HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 6616
City of Palo Alto (ID # 6616)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/29/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: PAFD Performance Report FY16 Q2
Title: Approval and Acceptance of Palo Alto Fire Department Quarterly
Performance Report for Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2016
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Fire
Recommendation
Staff recommends City Council review and accept the Palo Alto Fire Department
Quarterly Performance Report for the Second Quarter of Fiscal Year 2016.
Background and Discussion
Last Fiscal Year the Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) identified performance reporting
as a key initiative, and began reporting on key performance measures quarterly.
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.
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
City of Palo Alto Page 2
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.
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.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
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 (PDF)
ATTACHMENT B_FY16 Q2 Report FINAL (DOCX)
ATTACHMENT C_Customer Survey (PDF)
ATTACHMENT D_Letters of Appreciation (PDF)
City of Palo Alto
Fire Department
Honorable Councilmembers,
I am pleased to provide the second quarterly Performance Report of Fiscal Year 2016. You will see that
our call volume continues to increase while our workforce decreases. Of considerable note is the forty-
eight percent (48%) increase in fires from this same quarter last year. We had four major fire incidents
during this time, three in Palo Alto and one on Stanford Campus at Maples Pavilion.
Two of these were residential structure fires and we were very fortunate that no occupants or
firefighters were injured. Both homes however were a total loss, even though first responders quickly
arrived in less than the 8 minute goal for response times.
It is important to note that residential structure fires burn much faster today than they did 20 years ago.
Current scientific studies conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and
Underwriters Laboratory (UL) demonstrate that modern home furnishings, made of synthetic and
petrochemical products (foam cushions and synthetic carpet) are primarily to blame. These furnishings
create dangerous flashover conditions in three to four minutes, long before fire crews could reasonably
arrive at the fire. A flashover is the near-simultaneous ignition of the room and directly exposed
combustible material in an enclosed area.
l am proud to report that our crews have done an excellent job this quarter. Even though there has been
an increase in fires. For the first time, we have met our performance goal to arrive at Fire Calls within 8
minutes ninety percent (90%) of the time. This performance improvement is a reflection of a key new
initiative known as Operational Readiness. This has driven changes to reduce our response times, with
particular attention to the time between crews being notified of the call from dispatch to the time they
start responding to the call. An ongoing challenge to response times continues to be the impacts of
traffic created by Palo Alto's narrow, congested streets and commute patterns.
In the coming months l will be presenting the Community Risk Assessment and am looking forward to
continuing dialogue on improving performance and services to meet the needs of our community.
Sincerely,
{
Eric Nickel, EFO, CFO, CFC
Fire Chief
Printed with soy-based inks on 100% recycled paper processed without chlorine
P.0 Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
650.329.2184
650.327.6951 fax
1 | P a g e
Palo Alto Fire Department
Quarterly Performance Report
Fiscal Year 2016, Second Quarter
Calls for Service
The Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) responded to a total of 2,234 calls for service in the second
quarter of Fiscal Year 2016. This includes responses within Palo Alto, Stanford, and neighboring cities to
provide Auto and Mutual Aid. Approximately seventy-eight percent (78%) of calls are generated from
Palo Alto, seventeen percent (17%) from Stanford, and the remainder from neighboring cities or
requests for regional fire deployment.
The majority of calls were for Emergency Medical Services, making up sixty-one percent (61%) 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.
Table 1. Calls for Service
Type FY15 Q2 FY16 Q2
Emergency Medical Service 1303 1352
Good Intent 388 400
False Alarm & False Call 299 269
Service Call 101 115
Rescue & Hazardous Material 48 58
Fire 25 37
Explosion, No Fire 0 3
Severe Weather & Natural
Disaster
1 0
Grand Total 2165 2234
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.
Emergency Medical Services
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 1,352 Emergency Medical Service calls the PAFD responded to in the second quarter of Fiscal Year
2016, the overwhelming majority were for medical, trauma and cardiac calls that did not involve a
vehicle accident.
2 | P a g e
Table 2. EMS Performance Measures
Calls for Service FY15 Q2 FY16 Q2
NFIRS Code Description
321 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 1198 1255
322 Vehicle accident with injuries 71 72
324 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries 17 14
323 Motor vehicle/pedestrian accident 15 11
381 Rescue or EMS standby 2 0
Total 1303 1352
Transports
Number of Transports 932 977
Percent of EMS Calls resulting in transport 71.5% 72.3%
Response Times
Percent of first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 8 minutes 92.0% 91.5%
Percent of paramedic responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 12 minutes 93.9% 98.3%
Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls 05:19 04:47
Most EMS calls (72%) resulted in an ambulance transport to a local hospital or care facility. This is the
primary source of revenue generated from emergency medical services, and revenue received in this
quarter is on track with budget projections.
Response Time Goal Met: At least 90% of first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 8
minutes.
This quarter the PAFD first responder arrived on scene to EMS calls within 8 minutes ninety-two percent
(92%) of the time.
Response Time Goal Not 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-
eight percent (98%) of the time.
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 quarter PAFD responded to 37 calls where fire was
present, with 7 occurring in neighboring cities.
