Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 9054 City of Palo Alto (ID # 9054) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 4/2/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: PAFD Semi Annual Performance Report FY18 Title: Palo Alto Fire Department Semi-Annual Performance Report for the First Half of Fiscal Year 2018 From: City Manager Lead Department: Fire Recommendation Staff recommends the City Council review the First Palo Alto Fire Department Semi- Annual Performance Report for Fiscal Year 2018. Background and Discussion In Fiscal Year 2015 the Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) identified performance reporting as a key initiative, and began reporting on key performance measures quarterly. Beginning Fiscal Year 2018, the Department will be submitting reports twice each year. The report provides overall calls for service information, as well as more detailed information on the key service areas, including Emergency Medical Services, Fire Suppression, Rescue and Hazardous Materials Response, and Fire Prevention. The report also provides information on mutual and automatic aid with our regional public safety partners and internal workforce planning efforts. Performance measures include the following:  Calls for Service: This data provides information on the final outcome of all emergency response calls. The data is tracked in the Fire Department’s Record Management System, and uses standardized call type codes, which are defined by the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS). The report includes overall call volume by primary category, and a detailed listing of call type in the service type sections. In Fiscal Year 2018 the Department will be structuring and reporting on calls for service based on the NFIRS category groups in order to maintain consistency City of Palo Alto Page 2 amongst various City performance reports and statistics sent to State and National reporting centers.  Response Times: This aspect measures the time it takes from an emergency call or request for response being created in the dispatch center to the arrival of resources to the scene of the emergency. This information is tracked in the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) System, and the performance goals, or service levels, are set by Council in accordance with county and national standards.  Ambulance Transports: The report provides the number of ambulatory transports to hospitals or other medical care facilities, and the proportion of Emergency Medical Calls that included transports. This information is tracked in the Fire Department’s Emergency Medical Record Management System.  Fire Containment: This measures the proportion of building and structure fires that are contained to the area or room of origin within Palo Alto and Stanford Campus.  Mutual and Automatic Aid: This includes the number and proportion of all incidents in which the PAFD provided aid to neighboring communities, as well as the aid received from neighboring Fire Departments. This information is tracked in the CAD System.  Permits: This provides the count of facility, electric vehicle, and solar permits issued by the Fire Prevention Bureau. This information is currently tracked in the Development Center’s Records Management System.  Inspections: A count of the total number of Hazardous Materials and State Mandated inspections is provided. In addition, an estimated number of inspections to be completed for the year is also provided to assess overall workload performance to date.  Fire and Life Safety Plans Reviewed: This provides a total count of all plans reviewed, as well as the proportion of plans that were reviewed within the time guidelines.  Vacancies and Off-Line Employees: This section provides the total number of budgeted full-time equivalent line personnel, current vacancies, and employees that are off line from workers compensation or light duty. This information is obtained from the Fire Department’s Staffing and Scheduling System (TeleStaff), as well as the City’s Personnel Management System.  Succession Planning Metrics: This provides the number and proportion of line personnel that are eligible to retire, or will be eligible within the next five years. City of Palo Alto Page 3 This information is tracked in the City’s Personnel Management System. This report also provides the total number of hours line personnel have spent in an acting capacity. Personnel serving in an acting capacity are a key component of the Department’s overall succession planning efforts. Acting capacity allows junior officers to learn the responsibilities of higher ranks with guidance from senior officers. This information is tracked in TeleStaff.  Training hours: The total number of training hours completed by all line personnel is provided, as well as the average number of hours per each line personnel on staff. This information is tracked in the Fire Department’s Record Management System. Local, State and Federal mandates require fire personnel to train a minimum of 20 hours per month. Attachments:  Attachment A: Coverletter  Attachment B: Semi Annual Performance Report FY18.1 FINAL  Attachment C: EMS Survey  Attachment D: Thank You Notes P.O Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.2184 650.327.6951 fax City of Palo Alto Fire Department Honorable Councilmembers, I am pleased to provide the enclosed performance report for the first half of Fiscal Year 2018. After a review of the metrics, methodology and structure of the report as part of the Accreditation process the Department has made a few adjustments to the report. This includes moving to a semi-annual reporting frequency, aligning call type categories to mirror the National Fire Incident Report System categories, and improved tracking and methodologies. Another important item of note is that this period reflects staffing and deployment levels prior to the recent changes that were made effective in January 2018. Since January, Fire Command Staff has frequently reviewed workload and performance. Preliminarily, the new deployment is performing as planned including the even distribution of calls among crews and handling nearly every ambulance call. More importantly, system performance remains consistent. Turning to the events over these six months, the State faced the most difficult wildland fire season on record. The City of Palo Alto Firefighters did some of their best work to help protect life and property, minimize the damage and assist victims. There were five significant state fires this season, two of which were record breaking in their size and amount of destruction. In July, Palo Alto Fire supported the Detwiler Fire in Mariposa County. The fire grew to over 80,000 acres prior to full