Loading...
2017 Fire Department Operations and Staffing Study FINAL REPORT June 2017 Fire Department Operations and Staffing Study Oakland Park Fire Rescue Department Oakland Park, Florida Prepared by: FITCH & ASSOCIATES, LLC 2901 Williamsburg Terrace #G § Platte City § Missouri § 64079 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 2 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 FIRE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS AND STAFFING STUDY OAKLAND PARK, FLORIDA TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 COMMUNITY PROFILE & CHARECTERISTICS 8 POPULATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS 8 FINANCIAL OVERVIEW 8 TOPOGRAPHY 8 SERVICES PROVIDED 10 SERVICE DELIVERY PROGRAMS 10 Fire Suppression 10 Emergency Medical Services 11 Rescue & Hazardous Materials 11 CURRENT DEPLOYMENT STRATEGY 11 Fire Stations & Apparatus 11 CURRENT STAFFING STRATEGY 15 Organizational Structure 15 Figure 1: Oakland Park Fire Organizational Chart 16 TRAINING 16 INSPECTIONS 17 LOGISTICS 17 METHODOLOGY 18 Figure 2: Sample Record from the Master Incident Data Table 19 Figure 3: Sample Record from the Vehicles Assigned Data Table 20 TECHNOLOGY LIMITATIONS 21 RELATIONSHIP OF CAD AND CDR TIMELINES 21 Figure 4: Relationship Between Timelines in the CAD and CDR Data Tables 21 DISPATCH PROCESSING INTERVALS 22 CREDIBILITY OF P2/P3 STATISTICS 22 FIELD RESPONSE INTERVALS 23 Table 1: Error Conditions Identified in the Vehicles Assigned Data Table 24 COMMUNITY RESPONSE HISTORY 25 RELATIONSHIP TO BROWARD COUNTY 25 Figure 5: FIRE Incidents in Broward County by Jurisdiction 25 MUTUAL AID OUTBOUND 26 Table 2: Mutual Aid OutBound 26 MUTUAL AID INBOUND 26 Table 3: Contribution of Mutual Aid InBound to Total Time-on-Task for Oakland Park Incidents 26 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 3 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 4: Twenty Largest Contributors to MA InBound 27 RESPONSE HISTORY 27 Table 5: Incidents Dispatched by Category in Oakland Park 27 Figure 6: Incidents Dispatched by Category 28 Table 6: Average Incidents per Day by Month-of-Year 28 Figure 7: Average Incident per Day by Month-of-Year 29 Table 7: EMS and FIRE Response Intervals by Priority and by Month-of-Year 29 Figure 8: EMS Response Intervals at the 90th %-tile on Priority 6 Incidents 30 Figure 9: FIRE Response Intervals at the 90th %-tile on Priority 2 Incidents 30 Table 8: Average Incidents per Day by Day-of-Week 30 Figure 10: Average Incidents per Day by Day-of-Week 31 Table 9: Average Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day 31 Figure 11: Average Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day 32 Table 10: Average Time-on-Task per Hour-of-Day 33 Figure 12: Average Time-on-Task per Hour-of-Day 33 Table 11: All Hazards Time-on-Task by Stations and Unit 34 Table 12: Average P2/P3, Chute, & Travel Intervals by Category for Priority 6 Incidents 35 Figure 13: P2/P3 Intervals from EMS Incidents 35 Figure 14: Chute Intervals from EMS Incidents 36 Figure 15: Drive Intervals from EMS Incidents 36 Figure 16: Response Intervals from EMS Incidents 37 Figure 17: P2/P3 Intervals from FIRE Incidents 37 Figure 18: Chute Intervals from FIRE Incidents 38 Figure 19: Drive Intervals from FIRE Incidents 38 Figure 20: Response Intervals from FIRE Incidents 39 Figure 21: Average Dispatch, Chute, Drive, & Response Intervals for EMS and FIRE Responses. 39 Figure 22: Distribution of Chute Intervals for First Arrived Units 40 Figure 23: Distribution of Drive Intervals for First Arrived Units 40 Table 13: Vehicles Arrived at Scene & Total Time-on-Task 41 Table 14: Vehicles Cancelled Enroute 41 FIRE RELATED SERVICES 42 TEMPORAL ANALYSIS 42 Table 15: Average FIRE Related Incidents per Day by Month-of-Year 42 Figure 24: Average FIRE Related Incidents per Day by Month-of-Year. 43 Figure 25: Response Intervals for FIRE Incidents at the 90th %-tile by Month-of-Year 43 Figure 26: Average FIRE Related Incidents per Day by Day-of-Week 44 Table 16: Total and Average FIRE Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day 44 Figure 27: Total and Average FIRE Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day 45 Table 17: FIRE Related Signal Types (Non-Emergency Medical) 45 Table 18: Oakland Park Units Arrived At Scene on FIRE Incidents 46 Table 19: Time-on-Task for FIRE Incidents by Stations and Unit 46 GEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS - FIRE 47 Figure 28: Fire Heat Map – Including Highway Vehicle Accidents 47 Figure 29: Fire Heat Map – Without Highway Vehicle Accidents 48 EMERGENCY MEDICAL RELATED SERVICES 49 TEMPORAL ANALYSIS 49 Table 20: Average EMS Related Incidents per Day by Month of Year 49 Figure 30: Average Emergency Medical Incidents per Day by Month-of-Year 49 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 4 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 21: Average EMS Related Incidents per Day by Day of Week 50 Figure 31: Average EMS Incidents per Day by Day-of-Week 50 Table 22: Average EMS Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day 50 Figure 32: Average EMS Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day 51 Table 23: EMS Time-on-Task by Stations and Unit, with-Transports & non-Transport Combined 52 Table 24: EMS Time-on-Task by Stations and Unit, with Transports 53 Table 25: Average Transport & non-Transport EMS Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day 53 Figure 33: Average Transport & Non-Transport EMS per Hour by Hour-of-Day 54 GEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS – EMS 55 Figure 34: EMS Heat Map 55 REVIEW OF SYSTEM PERFORMANCE 56 CASCADE OF EVENTS 56 Detection 56 Call Processing 56 Turnout Time 56 Travel Time 57 Total Response Time 57 Figure 35: Progression of Response Intervals 57 Comparison of Workloads by Demand Zone 57 Table 26: Vehicle Responses and Workload by Station Demand Zone 57 Figure 36: Workloads by First Due Station Demand Zones 58 Table 27: Time-on-Task by Station, Unit, and Response Category 59 Comparison of Workloads by Unit Hour Utilization (UHU) 59 Table 28: All Responses UHU by Unit 61 Figure 37: Unit Utilizations in the Oakland Park System 62 RESPONSE TIME CONTINUUM 62 Fire 62 Figure 38: Example of Traditional Time Temperature Curve 63 Figure 39: Modern vs. Legacy Flashover Timeline 64 EMS 64 Figure 40: Cascade of Events for Sudden Cardiac Arrest with Shockable Rhythm 65 Description of First Arriving Unit Performance 65 Table 29: Response Performance of First Arriving Units 65 Figure 41: P2/P3 Intervals for First Arrived Units on EMS Incidents 66 Figure 42: Chute Intervals for First Arrived Units on EMS Incidents 66 Figure 43: Drive Intervals for First Arrived Units on EMS Incidents 67 Figure 44: Response Intervals for First Arrived Units on EMS Incidents 67 Figure 45: P2/P3 Intervals for First Arrived Units on FIRE Incidents 68 Figure 46: Chute Intervals for First Arrived Units on FIRE Incidents 68 Figure 47: Drive Intervals for First Arrived Units on FIRE Incidents 69 Figure 48: Response Intervals for First Arrived Units on FIRE Incidents 69 FIRST ARRIVING UNIT RESPONSE INTERVALS BY FIRST DUE STATION 70 Comparison of First Due Zone Stats 70 Table 30: Comparison of Incident Counts by FDZs as Taken from Data Tables as Supplied to FITCH and as Reported by Broward County 70 Table 31: Performance Intervals of Vehicles First Arrived at Scene by First Due Station at the 50th Percentile (Average) on Priority 6 EMS Incidents. 71 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 5 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 32: Performance Intervals of Vehicles First Arrived at Scene by First Due Station at the 90th Percentile on Priority 6 EMS Incidents. 71 Table 33: Performance Intervals of Vehicles First Arrived at Scene by First Due Station at the 50th Percentile (Average) on Priority 2 FIRE Incidents. 71 Table 34: Performance Intervals of Vehicles First Arrived at Scene by First Due Station at the 90th Percentile on Priority 2 FIRE Incidents. 71 Figure 49: Performance Intervals for Vehicles First Arrived at Scene on FIRE Incidents by First Due Station 72 Figure 50: Chute Intervals for Vehicles First Arrived at Scene on FIRE Incidents by First Due Station 72 Figure 51: Drive Intervals for Vehicles First Arrived at Scene on FIRE Incidents by First Due Station 72 Figure 52: Response Intervals for Vehicles First Arrived at Scene on FIRE Incidents by First Due Station 73 EFFECTIVE RESPONSE FORCE CAPABILITIES 73 Table 35: Drive Interval at 90th %-tile for ERF by First Due Station for Priority 1 Incidents 73 Table 36: Drive Interval at 90th %-tile for ERF by First Due Station for Priority 2 Incidents 73 Figure 53: Effective Response Force Capability by First Due Station for Priority 1 Incidents 74 RELIABILITY FACTORS 74 Table 37: First Due Compliance by Station 74 Figure 54: Reliability by First Due Station 75 SIMULTANEOUS INCIDENTS 75 Table 38: Simultaneous Incidents by First Due Station. 75 Figure 55: Master Incident Record Showing Four Simultaneities 76 COMMUNITY RISK ASSESSMENT AND RISK LEVELS 77 PROBABILITY/CONSEQUENCE OF FIRE EVENT RISK 77 Figure 56: Probability and Consequence Matrix for Fire Risk 77 Table 39: Summary of Risk Matrix 78 Table 40: NFIRS Reported Fire Data - 2012 thru 2014 78 OVERALL EVALUATION, OBSERVATIONS, AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 79 OVERALL EVALUATION 79 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS 79 Response Time 79 Impact of Adaptive Staffing 79 Table 41: Response Interval of All Vehicles Assigned to FIRE Incidents in First Due Zones Served by Station 20 82 Table 42: Response Interval of First Arrived Vehicles on EMS Incidents in First Due Zones Served by Station 20 82 Table 43: Response Intervals of All Vehicles Assigned to FIRE Incidents in All First Due Zones Comprising Oakland Park 82 Table 44: Response Interval of First Arrived Vehicles on EMS Incidents in All First Due Zones Comprising Oakland Park 82 GIS Modeling 84 Figure 57: Oakland Park Stations Only - 5 Minute Drive Time 84 Figure 58: Oakland Park Stations Only - 6 Minute Drive Time 85 Figure 59: Marginal Utility of Existing Fire Stations - 5 Minutes 85 Figure 60: Travel Time - 5-Minute Performance 86 Figure 61: Marginal Utility of Existing Fire Stations - 6 Minutes 86 Figure 62: Travel Time - 6-Minute Performance 87 Figure 63: Marginal Utility of Optimized Locations - 5 minutes 88 Figure 64: Optimized Travel Time - 5 Minute Performance 88 Figure 65: Marginal Utility of Optimized Locations - 6 minutes 89 Figure 66: Optimized Travel Time - 6 Minute Performance 89 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 6 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 90 Figure 67: Benchmark & Comparative Response Time Components for Oakland Park 90 atTable 45: Comparative Chute Times - Oakland Park v. Broward Aggregate 91 CONCLUSION & SERVICE ENHANCEMENTS 92 NEAREST UNIT RESPONSES FOR LIFE THREATENING EVENTS 92 PLACE INTO THE CITY’S CIP PROGRAM THE REPLACEMENT OF STATION 9 AND STATION 20 TO OPTIMIZED LOCATIONS 93 DEVELOP CAPABILITY FOR PEAK HOUR UNITS (PHU), AND DEPLOY AN EMS PHU WHEN WORKLOAD DEMANDS 93 ATTACHMENTS – Attachment A – Welch t-Test Attachment B – Stakeholder Feedback on Draft Report Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 7 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City engaged Fitch and Associates (FITCH) to undertake an objective analysis of the operations and staffing of the Oakland Park Fire Rescue Department. Comprehensive data based quantitative and geospatial analyses were utilized to objectively evaluate the historical community demand for services by type and severity. Occupancy level data were obtained from the Insurance Services Office (ISO) and was utilized to assess occupancy level risk within the community. The overall risk profile is similar or better than comparable communities, the city’s loss experience from fire, as reported to the U.S. Fire Administration, compares favorably against state and national experience. FITCH’s opinion is that overall, the City is well-served by its fire department. A policy that maintains the existing resources and levels of service is well justified. Notwithstanding the above, there are several opportunities for the City to provide service level enhancements should they desire. This includes maximizing the use of nearest unit response in life- threatening situations; consider relocating Stations 9 and / or 20 to optimize response times; and contemplate future use of peak-hour units for EMS when demands for service exceed current resources. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 8 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 COMMUNITY PROFILE & CHARECTERISTICS Population and Demographics The City of Oakland Park encompasses approximately 8 square miles and is located on the eastern portion of central Broward County. Bordering Fort Lauderdale to the north, and with the Atlantic Ocean less than 3 miles away, the City is in close proximity to major attractions including the Broward Center for Performing Arts, Broward Convention Center, Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport (FLL) and Port Everglades. Oakland Park’s population is estimated at 43,319. Its diverse community is comprised of 62.6% white and 25.6% black. Hispanic and Latino residents of any race represent 25.6% of the population. As of 2010 20.1% of the population was under 18 years old, compared to 22.4% in Broward County overall, and those over age 65 years old were only 9.7% compared to 14.3% for Broward County1. The City is primarily residential in nature, with just over 40% of its land use dedicated to residential properties. The City also has a significant proportion devoted to commercial, light industrial and community facility uses. This is reflected in the City's tax base which is comprised of 59.12% residential, 24.69% commercial, 14.74% industrial use and 1.45% other miscellaneous. Over the past 10 years, the city’s taxable property values have increased from 1.9 billion to $2.5 billion representing an annual growth rate of approximately 3.2% per year.2 Financial Overview The fire department’s resources have remained relatively stable over the past five years. In the current budget, the department has an authorized strength of 67 full-time personnel. The fiscal year 2017 adopted budget totals $9,686,629, which includes $8,542,346 for personnel services and $644,408 for normal operating cost. The capital budget for fiscal year 2017 is $499,875.3 The Department is funded through use of a special fire assessment fees, ambulance transport fees and general fund revenues. Topography One concern cited by some emergency personnel involved the potential impact of the Florida East Coast (FEC) rail line running north and south through the eastern portion of the city. The city currently has no 1 Accessed from Census Bureau Quick Facts at https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/12011,1250575 on March 7, 2017. 2 City of Oakland Park (2015). Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Accessed at http://www.oaklandparkfl.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/2905 February 15, 2017 3 City of Oakland Park (2016). Adopted Budget FY 2017. Accessed at http://www.oaklandparkfl.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/3569 February 15, 2017. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 9 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 fire stations positioned east of the FEC tracks. This rail line has been identified as a route for the future Brightline passenger rail service running between Miami and West Palm Beach – initially slated to begin service sometime later in 2017. During meetings with stakeholders, some raised questions regarding the potential impact future rail traffic may have on emergency vehicle responses. While an exact assessment specific to Oakland Park is not possible at this juncture, the following discussion examines this question more generally based on national research. A study from the Federal Railroad Administration4 found that it was very difficult to determine the impact of a delayed response and convert it into a quantifiable impact. The report indicated impacts on communities from delayed response due to blocked crossings, while sometimes severe, are less than the impacts of traffic delays and congestion caused by blocked crossings. While the report acknowledged some anecdotal reports of problems resulting from delays in emergency response due to blocked highway-railroad crossings, detailed information is not available to estimate the costs or impacts of such delays nationally or even at a local level. Noting that many freight trains are longer than one mile, at 20 MPH, such a train would take 3 minutes to clear a crossing. Case studies from the report found some communities mitigate the potential impact of potential railroad crossing delays by ensuring fire and EMS resources exist on both sides of the railroad track. While Oakland Park does not have a city resource located east of these tracks, the opportunity to mitigate any potential impact by incorporating external resources is discussed in more detail under the Recommendations section of this report. 