This quarter saw an increase in the number and severity of fire incidents. This includes two residential
house fires within Palo Alto, which fortunately did not result in any loss of life or injury of occupants or
fire fighters.
The first occurred in early November 4, in the 500 Block of Maybell Ave. Engine 65 responded to the call
from the station just around the corner and noted there was a smoke odor present and fire visible in the
sky enroute to the location. E65 arrived on scene of a single story residence with heavy fire extending
from the home which was extending into the trees and impinging on the neighbor’s home. A quick fire
attack contained the fire to the original property, and with the assistance of PAPD the residents were
located and confirmed to be out of the home and safe in a neighbor’s house. One family member was
3 | P a g e
shown house and explained the type of damage that occurred. They requested some personal
belongings be removed and our fire crews were able to find and deliver the valuables.
The second fire occurred on December 2, on Bryant Street. A large column of smoke visible from several
miles away, and dispatch reported a fully involved structure. The Palo Alto Battalion Chief was the first
to arrive followed shortly by Mountain View Engine 53 on the automatic aid response. A total of 20
firefighters from Palo Alto and Mountain View responded to the fire. The house was fully involved on
arrival and crews contained the fire to the building of origin, however the adjacent property suffered
heat damage.
The other two fires were relatively small and were able to be contained to the area of origin. This
included a fire on the roof of Maples Pavilion on Stanford Campus caused by aging exterior lights, and an
electrical fire in a restroom of the Veterans Affairs building.
Table 3. Fire Performance Measures
Calls for Service FY15 Q2 FY16 Q2
NFIRS Code Description
113 Cooking fire, confined to container 5 8
100 Fire, other 5 8
111 Building fire 6 6
131 Passenger vehicle fire 3 4
150 Outside rubbish fire, other 0 3
114 Chimney or flue fire, confined to chimney or flue 0 1
116 Fuel burner/boiler malfunction, fire confined 0 1
118 Trash or rubbish fire, contained 3 1
130 Mobile property fire, other 1 1
132 Road freight or transport vehicle fire 0 1
140 Natural vegetation fire, other 0 1
143 Grass fire 0 1
162 Outside equipment fire 0 1
154 Dumpster or other outside trash receptacle fire 1 0
151 Outside rubbish fire, trash or waste fire 1 0
Total 25 37
Response Times
Percent of first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls within 8 minutes 79.7% 95.0%
Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls 06:01 05:42
Fire Containment
Percent of building and structure fires contained to the room or area of origin 100% 50%
Response Time Goal Met: At least 90% of first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls within 8
minutes.
This quarter the PAFD first responder arrived on scene to Fire calls within 8 minutes ninety-five percent
(95%) of the time. This is a significant improvement with historical performance on this measure, which
typically is eighty-one percent (81%) to eighty-two percent (82%). The Fire Department has begun an
operational readiness initiative that includes some adjustments to reduce response times.
4 | P a g e
Fire Containment Goal Not Met: At least 90% of building and structure fires contained to the
room or area of origin.
This quarter there were three building fires within Palo Alto and one on Stanford. The two fires that
were not contained to room or area of origin were both residential home fires in Palo Alto. In both
cases, the fire had spread throughout the entire structure prior to arriving on scene despite a response
time under 8 minutes. PAFD additionally responded to two building fires as mutual aid to Mountain
View, however, the final confined to area information is unavailable.
Rescue and Hazardous Materials
The Fire Department responded to a total of 58 rescue and hazardous material calls. The most common
rescue call is for the removal of victims from a stalled elevator, which accounts for twenty-one percent
(21%) of these call types. Gas leak calls account for the majority of hazardous material calls, making up
thirty-one percent (31%).
Table 4. Rescue and Hazardous Materials Measures
Calls for Service FY15 Q2 FY16 Q2
NFIRS Code Description
353 Removal of victim(s) from stalled elevator 9 12
412 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 3 8
400 Hazardous condition, other 2 7
331 Lock-in (if lock out , use 511 ) 0 5
440 Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other 2 3
412U Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) - PA Utilities Related 7 3
413 Oil or other combustible liquid spill 1 3
442 Overheated motor 0 3
411 Gasoline or other flammable liquid spill 2 3
444U Power line down - PA Utilities Related 2 2
445 Arcing, shorted electrical equipment 2 2
444 Power line down 0 2
451 Biological hazard, confirmed or suspected 0 2
471 Explosive, bomb removal 0 1
480 Attempted burning, illegal action, other 0 1
422 Chemical spill or leak 0 1
421 Chemical hazard (no spill or leak) 0 0
460 Accident, potential accident, other 2 0
443 Light ballast breakdown 1 0
463 Vehicle accident, general cleanup 2 0
351 Extrication of victim(s) from building/structure 1 0
Total 48 58
Response Times
Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to
Rescue & Hazardous Materials calls
05:48 06:04
5 | P a g e
Mutual and Automatic Aid
The Fire Department has automatic aid agreements with five regional Fire Departments, including
Mountain View, Menlo Park, Woodside, Los Altos, and Santa Clara County Fire. The PAFD primarily
provides aid to Mountain View, and the data below shows an increase in the number of calls from the
prior fiscal year. This is due to the virtual consolidation effort with the cities of Mountain View and Los
Altos, which was completed at in the first quarter of FY15.