containment and took over one month to contain. Palo Alto crews spent seven days of uninterrupted firefighting to assist in the containment efforts. In late August, Palo Alto Fire deployed to the Helena Fire in Trinity County for a ten day commitment. The fire extended to the Trinity Alps Wilderness and reached over 21,000 acres before being contained in mid-November. The Tubbs Fire in October 2017 was the most destructive wildfire in California history. It spanned Napa, Sonoma and Lake Counties burning over 36,000 acres and claiming 22 lives. During the month it took to contain the fire, a team of four Palo Alto Firefighters from Engine 65 worked eleven days straight on a strike team to assist in the statewide effort. As part of the October Fire Storm, Engine 66 was deployed to the Mendocino Complex Fire as part of a multi-county task force as many strike team units were already on scene at the Tubbs fire. This fire extended to over 36,000 acres and claimed 546 structures. Crews were on duty for nine consecutive days. P.O Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.2184 650.327.6951 fax City of Palo Alto Fire Department The final large fire in the State that we deployed units to was in December to Ventura County for the Thomas Fire. This fire spread to over 281,000 acres and is the largest wildfire in modern California history. It also had the largest firefighting force on record in California, totaling over 8,500 firefighters. Our crews were there for a 14 day deployment. This fire tragically claimed the life of CalFire Firefighter Cory Iverson, who was from the CalFire San Diego Unit. He died from smoke inhalation and thermal injuries. We honored his service and sacrifice by lowering the flags to half-mast and attending local services to mourn the loss of a fellow firefighter. The courage and commitment to protecting our community and those who need us most is honorable, brave and demonstrated the best our City has to offer. The women and men of the Palo Alto Fire Department put their lives on the line at home and abroad. To those members and their families that stepped up to serve and fight these fires, I give my heartfelt gratitude and acknowledgement. These dauntless members of our team include: Fire Captain Barry Marchisio; Fire Captain Toby McDonnell; Fire Captain Marc Muzzi; Apparatus Operator Shelia Donovan; Apparatus Operator Carlos Gracia; Apparatus Operator Adam Palsgrove; Apparatus Operator Anthony Sozio; Firefighter Steven Fanchiang; Firefighter Adam Fortino; Firefighter Daniel Fortino; Firefighter Manny Macias; Firefighter Eban Johnson; Firefighter Nick Penko; Firefighter Chris Pombo; and Firefighter John Preston. The gratitude received from residents and communities served were overwhelming, and I’ve not seen this level of gratitude in my 31 years as a professional firefighter. The Department received thank you notes and letters all of which are attached at the end of this report and decorate the walls of the sixth floor. Let these serve as a reminder of the reason we got into public service, and the impact we have on those we serve. Sincerely, Eric Nickel, EFO, CFC, CFO Fire Chief Palo Alto Fire Department First Semi-Annual Performance Report Fiscal Year 2018 Calls for Service The Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) responded to a total of 4,637 calls for service in the first six- month period of Fiscal Year 2018. This includes responses within Palo Alto, Stanford, and neighboring cities to provide Auto and Mutual Aid. Approximately seventy-nine percent (79%) of calls are generated from Palo Alto, fifteen percent (15%) from Stanford, and the remainder from neighboring cities or requests for regional fire deployment. The majority of calls were for Rescue and Emergency Medical Services, making up fifty-eight percent (58%) of the responses. Table 1 below shows the main categories of the calls to which PAFD responded. Calls are classified based on the actual event occurred, rather than the initial call request. Call Type FY17 JUL-DEC FY18 JUL-DEC Rescue and Emergency Medical Services Incidents 2,768 2,692 Good Intent 703 804 False Alarm and False Call 616 695 Service Call 236 264 Fire 85 105 Hazardous Condition, No Fire 96 77 Overpressure Rupture, Explosion, Overheat, No Fire 1 0 Service Weather and Natural Disaster 1 0 Grand Total 4,506 4,637 Good Intent and False Alarm calls make up the second largest types of responses. Most calls for service that may be a true threat of fire, gas or other emergency hazard are actually found to be something else after Firefighters investigate the situation. These calls are coded as Good Intent calls. As well, many fire alarm activations are from causes other than fire or emergency hazard. These situations are categorized as False Alarm calls. PAFD FY18 Bi-Annual Performance Report 2 | P a g e Emergency Medical Services and Rescue Emergency Medical Service (EMS) is the primary service that the Palo Alto Fire Department provides to Palo Alto and Stanford. While this shift toward EMS is being seen across the region, the Palo Alto Fire Department is the only Fire Department in the County that provides ambulance and transport services. Of the 2,692 Emergency Medical Service calls the PAFD responded to in the first period of Fiscal Year 2018, the overwhelming majority were for medical, trauma and cardiac calls that did not involve a vehicle accident. Rescue and EMS Performance Measures FY17 JUL-DEC FY18 JUL-DEC Emergency Medical Service Incident 2708 2643 Lock-In 19 13 Extrication, Rescue 32 32 Water and Ice-Related Rescue 2 1 Rescue or EMS Standby 7 3 Total 2,768 2,692 Transports Number of Transports 1,865 1,703 Percent of EMS Calls resulting in transport 68% 63% Response Times Percent of first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 8 minutes 93% 95% Percent of paramedic responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 12 minutes 99% 99% Average response time for first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls 4:47 4:48 This period reflects a slight dip in the number of Rescue and EMS Incident calls. The number of EMS calls that resulted in an ambulance transport to a local hospital or care facility, accounted for sixty three percent (63%) of all EMS calls. This is the primary source of revenue generated from emergency medical services, and the Department has seen the revenue flatten out over the last period. The most common rescue calls involve the removal of victims from a stalled elevator totaling twenty- nine (29) that is ninety-one (91%) of these call types. Lock-Ins revealed a decrease this period accounting for twenty seven percent (27%) of rescue calls.  