North Carolina Fire Department Types
The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) definition of department type is as follows:
| Department Type | Definition |
|---|---|
| Career | All firefighters are career / paid firefighters |
| Mostly Career | More than half of the firefighters are career / paid firefighters |
| Mostly Volunteer | More than half of the firefighters are volunteer / un-paid firefighters |
| Volunteer | All of the firefighters are volunteer / un-paid firefighters |
The information below is based solely upon fire departments that have registered with the National Fire Service Registry. If you have not registered your fire department, please do so, it is free and contributes to a complete picture of the fire services. Check out some Quick Facts from the registry.
Department Type
NOTE: In the USFA National Fire Service Registry data for North Carolina there are 13 departments NOT classified, and so NOT included in these statistics. Departments should register as Career, Mostly Career, Volunteer or Mostly Volunteer but we do not have it for these 13 departments .
Departments Types of North Carolina
Percentages are intentionally rounded for simplicity not precision, so please use them as insights only.
| County | Career | Mostly Career | Mostly Volunteer | Volunteer | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alamance | 8% | 8% | 85% | – | 13 |
| Alexander | – | – | – | 100% | 5 |
| Alleghany | – | – | – | 100% | 5 |
| Anson | – | – | 40% | 60% | 5 |
| Ashe | – | – | – | 100% | 8 |
| Avery | – | – | 36% | 64% | 11 |
| Beaufort | – | 9% | – | 91% | 11 |
| Bertie | – | – | 11% | 89% | 9 |
| Bladen | – | – | 18% | 82% | 11 |
| Brunswick | 5% | 20% | 45% | 30% | 20 |
| Buncombe | 16% | 32% | 42% | 11% | 19 |
| Burke | 6% | – | 31% | 62% | 16 |
| Cabarrus | 9% | 9% | 18% | 64% | 11 |
| Caldwell | 7% | – | 43% | 50% | 14 |
| Camden | – | – | – | 100% | 2 |
| Carteret | – | 11% | 56% | 33% | 18 |
| Caswell | – | – | – | 100% | 8 |
| Catawba | 8% | 8% | 54% | 31% | 13 |
| Chatham | – | – | 86% | 14% | 7 |
| Cherokee | – | – | – | 100% | 13 |
| Chowan | – | – | 50% | 50% | 2 |
| Clay | – | – | – | 100% | 4 |
| Cleveland | 7% | – | 7% | 87% | 15 |
| Columbus | – | – | 14% | 86% | 14 |
| Craven | 8% | 8% | 8% | 77% | 13 |
| Cumberland | 14% | – | 76% | 10% | 21 |
| Currituck | – | 25% | 25% | 50% | 4 |
| Dare | – | 8% | 33% | 58% | 12 |
| Davidson | 9% | – | 36% | 55% | 22 |
| Davie | – | – | 10% | 90% | 10 |
| Duplin | – | – | 6% | 94% | 18 |
| Durham | 17% | 33% | 33% | 17% | 6 |
| Edgecombe | 11% | 11% | 11% | 67% | 9 |
| Forsyth | 16% | – | 53% | 32% | 19 |
| Franklin | – | – | 33% | 67% | 6 |
| Gaston | 4% | 4% | 17% | 74% | 23 |
| Gates | – | – | – | 100% | 5 |
| Graham | – | – | – | 100% | 2 |
| Granville | 9% | – | 9% | 82% | 11 |
| Greene | – | – | – | 100% | 10 |
| Guilford | 10% | 14% | 67% | 10% | 21 |
| Halifax | – | 10% | 10% | 80% | 10 |
| Harnett | – | 8% | 58% | 33% | 12 |
| Haywood | – | – | 42% | 58% | 12 |
| Henderson | 9% | 9% | 55% | 27% | 11 |
