Fire Department Metrics

Fire department metrics

Michael E. Norris

HPI515 Measurement and Assessment Strategies

Dr. David Veen

Grantham University

Fire department metrics

Abstract

        As with any other industry in the world, the fire service must incorporate changes to accommodate new demographics, economics, and technologies to deal with the new threats, and hazards to both public safety personnel and the public they are charged to protect. These necessary changes bring about challenges and resistance to change. The primary source of resistance to these changes surrounds budgeting for fire protection. City managers and councils struggle against increasing budget allotments for public safety since those departments rarely produce a demonstrable “profit” for the municipality. Government officials, for the most part, simply see fire and police as monetary outlay. In order to combat this, fire department executive staff must demonstrate the inherent values of their departments through industry-wide metrics which measure fire department performance. Fire chiefs must assess the structure and function of their departments in context with their communities. They must also demonstrate that the department’s performance measures such as response times, budgeting, training, fire prevention activities, and customer satisfaction are in line with the mission, vision, and values set forth in the city’s master plan. The department’s monetary, social, environmental, and political value can be inherently proven by demonstrating that the department is achieving its goals through articulated measurement.

Introduction

        The City of Mountain (a fictitious name) has a long history of cooperation, and collaboration with its citizens to provide and improve its services to its residents and visitors. This Mountain Fire Department (MFD) Performance Dashboard includes financial and operating measures important to the city and its citizens. For years, the City of Mountain has made its budgets and financial reports available to its citizens providing accountability and now this dashboard displays much of the same data, in a simple format continuing in the spirit of transparency.

Fire department administration division

The Administration Division consists of the Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Chief, and administrative staff. The division is responsible for the overall leadership, management, and oversight of the department including financial management, strategic planning, personnel matters, labor relations, special projects, planning, and policy direction.  The division provides superior staff support services and customer service to the citizens of Mountain through professionalism and compassion.  

Fiscal year 2014 was a productive year full of hard work and accomplishment for the division including prioritizing critical department functions ensuring fiscal stability while continuing to support the department’s operational mission.  Staff continues to participate in the evaluation of the division’s performance and progress towards maximizing efficiencies.

Operations division

The Operations Division is responsible for responding to all types of emergencies that threaten life, property, or the environment.  The division protects citizens and visitors with well trained, professional and properly equipped personnel.  

Operations personnel suppress all types of fires, provide Advanced Life Support Emergency Medical Services and therefore every fire engine has a minimum of one paramedic and three emergency medical technicians. Operations has specialized teams to include: Hazardous Materials, Swift Water Rescue, Rope Rescue, Auto Extrication, confined space rescue, fire prevention, and investigations. The division participates in mutual aid responding to emergencies with surrounding communities.      

In 2014 City of Mountain firefighters responded to 6,115 calls for service extinguishing 385 confirmed fires and 4998 emergency medical calls and rescues.  

2013 Total Incidents by Incident Type:

• Fires - 385
• EMS/Rescue - 5440
• Hazardous Materials Response - 22
• Public Service Call - 163
• False Alarm – 105

Additionally, in 2013, the operations division prevention bureau performed:

• Commercial, manufacturing, industrial inspections – 1582
• Construction plan reviews – 523
• Consultations – 414
• Fire and hazardous materials investigations – 73

The fire department training bureau consists of one battalion chief, one fire captain, and one EMS administrator. Together, in 2014, the bureau performed 1168 hours of training in all aspects of emergency response.

Performance Measures

The first step in program performance measurement is to define the specific goals and objectives of that program.

“Goal statements are qualitative statements that typically generalize the intended outcome of a program in words rather than numbers. Once intended goals are established, the department must identify the functions or actions that are taken in order to achieve said goal. They must also consider available resources - whether monetary, equipment, or person-hours” (Flynn, 2009, p. 4).

Outside of establishing response time criteria, and the identification of industry best practices for emergency medical services (EMS), MFD has recognized the fact through this analysis that further institution of goals and objectives for intended performance outcomes is necessary and will be implemented by January, 2016. The first objective will be to “research industry standards and to compile all possible performance measures with respective benchmarks, using NFPA (National Fire Protection Association), CPSE (Center for Public Safety Excellence), ISO (Insurance Services Office), and ICMA (International City Managers Association) sources” (Quedraogo, 2013, p. 64).

The City of Mountain like many cities, use a line-item budgeting process for allocating monies to its various departments. All city departments including fire and rescue utilize the same format to coincide and collaborate with the city as a whole. While line-item budgets are easy for the finance department, practical, easily understood, and good for allocation and tracking of departmental expenditures, it does not truly measure performance for the city’s fire department (O’Connor, 1999, p.5, 10). Wodicka (2013), posits “that traditional methods of performance measurement of fire departments insufficiently assess the quality of service provided to the public”. In these days of fiscal irresponsibility, the citizens of local, regional, state, and federal governments are demanding high accountability for the use of tax dollars and demanding the most in efficiency of all governmental services including the fire service.