Response Time Goal Met: At least 90% of first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within eight minutes. This period the PAFD first responder arrived on scene to EMS calls within eight minutes ninety-five percent (95%) of the time.  Response Time Goal Met: At least 99% of paramedic responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 12 minutes. This quarter the PAFD paramedic responder arrived on scene to EMS calls within 12 minutes ninety- nine percent (99%) of the time. PAFD FY18 Bi-Annual Performance Report 3 | P a g e Fire Suppression Very few of the potential fire calls coming into dispatch turn out to be a real fire once PAFD investigates the scene and cause of the concerning elements. This period PAFD responded to 105 calls where fire was present, with 81 in Palo Alto or Stanford. There were twelve building fires that the Department responded to in Palo Alto and Stanford, ten of which were contained to the area of origin. The first fire occurred July 12 at an apartment building on 3800 block of Park Boulevard. The fire was determined to have started from cooking which then spread to cabinets and wall. Upon arrival, the first in unit, Engine 64, established Incident Command and secured a hydrant water supply from Engine 65. The fire was quickly extinguished and confined to area of origin. There were no injuries. All residents were allowed to return to their homes except for those from the involved unit. The American Red Cross arrived to assist the displaced residents. Another fire in July began with flames showing from a garage at the 2300 block of Waverly Street. Engine 62 was the first in unit and established Incident Command, then set up for a fire attack. The garage was a detached single story unit that was fully involved with fire. The fire was quickly confined to the garage, with no extension to the main house or neighbors. Utilities to the unit were disconnected and the structure was “red tagged” by the City Building Department. The cause of the fire was a hot barbecue with the lid off placed next to the door. The family had just used the grill and moved it before the unit had cooled sufficiently. Fire investigators estimated the damage at $500,000. On August 9 another kitchen fire occurred at a four-story mid-rise on 700 block of Escondido. The fire set off the alarm and activated sprinklers causing flooding on the floor. Engine 66 investigated the unit on the third floor and found the fire has been extinguished by two activated sprinkler heads. Crews opened the drain to decrease the water pressure. A burn patient approached crew and requested an ambulance, and Medic 62 administered patient care to the patient who stated that he was cooking in his kitchen when something caught fire and he was burned. This incident left water damage on all floors below the fire floor. Water evacuation procedures were implemented and salvage and overhaul of the affected units conducted. The building was secured and handed over to Stanford Maintenance for restoration. In early September in the 800 block of El Camino Real, Engine 61 responded to a fire alarm for water flowing. Upon arrival crews saw smoke coming from the rear of the building, out of the eaves and the vent and upgraded the event to a full first alarm. Crews forced the first floor door and found a light haze of smoke and some water coming from the hallway, and light smoke throughout the building. The source was determined to be a vent in the bathroom that contained heavy smoke and some heat where a sprinkler had been activated. Upon removing the ceiling tiles, crews were able to extinguish the fire. Another incident of note occurred in late November in the 3900 block of El Camino Real. Units arrived on scene to a laundromat with the interior charged with smoke. Engine 65 made entry with a hose line and found a dryer on fire, and was able to quickly extinguish the fire. Ventilation of the facility was conducted, and upon investigation it was determined that excessive storage to the rear of the structure had contributed to the fire. PAFD FY18 Bi-Annual Performance Report 4 | P a g e Fire Suppression Measures FY17 JUL-DEC FY18 JUL-DEC Structure Fire 39 46 Mobile property (vehicle) fire 13 12 Natural vegetation on fire 11 20 Outside rubbish fire 17 22 Special outside fire 4 4 Cultivated vegetation, crop fire 1 0 Fire in mobile property used as a fixed structure 0 1 Total 85 105 Response Times Percent of first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls within 8 minutes 86% 90% Average response time for first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls 5:22 5:27 Fire Containment Percent of building and structure fires contained to the room or area of origin 90% 83%  Response Time Goal Met: At least 90% of first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls within eight minutes. This quarter the PAFD first responder arrived on scene to Fire calls within eight minutes ninety percent (90%) of the time.  Fire Containment Goal Not Met: At least 90% of building and structure fires contained to the room or area of origin. This period there were twelve building or structure fires within Palo Alto or Stanford, of which ten were contained to the room or area of origin. In both cases the fire had spread beyond the original area despite a response time under five minutes. PAFD FY18 Bi-Annual Performance Report 5 | P a g e Hazardous Materials The Fire Department responded to a total of 77 calls related to hazardous material incidents. The most common Hazardous Material call is spills and leaks of either natural or liquid petroleum gas (LPG) which totaled 42. This number accounted for fifty-five (55%) percent of all Hazardous Material calls. The second highest Hazardous Material calls were related to electrical wiring or equipment problems. Twenty-six (26) of these calls account for thirty-four (34%) percent of all Hazardous Material calls. Hazardous Materials Response Measures FY17 JUL-DEC FY18 JUL-DEC Combustible/Flammable spills and leaks 44 42 Chemical release, reaction, or toxic condition 12 1 Electrical wiring/Equipment problem 24 26 Biological hazard 2 4 Accident, potential accident 13 3 Attempted burning, illegal action 1 1 Total 96 77 Response Times Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to Rescue & Hazardous Materials calls 6:17 5:50 PAFD FY18 Bi-Annual Performance Report 6 | P a g e Mutual and Automatic Aid The Fire Department previously holds automatic aid agreements with five regional Fire Departments, including Mountain View, Menlo Park, Woodside, Los Altos, and Santa Clara County Fire. Palo Alto continues to primarily provide mutual and automatic aid to the City of Mountain View, at higher rates than aid received by Mountain View. The Department has made deployment changes and subsequent modifications to the mutual and automatic aid agreements with Mountain