The Deputy Chief of Operations communicates regularly with the Mountain View Fire Department to
review the agreement and ensure Palo Alto’s resources are not overly relied upon. In this quarter, the
PAFD provided mutual or automatic aid to three other jurisdictions on a total of 116 incidents. Five
agencies provided mutual or automatic aid for calls within Palo Alto or Stanford on a total of 102
incidents.
Table 5. Mutual and Automatic Aid Performance Measures
Mutual and Auto Aid Provided FY15 Q2 FY16 Q2
Agency
Mountain View Fire 77 92
Santa Clara County Fire 21 24
Menlo Park Fire 1 0
All Mutual and Auto Aid Provided 99 116
Mutual and Auto Aid Received
Agency
Mountain View Fire 65 73
Menlo Park Fire 4 20
Woodside Fire 2 5
Santa Clara County Fire 11 3
Moffet Fire 0 1
All Mutual and Auto Aid Received 82 102
6 | 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.
With the selection of the new Fire Marshall and the installation of the improved data tracking system,
some adjustments have been made to the performance measures. In addition, a thorough records
review was conducted to ensure that the total number of mandated inspections was accurate.
In comparison to the first quarter of this year, there was a slight rise in total plans reviewed coinciding
with rise in total inspections. We saw a drop in Electric Vehicle and Solar Permits, along with a drop in
total permits issued. This is expected as work usually slows during the winter holidays.
Table 6. Prevention Bureau Performance Measures
Permits FY15 Q2 FY16 Q2
Fire Permits Issued - 151
Electric Vehicle Permits Issued 9 13
Solar Permits Issued 23 32
Inspections
Hazardous Material Inspections Completed 47 98
Number of Hazardous Material Inspections for the year 270 207
Percent of Hazardous Material Facilities Inspections Complete to date 48.1% 90.3%
State Mandated Inspections Completed 21 114
Number of State Mandated Inspections for the year 96 340
Percent of State Mandated Facilities Inspections Complete to date 55.2% 58.5%
Fire and Life Safety Plan Review
Plans Reviewed 186 399
Percent of Reviews Completed On-Time 97.0% 100%
7 | 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 quarter, the department has operated with 9.0 positions vacant and 4.0 employees off-line
creating a total of 13.00 FTE positions that require backfilling.
This quarter the Department began the process of hiring entry level candidates from the most recent
eligibility list. We are expecting to bring two new firefighters on board next quarter. This will assist in
providing some relief from the amount of force-ins for our current personnel as well as reduce the
amount of overtime generated for backfilling.
The Training Battalion Chief continues to plan and coordinate a number of important trainings to ensure
our fire-fighting crews are familiar with new hazards, tools, and techniques. This quarter trainings
focused on infrequently used skills for Emergency Medical Services, smart home technologies, water
rescue, driver training, health and wellness, hazardous material awareness, respiratory protection, pain
management, and industrial ergonomics.
This quarter the PAFD launched a new mentoring program as part of the succession planning strategy.
This program pairs seasoned officers with junior firefighters, and identifies subject matter experts
internally for all personnel to connect with to improve their skills in certain areas. The kick-off included a
two-day training from a mentor and leadership expert.
Table 7. Vacancies and Off-Line Employees FY16 Q2
Classification Budgeted
FTE
Vacancies Off-Line Employees
(Workers
Comp/Light Duty)
Personnel
On Line
Percent of
Personnel
On Line
Battalion Chief 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 100%
Fire Captain 22.00 3.00 1.00 18.00 82%
Fire Apparatus Operator
& Fire Fighters
70.00 6.00 3.00 61.00 87%
TOTAL 96.00 9.00 4.00 83.00 87%
Table 8. Succession Planning
FY15 Q2 FY16 Q2
Number of Line Personnel Currently Eligible to Retire 10 18
Number of Line Personnel Eligible to Retire in Five Years 23 23
Percent of all Line Personnel Eligible to Retire within Five
Years
39.3% 43.2%
Number of Acting Battalion Chief Hours 1,136 372
Number of Acting Captain Hours 4,839 2,696
Number of Acting Apparatus Operator Hours 3,511 7,054
Training
Hours of Training Completed 5,965 6,091
Average Hours per Line Personnel 71.02 73.39
Number of Your Patients in this ReportYour Score
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
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
11495.50
Number of Patients in this Report
15,602
Number of Transport Services in All EMS DB
99
Page 1 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Executive Summary
This report contains data from 114 City of Palo Alto patients who returned a questionnaire between
10/01/2015 and 12/31/2015.
The overall mean score for the standard questions was 95.50; this is a difference of 3.32 points from the
overall EMS database score of 92.18.
The current score of 95.50 is a change of 1.29 points from last period's score of 94.21. This was the 6th
highest overall score for all companies in the database.
