HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 6933
City of Palo Alto (ID # 6933)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/6/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: PAFD Performance Report FY16 Q3
Title: Acceptance of Palo Alto Fire Department Quarterly Performance
Report for Third 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 Third 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:
Attachment6.a: ATTACHMENT A_Coverletter (PDF)
Attachment6.b: ATTACHMENT B_FY16 Q3 Peformance Report (DOCX)
Attachment6.c: ATTACHMENT C_Customer Survey (PDF)
Attachment6.d: ATTACHMENT D_Letters of Appreciation (PDF)
1 | P a g e
Palo Alto Fire Department
Quarterly Performance Report
Fiscal Year 2016, Third Quarter
Calls for Service
The Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) responded to a total of 2,133 calls for service in the third quarter
of Fiscal Year 2016. This includes responses within Palo Alto, Stanford, and neighboring cities to provide
Auto and Mutual Aid. Approximately eighty-three percent (83%) of calls are generated from Palo Alto,
twelve percent (12%) 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-three percent (63%) 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 Q3 FY16 Q3
Emergency Medical Service 1303 1348
Good Intent 351 377
False Alarm & False Call 245 206
Service Call 113 102
Rescue & Hazardous Material 37 57
Fire 34 43
Explosion, No Fire 1 0
Grand Total 2084 2133
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 1,348 Emergency Medical Service calls the PAFD responded to in the third quarter of Fiscal Year
2016, the overwhelming majority were for medical, trauma and cardiac calls that did not involve a
vehicle accident.
There was a twenty-five percent (25%) increase over the same quarter last year for motor vehicle
accidents, with most of those occuring with injuries.
2 | P a g e
Table 2. EMS Performance Measures
Calls for Service FY15 Q3 FY16 Q3
NFIRS Code Description
321 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 1214 1237
322 Vehicle accident with injuries 64 81
324 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries 14 17
323 Motor vehicle/pedestrian accident 11 10
381 Rescue or EMS standby 0 3
Total 1303 1348
Transports
Number of Transports 949 951
Percent of EMS Calls resulting in transport 72.8% 70.5%
Response Times
Percent of first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 8 minutes 91.3% 91.7%
Percent of paramedic responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 12 minutes 99.2% 99.0%
Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls 05:03 04:56
Most EMS calls (71%) 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 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.
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 43 calls where fire was
present, with 7 occurring in neighboring cities. There were six major fire incidents that occurred during
this period, and fortunately resulted in minor injuries of residents and no injuries of first responders.
In early January, on the 3000 block of Kenneth Drive the PAFD was dispatched to investigate smoke.
Upon arrival there was a light haze with no active fire or smoke production showing from an attached,
garage. The cause of the fire was burning rags stuffed under the garage door. Firefighters consulted with
the Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) and informed them of the suspicious nature of this fire. After
conducting an investigation, it was confirmed the cause of the fire was arson. PAPD quickly followed up
and within 24 hours a suspect was arrested and charged with arson on an inhabited building.
A small home fire on the 100 block of Hawthorne Ave occurred in February, with smoke and flames
showing upon arrival of emergency responders. A second alarm response was called, with a total of 14
units from PAFD, Santa Clara County, Mountain View, and Moffet Field. Crews knocked down the flames
3 | P a g e
from the outside and then made entry into the home from the front door. Upon inspection there was no
fire found inside the house, and crews extinguished the fire on the exterior of the building.
The largest fire this quarter occurred in a home on the 1100 block of Bryant Street. The first crew to
arrive on scene reported a two story structure fire with smoke showing from the basement and attic.
Ultimately, this three alarm fire required a significant response of 23 units who conducted primary
search, fire attack, vertical ventilation, incident command, overhaul, air supply, and safety roles. There
were no residents in the home at the time. The fire was controlled in approximately 30 minutes. Caused
by an incorrectly installed furnace, the fire started in the basement and burned its way through hidden
voids and behind walls up to the attic. It is important to note that nearly all multi-story homes in Palo
Alto built before 1945 contain balloon frame construction. The defect with balloon framing is the
absence of fire stopping between floors. A fire can burn undetected behind walls and floors and when it
is finally discovered, frequently some distance from the point of origin, a great deal of work is needed to
expose walls and extinguish the fire.