View. In the final report for Fiscal Year 2018 it is expected that these numbers will decline for both providing and receiving aid as a result. In this period, the PAFD provided mutual or automatic aid to three other jurisdictions which it had not in the previous year. Of the seven other jurisdictions where mutual aid was provided Santa Clara County received the next highest aid from the department. Six other agencies provided mutual or automatic aid for calls within Palo Alto or Stanford on a total of 61 incidents. Mutual Aid Performances FY17 JUL-DEC FY18 JUL-DEC Mutual and Auto Aid Provided Agency Mountain View Fire 202 221 Santa Clara County Fire 50 37 Menlo Park Fire 2 7 Sunnyvale 2 0 San Mateo City - 1 San Mateo County - 2 Out of Area - 3 All Mutual and Auto Aid Provided 256 271 Mutual and Auto Aid Received Agency Mountain View Fire 203 147 Menlo Park Fire 30 27 Santa Clara County Fire 16 13 Woodside Fire 6 15 Moffett Fire 1 2 Sunnyvale - 2 Cal-Fire - 2 All Mutual and Auto Aid Received 256 208 PAFD FY18 Bi-Annual Performance Report 7 | P a g e Fire Prevention The Fire Prevention Bureau ensures compliance with the Fire Code for the safety of occupants and protection of property. Fire Inspectors perform fire sprinkler and fire alarm plan checks, permitting, and field inspections with the goal of ensuring all construction complies with local and national codes. This year the Prevention Bureau has been able to track inspections with more detail and we have modified the methodology for capturing this data point. Rather than tracking single locations, we are tracking each inspection. It more accurately captures the workload of inspections by capturing the number of inspections, as most locations require multiple inspections. The figure for Fiscal Year 2017 has been updated to reflect the same methodology. This period saw a decrease in the number of permits issued compared the same period in the prior year. The number of Fire Inspections and Hazardous Material inspections increased, and the number of plans to review slightly decreased. Prevention Bureau Performance Measures FY17 JUL-DEC FY18 JUL-DEC Permits Fire Permits Issued 324 230 Sprinkler Permits Issued 131 114 Solar Permits Issued 39 26 Electric Vehicle Permits Issued 21 7 Inspections Fire Inspections 4205 4617 Hazardous Material Inspections Completed 170 219 Number of Hazardous Material Inspections for the year 563 563 Percent of Hazardous Material Facilities Inspections Complete 30% 39% State Mandated Inspections Completed 169 137 Number of State Mandated Inspections for the year 397 397 Percent of State Mandated Facilities Inspections Complete 43% 35% Fire and Life Safety Plan Review Plans Reviewed 998 853 Percent of Reviews Completed On-Time 97% 94% PAFD FY18 Bi-Annual Performance Report 8 | P a g e Workforce Planning The Department operates daily emergency response operations with a total of 96.00 FTE line personnel. This includes three battalions of crews that staff six stations in the City and Stanford 24 hours each day. Over the last period, the department has operated with 17.0 positions vacant and 6.0 employees off-line creating a total of 23.00 FTE positions that require backfill. The vacant positions are primarily within the Firefighter and Apparatus Operator Classifications, with five vacant Fire Captain positions. During this Fiscal Year the Department will conduct a promotional process for Fire Captain, which will shift all vacancies to the Apparatus Operator and Firefighter ranks. In addition, 11.0 FTE of these vacancies were eliminated effective January 2018 due to the deployment changes resulting from extensive and detailed meet and confer processes with the labor union, and approval from City Council. The proportion of shift staff eligible to retire within the next five years continues to grow, currently making up more than half of all shift staff. The Department is focusing on bolstering succession planning and hiring efforts in order to prepare for the consistent turn-over expected over the next 5 to 10 years. Training hours reported for this period continue to reflect a reduction as the division is in transition to a new tracking and records management software. Vacancies and Off-Line Employees FY18 JUL-DEC Classification Budgeted FTE Vacancies Off-Line Employees (Workers Comp/Light Duty) Personnel On Line Percent of Personnel On Line Battalion Chief 4 0 0 4 100% Fire Captain 22 5 1 16 73% Fire Apparatus Operator & Fire Fighters 70 12 5 53 76% TOTAL 96 17 6 73 76% Succession Planning FY17 JUL-DEC FY18 JUL-DEC Personnel Number of Shift Staff Currently Eligible to Retire 24 24 Number of Shift Staff Eligible to Retire in Five Years 17 19 Percent of all Shift Staff Eligible to Retire within Five Years 46% 51% Number of Acting Battalion Chief Hours 862 0 Number of Acting Captain Hours 3,292 3,045 Number of Acting Apparatus Operator Hours 12,599 7,053 Training Hours of Training Completed 25,605 14,748 Average Hours Per Line Personnel 328 202 Number of Your Patients in this ReportYour Score July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 EMS System Report Palo Alto, CA 1515 Center Street City of Palo Alto 1 (877) 583-3100 www.EMSSurveyTeam.com Client 9701 service@EMSSurveyTeam.com Lansing, Mi 48096 17893.38 Number of Patients in this Report 36,690 Number of Transport Services in All EMS DB 145 Page 1 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Executive Summary This report contains data from 178 City of Palo Alto patients who returned a questionnaire between 07/01/2017 and 12/31/2017. The overall mean score for the standard questions was 93.38; this is a difference of 0.75 points from the overall EMS database score of 92.63. The current score of 93.38 is a change of -2.06 points from last period's score of 95.44. This was the 32nd highest overall score for all companies in the database. You are ranked 9th for comparably sized companies in the system. 80.59% of responses to standard questions had a rating of Very Good, the highest rating. 97.98% of all responses were positive. Page 2 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Demographics — This section provides demographic information about the patients who responded to the survey for the current and the previous periods. The information comes from the data you submitted. Compare this demographic data to your eligible population. Generally, the demographic profile will approximate your service population. Total This PeriodLast Period OtherFemaleMale OtherMaleTotalFemale Under 18 3 5 08 363 0 18 to 30 1 1 02 121 0 31 to 44 3 4 07 143 0 45 to 54 7 2 09 484 0 55 to 64 16 9 025 5127 0 65 and older 48 86 0134 9214654 0 Total 78 107 0185 178 72 106 0 Gender Page 3 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Dispatch Analysis This report details results concerning dispatch performance. The report contains the mean scores for each survey item. The first column shows the organization score and the total EMS national database score; the second column is your difference from the database score. Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 94.54 92.72 1.82 Your Score Total DB Variance1000 Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 92.69 92.54 0.15 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived 90.09 91.02 -0.93 Your Score Total DB Variance -0.93 Variance1000 Overall Section Score Total DB 0.40 100 92.09 Variance 0 Your Score 92.48 Page 4 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Ambulance Analysis This report details the section results that concern ambulance performance. The report contains the mean scores for each survey item. The first column shows the organization score and the total database score, the second column is your difference from the database score. Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.27 92.15 3.12 Your Score Total DB Variance1000 Cleanliness of the ambulance 94.59 94.47 0.12 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Comfort of the ride 92.04 87.28 4.76 Your Score Total DB Variance1000 Skill of the person driving the ambulance 95.48 93.79 1.69 Your Score Total DB Variance1000 Overall Section Score Total DB 2.39 100 91.97 Variance 0 Your Score 94.36 Page 5 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Medic Analysis This report details the section results that concern medic performance. The report contains the mean scores for each survey item. The first column shows the organization score and the total database score, the second column is your difference from the database score. Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 96.15 94.35 1.80 Your Score Total DB Variance1000 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 95.38 94.31 1.07 Your Score Total DB Variance1000 Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 95.39 93.92 1.47 Your Score Total DB Variance1000 Skill of the medics 94.95 94.28 0.67 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 93.01 92.56 0.45 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable) 92.87 92.33 0.54 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 91.11 90.38 0.73 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Page 6 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Medic Analysis This report details the section results that concern medic performance. The report contains the mean scores for each survey item. The first column shows the organization score and the total database score, the second column is your difference from the database score. Medics' concern for your privacy 93.54 93.32 0.22 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 94.78 94.34 0.44 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Overall Section Score Total DB 0.94 100 93.31 Variance 0 Your Score 94.25 Page 7 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Billing Staff Assessment Analysis This report details the section results that concern office performance. The report contains the mean scores for each survey item. The first column shows the organization score and the total database score, the second column is your difference from the database score. Professionalism of the staff in our billing office 81.69 88.73 Your Score Total DB Variance -7.04 Variance1000 Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 84.04 88.63 Your Score Total DB Variance -4.59 Variance1000 Overall Section Score Total DB Variance 100 -5.84 88.68 0 Your Score 82.84 Page 8 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 01, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Overall Assessment Analysis This report details the section results that concern assessment of performance. The report contains the mean scores for each survey item. The first column shows the organization score and the total database score, the second column is your difference from the database score. How well did our staff work together to care for you 93.59 93.52 0.07 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 95.43 93.75 1.68 Your Score Total DB Variance1000 Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 94.66 93.58 1.08 Your Score Total DB Variance1000 Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 89.03 88.14 0.89 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service 94.59 93.70 0.89 Your Score Total DB VarianceVariance1000 Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 92.89 93.22 -0.33 Your Score Total DB Variance -0.33 Variance1000 Overall Section Score Total DB 0.83 100 92.66 Variance 0 Your Score 93.49 Page 9 of 24 July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 City of Palo Alto Question Analysis This section lists a synopsis of the information about your individual questions and overall scores for this monthly reporting period. The first column shows the company score from the previous period, the second column shows the change, the third column shows your score for this period and the fourth column shows the total Database score. Dispatch Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 94.54-0.69 92.7295.23 Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 92.69-1.02 92.5493.71 Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived 90.09-2.56 91.0292.65 Ambulance Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.27-1.55 92.1596.82 Cleanliness of the ambulance 94.59-2.80 94.4797.39 Comfort of the ride 92.04-0.24 87.2892.28 Skill of the person driving the ambulance 95.48-1.15 93.7996.63 Medic Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 96.15-1.58 94.3597.73 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 95.38-2.20 94.3197.58 Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 95.39-1.87 93.9297.26 Skill of the medics 94.95-2.15 94.2897.10 Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 93.01-2.12 92.5695.13 Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable)92.87-3.00 92.3395.87 Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 91.11-0.97 90.3892.08 Medics' concern for your privacy 93.54-0.92 93.3294.46 Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 94.78-2.00 94.3496.78 Billing Staff Assessment Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB Professionalism of the staff in our billing office 81.69-8.02 88.7389.71 Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 84.04-6.19 88.6390.23 Page 10 of 24 July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 City of Palo Alto Question Analysis (Continued) Overall Assessment Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB How well did our staff work together to care for you 93.59-3.79 93.5297.38 Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 95.43-1.58 93.7597.01 Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 94.66-1.98 93.5896.64 Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 89.03-1.02 88.1490.05 Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation 94.59-2.56 93.7097.15 Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 92.89-2.05 93.2294.94 Page 11 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Dec 2016 Jan 2017 Feb 2017 Mar 2017 Apr 2017 May 2017 Jun 2017 Jul 2017 Aug 2017 Sep 2017 Oct 2017 Nov 2017 Dec 2017 Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 83.33 97.73 95.83 100.00 91.91 95.83 100.00 93.52 92.39 96.43 91.67 100.00 97.22 Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 83.33 97.73 93.37 100.00 91.18 94.27 100.00 92.50 90.00 92.05 91.67 100.00 96.15 Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 100.00 97.73 91.85 100.00 89.42 93.90 100.00 90.82 81.00 91.25 91.67 100.00 94.79 Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 91.67 100.00 95.70 100.00 96.62 97.22 100.00 94.57 92.24 96.00 96.43 100.00 98.03 Cleanliness of the ambulance 100.00 100.00 96.05 100.00 97.86 97.64 100.00 95.63 88.46 94.79 92.86 100.00 97.22 Comfort of the ride 91.67 93.75 93.18 100.00 91.67 90.57 100.00 92.97 88.89 89.17 82.14 100.00 96.43 Skill of the person driving the ambulance 100.00 100.00 96.49 100.00 96.53 95.67 100.00 95.63 93.27 93.48 92.86 100.00 98.57 Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 100.00 100.00 97.50 100.00 96.32 98.11 100.00 97.76 92.89 94.57 96.43 100.00 96.56 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 100.00 100.00 97.13 100.00 95.45 98.58 100.00 97.39 91.07 94.57 96.43 100.00 95.17 Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 100.00 100.00 96.61 100.00 94.70 98.61 100.00 96.64 93.04 92.05 96.43 100.00 96.46 Skill of the medics 100.00 100.00 96.31 100.00 98.44 96.23 100.00 97.22 92.04 90.26 95.83 100.00 95.71 Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 100.00 97.92 93.10 100.00 94.86 96.30 100.00 95.63 88.58 86.96 100.00 100.00 93.97 Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions 100.00 97.92 94.32 100.00 98.00 95.00 100.00 94.02 88.29 91.25 100.00 100.00 93.27 Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 100.00 95.45 92.02 100.00 91.94 90.45 100.00 92.59 86.84 86.41 87.50 100.00 95.03 Medics' concern for your privacy 100.00 91.67 93.53 100.00 93.18 96.43 100.00 94.08 85.87 94.05 92.86 100.00 97.66 Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 100.00 97.92 96.19 100.00 94.85 98.08 100.00 96.15 89.32 94.57 96.43 100.00 96.32 Professionalism of the staff in our billing office 100.00 96.88 86.11 100.00 89.47 90.91 100.00 85.64 77.08 90.00 68.75 75.06 Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your 100.00 96.43 87.04 100.00 90.63 90.91 100.00 86.79 77.50 90.00 62.50 83.93 How well did our staff work together to care for you 100.00 100.00 96.61 100.00 96.88 97.64 100.00 95.24 89.13 90.91 96.43 100.00 94.56 Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical 100.00 100.00 96.93 100.00 93.94 98.04 100.00 96.88 91.67 94.57 96.43 100.00 96.00 Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 100.00 100.00 94.32 100.00 97.50 97.55 100.00 95.42 94.32 89.17 96.43 100.00 96.88 Extent to which the services received were worth the fees 100.00 93.18 85.96 100.00 88.54 93.59 100.00 92.33 86.76 83.38 95.83 100.00 86.68 Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 100.00 100.00 96.05 100.00 94.70 99.00 100.00 96.37 90.21 88.68 96.43 100.00 98.44 Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 91.67 97.73 94.23 100.00 90.59 97.22 100.00 96.31 88.58 85.81 96.43 100.00 93.24 Your Master Score 96.93 98.08 94.50 100.00 94.17 96.17 100.00 94.71 89.47 91.39 92.97 100.00 95.09 Your Total Responses 3 13 68 3 40 58 3 73 31 26 7 1 40 Monthly Breakdown Below are the monthly responses that have been received for your service. It details the individual score for each question as well as the overall company score for that month. Page 12 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Monthly tracking of Overall Survey Score Page 13 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Greatest Increase and Decrease in Scores by Question Decreases Last Period This Period Change Total DB Score Professionalism of the staff in our billing office 89.71 -8.01 88.7381.69 Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 90.23 -6.19 88.6384.04 How well did our staff work together to care for you 97.38 -3.79 93.5293.59 Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable) 95.87 -2.99 92.3392.87 Cleanliness of the ambulance 97.39 -2.81 94.4794.59 Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service 97.15 -2.57 93.7094.59 Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived 92.65 -2.56 91.0290.09 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 97.58 -2.20 94.3195.38 Skill of the medics 97.10 -2.16 94.2894.95 Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 95.13 -2.12 92.5693.01 Page 14 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Greatest Scores Above Benchmarks by Question Highest Above Benchmark This Period Variance Total DB Score Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 94.351.8196.15 Skill of the person driving the ambulance 93.791.7095.48 Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 93.751.6895.43 Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 93.921.4895.39 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 94.311.0795.38 Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 92.153.1195.27 Skill of the medics 94.280.6794.95 Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 94.340.4594.78 Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 93.581.0894.66 Cleanliness of the ambulance 94.470.1194.59 Page 15 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Highest and Lowest Scores Highest Scores Last Period This Period Change Total DB Score Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 96.1597.73 -1.58 94.35 Skill of the person driving the ambulance 95.4896.63 -1.15 93.79 Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 95.4397.01 -1.58 93.75 Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 95.3997.26 -1.87 93.92 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 95.3897.58 -2.20 94.31 Lowest Scores Last Period This Period Change Total DB Score Professionalism of the staff in our billing office 81.6989.71 -8.02 88.73 Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 84.0490.23 -6.19 88.63 Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 89.0390.05 -1.02 88.14 Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived 90.0992.65 -2.56 91.02 Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 91.1192.08 -0.97 90.38 Page 