You are ranked 1st for comparably sized companies in the system.
85.84% of responses to standard questions had a rating of Very Good, the highest rating. 99.36% of all
responses were positive.
Page 2 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
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 2 3 05 022 0
18 to 30 0 2 02 231 0
31 to 44 2 4 06 582 1
45 to 54 2 1 03 6104 0
55 to 64 3 10 013 4117 0
65 and older 36 50 288 488031 1
Total 45 70 2117 114 47 65 2
Gender
Page 3 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 01, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Dispatch Analysis
This analysis details the section results that concern dispatcher operations. The analysis contains the mean
scores for each survey question. The first column shows the company score and the total database score,
the second column is your variance from the database score.
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service
94.54
92.28
2.26
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service
92.86
91.97
0.89
Your Score
Total DB
VarianceVariance1000
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived
90.56
90.27
0.29
Your Score
Total DB
VarianceVariance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
0.29
100
91.51
Variance
0
Your Score
92.65
Page 4 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 01, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Ambulance Analysis
This analysis details the section results that concern ambulance operations. The analysis contains the mean
scores for each survey question. The first column shows the company score and the total database score,
the second column is your variance from the database score.
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner
95.19
91.59
3.60
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Cleanliness of the ambulance
96.34
93.88
2.46
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Comfort of the ride
92.38
87.29
5.09
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Skill of the person driving the ambulance
96.46
93.21
3.25
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
3.25
100
91.49
Variance
0
Your Score
95.09
Page 5 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 01, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Medic Analysis
This analysis details the section results that concern medic operations. The analysis contains the mean
scores for each survey question. The first column shows the company score and the total database score,
the second column is your variance from the database score.
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance
97.33
94.26
3.07
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously
97.12
94.16
2.96
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family
96.84
93.71
3.13
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Skill of the medics
97.06
94.16
2.90
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment
95.48
92.61
2.87
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable)
94.82
92.38
2.44
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort
95.11
90.60
4.51
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Page 6 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 01, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Medic Analysis
This analysis details the section results that concern medic operations. The analysis contains the mean
scores for each survey question. The first column shows the company score and the total database score,
the second column is your variance from the database score.
Medics' concern for your privacy
97.11
93.25
3.86
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person
98.25
94.11
4.14
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
4.14
100
93.25
Variance
0
Your Score
96.57
Page 7 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 01, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Billing Staff Assessment Analysis
This analysis details the section results that concern office operations. The analysis contains the mean
scores for each survey question. The first column shows the company score and the total database score,
the second column is your variance from the database score.
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office
89.22
88.62
0.60
Your Score
Total DB
VarianceVariance1000
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs
87.89
88.78
Your Score
Total DB
Variance
-0.89
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
Variance
100
-0.14
88.70
0
Your Score
88.56
Page 8 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 01, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Overall Assessment Analysis
This analysis details the section results that concern assessment of operations. The analysis contains the
mean scores for each survey question. The first column shows the company score and the total database
score, the second column is your variance from the database score.
How well did our staff work together to care for you
97.47
93.18
4.29
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility
97.75
93.32
4.43
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment
97.00
93.13
3.87
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged
89.89
87.76
2.13
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service
97.75
93.33
4.42
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others
96.24
92.73
3.51
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
3.51
100
92.24
Variance
0
Your Score
96.02
Page 9 of 28
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
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 94.54-0.68 92.2895.22
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 92.86-2.25 91.9795.11
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived 90.56-2.30 90.2792.86
Ambulance Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.19-0.83 91.5996.02
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.340.11 93.8896.23
Comfort of the ride 92.380.16 87.2992.22
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 96.461.13 93.2195.33
Medic Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.33-0.02 94.2697.35
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 97.120.72 94.1696.40
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 96.841.43 93.7195.41
Skill of the medics 97.061.19 94.1695.87
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 95.482.86 92.6192.62
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable)94.823.87 92.3890.95
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 95.112.45 90.6092.66
Medics' concern for your privacy 97.113.66 93.2593.45
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 98.252.65 94.1195.60
Billing Staff Assessment Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 89.220.76 88.6288.46