| Hertford | – | – | 11% | 89% | 9 |
| Hoke | – | – | 67% | 33% | 6 |
| Hyde | – | – | – | 100% | 5 |
| Iredell | 6% | 6% | 12% | 75% | 16 |
| Jackson | – | – | 14% | 86% | 7 |
| Johnston | 5% | – | 35% | 60% | 20 |
| Jones | – | – | – | 100% | 6 |
| Lee | 17% | – | 17% | 67% | 6 |
| Lenoir | 11% | – | – | 89% | 9 |
| Lincoln | – | 10% | 30% | 60% | 10 |
| Macon | – | – | 44% | 56% | 9 |
| Madison | – | – | 43% | 57% | 7 |
| Martin | – | – | 40% | 60% | 5 |
| McDowell | – | – | 38% | 62% | 8 |
| Mecklenburg | 7% | 7% | 21% | 64% | 14 |
| Mitchell | – | – | 25% | 75% | 4 |
| Montgomery | – | – | 22% | 78% | 9 |
| Moore | – | 12% | 65% | 24% | 17 |
| Nash | – | – | 36% | 64% | 14 |
| New Hanover | 20% | 20% | 40% | 20% | 5 |
| Northampton | – | – | – | 100% | 8 |
| Onslow | 12% | 6% | 24% | 59% | 17 |
| Orange | 25% | – | 50% | 25% | 8 |
| Pamlico | – | – | – | 100% | 7 |
| Pasquotank | 17% | 17% | – | 67% | 6 |
| Pender | – | – | 40% | 60% | 10 |
| Perquimans | – | – | – | 100% | 4 |
| Person | – | 14% | – | 86% | 7 |
| Pitt | 5% | – | 5% | 90% | 21 |
| Polk | – | – | 33% | 67% | 6 |
| Randolph | 6% | – | 69% | 25% | 16 |
| Richmond | – | – | 33% | 67% | 6 |
| Robeson | – | 6% | 17% | 78% | 18 |
| Rockingham | – | 6% | 33% | 61% | 18 |
| Rowan | 4% | – | 43% | 52% | 23 |
| Rutherford | – | 6% | 38% | 56% | 16 |
| Sampson | 8% | – | 8% | 83% | 12 |
| Scotland | – | – | 17% | 83% | 6 |
| Stanly | – | 8% | – | 92% | 12 |
| Stokes | – | – | 20% | 80% | 10 |
| Surry | – | – | 12% | 88% | 17 |
| Swain | – | – | 33% | 67% | 3 |
| Transylvania | – | – | – | 100% | 7 |
| Tyrrell | – | – | – | 100% | 1 |
| Union | 6% | 6% | 17% | 72% | 18 |
| Unspecified County | – | – | – | – | 0 |
| Vance | – | 14% | 14% | 71% | 7 |
| Wake | 19% | 24% | 52% | 5% | 21 |
| Warren | – | – | – | 100% | 8 |
| Washington | – | – | – | 100% | 4 |
| Watauga | – | 11% | 22% | 67% | 9 |
| Wayne | 10% | – | 5% | 85% | 20 |
| Wilkes | – | – | 6% | 94% | 17 |
| Wilson | 11% | – | – | 89% | 9 |
| Yadkin | – | – | 40% | 60% | 10 |
| Yancey | – | – | – | 100% | 5 |
Firefighter / Personnel Numbers of North Carolina
Here the personnel numbers by county for volunteer and career agencies within North Carolina.
Looking for NFIRS FDIDs?
Here are the fire department identifiers (FDIDs) for agencies within North Carolina. NFIRS FDIDs are required for submitting NFIRS reports with mutual aid or automatic aid with those departments.
Need more NFIRS help?
Here are some useful ressources to learn more about NFIRS.
NFIRS Codes Cheat Sheet – NFIRS Coding – NFIRS Examples – FDIDs – POCs – NFIRS Transactions – NFIRS Modules – NFIRS Elements – NFIRS Rules – NFIRS Reference – NFIRS Compliant ?
You can also read this NFIRS 5.0 Complete Reference Guide, and NFIRS 5.0 Design documentation in order to have a deeper understanding of NFIRS 5.0. Here are also NFIRS 5.0 Forms ready for you to download and use.
We are here to help, Feel free to contact us if you need any additionnal informations.
Last Updated on June 27, 2023