16 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Key Drivers — This section shows the relative importance of each question to the respondents' overall satisfaction. The greater the coefficient number, the more important the issue is to your patients' overall satisfaction. The questions are arranged based on their weighted importance value. Question Your Score Correlation Coeffecient How well did our staff work together to care for you .91571939393.59 Extent to which medics cared for you as a person .88579639394.78 Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort .87972118991.11 Skill of the medics .8766501394.95 Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance .87028470996.15 Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment .86548912393.01 Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility .85882088595.43 Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family .83076444595.39 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously .82217271295.38 Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service .81859378392.69 Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service .80274672694.54 Cleanliness of the ambulance .79949570394.59 Skill of the person driving the ambulance .79543444695.48 Medics' concern for your privacy .78814419193.54 Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment .74779488894.66 Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable).73532116392.87 Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged .69782127989.03 Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived .69657193390.09 Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs .67873677484.04 Comfort of the ride .65429533792.04 Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner .61088193695.27 Professionalism of the staff in our billing office .60273923881.69 Page 17 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Company Comparisons — The following chart gives a comparison of the mean score for each question as scored by comparable companies. Your company is highlighted. There is also a green-shaded highlight of the highest score for each question. This will show how you compare to similar companies. Your Company A B C D E F Comparison Companies Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 94.43 92.09 91.04 91.76 92.8891.1094.54 Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 94.76 90.77 91.20 91.38 92.5891.1792.69 Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 90.52 87.93 91.33 89.98 91.6788.4290.09 Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 93.75 90.10 90.07 91.64 92.8786.2795.27 Cleanliness of the ambulance 94.95 93.59 89.49 93.50 94.8290.5394.59 Comfort of the ride 87.65 86.77 82.35 88.45 87.3383.7492.04 Skill of the person driving the ambulance 94.51 94.33 90.58 92.02 93.8192.4995.48 Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 95.50 95.31 91.91 93.39 95.0492.9896.15 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 95.66 94.33 92.28 92.81 95.1892.1195.38 Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 94.95 94.50 91.67 91.82 94.2092.4995.39 Skill of the medics 94.25 94.50 91.79 92.83 94.7992.7894.95 Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 90.96 93.87 91.80 89.50 93.5890.4093.01 Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if 91.23 93.61 90.74 89.47 93.1491.2092.87 Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 92.08 92.74 91.96 89.66 91.3287.8491.11 Medics' concern for your privacy 93.52 94.34 92.97 91.25 93.8291.7993.54 Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 95.30 95.23 91.79 92.37 94.6393.3294.78 Professionalism of the staff in our billing office 89.90 89.52 91.94 84.12 88.3285.8881.69 Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 87.69 87.06 92.50 84.55 88.7984.3784.04 How well did our staff work together to care for you 94.24 93.00 91.41 91.96 93.9189.5093.59 Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 95.51 94.04 91.27 92.00 94.2191.1395.43 Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 95.19 94.23 92.74 90.81 94.3790.6294.66 Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 88.74 88.88 89.90 83.25 86.2284.3989.03 Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 95.52 94.73 93.65 91.74 94.1990.4594.59 Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 94.05 92.77 93.33 89.92 93.8688.6392.89 Overall score 93.38 89.90 93.37 92.64 91.16 90.76 93.02 National Rank 32 84 33 47 77 79 42 Comparable Size (Medium) Company Rank 9 25 10 16 22 23 14 Page 18 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Ca l i f o r n i a Al l F i r e De p a r t m e n t s Yo u r Co m p a n y 92.49 94.09Total Score Benchmark Comparison 93.38 To t a l D B Si m i l a r S i z e d 92.64 91.97 Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 94.13 94.3794.54 92.72 92.44 Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 92.62 93.5492.69 92.54 92.17 Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 90.80 92.0190.09 91.02 90.87 Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 93.69 95.2795.27 92.15 91.69 Cleanliness of the ambulance 94.60 95.9294.59 94.47 93.91 Comfort of the ride 88.54 90.3892.04 87.28 86.88 Skill of the person driving the ambulance 94.22 95.5595.48 93.79 93.33 Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 94.71 95.9396.15 94.35 94.13 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 94.33 95.9095.38 94.31 94.03 Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 94.07 95.4895.39 93.92 93.63 Skill of the medics 94.09 95.9094.95 94.28 93.79 Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 92.13 94.2493.01 92.56 92.19 Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions 92.77 93.7992.87 92.33 91.70 Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 90.39 92.3191.11 90.38 90.18 Medics' concern for your privacy 92.89 94.6493.54 93.32 93.17 Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 94.16 95.9094.78 94.34 94.03 Professionalism of the staff in our billing office 86.88 89.9081.69 88.73 88.08 Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your 87.92 90.3084.04 88.63 87.93 How well did our staff work together to care for you 93.35 95.0293.59 93.52 93.42 Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical 94.40 95.4795.43 93.75 93.16 Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 93.43 95.3594.66 93.58 93.04 Extent to which the services received were worth the fees 88.71 90.6089.03 88.14 87.33 Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 93.81 95.4394.59 93.70 93.49 Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 93.07 95.0392.89 93.22 92.67 Number of Surveys for the period 178 Page 19 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Benchmark Trending Graphic - Below are the monthly scores