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 87.89-2.83 88.7890.72
Page 10 of 28
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
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 97.472.12 93.1895.35
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 97.752.03 93.3295.72
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 97.001.91 93.1395.09
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 89.894.75 87.7685.14
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation 97.752.52 93.3395.23
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 96.241.71 92.7394.53
Page 11 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Dec
2014
Jan
2015
Feb
2015
Mar
2015
Apr
2015
May
2015
Jun
2015
Jul
2015
Aug
2015
Sep
2015
Oct
2015
Nov
2015
Dec
2015
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 96.15 97.22 98.21 96.09 95.83 92.67 85.71 95.00 93.93 96.51 92.36 100.00 95.83
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 95.49 96.53 96.43 95.16 95.83 91.37 85.71 95.00 94.87 95.35 89.29 91.67 95.65
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 93.22 95.00 91.67 92.74 95.83 91.67 85.71 91.67 93.42 92.68 89.29 100.00 91.13
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 96.47 93.62 96.88 97.37 96.43 95.56 91.67 100.00 96.88 94.12 95.35 100.00 94.77
Cleanliness of the ambulance 97.22 95.35 96.15 95.83 100.00 96.83 94.44 96.43 96.67 95.74 95.00 80.20 98.73
Comfort of the ride 92.96 90.00 93.75 90.28 95.83 92.74 83.44 94.64 92.44 91.33 89.23 80.20 95.76
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 97.89 94.44 95.45 95.71 95.83 94.35 94.44 100.00 95.35 93.88 93.89 100.00 98.25
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.30 95.83 98.33 99.31 100.00 95.90 91.67 95.31 97.87 97.50 95.63 100.00 98.28
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 96.58 94.32 100.00 99.26 100.00 96.77 91.67 95.00 96.20 97.00 95.12 100.00 98.28
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 96.18 93.60 100.00 98.53 100.00 95.90 94.44 93.33 96.74 94.79 95.12 100.00 97.81
Skill of the medics 97.50 94.77 98.08 98.48 100.00 96.37 91.67 93.33 95.65 96.88 95.00 95.00 98.68
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 96.74 95.95 98.21 97.50 95.00 95.56 91.67 90.00 95.56 90.56 92.11 95.00 98.04
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions 94.25 95.16 98.08 97.83 100.00 95.31 90.63 86.36 95.39 88.12 90.91 100.00 97.22
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 96.37 88.57 93.18 97.00 100.00 94.83 83.33 88.64 95.00 91.46 92.86 100.00 96.43
Medics' concern for your privacy 95.77 92.36 96.15 99.14 95.00 93.42 89.29 92.31 95.83 91.67 95.39 95.00 98.56
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 97.10 93.45 98.33 100.00 100.00 95.42 96.88 95.00 97.22 94.27 96.88 100.00 99.11
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing 92.86 86.11 95.00 86.67 91.67 87.88 91.67 90.91 90.79 85.23 89.58 50.50 92.39
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your 92.74 89.06 95.00 86.67 83.33 90.63 83.33 92.86 90.28 90.33 85.42 50.50 92.86
How well did our staff work together to care for you 98.24 94.51 97.92 96.77 100.00 94.74 90.63 96.88 95.11 95.10 95.63 100.00 98.61
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical 97.79 95.35 93.75 97.58 85.00 93.86 90.63 96.88 94.44 96.50 96.34 95.00 99.07
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 96.55 95.00 92.31 99.17 100.00 94.92 90.63 97.06 96.20 93.37 93.90 100.00 99.07
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees 87.32 86.39 90.63 92.00 93.75 91.50 84.38 83.33 87.18 83.79 89.39 81.25 90.98
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 97.79 94.77 100.00 97.66 95.00 95.61 90.63 95.59 96.11 94.27 95.12 100.00 99.54
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 97.19 95.27 97.50 97.66 100.00 94.92 90.63 96.88 96.02 92.24 94.87 93.75 97.50
Your Master Score 96.00 93.77 96.59 96.46 96.64 94.38 90.03 94.19 95.10 93.39 93.53 93.73 97.08
Your Total Responses 84 49 17 42 7 66 9 17 48 52 45 5 64
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 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Monthly tracking of Overall Survey Score
Page 13 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Greatest Increase and Decrease in Scores by Question
Increases
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 85.14 4.75 87.7689.89
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions
(if applicable)
90.95 3.87 92.3894.82
Medics' concern for your privacy 93.45 3.66 93.2597.11
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your
treatment
92.62 2.86 92.6195.48
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 95.60 2.65 94.1198.25
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical
Transportation service
95.23 2.52 93.3397.75
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 92.66 2.45 90.6095.11
How well did our staff work together to care for you 95.35 2.12 93.1897.47
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 95.72 2.03 93.3297.75
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 95.09 1.91 93.1397.00
Decreases
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 90.72 -2.84 88.7887.89
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance
arrived
92.86 -2.30 90.2790.56
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 95.11 -2.25 91.9792.86
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 96.02 -0.83 91.5995.19
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 95.22 -0.68 92.2894.54
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.35 -0.02 94.2697.33
Page 14 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Greatest Scores Above Benchmarks by Question
Highest Above Benchmark
This
Period Variance
Total DB
Score
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 94.114.1498.25
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service 93.334.4297.75
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 93.324.4397.75
How well did our staff work together to care for you 93.184.2997.47
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 94.263.0797.33
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 94.162.9697.12
Medics' concern for your privacy 93.253.8697.11
Skill of the medics 94.162.997.06
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 93.133.8797
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 93.713.1496.84
Page 15 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Highest and Lowest Scores
Highest Scores
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 98.2595.60 2.65 94.11
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 97.7595.72 2.03 93.32
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical
Transportation service
97.7595.23 2.52 93.33
How well did our staff work together to care for you 97.4795.35 2.12 93.18