4 Federal Railroad Administration (2006). Impact of Blocked Highway/Rail Grade Crossings On Emergency Response Services. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 10 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 SERVICES PROVIDED Service Delivery Programs Rapid access to the city emergency services begins with the Broward County Regional 911 System. Fitch recently completed a comprehensive review of the county’s 911 operations, and some of the data utilized in this analysis was derived from that study. Overall that recent study found the 911 system performs well, but there are areas that were identified for further improvement. One specific area of interest to this study involves furthering the use of automatic aid through nearest unit response for life threatening fire rescue emergencies. This concept was discussed in detail in FITCH’s full report on the Broward County 911 system which can be found on Broward County’s website at http://www.broward.org/CommunicationsTechnology/Documents/BrowardCountyAssessmentRegional 911-FinalReport12222016.pdf Fire Suppression Fire suppression services are provided from one of three fire stations located throughout the city. Fire station 9 is the busiest of these facilities, and houses on a 24-hour basis a battalion chief, fire apparatus with a minimum of three personnel, and a paramedic level EMS transport unit with a minimum of two personnel. Fire station 87 also houses a three-person fire apparatus and a two-person paramedic level EMS transport unit. Fire station 20 utilizes a cross staffed crew of three personnel to operate either a fire apparatus or paramedic level EMS transport unit depending on the type of incident which they are assigned. This adaptive / cross staffing of two apparatus with a single three-person crew was one issue of particular interest in the study. The findings from that analysis are addressed later in the report. The department’s assigned staffing for each of its 24-hour shifts involves 17 personnel, with a minimum staffing level of 14 at all times. The department reported its annual total call volume was 8,184 in 2015. This reflects a 9.63% increase from 2011, or an annualized increase of 2.4%. As part of the county’s large metropolitan area encompassing approximately 1.9 million citizens, Oakland Park takes advantage of partnering with other fire rescue agencies in the delivery of services. Historically, this has involved a robust mutual aid system, utilization of regional communications, specialized services, and even logistical support. Overall, the department’s active participation in this collaborative approach has served its residents well. The department has received a Class 3 rating from the Insurance Services Office’s (ISO) Public Protection Classification survey placing it in the top 8.7% of over 48,000 rated fire agencies across the nation. As noted in its January 2016 evaluation by ISO, the City was only 1.49 points short of achieving a Class 2 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 11 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 rating. The best opportunities to improve its rating to a Class 2 a in the areas of the water supply system, number of on-duty personnel and improvements to the Department’s training program. Emergency Medical Services The department provides Advanced Life Support (ALS) level service by use of paramedics deployed on all front-line apparatus. Through the use of Broward County’s 911 system, emergency medical incidents are processed utilizing emergency medical dispatch (EMD). The system allows for calls to be categorized based on their severity, and provides callers with pre-arrival instructions in that brief time-period before paramedics arrive on the scene. The city contracts with their own medical director who oversees the paramedic program. Personnel operate through use of written medical protocols and there is an identified continuous quality improvement process when medical issues arise. These issues are initially addressed by the on-duty battalion chief or EMS captain. The medical director’s quality improvement process focuses on sentinel events, and all such incidents are forwarded to both medical director and the EMS captain for review. It was noted that the department does not currently report cumulative statistics on certain key performance measures, such as cardiac arrest resuscitation rates. Broward County is fortunate to have several trauma centers available in those instances where injury severity requires that level of service. Rescue & Hazardous Materials Oakland Park’s demand for specialized services, specifically hazardous materials and technical rescue responses, it quite limited. In 2015, there were only 34 hazardous materials incidents, and only a single incident classified as heavy rescue. For several decades Broward County has funded regional services through the use of select municipal partners, and directly. These specialized teams provide both hazardous materials and technical rescue specialized services to all municipalities. Oakland Park has taken advantage of these countywide regional services and utilizes these regional teams when required. For the remaining analysis of service demands required of Oakland Park Fire Rescue we limit the review to the two primary services – fire suppression and EMS. Current Deployment Strategy Fire Stations & Apparatus The City currently operates three fire stations geographically dispersed across the city. Stations 9, 20 and 87, along with a brief summary of each facility and its associated apparatus, is presented below. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 12 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Fire Station #9 STATION Year Built # Bays # Sleeping Quarters Diesel Exhaust System Station #9 1967 2 drive-thru 8 Yes APARATUS Unit # Year Make Model Battalion 9 327 2016 Ford F350 Quint 9 358 2013 E-One HP78 Rescue 9 361 2016 Braun Super Chief Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 13 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Fire Station #20 STATION Year Built # Bays # Sleeping Quarters Diesel Exhaust System Station #20 1968 3 useable back- ups 7 Yes APARATUS Unit # Year Make Model Rescue 20 359 2016 Braun Super Chief Engine 20* 357 2006 Pierce Enforcer *A single 3-person crew provides adaptive/cross-staffing of both the rescue and engine, depending on the type of incident they are dispatched. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 14 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Fire Station #87 STATION Year Built # Bays # Sleeping Quarters Diesel Exhaust System Station #87 1982 2 drive-thru 7 Yes APARATUS Unit # Year Make Model Squirt 87 356 2006 Pierce Aerial (61 ft.) Rescue 87 360 2016 Braun Super Chief Rescue boat* Jon Boat *The rescue boat is not staffed on a regular basis, but deployed when the incident type requires it use. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 15 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Current Staffing Strategy Organizational Structure The agency is led by a fire chief who reports directly to the city manager. The fire chief is assisted by a single assistant fire chief and a fire marshal who serves at the rank of division chief. Currently operating with an ‘acting’ fire chief, not all 40-hour management positions are currently filled. The department should seek to fill each of these positions as soon as practical. The agency operates under a traditional 24/48-hour work schedule and includes 17 personnel assigned to each of three platoons. Shift staffing includes a battalion chief, fire captain, three lieutenants, three driver engineers, three rescue supervisors, and six firefighter positions. Fire prevention has three full- time inspectors and one part-time fire inspector. The department’s current organizational structure is shown below. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 16 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 1: Oakland Park Fire Organizational Chart5 Training Personnel must be certified at a Firefighter II Level and certified as a Paramedic from the State of Florida prior to employment. As required by the state, personnel receive ongoing continuing medical education to ensure their competency in emergency medical care. Fire training encompasses various activities designed to meet requirements from National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and ISO. Various modalities are utilized, including training delivered by company officers and multi-company drills conducted at either the Broward Fire Academy or Coral Springs training facilities. The department also 5 Oakland Park FY 2017 Annual Budget. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 17 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 makes good use of inter-agency training opportunities partnering with other fire rescue agencies throughout the county. The department previously had a 40-hour training officer position that was eliminated during the economic recession. This has reportedly resulted in challenges to accomplish mandatory training needs, including night drills, multi-company drills, etc. A strong training program facilitates the competent delivery of public safety services, and enhances personnel safety. As noted above, ISO identified training as one area that has a greater likelihood of improving the department’s overall rating. For an agency this size, a dedicated training officer is justified. The City would benefit from re-establishment of this position. Inspections Under the supervision of its fire marshal, three full-time fire inspectors and one part-time fire inspector inspect and maintain files on all properties subject to inspections. The department ensures building fire protection systems and features are inspected and functioning properly prior to approving any certificate of occupancy. The department reports high level of compliance with their plan review turnaround goals and annual fire inspections – 87% for fire inspections on an annual basis. The department also delivers a variety of fire safety programs throughout the year focusing on elementary children, as well as providing opportunities at career days for middle and high school students. As resources permit, greater emphasis on community education programs, and enhancing compliance with goals towards fire inspections and plan reviews, will further benefit the community’s risk profile. Logistics The department utilizes the Broward Sheriff's Office Fire Rescue Logistics warehouse, or a private vendor, for most of their day-to-day supply needs. Supplies are delivered directly to the city several times a week. Fleet services are provided through the city’s public works department through the use of a five- member fleet maintenance team. Fire apparatus and rescue ambulances receive preventive maintenance service every three months as recommended by the manufacturer. Administrative and fire inspector vehicles are serviced every four months. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 18 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 METHODOLOGY Data was obtained from Broward County’s Office of Regional Communications and Technology (ORCAT). This data was used to inform descriptive statistics described here, as well as integrated into geographic information system (GIS) analysis. Data extracted by ORCAT from the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system was provided to the consultant as an Excel file with nine worksheets. The first worksheet in this Excel file contained the 8,217 master incident records that logged FIRE responses in the Oakland Park jurisdiction for CY2015. These records were imported into the consultant’s database that was custom designed to facilitate the analyses required for this report. A sample record from the consultant’s Master Incident data table is presented below. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 19 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 2: Sample Record from the Master Incident Data Table The next eight worksheets in this Excel file contained 90,978 records. Each record logged a single status change for a unit assigned to a response. Attempting to conduct analyses directly from the status change data table, as received, would have been especially inefficient. The workaround was to first segregate the status change records by Event Number from the Master Incident records, and then further segregate the status change records by unit assigned to the incident. In this manner, a Vehicles Assigned data table was created in the consultant’s database. A sample record from consultant’s Vehicles Assigned data table is presented below. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 20 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 3: Sample Record from the Vehicles Assigned Data Table In this report, the term “incident” will refer to a request for service that resulted in the creation of a record in the Master Incident data table. The term “response” will refer to the assignment of a unit to the incident. Multiple units may be assigned to a single incident. Each “response” created a record in the Vehicles Assigned data table. Time intervals are presented using the [hh:mm:ss] format. The terms “average” and “standard deviation” have their commonly accepted meanings. Time intervals reported at the 90th percentile are calculated using a ranked 90th protocol. All of the instances between the 90th and 91st percentiles are collected and averaged. This methodology was used expressly because it avoids giving undue weight to long duration outliers that may be atypical and may not reflect normal operations in the jurisdiction. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 21 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 TECHNOLOGY LIMITATIONS Relationship of CAD and CDR Timelines Access to data in the Broward system is complicated because there is no single source for all of the timestamps required to describe the overall performance of the system. The telephony server and the Computer Aided Dispatch system contain the primary data tables for the system. The relationship of these two data tables is diagrammed in Figure 4. The upper timeline in Figure 4, below, shows the names and relative sequence of the timestamps that comprise a Call Detail Record, CDR, for an incident in the telephony server. The lower timeline in the Figure below shows the names and relative sequence of the timestamps that comprise the record of an incident in the CAD server. Figure 4: Relationship Between Timelines in the CAD and CDR Data Tables The processing of an incident begins when a call rings in to the 911 trunk line at [CDR Begin]. The answer delay interval P1, as defined to FITCH by Broward County, extends from when the calling phone number is validated at [ANI Valid] until a dispatcher is identified as available at [Call Connected]. The intake dispatcher picks up the call at [AGENT CONNECTED]. The spillover of data from the telephony server (the CDR timeline) to the CAD server (the CAD timeline) occurs at this time point. The beginning of the spillover process is logged in the telephony data tables as the [AGENT CONNECTED] timestamp. The end of the spillover process is logged into the CAD data tables as the [Received] timestamp. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 22 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Even if a [Received] timestamp is logged into the CAD, it still may not be reliable. FITCH learned that the CAD [Received] timestamps is overwritten every time the Intake dispatcher rebids or asks the 911- system software to verify and update a caller’s location. It is common for multiple rebids to be requested on an incoming 911 call. Each rebid introduces an increasing offset between the caller’s actual ring-in and the [Received] timestamp. The intake processing interval, P2, extends from the [Received] timestamp to the [Transmit] timestamp when the intake dispatcher releases the incident to the assignment workstations. The assignment processing interval, P3, extends from the [Transmit] timestamp until the [Dispatch] timestamp. The combined P2/P3 interval extends from the [Received] timestamp until the [Dispatched] timestamp. Dispatch Processing Intervals A major deficiency of information technology in the BSO Communications system is that for more than half the combined LAW and FIRE incidents, the incident record in the CAD server cannot be linked to a unique incident record in the CDR server. The consequence is that there is an inability to reliably link phone records in the telephony served to incident records in the CAD server and establish a seamless start-to-finish timeline for each incident. These limitations apply to the Oakland Park incidents that flow through the Broward County Communications Center. As shown in Figure 4, above, the [Received] timestamp in the CAD is a misnomer. This timestamp logs when an incident record is initiated into the CAD server, NOT when the caller rang-in at the 911 PSAP. At best, there is a systematic offset between ring-in and the [Received] timestamp. The amount of this offset is not constant, but can vary from incident to incident depending on the number of ANI rebids requested by the Intake dispatcher. The technology issues noted in this report are currently being addressed by the County. Credibility of P2/P3 Statistics The credibility of P2/P3 statistics derived from timestamps in the CAD is in question. Counter-intuitively, the missing [Received] timestamps pose more of a problem than the ones that are present. The missing [Received] timestamps erode the credibility of the P2/P3 intervals that can be calculated from the [Received] timestamps that are available. An assumption about the P2/P3 intervals that would be convenient is that the numbers automatically serve as a metric for the system as a whole, that the variability in the P2/P3 intervals that they calculate, properly reflects the variability in all the P2/P3 intervals, even the ones not able to be calculated. This assumption is not warranted. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 23 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 The why/how behind the missing timestamps is unknown. The first consequence is that a reverse bias would then be imposed on the P2/P3 intervals calculated from the remaining timestamps. The second consequence is that the calculated P2/P3 timestamps are statistically biased and do not accurately represent the properties of the system as a whole. Preliminary investigation of the why/how behind the missing timestamps indicates that operator intervention by the intake dispatchers may play a major role in the missing timestamps. This is a problem, as human intervention is almost guaranteed to be biased and not statistically random. Even more confounding, the degree of bias is then almost guaranteed to be operator specific, thereby introducing a time dependent variability to the bias, depending on which dispatcher is on duty at what hour-of-day. The extent to which the bias skews the P2/P3 interval to longer or shorter durations is unknown. The Broward County E911 Consolidated Communications Center logs 8,217 FIRE related incidents as occurring within the Oakland Park jurisdiction for CY2015. Of these incident records, 2,907 (35.4%) lack a [Received] timestamp. How many of the remaining [Received] timestamps are subject to increased offsets due to multiple ANI rebids is not known. Field Response Intervals The credibility of field response intervals must be viewed with caution because of a similar problem with missing timestamps. The conduct of field operations is recorded into the CAD as a progression of timestamps that log each status change for each vehicle involved in the response. The logging of most of these intermediate status change timestamps is triggered by a manual input from an operator. When a timestamp is not logged, it is due to an act of omission by an operator. Again, human intervention is almost guaranteed to be biased and not statistically random. The consultant estimates 24% of the Vehicle Assigned records in the CAD are missing one or more of the intermediate status change timestamps needed to calculate the complete set of field response intervals for an incident. Another 2% of the Vehicle Assigned records contain errors that lead to the calculation of negative response intervals, which means that one of the two timestamps that delimit the response interval must be drastically in error. The why/how behind the missing status change timestamps is unknown. What specific bias was operating to select which status change timestamps went missing is unknown. The first consequence is that a reverse bias would then be imposed on the field response intervals calculated from the remaining timestamps. The second consequence is that the calculated field response intervals are statistically biased and do not accurately represent the properties of the system as a whole. The extent to which the bias skews the response intervals to longer or shorter durations is unknown. Table 1 presents a tally of the identifiable error conditions in the Vehicles Assigned data tables that relate to operations in Oakland Park. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 24 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 1: Error Conditions Identified in the Vehicles Assigned Data Table Identifiable Error Conditions Instances Unit dispatched with no termination status change: AV or CL or CX 88 Downstream status changes logged; no dispatched status 14 Enroute to hospital logged; no arrived at hospital logged 454 Arrived hospital logged; no enroute hospital logged 74 Enroute hospital logged, no arrived at scene logged 141 Arrived hospital logged, no arrived at scene logged 124 Arrived at scene logged, no enroute logged 1,162 Dispatched, no enroute logged, no arrived logged (corrected for CL & CX) 2,961 Downstream status changes logged, but one response interval < 00:00:00 345 Total Error Conditions 5,363 Total Vehicles Assigned Response Records 20,584 Percent Records with Error Conditions 26.1% The error conditions tallied in Table 1 are so egregious that they become readily identifiable by simple inspection of the Vehicles Assigned data table. More subtle error conditions may remain undetected. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 25 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 COMMUNITY RESPONSE HISTORY Relationship to Broward County Oakland Park has a population of almost 43,000 with a population density of about 5,700 per square mile. The City is embedded in a highly urbanized area of Broward County. Emergency services are dispatched by the Broward Sheriff’s Office through the Broward E911 Consolidated Communications Center. The number of incidents requiring FIRE responses in Oakland Park compared to the rest of Broward County is presented in Figure 5. Figure 5: FIRE Incidents in Broward County by Jurisdiction Municipality Fire Incidents Rate per 100,000 Pop. Miramar FR 11,804 9,672 North Lauderdale FR 5,045 12,298 Lighthouse Point FR 1,411 13,641 Pembroke Pines FR 21,580 13,945 Davie FR 14,023 15,244 Margate-Coconut Creek FR 16,568 15,602 Sunrise FR 14,534 17,212 Tamarac FR 11,223 18,573 Oakland Park FR 8,178 18,879 Lauderhill FR 14,198 21,227 Hollywood FR 30,929 21,972 Hallandale FR 8,394 22,617 Pompano Beach FR 28,028 28,072 Fort Lauderdale FR 54,316 32,815 In the context of the number of FIRE incidents, Oakland Park is small compared to the surrounding municipalities. The relative size of Oakland Park relative to its environs manifests in terms of Mutual Aid InBound and OutBound. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 26 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Mutual Aid OutBound For purposes of this report, Mutual Aid OutBound was defined as Oakland Park units responding to incidents outside of the Oakland Park jurisdiction. No attempt was made to address the inter- municipality arrangements that may govern these responses. Table 2: Mutual Aid OutBound Unit ID Dispatched Arrived At Scene Time-on-Task [hh:mm:ss] B9P 4 0 00:03:20 E87 1 1 00:31:36 E9 2 1 00:02:58 Q87 3 1 00:10:11 Q9 2 0 00:31:21 R220 3 2 01:21:17 R87 19 13 08:29:20 R9 4 3 01:08:26 SQ87 1 1 00:18:04 Totals MA OutBound 39 22 12:36:23 All OP Units 7,179:03:43 MA OutBnd / All OP [%] 0.18 % Timestamps for mutual aid outbound vehicle records are especially unreliable because of a very large portion of absent timestamps. Mutual Aid OutBound imposes a negligible burden on emergency service operations in Oakland Park. Time-on-Task for MA OutBound amounts to only 0.18% of Time-on-Task for all emergency services in Oakland Park. Mutual Aid InBound For purposes of this report, Mutual Aid InBound was defined as ex-Oakland Park units responding to incidents within the Oakland Park jurisdiction. The ex-Oakland park units most often responded in conjunction with Oakland Park units. No attempt was made to address the inter-municipality arrangements that may govern these responses. Table 3: Contribution of Mutual Aid InBound to Total Time-on-Task for Oakland Park Incidents Unit ID MA InBound Vehicle Assigned Records Time-on-Task [hh:mm:ss] MA InBound as % of Total Time-on-Task Ex-OP all 785 352:47:49 4.90% OP 19,799 7,179:03:43 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 27 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Mutual Aid InBound makes a modest, but definitive, contribution to the conduct of emergency services within Oakland Park. The 20 largest ex-OP contributors to Mutual Aid InBound are listed in the Table below. Table 4: Twenty Largest Contributors to MA InBound Unit ID MA InBound Vehicle Assigned Records Time-on-Task [hh:mm:ss] SMF 4 22:22:51 R35 36 21:58:25 R37 34 21:41:00 CN26 15 19:36:30 GP1OP 168 17:37:19 R16 22 14:09:46 R237 17 11:03:49 REDX 1 10:51:57 R53 14 08:50:57 R29 15 08:44:26 BC17 6 08:20:30 C57 1 07:26:31 E23 5 07:26:13 B16 8 06:03:07 E35 11 05:40:22 HM17 3 05:28:55 R246 6 05:27:21 I509 3 05:16:14 D2 32 05:15:55 B2 4 04:59:53 Sub-Total 372 219:09:50 Other ex-OP 413 132:37:59 ex-OP all 785 352:47:49 Response History Table 5: Incidents Dispatched by Category in Oakland Park Category Incident Records Incident per Day Percentage EMS 6,129 16.84 74.9% FIRE 1,305 3.68 16.0% CX 500 1.42 6.1% XX (Unaccounted) 244 0.47 3.0% Total 8,178 22.41 100.0% In the above table, “CX” designates incident records in the Master Incident table where all units assigned to the response were cancelled before any of them arrived at scene. “Unaccounted” refers to Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 28 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 incident records in the Master Incident table where the [Signal_Type] field is blank: no signal description was logged for the incident. The data in Table 5 is presented graphically in Figure 6, below. Figure 6: Incidents Dispatched by Category Table 6: Average Incidents per Day by Month-of-Year EMS EMS wTr Patients Transported FIRE CX Jan 16.10 11.29 12.71 3.19 1.68 Feb 15.14 10.29 11.50 4.18 1.68 Mar 16.06 10.97 11.68 3.19 1.42 Apr 17.50 11.67 12.33 4.07 1.43 May 16.55 10.35 11.35 3.13 1.90 Jun 16.50 11.63 12.57 3.20 1.67 Jul 16.29 10.94 12.23 4.03 1.32 Aug 16.81 11.23 12.48 3.90 1.29 Sep 17.67 12.47 13.17 3.93 1.10 Oct 17.48 11.97 12.71 3.48 1.13 Nov 18.03 12.10 12.60 3.37 1.33 Dec 17.10 11.90 12.74 4.19 1.06 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 29 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 7: Average Incident per Day by Month-of-Year The data presented in Table 6 and in Figure 7, above, show that no strong seasonality drive requests for emergency services in Oakland Park. What is sometimes seen in south Florida municipalities is a wintertime spike in emergency medical incidents associated with the influx of an aged population of “snow birds”. This does not appear to affect Oakland Park. Table 7: EMS and FIRE Response Intervals by Priority and by Month-of-Year Month Response Intervals at the 90th %-tile EMS FIRE Priority 1 Priority 6 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 6 Jan 07:25 08:14 08:49 09:12 12:53 Feb 08:31 08:09 09:26 09:54 14:42 Mar 08:04 08:24 10:45 09:13 12:47 Apr 08:14 07:42 10:28 07:53 10:20 May 06:59 07:49 07:46 09:05 12:20 Jun 08:30 07:57 09:01 08:03 11:18 Jul 08:28 07:55 09:03 07:52 16:19 Aug 10:35 07:54 11:26 07:37 10:55 Sep 08:21 08:10 10:58 08:46 10:54 Oct 07:18 08:02 09:46 08:39 12:30 Nov 08:04 08:59 10:07 08:47 12:24 Dec 07:19 08:06 09:33 10:23 12:37 Jan - Dec 08:07 08:08 10:11 08:58 12:20 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 30 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 8: EMS Response Intervals at the 90th %-tile on Priority 6 Incidents Figure 9: FIRE Response Intervals at the 90th %-tile on Priority 2 Incidents Both EMS and FIRE response intervals at the 90th percentile show a slight seasonality, with longer response intervals being observed in the winter months. Table 8: Average Incidents per Day by Day-of-Week EMS FIRE CX Mon 15.15 3.65 1.46 Tue 17.79 3.67 1.52 Wed 17.15 3.71 1.21 Thu 17.21 4.10 1.25 Fri 15.91 3.45 1.53 Sat 17.77 3.75 1.50 Sun 16.46 3.23 1.44 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 31 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 10: Average Incidents per Day by Day-of-Week Table 9: Average Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day Hour EMS FIRE CX 0000 0.47400 0.10140 0.05480 0100 0.42740 0.06850 0.05480 0200 0.34520 0.06300 0.02740 0300 0.32880 0.07120 0.02740 0400 0.30960 0.04930 0.03840 0500 0.33150 0.06580 0.01640 0600 0.39450 0.11230 0.04660 0700 0.54520 0.13700 0.03840 0800 0.76710 0.13970 0.04660 0900 0.81100 0.17260 0.05210 1000 0.92050 0.20550 0.05750 1100 0.90680 0.20000 0.05750 1200 0.92330 0.21370 0.10140 1300 0.97260 0.21370 0.06300 1400 0.92050 0.21640 0.08220 1500 0.91510 0.24930 0.09320 1600 0.90960 0.20270 0.07120 1700 0.87400 0.26030 0.09320 1800 0.87120 0.22190 0.10410 1900 0.87950 0.16710 0.07670 2000 0.80000 0.16710 0.06030 2100 0.78360 0.15340 0.04660 2200 0.70410 0.12880 0.05480 2300 0.66030 0.07120 0.05210 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 32 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 11: Average Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 33 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 10: Average Time-on-Task per Hour-of-Day Time-on-Task [x.xxx hours] Hour EMS FIRE CX 0000 0.458 0.103 0.009 0100 0.371 0.070 0.013 0200 0.329 0.203 0.011 0300 0.337 0.079 0.008 0400 0.268 0.046 0.007 0500 0.335 0.104 0.011 0600 0.385 0.439 0.006 0700 0.495 0.224 0.021 0800 0.724 0.133 0.022 0900 0.794 0.149 0.024 1000 0.886 0.183 0.026 1100 0.889 0.149 0.025 1200 0.848 0.184 0.044 1300 0.927 0.174 0.030 1400 0.869 0.161 0.043 1500 0.920 0.291 0.031 1600 0.896 0.338 0.043 1700 0.821 0.251 0.045 1800 0.833 0.256 0.030 1900 0.842 0.136 0.023 2000 0.762 0.206 0.021 2100 0.754 0.130 0.020 2200 0.641 0.102 0.015 2300 0.593 0.080 0.012 Figure 12: Average Time-on-Task per Hour-of-Day Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 34 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 11: All Hazards Time-on-Task by Stations and Unit Station Unit Annual Responses Annual Time-on-Task Average Time-on-Task per Response Sta 09 B9 2,178 474:48:22 00:13:04 B9P 141 11:05:13 00:04:43 C9 18 09:48:29 00:32:41 E9 532 125:46:06 00:14:11 E9P 3 00:04:04 00:01:21 EMS9 225 39:49:51 00:10:37 EMS9P 1 00:04:26 00:04:26 FM9 63 35:12:45 00:33:32 I9 1 00:19:29 00:19:29 Q9 3,726 857:36:39 00:13:48 Q9P 22 00:45:02 00:02:02 R9 3,256 1,868:27:04 00:34:25 R9P 16 00:19:57 00:01:14 Sta 9 Totals 10,182 3,424:07:27 00:20:10 Sta 20 C20 2 01:10:04 00:35:02 E20 1,607 398:39:48 00:14:53 E20P 12 00:26:31 00:02:12 Q20 14 01:29:29 00:06:23 R20 778 401:16:07 00:30:56 R220 1,632 877:52:01 00:32:16 R220P 11 00:12:09 00:01:06 Sta 20 Totals 4,056 1681:06:09 00:24:52 Sta 87 E87 412 104:13:09 00:15:10 E87P 1 00:01 :25 00:01:25 Q87 1,464 