for your service. It details the overall score for each month as well as your subscribed benchmarks for that month. Page 20 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Cumulative Comparisons This section lists a synopsis of the information about your individual questions and overall scores over the entire lifetime of the dataset. The first column shows the company score and the second column details the total database score. Your Score Total DB 91.8694.21Overall Facility Rating Dispatch 93.82 91.64 Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 92.3594.81 Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 92.1194.19 Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 90.4692.46 Ambulance 95.07 91.44 Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 91.7595.53 Cleanliness of the ambulance 93.9796.25 Comfort of the ride 87.1292.64 Skill of the person driving the ambulance 92.9295.87 Medic 95.31 92.85 Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 93.8896.71 Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 93.8096.52 Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 93.5196.11 Skill of the medics 93.9296.42 Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 92.0294.56 Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if 91.8193.73 Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 90.1893.01 Medics' concern for your privacy 92.7994.48 Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 93.7596.21 Billing Staff Assessment 87.93 88.24 Page 21 of 24 City of Palo Alto July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 Cumulative Comparisons (Continued) Your Score Total DB 91.8694.21Overall Facility Rating Billing Staff Assessment 87.93 88.24 Professionalism of the staff in our billing office 88.2087.87 Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 88.2987.99 Overall Assessment 94.29 91.96 How well did our staff work together to care for you 92.9895.76 Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 93.1595.87 Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 92.9195.45 Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 86.9787.72 Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 93.0696.08 Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 92.6894.86 Page 22 of 24 The Top Box Analysis displays the number of responses for the entire survey by question and rating. The Top Box itself shows the percentage of "Very Good" responses, the highest rating, for each question. Next to the company rating is the entire EMS DB rating for those same questions. Top Box Comparisons July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 City of Palo Alto EMS DB % Very Good Company % Very Good Very GoodGoodFairPoor Very Poor Overall Company Rating 35 33 69 517 76.11%80.59%2716 Dispatch 2 3 12 73 74.34%76.25%289 Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 1 0 2 20 105 82.03%76.12% Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 0 1 5 25 99 76.15%75.20% Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived 1 2 5 28 85 70.25%71.71% Ambulance 1 3 14 103 74.52%81.03%517 Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 0 0 4 24 141 83.43%75.03% Cleanliness of the ambulance 0 1 2 27 127 80.89%79.98% Comfort of the ride 1 1 6 31 118 75.16%64.28% Skill of the person driving the ambulance 0 1 2 21 131 84.52%78.78% Medic 15 14 18 170 79.23%83.76%1119 Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 2 0 2 13 145 89.51%81.78% Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 1 2 1 18 140 86.42%82.39% Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 2 0 2 17 136 86.62%81.12% Skill of the medics 2 2 1 15 133 86.93%81.44% Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 2 2 3 22 121 80.67%76.80% Page 23 of 24 Top Box Comparisons July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 City of Palo Alto (Continued) EMS DB % Very Good Company % Very Good Very GoodGoodFairPoor Very Poor Overall Company Rating 35 33 69 517 76.11%80.59%2716 Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable)2 1 4 15 97 81.51%76.82% Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 2 4 1 25 100 75.76%72.21% Medics' concern for your privacy 1 1 3 24 114 79.72%78.10% Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 1 2 1 21 133 84.18%82.44% Billing Staff Assessment 3 5 8 58 63.61%49.66%73 Professionalism of the staff in our billing office 2 2 6 29 36 48.00%63.42% Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 1 3 2 29 37 51.39%63.80% Overall Assessment 14 8 17 113 77.52%82.53%718 How well did our staff work together to care for you 1 2 2 24 119 80.41%78.91% Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 1 1 1 19 131 85.62%79.31% Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 1 2 3 15 124 85.52%79.26% Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 4 1 10 16 94 75.20%67.82% Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service 2 2 0 19 129 84.87%80.06% Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 5 0 1 20 121 82.31%79.78% Page 24 of 24   ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Lisa Fremont [mailto:fremontlisam@gmail.com]   Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 12:02 AM  To: Fire  Cc: Michael Fremont  Subject: call to 1240 Dana Avenue at 10:45ish p.m. ‐ 8/29/17    Our sincere thanks to the team who visited our home this evening, and carefully checked for the source  of our “burnt marshmallow” smell.  After you left, we later discovered that there is a 15‐amp fuse  leading to our furnace (separate from the circuit‐breaker panel), and it had blown.  We don’t know why  and will get a serviceman here to find out.  Thank you again for your thorough inspection.  It gave us  some much needed peace of mind.    Sincerely,    Mike and Lisa Fremont    ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Your.Voicemail@aam.cityofpaloalto.org [mailto:Your.Voicemail@aam.cityofpaloalto.org]   Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 12:36 PM  To: Nickel, Eric  Subject: Voice Message fro    Voice message copy     Caller: 6503276474   Duration: 01:29     The message from Ann reads as follows ‐      "This Anne DeBusk, I live on Alvarado road at Stanford and our alarm went off for smoke and fired and  made a huge noise and then Captain William Crump came to the door with Emilio and they stayed and  really tried to work on it and were a great help. The security people couldn’t even fix it! They were very  helpful and I really highly commend them and I wanted to tell you. Thank you very much, they were  really professional and tried their hardest to figure out the system. But none of us could because it was  the fire and smoke part of the system and we just use the system for coming and going for security. I  wanted to get this message to you.”