Table 3. Fire Performance Measures
Calls for Service FY15 Q3 FY16 Q3
NFIRS Code Description
113 Cooking fire, confined to container 9 12
111 Building fire 7 12
154 Dumpster or other outside trash receptacle fire 3 6
131 Passenger vehicle fire 2 4
100 Fire, other 3 3
140 Natural vegetation fire, other 0 2
142 Brush, or brush and grass mixture fire 1 1
130 Mobile property fire, other 0 1
132 Road freight or transport vehicle fire 0 1
161 Outside storage fire 0 1
150 Outside rubbish fire, other 2 0
114 Chimney or flue fire, confined to chimney or flue 3 0
118 Trash or rubbish fire, contained 1 0
115 Incinerator overload or malfunction, fire confined 1 0
122 Fire in motor home, camper, recreational vehicle 1 0
153 Construction or demolition landfill fire 1 0
Total 34 43
Response Times
Percent of first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls within 8 minutes 81.0% 86.8%
Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls 05:46 05:43
Fire Containment
Percent of building and structure fires contained to the room or area of origin 100% 78%
Response Time Goal Not 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 eighty-seven
percent (87%) of the time. While, under the goal this is still an improvement from historical
performance on this measure, which is typically near eighty-one percent (81%). The Fire Department
has begun an operational readiness initiative that includes initiatives 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 eight 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 fires in Palo Alto. In both cases, the
fire spread from the original area despite a response time under 8 minutes. PAFD also responded mutual
aid to three building fires in Mountain View.
Rescue and Hazardous Materials
The Fire Department responded to a total of 57 rescue and hazardous material calls. The most common
rescue call is for the removal of victims from a stalled elevator, which accounts for thirty-two percent
(32%) of these call types. There was a big increase in the number of stalled elevator calls, many of which
were in buildings on Stanford campus that had multiple incidents. Gas leak calls account for the second
largest type of call, making up twenty-five percent (25%) of the total.
Table 4. Rescue and Hazardous Materials Measures
Calls for Service FY15 Q3 FY16 Q3
NFIRS Code Description
353 Removal of victim(s) from stalled elevator 6 18
412 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 4 8
400 Hazardous condition, other 4 7
412U Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) - PA Utilities Related 3 4
445 Arcing, shorted electrical equipment 0 4
463 Vehicle accident, general cleanup 2 4
331 Lock-in (if lock out , use 511 ) 1 3
411 Gasoline or other flammable liquid spill 2 2
422 Chemical spill or leak 3 2
413 Oil or other combustible liquid spill 3 1
444U Power line down - PA Utilities Related 0 1
444 Power line down 0 1
442 Overheated motor 1 0
440 Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other 2 0
443 Light ballast breakdown 1 0
350 Extrication, rescue, other 2 0
352 Extrication of victim(s) from vehicle 1 0
360 Water & ice related rescue, other 1 0
410 Flammable gas or liquid condition, other 1 0
Total 37 57
Response Times
Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to
Rescue & Hazardous Materials calls
06:05 05:19
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
5 | P a g e
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 107 incidents. Five
agencies provided mutual or automatic aid for calls within Palo Alto or Stanford on a total of 119
incidents.
Table 5. Mutual and Automatic Aid Performance Measures
Mutual and Auto Aid Provided FY15 Q3 FY16 Q3
Agency
Mountain View Fire 81 85
Santa Clara County Fire 1 17
Menlo Park Fire 0 3
Santa Clara City Fire 0 2
San Jose Fire 1 0
All Mutual and Auto Aid Provided 83 107
Mutual and Auto Aid Received
Agency
Mountain View Fire 50 91
Menlo Park Fire 22 13
Santa Clara County Fire 3 9
Woodside Fire 3 3
Moffet Fire 0 3
All Mutual and Auto Aid Received 78 119
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.
The Bureau completed an in-depth analysis of fees and finalized a revised fee schedule this quarter. Staff
continues to refine the records management system, Accela to meet inspection data storage and billing
needs. They are currently working on a mobile application for scheduling inspections that should be
launched before the end of the fiscal year.
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 an increase in Electric Vehicle and small drops in Solar Permits
and in total permits issued.
