
  • Is rapid cooling equipment available on site?

4. Are our live-fire evolutions run strictly by NFPA 1403?

  • Are instructor-to-student ratios appropriate?
  • Is fuel load limited and controlled?
  • Is a a rapid intervention team in place, with mayday procedures reviewed beforehand?

5. Do we have ALS-level EMS coverage embedded in training?

  • Are defibrillators, advanced airway equipment and cooling resources immediately available?
  • Is there a designated medical officer monitoring recruits during PT and drills?

References

Bill Carey is the associate editor for FireRescue1.com and EMS1.com. A former Maryland volunteer firefighter, sergeant, and lieutenant, Bill has written for several fire service publications and platforms. His work on firefighter behavioral health garnered a 2014 Neal Award nomination. His ongoing research and writings about line-of-duty death data is frequently cited in articles, presentations, and trainings. Have a news tip? He can be reached at news@lexipol.com.