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.3397.35 -0.02 94.26
Lowest Scores
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 87.8990.72 -2.83 88.78
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 89.2288.46 0.76 88.62
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 89.8985.14 4.75 87.76
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance
arrived
90.5692.86 -2.30 90.27
Comfort of the ride 92.3892.22 0.16 87.29
Page 16 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
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
Skill of the person driving the ambulance .84114767596.46
Medics' concern for your privacy .76893996697.11
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office .7598536989.22
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort .74996534395.11
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance .74479618897.33
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable).74352371394.82
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously .73859899397.12
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service .73503605797.75
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others .72320476196.24
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service .71784203194.54
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family .71539931196.84
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment .71366538897.00
How well did our staff work together to care for you .70891385897.47
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility .70089302197.75
Cleanliness of the ambulance .69445168896.34
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service .69213747892.86
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment .6809714395.48
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person .67271961598.25
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived .65876729890.56
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs .64932668487.89
Comfort of the ride .6279057392.38
Skill of the medics .62431570997.06
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged .55946233889.89
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner .55383488495.19
Page 17 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
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 89.57 88.10 95.38 90.42 91.1991.3594.54
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 88.75 89.75 95.06 89.35 90.0191.8892.86
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 87.96 89.11 95.63 87.01 87.6388.9090.56
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 89.21 85.29 96.80 90.51 88.7890.5695.19
Cleanliness of the ambulance 91.99 90.17 97.60 93.30 92.0194.5496.34
Comfort of the ride 86.08 77.68 92.96 88.08 82.1987.9492.38
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 90.06 89.17 96.80 93.45 91.1995.5996.46
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 93.52 90.50 98.75 93.25 93.2094.4497.33
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 91.29 90.82 97.60 93.55 92.7594.4497.12
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 90.68 88.71 97.89 92.38 91.8895.2596.84
Skill of the medics 90.42 88.37 98.80 93.58 94.1195.9497.06
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 88.65 85.46 98.17 90.91 90.6992.0095.48
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if 88.59 87.95 97.76 91.48 89.7392.3494.82
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 87.67 83.97 94.22 89.31 90.9191.0795.11
Medics' concern for your privacy 89.54 87.54 96.79 92.95 90.7993.6797.11
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 90.94 88.74 98.46 92.85 92.8695.0098.25
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 87.75 82.81 93.10 88.93 88.8585.8589.22
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 88.23 81.33 92.86 88.64 88.2884.5087.89
How well did our staff work together to care for you 90.14 86.85 97.57 90.94 91.7494.7597.47
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 90.75 85.96 96.92 90.84 91.7492.8397.75
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 90.28 85.91 97.76 90.40 90.7193.6097.00
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 84.69 80.58 94.79 86.47 87.0087.3489.89
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 89.57 86.04 98.21 90.34 92.2194.0697.75
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 89.09 85.05 98.13 91.04 90.4792.9696.24
Overall score 95.50 92.38 89.50 86.68 96.83 91.04 90.59
National Rank 6 31 62 73 2 50 54
Comparable Size (Medium) Company Rank 1 18 15
Page 18 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Yo
u
r
Co
m
p
a
n
y
Total Score
Benchmark Comparison
95.50
To
t
a
l
D
B
Si
m
i
l
a
r
S
i
z
e
d
92.11 91.74
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 94.54 92.28 92.08
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 92.86 91.97 91.61
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 90.56 90.27 90.06
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.19 91.59 90.98
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.34 93.88 93.50
Comfort of the ride 92.38 87.29 88.05
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 96.46 93.21 93.01
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.33 94.26 93.64
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 97.12 94.16 93.63
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 96.84 93.71 93.29
Skill of the medics 97.06 94.16 93.67
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 95.48 92.61 92.22
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions 94.82 92.38 91.52
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 95.11 90.60 90.36
Medics' concern for your privacy 97.11 93.25 92.93
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 98.25 94.11 93.45
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing 89.22 88.62 88.76
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your 87.89 88.78 89.02
How well did our staff work together to care for you 97.47 93.18 92.86
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical 97.75 93.32 92.77
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 97.00 93.13 92.49
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees 89.89 87.76 87.26
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 97.75 93.33 92.85
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 96.24 92.73 91.75
Number of Surveys for the period 114
Page 19 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
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 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
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
91.6494.72Overall Facility Rating
Dispatch 94.25 91.43
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 92.2095.38
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 91.9094.62