373:03:24 00:15:17 Q87P 2 00:01:20 00:00:40 R87 2,456 1,302:09:25 00:31:48 R87P 6 00:09:49 00:01:38 SQ87 1,214 293:52:48 00:14:31 SQ87P 6 00:18:47 00:03:07 Sta 87 Totals 5,561 2,073:50:07 00:22:22 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 35 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 1,681 Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Time intervals in Table 12, below, are calculated as the difference between two timestamps. In many of the incident records, the timestamps required to delimit the time intervals are absent. The number of absent timestamps is not consistent across all four time intervals. Consequently, the incident count is reported as a min-max. The consultant estimates that fully 30% of the incident records in the CAD are missing one or more of the timestamps required to log the complete progression of the response. Table 12: Average P2/P3, Chute, & Travel Intervals by Category for Priority 6 Incidents Incident Category Incidents min - max Dispatch P2/P3 Chute Drive Response EMS 7158 - 8096 00:01:03 00:01:10 00:04:23 00:05:27 FIRE 550 - 783 00:01:36 00:02:16 00:07:15 00:08:31 The data summarized in Table 12, above, was obtained from the individual response interval reports presented below. Figure 13: P2/P3 Intervals from EMS Incidents P2P3 EMS OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Rcvd to Assgn Average 90th %tile 1 1,681 00:01:14 00:02:08 2 27 00:01:41 00:02:07 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 8,096 00:01:03 00:01:49 7 1 00:05:11 00:05:11 8 0 9 30 00:03:02 00:04:38 Total 9,835 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 36 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 1,879 1,555 Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Figure 14: Chute Intervals from EMS Incidents Chute EMS OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Assgn to Enroute Average 90th %tile 1 1,879 00:01:14 00:02:08 2 53 00:01:09 00:02:05 3 9 00:01:02 00:01:21 4 0 5 0 6 7,946 00:01:10 00:02:00 7 1 00:01:14 00:01:14 8 0 9 20 00:01:39 00:03:03 Total 9,908 Figure 15: Drive Intervals from EMS Incidents Drive EMS OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Enroute to Arrvd Average 90th %tile 1 1,555 00:04:11 00:06:28 2 43 00:05:16 00:09:42 3 6 00:04:50 00:05:55 4 0 5 0 6 7,158 00:04:23 00:06:40 7 1 00:07:35 00:07:35 8 0 9 12 00:04:16 00:06:22 Total 8,775 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 37 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 1,696 * 912 Interval Category FDZ Start_Date End_Date Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Figure 16: Response Intervals from EMS Incidents Response EMS OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Assgn to Arrvd Average 90th %-tile 1 1,696 00:05:22 00:08:07 2 54 00:05:11 00:10:41 3 9 00:06:15 00:07:29 4 0 5 0 6 7,991 00:05:27 00:08:08 7 1 00:08:49 00:08:49 8 0 9 18 00:04:27 00:07:08 Total 9,769 Figure 17: P2/P3 Intervals from FIRE Incidents P2P3 FIRE OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Rcvd to Assgn Average 90th %tile 1 912 00:01:19 00:02:12 2 526 00:01:17 00:02:17 3 97 00:02:03 00:03:18 4 0 5 1 00:01:09 00:01:09 6 652 00:01:36 00:02:48 7 6 00:07:06 00:11:15 8 0 9 11 00:05:40 00:13:36 Total 2,205 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 38 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 924 661 Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Figure 18: Chute Intervals from FIRE Incidents Chute FIRE OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Assgn to Enroute Average 90th %tile 1 924 00:01:35 00:02:43 2 1,218 00:01:29 00:02:31 3 154 00:01:03 00:01:54 4 0 5 1 00:00:19 00:00:19 6 783 00:01:20 00:02:16 7 4 00:01:44 00:02:43 8 0 9 12 00:00:53 00:01:10 Total 3,096 Figure 19: Drive Intervals from FIRE Incidents Drive FIRE OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Enroute to Arrvd Average 90th %tile 1 661 00:05:04 00:08:24 2 816 00:04:33 00:07:19 3 139 00:05:39 00:08:58 4 0 5 1 00:01:23 00:01:23 6 550 00:07:15 00:10:50 7 4 00:05:49 00:08:00 8 0 9 8 00:06:52 00:08:38 Total 2,179 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 39 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 705 Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Figure 20: Response Intervals from FIRE Incidents Response FIRE OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Assgn to Arrvd Average 90th %tile 1 705 00:06:42 00:10:11 2 902 00:05:56 00:08:58 3 183 00:06:43 00:10:32 4 0 5 1 00:00:05 00:00:05 6 577 00:08:31 00:12:20 7 4 00:07:33 00:09:29 8 0 9 12 00:04:02 00:09:48 Total 2,384 Figure 21: Average Dispatch, Chute, Drive, & Response Intervals for EMS and FIRE Responses. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 40 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 22: Distribution of Chute Intervals for First Arrived Units Figure 23: Distribution of Drive Intervals for First Arrived Units Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 41 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 13: Vehicles Arrived at Scene & Total Time-on-Task Category Incident Records Vehicles Arrvd At Scene Avg Veh Arrvd At Scene per Incident Annual Time- on-Task [hh:mm:ss] Avg T-on-T per Veh [hh:mm:ss] EMS 6,129 10,043 1.64 5,488:04:41 00:32:47 FIRE 1,305 2,42 1.95 1,270:04:05 00:29:58 Table 14: Vehicles Cancelled Enroute Category Incident Records Vehicles Assigned & Cancelled Avg Veh Assigned & Cancelled per Incident Annual Time- on-Task [hh:mm:ss] Avg T-on-T per Veh [hh:mm:ss] Veh CX 5,165 3,415 0.66 197:04:22 00:03:27 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 42 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 FIRE RELATED SERVICES The following evaluation of fire related services are done from both a temporal dimension and a geographic dimension. Temporal Analysis Temporal analyses were conducted to evaluate patterns in community demands for fire related services. These measures examined the frequency of requests for service in CY2015 by month-of-year, by day-of- week, and by hour-of-day.as shown below. Table 15: Average FIRE Related Incidents per Day by Month-of-Year Month Incidents Average Incidents per Day Annual Distribution January 99 3.19 7.43% February 117 4.18 8.78% March 99 3.19 7.43% April 122 4.07 9.16% May 97 3.13 7.28% June 96 3.20 7.20% July 125 4.03 9.38% August 121 3.90 9.08% September 117 3.93 8.78% October 108 3.48 8.11% November 101 3.37 7.58% December 130 4.19 9.76% Total 1,332 3.65 100.00% Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 43 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 24: Average FIRE Related Incidents per Day by Month-of-Year. Figure 25: Response Intervals for FIRE Incidents at the 90th %-tile by Month-of-Year Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 44 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 26: Average FIRE Related Incidents per Day by Day-of-Week Table 16: Total and Average FIRE Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day Hour-of- Day Incident Count Average Incidents per Hour Percentage 0 37 0.1014 2.78 1 25 0.0685 1.88 2 23 0.0630 1.73 3 26 0.0712 1.95 4 18 0.0493 1.35 5 24 0.0658 1.80 6 41 0.1123 3.08 7 50 0.1370 3.75 8 51 0.1397 3.83 9 63 0.1726 4.73 10 75 0.2055 5.63 11 73 0.2000 5.48 12 78 0.2137 5.85 13 78 0.2137 5.85 14 79 0.2164 5.93 15 91 0.2493 6.83 16 74 0.2027 5.55 17 95 0.2603 7.13 18 81 0.2219 6.08 19 61 0.1671 4.58 20 61 0.1671 4.58 21 56 0.1534 4.20 22 47 0.1288 3.53 23 26 0.0712 1.95 1,333 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 45 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 27: Total and Average FIRE Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day Table 17: FIRE Related Signal Types (Non-Emergency Medical) Signal Type Signal Description Incident Count Percentage Demand S25CF COMMERCAL STRUCTURE FIRE 89 6.56% S25EH ELECTRICAL / UTILITY HAZARD 103 7.54% S25EV ELEVATOR RESCUE 48 3.54% S25HM HAZ-MAT 34 2.51% S25HR HEAVY RESCUE 1 0.07% S25OT OTHER TYPE OF FIRE 101 7.44% S25RS RESIDENTIAL FIRE 50 3.68% S25SI SMOKE INVESTIGATION 10 0.74% S25VF VEHICLE FIRE 77 5.67% S49F FIRE ALARM 352 25.94% S4H ACCIDENT HIGHWAY 318 23.43% S55 EXPLOSION 2 0.15% S68 FIRE /MEDICAL SERVICE 172 12.68% Total FIRE Related Incidents with Veh Arrvd At Scene 1,357 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 46 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 18: Oakland Park Units Arrived At Scene on FIRE Incidents OP Units Arrvd At Scene Incident Count Time-on-Task Percent of Total Sum for all OP Units [hh:mm:ss] Avg per OP Unit [hh:mm:ss] Per Count Per Sum T- on-T 1 684 228:21:17 00:20:01 51.12% 20.19% 2 373 316:35:10 00:25:27 27.88% 27.92% 3 181 240:11:44 00:26:32 13.53% 21.24% 4 59 108:28:35 00:28:03 4.41% 9.59% 5 16 42:48:38 00:29:11 1.20% 3.79% 6 12 48:05:39 00:40:04 0.90% 4.25% 7 12 102:41:12 01:13:20 0.90% 9.08% 8 1 44:39:00 05:34:52 0.07% 3.95% Eight OP units arrived at scene in response to a singular event, a commercial structure fire at 5235 North Dixie Highway. A total of 36 units arrived at scene for this incident, 28 of which were ex-Oakland Park units. Table 19: Time-on-Task for FIRE Incidents by Stations and Unit Station Unit Annual Responses Annual Time-on-Task Average Time-on-Task per Response Sta 09 B9 1,175 265:10:42 00:13:32 B9P 53 03:00:22 00:03:24 C9 17 09:28:03 00:33:24 E9 88 31:40:32 00:21:35 EMS9 85 17:48:31 00:12:34 FM9 51 31:40:23 00:37:15 I9 1 00:19:29 00:19:29 Q9 666 210:25:50 00:18:57 Q9P 11 00:30:39 00:02:47 R9 528 153:56:01 00:17:29 R9P 1 00:01:27 00:01:27 Sta 9 Totals 2,676 724:01:59 00:16:14 Sta 20 E20 807 200:51:13 00:16:25 E20P 6 00:19:22 00:03;13 Q20 4 00:36:49 00:09;12 R20 134 42:33:28 00:19:03 R220 110 31:20:33 00:17:05 Sta 20 Totals 1,061 295:41:25 00:16:43 Sta 87 E87 95 39:29:32 00:24:56 Q87 313 1403:42:52 00:19:52 R87 483 126:08:07 00:15:40 SQ87 264 95:48:35 00:21:29 SQ87 3 00:11:22 00:03:47 Sta 87 Totals 1,158 364:07:41 00:18:52 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 47 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Geographic Analysis - Fire Geographic analysis of demand for fire services was evaluated through the use of a heat map, indicating those areas of the city requiring the greatest demand. Figure 28 shows an interesting pattern where the three main hotspots are located at the intersection between I-95 and three major thoroughfares. Because of the large number of vehicle accidents that occur on the highway, 23.4% of all fire incidents in 2015, the heat map was revised to exclude those incidents and the bias they may represent. Without such Highway vehicle accidents, the heat map reflects that shown in Figure 29. Figure 28: Fire Heat Map – Including Highway Vehicle Accidents Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 48 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 29: Fire Heat Map – Without Highway Vehicle Accidents Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 49 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 EMERGENCY MEDICAL RELATED SERVICES Similar to the analysis done for fire related services, EMS services are evaluated from the temporal and geographic perspective. Temporal Analysis Temporal analyses were conducted to evaluate patterns in community demands for emergency medical related services. These measures examined the frequency of requests for service in CY2015 by month- of-year, by day-of-week, and by hour-of-day.as shown below. Table 20: Average EMS Related Incidents per Day by Month of Year Month Incidents Average Incidents per Day Annual Distribution January 499 16.10 8.15% February 424 15.14 6.92% March 498 16.07 8.13% April 525 17.50 8.57% May 513 16.55 8.38% June 495 16.50 8.08% July 505 16.29 8.25% August 521 16.81 8.51% September 530 17.67 8.66% October 542 17.48 8.85% November 541 18.03 8.84% December 530 17.10 8.66% Total 6,123 100.00% Figure 30: Average Emergency Medical Incidents per Day by Month-of-Year Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 50 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 21: Average EMS Related Incidents per Day by Day of Week Month Incidents Average Incidents per Day Distribution Sunday 788 15.154 12.90% Monday 925 17.788 15.15% Tuesday 892 17.154 14.61% Wednesday 895 17.212 14.66% Thursday 827 15.906 13.54% Friday 924 17.769 15.13% Saturday 856 16.462 14.02% Total 6,107 Figure 31: Average EMS Incidents per Day by Day-of-Week Table 22: Average EMS Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day Hour-of- Day Annual EMS Incidents Average EMS Incidents per Hour-of-Day Percentage 0000 173 0.4740 2.81% 0100 156 0.4274 2.53% 0200 126 0.3452 2.05% 0300 120 0.3288 1.95% 0400 113 0.3096 1.83% 0500 121 0.3315 1.96% 0600 144 0.3945 2.34% 0700 199 0.5452 3.23% 0800 280 0.7671 4.55% 0900 296 0.8110 4.81% 1000 336 0.9205 5.45% 1100 331 0.9068 5.37% 1200 337 0.9233 5.47% 1300 355 0.9726 5.76% Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 51 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 1400 336 0.9205 5.45% 1500 334 0.9151 5.42% 1600 332 0.9096 5.39% 1700 319 0.8740 5.18% 1800 318 0.8712 5.16% 1900 321 0.8795 5.21% 2000 292 0.8000 4.74% 2100 286 0.7836 4.64% 2200 293 0.8041 4.76% 2300 241 0.6603 3.91% Figure 32: Average EMS Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 52 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 23: EMS Time-on-Task by Stations and Unit, with-Transports & non-Transport Combined Station Unit Annual Responses Annual Time-on- Task[hh:m:ss] Average Time-on-Task per Response [hh:m:ss] Sta 09 B9 1,036 217:17:48 00:12:35 B9P 89 08:04:55 00:05:26 C9 1 00:20:26 00:20:26 E9 443 93:33:19 00:12:40 E9P 3 00:04:04 00:01:21 EMS9 143 22:37:02 00:09:29 EMS9P 1 00:04:26 00:04:26 FM9 13 04:25:12 00:20:24 Q9 3,068 649:29:42 00:12:42 Q9P 11 00:14:23 00:01:18 R9 2,739 1,719:56:38 00:37:40 R9P 15 00:18:30 00:01:14 Sta 9 Totals 7,562 2,716:33:25 00:21:33 Sta 20 C20 2 01:10:04 00:35:02 E20 817 184:42:53 00:13:33 E20P 6 00:07:09 00:01:11 Q20 10 00:52:40 00:05:16 R20 647 362:16:28 00:33:35 R220 1,529 847:52:32 00:33:16 R220P 11 00:12:09 00:01:06 Sta 20 Totals 3,022 1,397:13:55 00:27:44 Sta 87 E87 320 65:56:42 00:12:21 E87P 1 00:01:25 00:01:25 Q87 1,159 272:14:25 00:14:05 Q87P 2 00:01:20 00:00;40 R87 1,996 1,183:34:28 00:35:34 R87P 6 00:09:49 00:01:38 SQ87 958 200:54:15 00:12:34 SQ87P 3 00:07:25 00:02:28 Sta 87 Totals 4,445 1,722:59:48 00:23:15 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 53 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Average Average Hr-of-Day EMS EMS nTr Incidents/hr Incidents/hr Average EMS wTr Incidents/hr Transport Percentage Table 24: EMS Time-on-Task by Stations and Unit, with Transports Station Unit Annual Responses Annual Time-on- Task [hh:mm:ss] Average Time-on-Task per Tr Response[hh:mm:ss] Sta 09 B9 6 05:29:04 00:54:50 E9 14 08:15:41 00:35:24 Q9 137 83:23:16 00:36:31 R9 1,769 1,478:06:59 00:50:08 Sta 9 Totals 1,926 1,575:15:00 00:49:04 Sta 20 C20 1 01:06:11 01:06:11 E20 33 16:14:05 00:29:31 R20 372 306:19:32 00:49:24 R220 883 719:42:14 00:48:54 Sta 20 Totals 1,289 1,043:22:02 00:48:33 Sta 87 E87 6 03:48:46 00:38:07 Q87 7 04:31:01 00:38:43 R87 1,167 969:26:29 00:49:50 SQ87 11 07:27:54 00:40:43 Sta 87 Totals 1,191 985:14:10 00:49:38 Table 25: Average Transport & non-Transport EMS Incidents per Hour by Hour-of-Day 0 0.474 0.132 0.342 72.3 % 1 0.427 0.145 0.282 66.0 % 2 0.345 0.126 0.219 63.5 % 3 0.329 0.110 0.219 66.7 % 4 0.310 0.104 0.205 66.4 % 5 0.332 0.107 0.225 67.8 % 6 0.395 0.104 0.290 73.6 % 7 0.545 0.195 0.351 64.3 % 8 0.767 0.247 0.521 67.9 % 9 0.811 0.189 0.622 76.7 % 10 0.921 0.258 0.663 72.0 % 11 0.907 0.258 0.649 71.6 % 12 0.923 0.277 0.647 70.0 % 13 0.973 0.282 0.690 71.0 % 14 0.921 0.323 0.597 64.9 % 15 0.915 0.342 0.573 62.6 % 16 0.910 0.307 0.603 66.3 % 17 0.874 0.315 0.559 63.9 % 18 0.871 0.310 0.562 64.5 % 19 0.879 0.268 0.611 69.5 % 20 0.800 0.271 0.529 66.1 % 21 0.784 0.233 0.551 70.3 % 22 0.704 0.247 0.458 65.0 % 23 0.660 0.225 0.436 66.0 % Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 54 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 33: Average Transport & Non-Transport EMS per Hour by Hour-of-Day Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 55 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Geographic Analysis – EMS Geographic Analysis The relative demand for EMS services is reflected in the Figure below. Four hotspots are easily identifiable in this graphic. The most significant of these is in the area immediately adjacent and around Fire