The hazardous material inspections are above the projected total for the year, however, this is due to
multiple visits to a single site. This year businesses have been mandated to register on a State Hazardous
Materials registry (CERS) and the department has been providing assistance to these sites with the
registration process.
Table 6. Prevention Bureau Performance Measures
Permits FY15 Q3 FY16 Q3
Fire Permits Issued - 135
Electric Vehicle Permits Issued 20 25
Solar Permits Issued 20 24
Inspections
Hazardous Material Inspections Completed 106 113
Number of Hazardous Material Inspections for the year 270 207
Percent of Hazardous Material Facilities Inspections Complete to date 87.4% 140%
State Mandated Inspections Completed 131 99
Number of State Mandated Inspections for the year 340 340
Percent of State Mandated Facilities Inspections Complete to date 54.1% 87.6%
Fire and Life Safety Plan Review
Plans Reviewed 348 435
Percent of Reviews Completed On-Time 98.0% 97.0%
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 was able to hire two new firefighter/paramedics, who are in the process of
completing the fire academy. Although these hires were expected to provide some relief from the
amount of mandatory overtime for our current personnel as well as reduce the total amount of
overtime, we had four employees leave for positions in other fire departments.
With the current hiring list nearly exhausted, the Department will begin a new entry level testing
process within the next six months. Once the position is posted it can take up to 12 months to complete
the necessary review, selection and background procedures to create a new list. As additional
employees leave or retire, the department may have to continue relying on overtime in the next year.
This quarter the department was also able to fill the remaining Fire Captain vacancies, promoting three
firefighters to the rank of Captain in January. The number of acting captain hours was reduced to nearly
half of last quarter, primarily from the filling of these three positions with promotions.
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 0.00 2.00 20.00 91%
Fire Apparatus Operator
& Fire Fighters
70.00 11.00 4.00 55.00 79%
TOTAL 96.00 11.00 6.00 79.00 82%
Table 8. Succession Planning
FY15 Q3 FY16 Q3
Number of Line Personnel Currently Eligible to Retire 12 21
Number of Line Personnel Eligible to Retire in Five Years 21 20
Percent of all Line Personnel Eligible to Retire within Five
Years
37.9% 46.1%
Number of Acting Battalion Chief Hours 252 408
Number of Acting Captain Hours 5,614 1,474
Number of Acting Apparatus Operator Hours 6,517 6,493
Training
Hours of Training Completed 7,182 9,617
Average Hours per Line Personnel 87.59 121.73
Number of Your Patients in this ReportYour Score
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
14395.52
Number of Patients in this Report
17,169
Number of Transport Services in All EMS DB
114
Page 1 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
Executive Summary
This report contains data from 143 City of Palo Alto patients who returned a questionnaire between
01/01/2016 and 03/31/2016.
The overall mean score for the standard questions was 95.52; this is a difference of 3.06 points from the
overall EMS database score of 92.46.
The current score of 95.52 is a change of 0.02 points from last period's score of 95.50. This was the 7th
highest overall score for all companies in the database.
You are ranked 1st for comparably sized companies in the system.
85.06% of responses to standard questions had a rating of Very Good, the highest rating. 99.42% of all
responses were positive.