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 90.1992.74
Ambulance 95.25 91.24
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 91.5795.66
Cleanliness of the ambulance 93.7596.71
Comfort of the ride 86.9792.50
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 92.6896.12
Medic 95.77 92.64
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 93.6797.13
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 93.5796.83
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 93.3296.28
Skill of the medics 93.7596.69
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 91.7494.98
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if 91.5694.09
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 90.1694.01
Medics' concern for your privacy 92.5495.16
Page 21 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Cumulative Comparisons (Continued)
Your Score Total DB
91.6494.72Overall Facility Rating
Medic 95.77 92.64
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 93.4996.75
Billing Staff Assessment 89.4 88.02
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 87.9988.93
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 88.0489.86
Overall Assessment 94.82 91.7
How well did our staff work together to care for you 92.7296.36
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 92.9296.36
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 92.6896.13
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 86.5387.84
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 92.8596.52
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 92.4995.74
Page 22 of 28
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
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
City of Palo Alto
EMS DB %
Very Good
Company
% Very
Good
Very
GoodGoodFairPoor
Very
Poor
Overall Company Rating 8 6 49 249 74.85%85.84%1891
Dispatch 1 1 15 37 72.89%78.66%199
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance
service 0 0 3 13 71 81.61%74.81%
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance
service 0 1 5 11 67 79.76%73.84%
Extent to which you were told what to do until the
ambulance arrived 1 0 7 13 61 74.39%70.03%
Ambulance 4 1 8 50 72.58%85.42%369
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely
manner 1 1 1 12 94 86.24%72.86%
Cleanliness of the ambulance 1 0 1 10 97 88.99%77.86%
Comfort of the ride 2 0 5 15 86 79.63%62.99%
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 0 0 1 13 92 86.79%76.60%
Medic 0 0 13 91 78.44%88.05%766
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the
ambulance 0 0 1 9 93 90.29%80.95%
Degree to which the medics took your problem
seriously 0 0 2 8 94 90.38%81.38%
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or
your family 0 0 2 9 92 89.32%79.93%
Skill of the medics 0 0 1 10 91 89.22%80.62%
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about
your treatment 0 0 2 13 79 84.04%76.40%
Page 23 of 28
Top Box Comparisons
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
City of Palo Alto
(Continued)
EMS DB %
Very Good
Company
% Very
Good
Very
GoodGoodFairPoor
Very
Poor
Overall Company Rating 8 6 49 249 74.85%85.84%1891
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment
decisions (if applicable)0 0 2 13 67 81.71%76.22%
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or
discomfort 0 0 1 15 71 81.61%72.13%
Medics' concern for your privacy 0 0 1 9 85 89.47%77.18%
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 0 0 1 5 94 94.00%81.13%
Billing Staff Assessment 2 1 2 18 63.50%68.06%49
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service
billing office 1 0 1 10 25 67.57%63.12%
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address
your needs 1 1 1 8 24 68.57%63.87%
Overall Assessment 1 3 11 53 75.75%88.19%508
How well did our staff work together to care for you 0 0 1 8 90 90.91%77.14%
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the
medical facility 0 0 1 7 92 92.00%77.47%
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation
treatment 0 0 1 10 89 89.00%77.25%
Extent to which the services received were worth the
fees charged 1 3 5 11 64 76.19%66.17%
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency
Medical Transportation service 0 0 1 7 92 92.00%78.37%
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to
others 0 0 2 10 81 87.10%78.10%
Page 24 of 28
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
City of Palo Alto
Standard Deviation by Question
SD
Variance
Database
Standard
Deviation
Company
Standard
Deviation
Total
DBYour Score
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 94.54 92.28 12.239 15.481 3.24
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 92.86 91.97 15.703 15.594 -0.11
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance
arrived
90.56 90.27 18.518 17.599 -0.92
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.19 91.59 14.497 15.987 1.49
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.34 93.88 12.522 12.401 -0.12
Comfort of the ride 92.38 87.29 18.055 19.773 1.72
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 96.46 93.21 9.366 13.871 4.51
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.33 94.26 8.471 13.562 5.09
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 97.12 94.16 9.372 14.233 4.86
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 96.84 93.71 9.654 14.614 4.96
Skill of the medics 97.06 94.16 8.783 13.592 4.81
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 95.48 92.61 10.917 15.371 4.45
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if
applicable)
94.82 92.38 11.541 15.982 4.44
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 95.11 90.60 10.613 18.081 7.47
Medics' concern for your privacy 97.11 93.25 8.783 14.123 5.34
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 98.25 94.11 7.293 14.29 7.00
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 89.22 88.62 19.624 17.482 -2.14
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 87.89 88.78 22.545 17.616 -4.93
How well did our staff work together to care for you 97.47 93.18 8.33 14.301 5.97
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 97.75 93.32 7.98 14.165 6.18
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 97.00 93.13 8.86 14.601 5.74
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 89.89 87.76 21.12 20.70 -0.42
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical
Transportation service
97.75 93.33 7.98 14.753 6.77
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 96.24 92.73 10.335 16.548 6.21
Overall Survey Rating 95.50 92.18 12.21 15.61 3.4
Page 25 of 28
City of Palo Alto
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
Responses vs Score Histogram — This graph shows the number of responses on the Y
axis vs the average score on the X axis.