Station 9. Incidents of highway vehicle accidents do not impact this heat map as that category of call are only reflected in the fire related response data Figure 34: EMS Heat Map Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 56 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 REVIEW OF SYSTEM PERFORMANCE The first step in determining the current state of Oakland Park’s deployment model is to establish baseline measures of performance. This analysis is crucial to the ability to discuss alternatives to the status quo and in identifying opportunities for improvement. This portion of the analysis will focus efforts on elements of response time and the cascade of events that lead to timely response with the appropriate apparatus and personnel to mitigate the event. Response time goals should be looked at in terms of total reflex time, or total response time, which includes the dispatch or call processing time, turnout time, and travel time, respectively. Cascade of Events The cascade of events is the sum of the individual elements of time beginning with a state of normalcy and continuing until normalcy is once again returned through the mitigation of the event. The elements of time that are important to the ultimate outcome of a structure fire or critical medical emergency begin with the initiation of the event. For example, the first on-set of chest pain begins the biological and scientific time clock for heart damage irrespective of when 911 is notified. Similarly, a fire may begin and burn undetected for a period of time before the fire department is notified. The emergency response system does not have control over the time interval for recognition or the choice to request assistance. Therefore, OPFD utilizes quantifiable “hard” data points to measure and manage system performance. These elements include alarm processing, turnout time, travel time, and the time spent on-scene. An example of the cascade of events and the elements of performance utilized by OPFD is provided below. Detection Is the element of time between the time an event occurs and someone detects it and the emergency response system has been notified. This is typically accomplished by calling the 911 Primary Safety Answering Point (PSAP). Call Processing This is the element of time measured between when communication center answers the 911 call, processes the information, and subsequently dispatches OPFD. Turnout Time This is the element of time that is measured between the time the fire department is dispatched or alerted of the emergency incident and the time when the fire apparatus or ambulance is enroute to the call. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 57 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Travel Time The travel time is the element of time between when the unit went enroute, or began to travel to the incident, and their arrival on-scene. Total Response Time The total response time, or total reflex time, is the total time required to arrive on-scene beginning with dispatch center answering the phone request for service and the time that the units arrive on-scene. Figure 35: Progression of Response Intervals Comparison of Workloads by Demand Zone Table 26: Vehicle Responses and Workload by Station Demand Zone Station Vehicle Responses % Vehicle Responses Time-on-Task [hh:mm:ss] Percent Tm-on-Task Sta 09 10,182 51.43 % 3,424:07:27 47.70 % Sta 20 4,056 20.49 % 1,681:06:09 23.42 % Sta 87 5,561 28.09 % 2,073:50:07 28.89 % In many systems, assessment of the relative contribution of each station towards the total effort can often be made based on counts of incidents. This does not work in Oakland Park because the response to many incidents involved vehicles from multiple stations, some of which are ex-Oakland Park. An assessment of relative contribution can be made using counts of vehicle responses. A better assessment Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 58 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 of relative activity is based on Time-on-Task. This metric correctly accounts for the participation of vehicles in long duration events. Figure 36: Workloads by First Due Station Demand Zones As noted both in Table 26 and Figure 36 above, Station 9 provides the greatest contribution to handling emergencies within the city, while Station 20 provides the least. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 59 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 27: Time-on-Task by Station, Unit, and Response Category Station Unit Annual Responses EMS EMS Avg Tm-on-Task FIRE FIRE Avg Tm-on-Task CX CX Avg Tm-on-Task Sta 09 B9 2,178 744 00:15:06 902 00:15:52 532 00:05:29 B9P 141 63 00:06:12 28 00:03:53 50 00:03:17 C9 18 1 00:20:26 13 00:39:03 4 00:15:04 E9 532 335 00:16:06 82 00:22:53 113 00:01:59 E9P 3 3 00:01:21 --- ----- --- ----- EMS9 225 94 00:12:05 62 00:13:46 69 00:05:47 EMS9P 1 1 00:04:26 --- ----- --- ----- FM9 63 12 00:17:41 45 00:41:40 6 00:04:13 I9 1 --- ----- --- ----- 1 00:19:29 Q9 3,726 2,409 00:15:26 589 00:20:53 723 00:02:37 Q9P 22 6 00:01:32 7 00:03:57 9 00:00:53 R9 3,256 2,625 00:39:03 406 00:21:17 220 00:03:31 R9P 16 7 00:00:29 1 00:01:27 8 00:01:53 Sta 20 C20 2 2 00:35:02 --- ----- --- ----- E20 1,607 610 00:16:53 618 00:20:14 378 00:02:54 E20P 12 5 00:01:22 3 00:05:43 4 00:00:37 Q20 14 5 00:09:15 3 00:12:10 6 00:01:06 R20 778 600 00:35:45 105 00:22:28 72 00:03:31 R220 1,632 1,407 00:35:54 86 00:20:20 135 00:02:24 R220P 11 7 00:01:19 --- ----- 4 00:00:42 Sta 87 E87 412 255 00:14:36 84 00:27:46 73 00:02:40 E87P 1 1 1 --- ----- --- ----- Q87 1,464 931 00:16:45 278 00:21:34 253 00:02:51 Q87P 2 --- ----- --- ----- 2 00:00:40 R87 2,456 1,873 00:37:29 386 00:18:20 195 00:04:02 R87P 6 6 00:01:38 --- ----- --- ----- SQ87 1,214 737 00:15:30 224 00:24:31 253 00:02:49 SQ87P 6 2 00:02:03 1 00:04:09 3 00:03:30 Comparison of Workloads by Unit Hour Utilization (UHU) Another measure, time on task, is necessary to evaluate best practices in efficient system delivery and consider the impact workload has on personnel. Unit Hour Utilization (UHU) determinants were developed by mathematical model. This model includes both the proportion of calls handled in all major service areas and total unit time on task for these service categories in aggregate by each unit. The resulting UHU’s represent the percentage of the work period (24 hours) that is utilized responding to requests for service. Historically, the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) has recommended that 24-hour units utilize 0.30, or 30% workload as an upper threshold.6 In other words this recommendation would have personnel spend no more than eight (8) hours per day on emergency incidents. These thresholds take into consideration the necessity to accomplish non-emergency 6 International Association of Firefighters. (1995). Emergency Medical Services: A Guidebook for Fire-Based Systems. California, DC: Author. (p. 11) Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 60 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 activities such as training, health and wellness, public education, and fire and community risk reduction inspections. The 4th edition of the IAFF EMS Guidebook no longer specifically identifies an upper threshold. However, FITCH recommends that an upper unit utilization threshold of approximately 0.30, 0r 30%, would be considered best practice. In other words, units and personnel assigned on 24-hour shifts should not exceed 30%, or eight (8) hours, of their workday responding to calls. These recommendations are also validated in the literature. For example, in their review of the City of Rolling Meadows, the Illinois Fire Chiefs Association utilized a UHU threshold of 0.30 as an indication to add additional resources.7 Similarly, in a standards of cover study facilitated by the Center for Public Safety Excellence for the Castle Rock Fire and Rescue Department utilizes a UHU of 0.30 as the upper limit in their standards of cover due to the necessity to accomplish other non-emergency activities.8 Both the following table and figure reflect that Rescue 9 is the busiest unit in the city with a UHU of 21.3%, followed by Rescue 82 and then Rescue 220. This pattern is typical as most of the workload in related to EMS incidents. Overall, the data reflects that the department has capacity in its ability to absorb greater levels of workload without any additional resources for the near future. 7 Illinois Fire Chiefs Association. (2012). An Assessment of Deployment and Station Location: Rolling Meadows Fire Department. Rolling Meadows, Illinois: Author. (pp. 54-55) 8 Castle Rock Fire and Rescue Department. (2011). Community Risk Analysis and Standards of Cover. Castle Rock, Colorado: Author. (p. 58) Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 61 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 28: All Responses UHU by Unit Station Unit Annual Responses Annual Time- on-Task Unit Hour Utilization [UHU] 9 B9 2,178 474:48:22 0.054 B9P 141 11:05:13 0.001 C9 18 09:48:29 0.001 E9P 3 00:04:04 0 EMS9 225 39:49:51 0.005 EMS9P 1 00:04:26 0 FM9 63 35:12:45 0.004 I9 1 00:19:29 0 E9/Q9 4,258 983:22:45 0.112 Q9P 22 00:45:02 0 R9 3,256 1868:27:04 0.213 R9P 16 00:19:57 0 20 C20 2 01:10:04 0 E20 1,607 398:39:48 0.046 E20P 12 00:26:31 0 Q20 14 01:29:29 0 R20 2410 1279:08:08 0.146 R220P 11 00:12:09 0 87 E87P 1 00:01:25 0 E87/Q87 3,090 771:09:21 0.089 Q87P 2 00:01:20 0 R87 2,456 1302:09:25 0.149 R87P 6 00:09:49 0 SQ87P 6 00:18:47 0 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 62 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 37: Unit Utilizations in the Oakland Park System Response Time Continuum Fire The number one priority with structural fire incidents is to save lives followed by the minimization of property damage. A direct relationship exists between the timeliness of the response and the survivability of unprotected occupants and property damage. The most identifiable point of fire behavior is Flashover. Flashover is the point in fire growth where the contents of an entire area, including the smoke, reach their ignition temperature, resulting in a rapid-fire growth rendering the area un-survivable by civilians and untenable for firefighters. Best practices would result in the fire department arriving and attacking the fire prior to the point of flashover. A representation of the traditional time temperature curve and the cascade of events is provided below. Unit Hour Utilization 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 63 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 38: Example of Traditional Time Temperature Curve9 Recent studies by Underwriter’s Laboratories (UL) have found that in compartment fires such as structure fires, flashover occurs within 4 minutes in modern fire environment. In addition, the UL research has identified an updated time temperature curve due to fires being ventilation controlled rather than fuel controlled as represented in the traditional time temperature curve. While this ventilation controlled environment continues to provide a high risk to unprotected occupants to smoke and high heat, it does provide some advantage to property conservation efforts as water may be applied to the fire prior to ventilation and the subsequent flashover. An example of UL’s modern versus legacy flashover timeline in provided below. 9 Derived from U.S. Fire Administration accessed at https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/coffee-break/time-vs-products- of-combustion.pdf on March 30, 2017 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 64 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 39: Modern vs. Legacy Flashover Timeline10 EMS The effective response to Emergency Medical Service (EMS) incidents also has a direct correlation to the ability to respond within a specified period of time. However, unlike structure fires, responding to EMS incidents introduces considerable variability in the level of clinical acuity. From this perspective, the association of response time and clinical outcome varies depending on the severity of the injury or the illness. Research has demonstrated that the overwhelming majority of requests for EMS services are not time sensitive between 5 minutes and 12 minutes. The 12-minute upper threshold is only the upper limit of the available research and is not a clinically significant time measure, as patients were not found to have a significantly different clinical outcome when the 12-minute threshold was exceeded.11 Out of hospital sudden cardiac arrest is the most identifiable and measured incident type for EMS. In an effort to demonstrate the relationship between response time and clinical outcome, a representation of the cascade of events and the time to defibrillation (shock) is presented below. The American Heart Association (AHA) has determined that brain damage will begin to occur between four and six minutes and become irreversible after 10 minutes without intervention. Modern sudden cardiac arrest protocols recognize that high quality Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) at the Basic Life Support (BLS) level is a quality intervention until defibrillation can be delivered in shockable rhythms. 10(Kerber, 2012). Analysis of Changing Residential Fire Dynamics. Underwriter Laboratories, Northbrook, IL. 11 See Blackwell, T.; Kaufman, J. (2002). Response time effectiveness: Comparison of response time and survival in an urban emergency medical services system. Academic Emergency Medicine. 9:4, 288-295. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 65 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 40: Cascade of Events for Sudden Cardiac Arrest with Shockable Rhythm12 In general, the actual performance validates the planning assessments on potential performance. The historical travel time performance for each fire station demand zone is provided below. Description of First Arriving Unit Performance Priority 6 EMS and Priority 2 FIRE are the types of incidents that occur most frequently. Statistics developed using these incident types have the greatest numbers of instances and, thereby, have the greatest reliability for making comparisons. Table 29: Response Performance of First Arriving Units Interval EMS Priority = 6 FIRE Priority = 2 average 90th %-tile average 90th %-tile P2/P3 00:01:02 00:01:47 00:01:14 00:02:14 Chute 00:01:09 00:01:58 00:01:25 00:02:22 Drive 00:04:05 00:06:07 00:04:15 00:06:33 Response 00:05:08 00:07:28 00:05:32 00:08:14 Note: Statistics calculated for sequential time intervals are not expected to be exactly additive. 12 Derived from Cummins, RO; Eisenberg, M.; Larsen, M. (1993). Predicting survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A graphic model. Annals of Emergency Medicine. 22:11, 1652-1658. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 66 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 465 713 Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Figure 41: P2/P3 Intervals for First Arrived Units on EMS Incidents P2P3 EMS 1st OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Rcvd to Assgn Average 90th %tile 1 465 00:01:15 00:02:12 2 8 00:01:43 00:02:07 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 3,550 00:01:02 00:01:47 7 1 00:05:11 00:05:11 8 0 9 8 00:03:10 00:04:15 Total 4,032 Figure 42: Chute Intervals for First Arrived Units on EMS Incidents Chute EMS 1st OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Assgn to Enroute Average 90th %tile 1 713 00:01:12 00:02:03 2 24 00:01:11 00:02:05 3 5 00:01:35 00:03:01 4 0 5 0 6 4,596 00:01:09 00:01:58 7 1 00:01:14 00:01:14 8 0 9 9 00:01:39 00:02:40 Total 5,348 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 67 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 721 806 Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Figure 43: Drive Intervals for First Arrived Units on EMS Incidents Drive EMS 1st OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Enroute to Arrvd Average 90th %tile 1 721 00:03:44 00:05:38 2 24 00:05:05 00:09:42 3 5 00:04:55 00:07:07 4 0 5 0 6 4,663 00:04:05 00:06:07 7 1 00:07:35 00:07:35 8 0 9 8 00:03:21 00:04:57 Total 5,422 Figure 44: Response Intervals for First Arrived Units on EMS Incidents Response EMS 1st OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Assgn to Arrvd Average 90th %tile 1 806 00:04:49 00:07:02 2 34 00:04:30 00:10:41 3 7 00:06:20 00:07:29 4 0 5 0 6 5,173 00:05:08 00:07:28 7 1 00:08:49 00:08:49 8 0 9 13 00:03:25 00:06:21 Total 6,034 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 68 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 195 265 Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Figure 45: P2/P3 Intervals for First Arrived Units on FIRE Incidents P2P3 FIRE 1st OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Rcvd to Assgn Average 90th %tile 1 195 00:01:22 00:02:18 2 172 00:01:14 00:02:14 3 60 00:01:53 00:03:15 4 0 5 0 6 151 00:01:33 00:02:40 7 3 00:07:06 00:11:15 8 0 9 3 00:08:06 00:13:36 Total 584 Figure 46: Chute Intervals for First Arrived Units on FIRE Incidents Chute FIRE 1st OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Assgn to Enroute Average 90th %tile 1 265 00:01:32 00:02:48 2 509 00:01:25 00:02:22 3 118 00:01:01 00:01:51 4 0 5 1 00:00:19 00:00:19 6 264 00:01:16 00:02:08 7 3 00:01:24 00:02:09 8 0 9 6 00:00:55 00:01:10 Total 1,166 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 69 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 269 289 Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Interval Category Units Start_Date End_Date Figure 47: Drive Intervals for First Arrived Units on FIRE Incidents Drive FIRE 1st OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Enroute to Arrvd Average 90th %tile 1 269 00:04:15 00:07:44 2 510 00:04:15 00:06:33 3 122 00:05:46 00:09:00 4 0 5 1 00:01:23 00:01:23 6 259 00:06:25 00:09:50 7 3 00:05:43 00:08:00 8 0 9 6 00:06:42 00:08:38 Total 1,170 Figure 48: Response Intervals for First Arrived Units on FIRE Incidents Response FIRE 1st OP Units 01/01/2015 12/31/2015 Priority Count Assgn to Arrvd Average 90th %tile 1 289 00:05:47 00:09:18 2 567 00:05:32 00:08:14 3 164 00:06:51 00:10:34 4 0 5 1 00:01:42 00:01:42 6 273 00:07:31 00:11:02 7 3 00:07:08 00:09:29 8 0 9 7 00:01:56 00:04:21 Total 1,304 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 70 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 First Arriving Unit Response Intervals by First Due Station Comparison of First Due Zone Stats Broward County ORCAT personnel provided two outputs of data to the consultant that were relevant to Oakland Park FIRE operations. The first contained all Broward FIRE incident records. The second was a truncated file containing only Event Numbers and First Due Zones for Broward County FIRE incidents. The consultant then merged the FDZ file into the FIRE incident records and filtered for the incidents specific to Oakland Park. In this way 8,164 records in the consultant’s Oakland Park data table were associated with First Due Zones. The table below, shows a comparison of incidents counts by FDZ in the data table available to the consultant and FIRE incident counts for Oakland Park, as reported by Broward County. Table 30: Comparison of Incident Counts by FDZs as Taken from Data Tables as Supplied to FITCH and as Reported by Broward County First Due Zone Incident Count per Broward1 per FITCH 09A 124 124 09B 542 546 09C 372 373 09D 699 706 09E 441 442 09F 295 295 09G 724 726 09H 545 547 20A 609 610 20B 175 176 20D 550 553 20E 94 95 20F 224 224 20G 84 84 20H 32 32 20I 291 293 87C 84 84 87D 62 63 87E 418 418 87F 297 297 87G 459 460 87H 807 810 87J 208 204 Total 8,136 8,164 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 71 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 The discrepancies between the two counts of incidents by FDZ are minor. How they came about is unknown. The consultant feels that an exact reconciliation is not warranted because the discrepancies are unlikely to materially affect the results of response time statistics as calculated in this report. Table 31: Performance Intervals of Vehicles First Arrived at Scene by First Due Station at the 50th Percentile (Average) on Priority 6 EMS Incidents. First Due Station Performance Intervals [hh:mm:ss] P2/P3 Chute Enroute Response Min – Max Sample Size Sta 09 00:01:00 00:01:06 00:04:02 00:05:00 1754 - 2553 Sta 20 00:01:03 00:01:10 00:04:08 00:05:14 792 - 1119 Sta 87 00:01:04 00:01:14 00:04:07 00:05:16 1002 - 1489 Table 32: Performance Intervals of Vehicles First Arrived at Scene by First Due Station at the 90th Percentile on Priority 6 EMS Incidents. First Due Station Performance Intervals [hh:mm:ss] P2/P3 Chute Enroute Response Min – Max Sample Size Sta 09 00:01:44 00:01:50 00:06:09 00:07:21 1754 - 2553 Sta 20 00:01:48 00:02:02 00:06:01 00:07:29 792 - 1119 Sta 87 00:01:55 00:02:03 00:06:06 00:07:38 1002 - 1489 Table 33: Performance Intervals of Vehicles First Arrived at Scene by First Due Station at the 50th Percentile (Average) on Priority 2 FIRE Incidents. First Due Station Performance Intervals [hh:mm:ss] P2/P3 Chute Enroute Response Min – Max Sample Size Sta 09 00:01:17 00:01:26 00:03:54 00:05:09 68 - 278 Sta 20 00:01:36 00:01:19 00:04:43 00:05:52 32 - 99 Sta 87 00:01:08 00:01:27 00:04:32 00:05:56 71 - 188 Table 34: Performance Intervals of Vehicles First Arrived at Scene by First Due Station at the 90th Percentile on Priority 2 FIRE Incidents. First Due Station Performance Intervals [hh:mm:ss] P2/P3 Chute Enroute Response Min – Max Sample Size Sta 09 00:02:19 00:02:21 00:06:32 00:07:52 68 - 278 Sta 20 00:02:01 00:02:26 00:06:50 00:08:06 32 - 99 Sta 87 00:02:00 00:02:23 00:06:26 00:08:21 71 - 188 The sample sizes are highly variable from one statistic determination to the next due to the very high number of timestamps that are missing from the CAD data tables. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 72 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 49: Performance Intervals for Vehicles First Arrived at Scene on FIRE Incidents by First Due Station Figure 50: Chute Intervals for Vehicles First Arrived at Scene on FIRE Incidents by First Due Station Figure 51: Drive Intervals for Vehicles First Arrived at Scene on FIRE Incidents by First Due Station Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 73 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 52: Response Intervals for Vehicles First Arrived at Scene on FIRE Incidents by First Due Station Effective Response Force Capabilities The assembly of an effective fire force for structure fires is a standard practice in the fire service. To evaluate that capacity, the following analysis examines the time required to assemble the first 3 arriving units. Table 35: Drive Interval at 90th %-tile for ERF by First Due Station for Priority 1 Incidents Order of Arrival Drive Interval Average [hh:mm:ss] At 90th %-tile [hh:mm:ss] Sta 09 Sta 20 Sta 87 Sta 09 Sta 20 Sta 87 1st Arrvd 00:03:32 00:04:36 00:05:01 00:05:58 00:07:48 00:08:31 2nd Arrvd 00:04:16 00:06:05 00:05:49 00:06:07 00:11:11 00:08:49 3rd Arrvd 00:04:46 00:06:17 00:06:20 00:07:05 00:10:05 00:08:04 Table 36: Drive Interval at 90th %-tile for ERF by First Due Station for Priority 2 Incidents Order of Arrival Drive Interval Average [hh:mm:ss] At 90th %-tile [hh:mm:ss] Sta 09 Sta 20 Sta 87 Sta 09 Sta 20 Sta 87 1st Arrvd 00:03:54 00:04:43 00:04:32 00:06:32 00:06:50 00:06:26 2nd Arrvd 00:04:13 00:05:34 00:05:19 00:06:52 00:09:20 00:08:04 3rd Arrvd 00:03:50 00:05:37 00:06:09 00:06:52 00:08:01 00:08:50 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 74 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 53: Effective Response Force Capability by First Due Station for Priority 1 Incidents Reliability Factors The reliability of the distribution model is a factor of how often the response model is available and able to respond to the call within the assigned demand zone. If at least one unit from the first due station is able to respond to a call, we consider the station is able to respond to the call within the assigned demand zone. Utilizing the Fire Station Demand Zones (FDZ), analyses reveal that both Station 9 and Station 87 were capable of meeting their demand for services at greater than the 90th percentile. Station 20 performed slightly lower at 80.6% of the time. This analysis utilized all dispatched calls within the jurisdiction and the performance included all assigned units to the specific FDZ. Table 37: First Due Compliance by Station First Due Station Incident Count Incidents with Units from 1st Due Sta Percentage Compliance Sta 09 3,759 3,480 92.6% Sta 20 2,067 1,665 80.6% Sta 87 2,336 2,162 92.6% Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 75 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 54: Reliability by First Due Station Simultaneous Incidents Simultaneous incidents were identified in the CAD by stepping through each incident record, noting its duration, and then searching this time interval for incidents that were initiated during the interval. When simultaneity was discovered, the event number of the initiating incident was written as a notation into the incident record of the subsequent incident. In this way, a tabulation of all simultaneities was constructed. A single incident was discovered that was simultaneous with four preceding incidents (line 7 in Table below). The record from the consultant’s Master Incident table corresponding to line 7 is presented Figure 55 immediately following. Table 38: Simultaneous Incidents by First Due Station. Sta 09 Sta 20 Sta 87 Incidents 3,677 1,958 2,290 With Simultaneous = 0 2,717 1,649 1,877 With Simultaneous = 1 802 282 373 With Simultaneous = 2 149 25 38 With Simultaneous = 3 18 2 2 With Simultaneous = 4 1 0 0 With Simultaneous >0 970 309 413 % Simultaneous >0 26.4% 15.8% 18.0% Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 76 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 55: Master Incident Record Showing Four Simultaneities Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 77 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 COMMUNITY RISK ASSESSMENT AND RISK LEVELS Probability/Consequence of Fire Event Risk The relatively low frequency of fire related events required the Department to rely more heavily on the consequences of the events than the probability of the event occurring. For example, according to the Department’s NFIRS reports submitted to USFA, there were only 51 fire incidents with any reported property loss over the three-year period from 20012 through 2014. The resulting probability and consequence matrix is presented below. Figure 56: Probability and Consequence Matrix for Fire Risk Community Risks - Fire Occupancy risk was evaluated across the jurisdiction utilizing the most recent ISO batch report as well as internal data provided by the department. The risk matrices utilized are presented here. The risk matrix utilized with the ISO data evaluated Fire Flow, Height and Square Footage. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 78 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Table 39: Summary of Risk Matrix Risk Class Fire Flow Number of Stories Square Footage Total Risk Score Value Scale Value Scale Value Scale Scale High 3 ≥ 1500 gpm 5 ≥ 4 5 >= 100,000 sq.ft. 10 or more Moderate 2 > 499 and < 1500 gpm 3 > 1 and < 4 3 > 10,000 sq.ft. and < 100,000 sq.ft. 6-9 Low 1 ≤ 499 gpm 1 1 1 <= 10,000 sq.ft. 5 or less Due to the relatively higher demands for personnel and apparatus required for fire events that have a large square footage, higher elevation (stories), and greater required fire flows these occupancies garnished the highest numeric values. Applying this methodology to all 1,564 independently rated occupancies within the city, 19 were categorized and rated as high, 315 as moderate and the remainder of 1,230 were rated low. A review was conducted on 3 years of National Fire Incident Reporting (NFIRS) data as submitted to the US Fire Administration for years 2012 thru 2014. Fire related incident data for Oakland Park is summarized below. Table 40: NFIRS Reported Fire Data - 2012 thru 2014 2012 2013 2014 Average State Average Based on Population National Average Based on Population Fire Incidents with Reported Property Loss 12 19 20 17.0 15.9 15.3 Total Reported Property Loss $62,700 $132,700 $198,750 $131,383 -- -- Average Reported Loss / Incident $5,225 $6,984 $9,938 $7,382 $40,322 $64,221 Overall, the city’s risk profile reflects no exceptional challenges. Evaluation of risk on independently rated properties reflects few that meet a high-risk rating. Historical fire data reflects a low incidence and severity of property loss, as well as civilian or firefighter injuries. There was loss of life from fire in 2013 (2) and again in 2015 (1) as reported by the Department. The Department did not report any fire related injuries during the period examined. Overall, the fire related fatalities and injuries are comparable or less than national experience based on population.13 13 Ahrens, M. (2016). Trends and Patterns of U.S. Fire Loss. National Fire Protection Association. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 79 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 OVERALL EVALUATION, OBSERVATIONS, AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Overall Evaluation The city is well served by its fire rescue department. The agency is organized to address those elements found in modern and contemporary fire rescue agencies delivering the fire, EMS and specialized services needed by Oakland Park’s citizens. The department has made good use of the resources it is been provided, as well as those available from regional partners – especially other fire rescue agencies. Based on the community’s risk profile, historical demand, and compact municipal boundaries, services are provided in a timely, effective, and efficient manner. The following discussion will highlight these specific areas General Observations Response Time The department should continue monitoring call the receipt and processing times as handled by the Broward Sheriff's Office. However in establishing performance goals for the department these generally focus on chute times of their own personnel, and the travel time required to reach emergency incident locations. These should be monitored at a 90% compliance level. As noted previously, current travel times for apparatus is relatively strong at the 90th percentile - approximately 6:07 for EMS incidents and 6:33 for fire incidents. In exploring methods to maintain the same level of service, or even improve performance, the following discussion is insightful. Impact of Adaptive Staffing Collisions between Incidents The duration over which an incident involving unit R220 may have an impact on operations in the rest of the system extends from when R220 is initially assigned until R220 returns to quarters. Adaptive staffing cannot be undone until R220 is back in quarters. As the BSO CAD is currently configured, there is no timestamp that logs when a unit returns to quarters. The last timestamp available in the CAD for an incident in-progress is status change code “USAV”, which logs when unit R220 is available for reassignment at some unspecified remote location in the field. For purposes of calculating a total R220 duration for these analyses, a “Return Drive” interval was added to the USAV timestamp. The length of the “Return Drive” interval was calculated on a per incident basis as being 1.5 time the outbound drive time of unit R220 for that particular incident. Run “hot” on the response leg, run “cold” on the return leg. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 80 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 There is no simple “back-of-the-envelope” method to estimate the impact of “collisions” between incidents involving responses using unit R220 and all other incidents in Oakland Park that were initiated while the R220 incident was in-progress. Enumeration of these collisions required conducting an exact tally that was obtained by stepping through the CAD one incident at a time. The logic used in the search algorithm was the following: 1. Step through each record in the Vehicles Assigned data table; 2. Identify whether the incident involved unit R220; 3. Acquire the duration of the incident involving unit R220; 4. Search this duration in the Vehicle Assigned table for all vehicle assignments initiated during the R220 duration; 5. Set the needed flags in the found set to show vehicle assignments occurring while a R220 incident is in-progress; 6. Return to stepping through the Vehicle Assigned data table. In this manner, 1,794 vehicle assignments occurred while R220 incidents were in-progress. Another 10,571 vehicle assignments occurred while no R220 incidents were in-progress. These tallies are across all of Oakland Park. Metrics of Comparisons The consultant chose response times as the metric to judge the impact of R220 incidents in-progress on the conduct of operations in the rest of Oakland Park. For judging the possible impact on FIRE incidents, the response time for all units arrived at scene was used to embrace the complexity of FIRE all hazard responses. This metric reflects the urgency of assembling the complex “package” of multiple units that constitute an Effective Response Force. For judging the possible impact on EMS incidents, the response time of first arrived at scene is the more applicable metric. This metric reflects the urgency of stabilizing the patient. Oakland Park experiences a small number of incidents with individual unit response times in excess of 16 minutes. The consultant believes that such incidents are atypical, do not reflect routine operations within Oakland Park, and can be considered long duration outliers. Including all long duration outliers in the response statistics has two consequences. First, inclusion moves the average response time to a longer value. Second, inclusion dramatically increases the standard deviations about the averages. The consultant’s concern was that such atypical events would obscure any real affects the R220 incidents may have on operations in the rest of Oakland Park. The source of the concern arises from the mathematics needed to determine the probability that two distributions of response time are the same or different. The methodology used to make this decision is the t-Test. The magnitude of the t-value in the t-Test is highly dependent on the standard deviations of the distributions being examined. When the standard deviations “blow up” because of long duration Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 81 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 outliers, the ability of the t-Test to see that two distributions really are different is lost. As standard deviations get larger, all distributions of response times become indistinguishable regardless of whether real and systematic differences actually exist. The ability to perceive a difference between two data sets can be lost when the standard deviation (variance) in the dataset gets magnified by the outliers. The methodology used to limit the influence of long duration outliers on the analyses of the Oakland Park data was implemented as a dynamic filter: 1. Collect the set of response time under consideration; 2. Sort in ascending order; 3. Find the median response time; 4. When response times > 3 X median, exclude as long duration outliers, Hence, the exclusion criterion for each set of response times was dynamically calculated from the data contained in that specific set of response times. The t-Test is a standard statistical method for assigning a probability to whether two distributions are the same or different. The method for calculating t-values and the table for correlating p-value with t- values are presented in Attachment A. The p-value is the probability, expressed as a decimal, that two distributions are actually different. In the context of Oakland Park, small p-values mean that R220 incidents have very low probabilities of actually having impacted the conduct of other emergency services operations in the rest of Oakland Park. Specifically, the Welch version of the t-Test was implemented for these analyses. This version applies to the probability whether two distributions are the same or different when the two distributions have non-equal population sizes and non-equal standard deviations. The Welch-Satterwaithe equation was used to calculate the degrees of freedom in these systems. The t-values and the Z-values calculated in these ways were then taken to the t-Table in Attachment A, and a “two-tails” p-value was determined by linear interpolation between the published table entries. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 82 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Results of t-Tests Table 41: Response Interval of All Vehicles Assigned to FIRE Incidents in First Due Zones Served by Station 20 All Vehicles Assigned to FIRE Incidents Raw Count Median [sec] Filtered Count Average Response Time [sec] Std Dev ± [sec] t-Value & Z p-Value No R220 In- Progress 673 718 580 723 ±523 t=1.598 Z=90 p = 0.001 With R220 In- Progress 81 864 73 830 ±541 Table 42: Response Interval of First Arrived Vehicles on EMS Incidents in First Due Zones Served by Station 20 First Arrived Vehicles Assigned to EMS Incidents Raw Count Median [sec] Filtered Count Average Response Time [sec] Std Dev ± [sec] t-Value & Z p-Value No R220 In-Progress 535 698 514 713 ± 396 t=3.588 Z=217 p = 0.001 With R220 InThe accomplishment- Progress 158 912 156 870 ± 501 Table 43: Response Intervals of All Vehicles Assigned to FIRE Incidents in All First Due Zones Comprising Oakland Park All Vehicles Assigned to FIRE Incidents Raw Count Median [sec] Filtered Count Average Response Time [sec] Std Dev ± [sec] t-Value & Z p-Value No R220 In-Progress 2,143 394 2,094 412 ±180 t=1.287 Z=400 p=0.200 With R220 In-Progress 321 384 316 397 ±195 Table 44: Response Interval of First Arrived Vehicles on EMS Incidents in All First Due Zones Comprising Oakland Park First Arrived Vehicles Assigned to EMS Incidents Raw Count Median [sec] Filtered Count Average Response Time [sec] Std Dev ± [sec] t-Value & Z p-Value No R220 In-Progress 5,184 298 5,084 298 ±108 t=2.257 Z=1085 p=0.026 With R220 In-Progress 889 304 888 309 ±138 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 83 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Assessment of Results As explained above, the average response time of all vehicles arrived at scene is the most appropriate metric to assess the impact of adaptive staffing of unit R220 on the conduct of FIRE responses in all of the First Due Zones served by Station 20. This data is presented above. Based on the data above, there is a 99.9% probability that adaptive staffing of unit R220 has no effect on the conduct of simultaneous Fire incidents in the First Due Zones served by Station 20. In contrast, the average response time of vehicles first arrived at scene is the most appropriate metric to assess the impact of adaptive staffing of unit R220 on the conduct of EMS responses in all of the First Due Zones served by Station 20. This data is presented above. Based on the data above, there is a 99.9% probability that adaptive staffing of unit R220 has no effect on the conduct of simultaneous emergency medical incidents in the First Due Zones served by Station 20. For adaptive staffing of unit R220 to NOT have an effect on Fire response in the First Due Zones served by Station 20, then units must be coming into the Station 20 First Due Zones from Station 09 and Station 87. The question then becomes whether adaptive staffing manifests as an increased response time on fire incidents in Oakland Park taken as a whole. In order to broaden the scope of this analysis, as indicated above, parallel analyses were conducted, but considering all of the First Due Zones that comprise Oakland Park. The results for Fire and EMS incidents are presented above. Based on the data above, having unit R220 running an incident in-progress appears to decrease the average response time of all FIRE units arrived at scene by 15 seconds. Based strictly on the mathematics, there is a 20.0% probability that this decrease is real, and an 80.0% probability that this decrease is due to random fluctuations in the data. The consultants can conceive of no credible mechanism by which unit R220 running an incident in- progress can reduce the response times of units on FIRE incidents in Oakland Park. The apparent reduction in response times is certainly due to random fluctuations superimposed on the data. The soundest interpretation of the data is that unit R220 running an incident in-progress has NO discernable effect on FIRE responses in Oakland Park. Based on the data above, there is a 97.4% probability that adaptive staffing of unit R220 has no effect on the conduct of simultaneous emergency medical incidents in the rest of Oakland Park. Conversely, there remains a 2.6% probability that adaptive staffing does make a difference, but the difference is, at most, an increase of 9 seconds. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 84 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 When unit R220 is running an incident in-progress, the first arrived average response times of other EMS incidents in Oakland Park appears to increase by 9 seconds. This 9-second increase is best accounted for as a random fluctuation in the response time data. There is only a 1-in-38 chance that the 9-second increase is due to a real and systematic difference due to unit R220 running an incident in-progress. The consultant concludes that adaptive staffing of R220 has no statistically valid impact on the response times of all vehicles arrived at scene for fire incidents in either the First Due Zones served by Station 20 or in Oakland Park taken as a whole. GIS Modeling We first explore the system contemplating only the impact of Oakland Park stations. As noted in Figures 57 and 58 below, a 5-minute drive time would provide strong coverage, but certain areas in the northeast and eastern part of the city are not covered in this drive time performance. A 6-minute drive time essentially provides complete coverage of the city. Figure 57: Oakland Park Stations Only - 5 Minute Drive Time Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 85 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 58: Oakland Park Stations Only - 6 Minute Drive Time GIS modeling was also conducted exploring alternate travel times utilizing both Oakland Park and adjacent fire station locations. Figures 59 and 60 reflect travel time from these station locations at a performance level of five minutes. As noted in the table below, for this analysis both Oakland Park and adjacent municipalities’ fire stations were allowed to ‘respond’ to Oakland Park’s incidents. Figure 59: Marginal Utility of Existing Fire Stations - 5 Minutes Rank Station Number Post Capture Total Capture Percent Capture 1 9 5501 5501 66.99% 2 87 1776 7277 88.61% 3 35 820 8097 98.60% 4 78 67 8164 99.42% 5 37 25 8189 99.72% 6 46 6 8195 99.79% 7 54 5 8200 99.85% 8 29 2 8202 99.88% 9 16 1 8203 99.89% 10 88 1 8204 99.90% Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 86 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 60: Travel Time - 5-Minute Performance Figures 60 and 61 reflect the same information at a performance level of six minutes. As noted in each of the tables, a three-station configuration employing two existing Oakland Park stations and fire station 35 from Fort Lauderdale would allow the city's performance to cover over 99% of all incidents. Figure 61: Marginal Utility of Existing Fire Stations - 6 Minutes Rank Station Number Post Capture Total Capture Percent Capture 1 20 6639 6639 80.85% 2 87 928 7567 92.15% 3 35 613 8180 99.61% 4 78 11 8191 99.74% 5 46 8 8199 99.84% 6 54 6 8205 99.91% 7 29 2 8207 99.94% Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 87 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 62: Travel Time - 6-Minute Performance The differences between the five-minute and six-minute performance level, as noted in the maps and tables, employ different Oakland Park fire stations. At the five-minute level, fire stations 9 and 87 from Oakland Park are utilized along with station 35 from Fort Lauderdale. Upon expanding the travel time to six minutes, the respective catchment areas for each station adjust, and the model then reflects a preference to utilize Oakland Park stations 20 and 87. This allows a small portion of the city, just east of the FEC tracks, to lose coverage at the six-minute performance level. The addition of Fort Lauderdale station 35 back into the model would take performance at six minutes to nearly 100% coverage, including this area east of the FEC tracks. GIS Modeling was also employed to optimize performance at both the 5-minute and 6-minute performance levels of travel time. The optimized model reflected below, with associated GPS coordinates. Reflects that at 5 minutes, greater than 90% coverage can be achieved with only 2 fire stations. These locations are reflected in the map below. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 88 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Figure 63: Marginal Utility of Optimized Locations - 5 minutes Rank Latitude Longitude Post Capture Total Capture Percent Capture 1 26.166821 -80.153448 6514 6514 79.32% 2 26.175745 -80.133222 1073 7587 92.39% 3 26.184669 -80.173674 460 8047 97.99% 4 26.166821 -80.163561 126 8173 99.53% 5 26.166821 -80.133222 13 8186 99.68% 6 26.122203 -80.153448 6 8192 99.76% 7 26.184669 -80.183787 5 8197 99.82% 8 26.202516 -80.133222 4 8201 99.87% 9 26.175745 -80.102883 3 8204 99.90% 10 26.175745 -80.153448 1 8205 99.91% Figure 64: Optimized Travel Time - 5 Minute Performance Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 89 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Upon modeling an optimized 6-minute travel time performance, it was determined a single fire station location as reflected below would provide the majority of the community coverage of nearly 95% within the 6-minute travel time. Those areas outside the green shading in Figure 66 would still receive coverage, though slightly beyond the 6-minute target. It is important to note these models consider only geographic coverage, and not that required to handle overall demand. Based on Oakland Park’s compact municipal boundaries, this finding is not surprising. Figure 65: Marginal Utility of Optimized Locations - 6 minutes Rank Latitude Longitude Post Capture Total Capture Percent Capture 1 26.166821 -80.153448 7772 7772 94.64% 2 26.193592 -80.133222 351 8123 98.92% 3 26.193592 -80.183787 72 8195 99.79% 4 26.166821 -80.112996 6 8201 99.87% 5 26.122203 -80.153448 6 8207 99.94% 6 26.166821 -80.133222 1 8208 99.95% Figure 66: Optimized Travel Time - 6 Minute Performance Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 90 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Overall assessment of the GIS modeling reflects there are potential future opportunities to allow the system greater performance and efficiency. However, it is likely this would need to occur when the city is able to consider replacement and or relocation of fire stations – all done in concert with other municipal partners should Oakland Park elect to develop a robust partnership with others, for example Fort Lauderdale. Comparative Analysis Overall, the aggregate current performance for the Department is consistent with baseline recommendations for Urban and Suburban densities from the Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI). The average and 90th percentile compliance in travel time is shown below, along with that of other industry benchmarks. Figure 67: Benchmark & Comparative Response Time Components for Oakland Park Call Category Average Travel Time 90th Percentile Travel Time CFAI14 90th Percentile Urban Travel Time CFAI15 90th Percentile Suburban Travel Time CFAI16 90th Percentile Rural Travel Time NFPA 171017 90th Percentile BLS Travel Time NFPA 171018 90th Percentile ALS Travel Time USFA19 90th Percentile Turnout and Travel Fire 4:15 6:33 5:12 6:30 13:00 4:00 _ 10:59 EMS 4:05 6:07 5:12 6:30 13:00 _ 8:00 10:59 While the Broward County 911 Report did not include travel times, there was comparative information regarding chute times. These are summarized below comparing Oakland Park personnel against all Broward County fire rescue agencies. Overall, Oakland Park compares well on this metric. 14 CFAI. (2009). Fire & emergency service self-assessment manual, (8th ed.). Chantilly, Virginia: Author. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 17 National Fire Protection Association. (2016). NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments. Boston, MA: National Fire Protection Association. 18 National Fire Protection Association. (2016). NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments. Boston, MA: National Fire Protection Association. 19 USFA. (August 2006). Structure fire response times: Topical fire research series, 5(7). Emmitsburg, Maryland: Author. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 91 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 atTable 45: Comparative Chute Times - Oakland Park v. Broward Aggregate Chute Time (sec.) Target at 90th (per NFPA 1710-2016) Average 90th % Oakland Park - EMS 60 70 120 Broward Aggregate - EMS 60 111 174 Oakland Park - Fire 80 136 151 Broward Aggregate - FIRE 80 138 197 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 92 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 CONCLUSION & SERVICE ENHANCEMENTS Having considered the descriptive statistics of current system performance, risk profile as assessed by ISO independent evaluations, historical experience of the community, national fire experience, and GIS modeling of current performance, FITCH’s opinion is that overall, the city is well-served by its fire department. As such, a policy that focuses on continuation of the existing service levels is well-justified. Notwithstanding that assessment, there are also opportunities for the city to provide service level enhancements should they desire. The following discussion outlines these various opportunities. It is important to note the following opportunities can be implemented individually, collectively, or not at all. Through different mechanisms, each has the opportunity to enhance the current service levels, though policy-makers should consider potential impacts – operational and financial – in determining which they may wish to further pursue. Nearest Unit Responses for Life Threatening Events Broward County’s Charter provides language that led to the development of a regional 911 system. The origin of that charter language was intended to facilitate the response of the closest fire rescue vehicle to any life-threatening emergency, regardless of jurisdictional boundaries.20 GIS modeling, marginal utility analysis, and historical use of Fort Lauderdale resources when appropriate, all reflect the value to city residents that mutual aid and automatic aid can provide. In particular, GIS modeling demonstrates the greatest benefit is derived from Fort Lauderdale’s Station #35 located at 1969 E. Commercial Blvd. In concert with Broward County’s current efforts to more fully deploy nearest unit response in life threatening emergencies, the city should consider strengthening its’ relationship with Fort Lauderdale to appropriately use Station 35. This enhancement can be a cost-effective approach to improve responses in the eastern part of the city, especially areas east of the railroad tracks. 20 Broward County Charter, Section 5.03 (A.), states “The County Commission with cooperation from Municipalities shall establish a countywide communications infrastructure for fire and emergency medical services. The County shall provide funding for the communications infrastructure and all service providers will utilize the elements of the communications infrastructure. The communications infrastructure shall facilitate closest unit response for life-threatening emergencies and support for regional specialty teams.” Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 93 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Place Into the City’s CIP Program the Replacement of Station 9 and Station 20 to Optimized Locations As noted in the GIS analysis, the city could optimize fire station placement and have a concurrent improvement in overall response time performance, as defined by travel time at the 90th percentile. Recognizing the age and condition of fire stations, specifically station 9 and station 20, there is an opportunity for the city to replace and relocate these two facilities. With current travel time performance at the 90th percentile just over six minutes, the redeployment of stations 9 & 20, with continuing use of the existing station 87, is expected to reduce the 90th percentile travel performance significantly. Upon identification of potential future sites, further GIS analysis can better quantify these improvements. Recognizing the timeframe to identify potential land for new stations, determine funding, engage design and construction professionals, the City should consider placing into their capital improvement plan (CIP) preliminary funding for site selection and procurement of land for use as future fire stations. Develop Capability for Peak Hour Units (PHU), and Deploy an EMS PHU When Workload Demands Typical of most fire rescue systems in Florida, Oakland Park deploys their resources utilizing a classic 24- hour shift. However, an increasing number of agencies are addressing growing demands for service through utilization of peak hour units (PHU), typically utilized during the busiest 12-hours of each day As reflected in Figure 11, the busiest 12-hours of each day is from 8:00AM until 8:00PM. While reflecting 50% of a 24-hour period, this timeframe aligns with approximately 66% of the total emergency activity (63.2% for EMS and 67.5% for fire activity). The deployment of a single PHU can best be accomplished by the addition of four (4) new firefighter paramedic positions. Each individual is typically assigned a schedule that includes working an average 42-hour weekly schedule, encompassing three 12- hour shifts one week and four 12-hour shifts the alternate week. Experience in other Florida cities, including St. Petersburg, show these units have a significant impact on the system overall, while being well received by fire personnel once the system design is understood and assignment to these units occur in consultation with the labor organization. In order to accommodate normally scheduled time off, minimal amounts of overtime will also be required beyond the four additional FTEs. While previous sections of this assessment demonstrate the strength of current system performance, EMS demands are continuing to increase. Therefore, depending on the current labor agreements in place, it may be necessary to amend existing provisions to allow for this efficient approach to be implemented when service demands increase to a level that justify their use. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Page 94 © Fitch & Associates, LLC Operations & Staffing Study June 2017 Attachment A Welch t-test Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 95 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 𝜎 0 0 - 𝜎 0 𝑁- 𝑁0 + 0 𝑁- − 1 𝑁0 − 1 - Attachment A. Welch t-Test Welch’s t-Value Equation for Unequal Populations with Unequal Variances 𝑁- = Number of samples in distribution 1 𝑋- = Mean of distribution 1 𝜎- = Standard deviation of distribution 1 𝑁0 = Number of samples in distribution 2 𝑋0 = Mean of distribution 2 𝜎0 = Standard deviation of distribution 2 𝑍 = Degrees of Freedom (Welch-Satterwaite equation) 𝑡 = 𝑋- − 𝑋0 0 0 𝜎- + 𝜎0 𝑁- 𝑁0 Degrees of Freedom for Unequal Populations with Unequal Variances 𝑍 = Degrees of Freedom (Welch-Satterwaite equation) 𝑍 = 𝜎0 0 𝑁- 𝑁- 𝜎0 0 − 1 + 0 𝑁0 𝑁0 − 1 Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 96 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 p-Values Tabulated as a Function of t-Values and Z Oakland Park Fire Rescue Page 97 © Fitch & Associates, LLC Operations & Staffing Study June 2017 Attachment B Stakeholder Feedback on Draft Report Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 98 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Stakeholder Feedback on Draft Report Page Feedback Fitch Response 7 Stakeholder recommended removal or clarification of NFIRS comparison data to that of Oakland Park's loss experience. State that 'previous management directed not to estimate property / content loss in all structure / vehicle fires . . .' Data utilized was limited to incident records with a dollar loss reported. Found that Oakland Park fire reports do provide dollar losses for all 3 years examined. 10 Related to adaptive staffing of Station 20, it was recommended to adjust the analysis to reflect those times when adaptive staffing was in place versus when it was not in place due to increased available staffing. Fitch's analysis only examined when operating in an ‘adaptive’ deployment, and not when full staffing of 5 personnel was in place. 10 Asked that Fitch provide "comparisons on departments in Tri-County area who have Class 1 or 2 departments with regard to staffing, training, etc." as related to the City's ISO rating. No change - such analysis was not within the scope of this study. 15 Generally questioned if the department has "adequate staffing to account for vacation and sick usage without incurring overtime costs or employee fatigue? How many employees do we need per shift per day?" Specifically requested Fitch provide "data on overtime and to calculate a staffing factor for the agency. Staffing, as used within the report, refers to daily minimum staffing required for each day. It does not reflect the full-time equivalents (FTEs) necessary to be funded in the budget to achieve the daily minimum staffing. The scope of work did not specify the calculation of a staffing factor, nor was Fitch provided the requisite data to perform such an analysis. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 99 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Stakeholder Feedback on Draft Report Page Feedback Fitch Response 24 Referring to Table 1, questioned if with a reported 26.1% of CAD records containing an 'error condition', "can an accurate recommendation be made . . .?" Specifically asked to "provide [the] overall effect error conditions have on data" and to "provide error conditions from [the] Regional 911 Report" The requested error conditions are stated in Table 1. Nearly all the error conditions identified in Table 1 reflect the failure to capture a time stamp(s) within the response sequence. In those circumstances, the related incident cannot be considered in calculating certain descriptive statistics. However, the majority of descriptive data was not impacted by these issues. Even if all incidents with an error condition were rejected, the sample size based on the population is 73.9%. With no basis to assume a sampling bias in selecting the 15,221 incidents, the statistical inferences drawn within the report remain valid. 27 Referring to Table 4, questioned impact of mutual aid and ability to achieve a timely transport vehicle on-scene. Question if adaptive response impacted mutual aid. Specifically requested that Fitch "provide NIST study on EMS response specifically time- to-task analysis, effects on patient care, overall patient care." The NIST studies are based on simulated data, while this analysis is reporting descriptive statistics based on actual performance of Oakland Park fire rescue resources as captured by CAD. Fitch did not specifically evaluate time-to-task on EMS calls. Fitch did evaluate response time impacts from adaptive response, but intermediate tasks were not evaluated separately. This question was not asked, nor is there any basis to believe intermediate tasks would be impacted. 55 Referring to Table 26 and Figure 36, noted that Station 9 is the primary back-up to Station 20's primary response area. Questioned what impact does adaptive staffing have on the workload distribution and would a 'fully staffed' Station 20 change the workload distribution. The data reported in Table 26 and Figure 36 reflect the geographic distribution of incidents, not the primary station which handled the incident. There is no impact on workload among stations. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 100 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Stakeholder Feedback on Draft Report Page Feedback Fitch Response 71 Referring to Figure 53, generally question if response time variance for Station #20 is due to adaptive staffing, the impact of staggered response times, would Station #20 be able to increase their ability to handle calls within their primary response area. Specifically requested that Fitch "provide NIST study on EMS response specifically time-to-task analysis, effects on patient care, overall patient care." The NIST studies are based on simulated data, while the report utilizes data based on actual performance of Oakland Park fire rescue resources as captured by CAD. Empirical data does not support an identifiable outcome that can be attributed to adaptive staffing. 77 It questions how the adaptive response analysis is impacted if 26.5% of CAD records have missing data, the Station was 'fully staffed' for 102 days of the year, and the impact of mutual aid and the reported response times and workload for Station #20. The adaptive staffing analysis utilized a t- test to differentiate response times for when R220 was already on a call versus when they were not. The sample size was statistically valid, therefore the loss of some data from CAD would not impact the analysis unless there is evidence of a selection bias - none was identified. The use of unit ‘R220’ already excludes the 102 days in which Station #20 was ‘fully staffed’. The impacts from mutual aid and ‘extended response times’ were addressed in the analysis as response time was the dependent variable. In summary, none of these issues affect the validity of the adaptive staffing analysis. 82-87 Questions how GIS modeling is impacted when units are already on calls, and from adaptive staffing. Actual performance was aligned with the modeled performance of the system based on a 6-minute travel time and three fire stations. Therefore, the GIS modeling reflects travel time, as supported and calibrated by actual performance. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 101 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Stakeholder Feedback on Draft Report Page Feedback Fitch Response N/A Cites the RFP from the City and comparisons of staffing levels and utilization and training operations. See response above related to p. 15 and staffing levels. Final report edited to reflect increased discussion of fire prevention, training and management structure. The report does provide community comparisons across various factors - see Figure 5; Figure 67; Table 40; Table 45 91 Regarding the future option for peak hour units (PHUs), questions if the 4 personnel provides full staffing and the cost for this option. The 4-person staffing related to operation of a PHU does not include a relief factor. As noted in the report text, this would most efficiently be covered by overtime. The opportunity dealing with PHUs suggests the City work with labor to ensure the capability to deploy UHUs at some future time. There should be no cost to ensure the capability. The cost to deploy, at some future date, will depend on future labor, operating and capital costs yet to be determined. N/A Complete report as requested in contractual agreement. Specifically: Question 4 Unit Utilization including effects of adaptive response. Fully addressed in report. Specifically see current deployment strategy on p. 11; response history starting on p. 27; and adaptive staffing analysis starting on p. 77 Question 5 Review of Management structure with considerations. See current staffing structure / organizational structure beginning on p. 15. Final reported edited to expand discussion. Question 6 Assessment of Training programs and identify current future capabilities See current staffing structure / organizational structure beginning on p. 15. Final reported edited to expand discussion. Question 7 Conduct an Analysis of the effects from mutual aide See section on mutual aid starting on p. 26 and nearest unit response starting on p. 90 Question 10 Alternate Fire Rescue service delivery methods See sections on nearest unit response starting on p. 90 and peak hour units starting on p. 91 Question 14 Assist in developing reporting tools, charts etc. Feedback provided to Fire Chief under separate cover to address recommended periodic reporting. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Operations & Staffing Study Page 102 © Fitch & Associates, LLC June 2017 Stakeholder Feedback on Draft Report Page Feedback Fitch Response 57-59 Questions if unit hour utilization (UHU) is accurate based on the 26.1% error conditions noted in the report. UHU calculations only require two time stamps - when dispatched and when available/cleared. Examination of Table 1 reflects less than one-half of one percent (0.00496) of vehicle data records could not be utilized in the UHU calculations. This is an acceptable error rate for a UHU analysis. Oakland Park Fire Rescue Page 103 © Fitch & Associates, LLC Operations & Staffing Study June 2017