Page 26 of 28
Facilities in Database
October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015
City of Palo Alto
Adair EMS Kirksville, MO Air San Juan Island Friday Harbor, WA
Alliance Health null Alliance Mobile Health Troy, MI
AMT Peoria, IL Bay State Springfield, MA
Bay Village Bay Village, OH Beaumont Troy, MI
Birmingham Fire Birmingham, MI Bloomfield Township Bloomfield Hills, MI
Carilion Clinic Roanoke, VA Cetronia Allentown, PA
City of Palo Alto Palo Alto, CA Columbus Connection Cols, OH
Community Ambulance Macon, GA Community Care EMS Ashtabula, OH
Community EMS MI Southfield, MI Community EMS OH Columbus, OH
Cumberland Carlisle, PA Cy-Fair Houston, TX
Cypress Creek Spring, TX DMC Care Detroit, MI
Edward Naperville, IL Emergent Health Partners Ann Arbor, MI
Employee Survey-LifeCare null EMSA Oklahoma City, OK
Escalon Ambulance Service Escalon, CA Ferndale Fire and Rescue Ferndale, MI
Genesis Community Zanesville, OH Gold Cross Menasha, WI
Guilford EMS Greensboro, NC Harris County Emergency Houston, TX
Health East St. Paul, MN Health Link Taylor, MI
HEMSI Hunsville, AL Hennepin County EMS Minneapolis, MN
Hot Springs Hot Springs, AR Hot Springs Village Hot Springs, AR
Howard County Nashville, AR Humboldt Winnemucca, NV
HVA null Iosco County EMS East Tawas, MI
Lassen County Ambulance Susanville, CA LifeCare Ambulance Battle Creek, MI
LifeCare Medical EMS Sterling, CO Life EMS Ambulance Grand Rapids, MI
LifeNet EMS Texarkana, TX Madison Heights Fire Madison Heights, MI
Malvern Malvern, AR MCHD Conroe, TX
Medcare Ambulance Columbus, OH Medic 1 Ambulance Canton, MI
Medic Ambulance Services Vallejo, CA Medic EMS Davenport, IA
Medstar Clinton Twp., MI Medstar Mobile Healthcare Fort Worth, TX
Mercy Flights Medford, OR Mercy Ohio Cincinnati, OH
Metro West Hillsboro, OR Mobile Life Support New Windsor, NY
Mobile Life Support New Windsor, NY Mobile Medical Response Saginaw, MI
MONOC Neptune, NJ Nature Coast Lecanto, FL
North Memorial Robbinsdale, MN North Shore LLJ Syosset, NY
Oceana Hart, MI Patterson District Patterson, CA
Pearland EMS Pearland, TX Portage County Stevens Point, WI
Pro EMS Cambridge, MA ProMed Muskegon, MI
Prompt Ambulance Highland, IN PTS Loveland, OH
Puckett Austell, GA Regional EMS Flint, MI
REMSA Reno, NV REMSA Air Transport Reno, NV
Ridgefield Fire Department Ridgefield, CT Riggs Ambulance Merced, CA
Royal Oak Fire Department Royal Oak, MI San Juan Island Friday Harbor, WA
San Marcos Hays County San Marcos, TX Scott & White Temple, TX
Senior Care Bronx, NY Sioux Land Sioux City, IA
SMCAS Niles, MI Snohomish County Fire Snohomish, WA
Page 27 of 28
St. Charles St. Peters, MO Stillwater Stillwater, OK
Suburban Palmer, PA Swartz Flint, MI
Texarkana Texarkana, TX Tri-Hospital Port Huron, MI
University Medical Center Lubbock, TX Van Buren EMS Paw Paw, MI
West Bloomfield Fire West Bloomfield, MI WestSide Community Newman, CA
York Regional EMS Yoe, PA
Page 28 of 28
October ll)2a15
Dear PD.\o A Ito F'.'re De.petr-1-Men+,
MLt t\Cl'(Y)e \ 'b I ~m
a bth aytDde s+uder;..:t af-3ennu L1'nd
E/erien+'ar~ $c.hDo/. Keceritl4) +h'kre
W(;.(.S D.. ~ire 1'n Mlf Cort/m£.1,n/ty
Clllted the Gutte ~lrtf.Several
~\ends of m I r1e I.Jere evae.ua . .fec:I
Ctnd two Of '{Y}.y 'oest ~~\ends houses
burnt down.one o~ thefYJ spenf f-he
n\gh+-a+ M~ house .for ~ ou+ o~
tne to days LJe d 1'd n+ hetve sc.hoo I
Ctnd thed'-Hind O.(: got-he'r p1Jnd Of.P
Of" 'ner \Jouse bein?f t,one. k/hile
She lJCLS D-t 'M'd_ hobis~ LJ~ LJent
<ohopplng and got-her '56(>Je Cl0fhes.
1 Dur t\D.$<0 WotA \A \ \\\e \-o
¥nox,\}\ \&Dl). f'o(' L:1our heroic L.JorK
Q.n fhe \.)u+te l=lfe. Dud~ t'ne, ~,\e
~ SCl.W Se>'('(\ e f1\~\)\~'f\e~ OfO\>Q''<' ~
\et-et~~n+ on +ne ~\'fe CJ.~c\ ~e\,co(Jt-e(S d~O??'"~ We>..ter. ~\\e r~C\hters CL\e Vet~ 'o'tCAve!!I A9Ct\""' 1tnu..nH LJOtA so
'0\ u.ch ~err '{\e \?'"'~ SClAJe o~
(,L)'(V) YY\ LA Yl \ + ~ {