Page 2 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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 0 02 033 0
18 to 30 1 2 03 220 0
31 to 44 2 5 18 341 0
45 to 54 4 6 010 462 0
55 to 64 7 4 011 71811 0
65 and older 31 48 180 6111049 0
Total 47 65 2114 143 66 77 0
Gender
Page 3 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 01, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
96.03
92.61
3.42
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service
95.71
92.49
3.22
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived
93.56
90.87
2.69
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
3.16
100
91.99
Variance
0
Your Score
95.15
Page 4 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 01, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
95.74
91.94
3.80
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Cleanliness of the ambulance
96.30
93.94
2.36
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Comfort of the ride
93.16
87.75
5.41
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Skill of the person driving the ambulance
96.96
93.47
3.49
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
3.74
100
91.80
Variance
0
Your Score
95.54
Page 5 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 01, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
97.38
94.18
3.20
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously
97.00
94.01
2.99
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family
97.38
93.66
3.72
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Skill of the medics
97.13
94.05
3.08
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment
96.65
92.50
4.15
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable)
94.35
92.28
2.07
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort
95.41
90.70
4.71
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Page 6 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 01, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
95.58
93.05
2.53
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person
97.51
94.14
3.37
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
3.40
100
93.18
Variance
0
Your Score
96.58
Page 7 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 01, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
89.02
88.74
Your Score
Total DB
VarianceVariance1000
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs
85.49
88.81
Your Score
Total DB
Variance
-3.32
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
Variance
100
-1.39
88.78
0
Your Score
87.39
Page 8 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 01, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
96.37
93.33
3.04
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility
96.52
93.47
3.05
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment
96.02
93.27
2.75
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged
88.07
87.70
Your Score
Total DB
VarianceVariance1000
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service
96.46
93.42
3.04
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others
96.21
93.01
3.20
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
2.81
100
92.38
Variance
0
Your Score
95.19
Page 9 of 28
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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 96.031.49 92.6194.54
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 95.712.85 92.4992.86
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived 93.563.00 90.8790.56
Ambulance Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.740.55 91.9495.19
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.30-0.04 93.9496.34
Comfort of the ride 93.160.78 87.7592.38
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 96.960.50 93.4796.46
Medic Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.380.05 94.1897.33
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 97.00-0.12 94.0197.12
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 97.380.54 93.6696.84
Skill of the medics 97.130.07 94.0597.06
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 96.651.17 92.5095.48
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable)94.35-0.47 92.2894.82
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 95.410.30 90.7095.11
Medics' concern for your privacy 95.58-1.53 93.0597.11
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 97.51-0.74 94.1498.25
Billing Staff Assessment Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 89.02-0.20 88.7489.22
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 85.49-2.40 88.8187.89
Page 10 of 28
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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 96.37-1.10 93.3397.47
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 96.52-1.23 93.4797.75
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 96.02-0.98 93.2797.00
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 88.07-1.82 87.7089.89
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation 96.46-1.29 93.4297.75
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 96.21-0.03 93.0196.24
Page 11 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
Mar
2015
Apr
2015
May
2015
Jun
2015
Jul
2015
Aug
2015
Sep
2015
Oct
2015
Nov
2015
Dec
2015
Jan
2016
Feb
2016
Mar
2016
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 96.09 95.83 92.67 85.71 95.00 93.93 96.51 92.36 100.00 95.83 94.57 97.00 97.22
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 95.16 95.83 91.37 85.71 95.00 94.87 95.35 89.29 91.67 95.65 94.32 96.00 97.22
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 92.74 95.83 91.67 85.71 91.67 93.42 92.68 89.29 100.00 91.13 93.59 87.50 97.22
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 97.37 96.43 95.56 91.67 100.00 96.88 94.12 95.35 100.00 94.77 94.74 92.31 98.91
Cleanliness of the ambulance 95.83 100.00 96.83 94.44 96.43 96.67 95.74 95.00 80.20 98.73 93.09 96.15 100.00
Comfort of the ride 90.28 95.83 92.74 83.44 94.64 92.44 91.33 89.23 80.20 95.76 90.63 92.31 96.51
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 95.71 95.83 94.35 94.44 100.00 95.35 93.88 93.89 100.00 98.25 95.31 96.00 99.40
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 99.31 100.00 95.90 91.67 95.31 97.87 97.50 95.63 100.00 98.28 97.81 93.75 98.84
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 99.26 100.00 96.77 91.67 95.00 96.20 97.00 95.12 100.00 98.28 96.05 94.79 99.43
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 98.53 100.00 95.90 94.44 93.33 96.74 94.79 95.12 100.00 97.81 96.05 95.83 100.00
Skill of the medics 98.48 100.00 96.37 91.67 93.33 95.65 96.88 95.00 95.00 98.68 95.98 96.74 98.84
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 97.50 95.00 95.56 91.67 90.00 95.56 90.56 92.11 95.00 98.04 96.00 95.45 98.13
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions 97.83 100.00 95.31 90.63 86.36 95.39 88.12 90.91 100.00 97.22 93.29 94.32 95.83
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 97.00 100.00 94.83 83.33 88.64 95.00 91.46 92.86 100.00 96.43 94.32 92.86 98.48
Medics' concern for your privacy 99.14 95.00 93.42 89.29 92.31 95.83 91.67 95.39 95.00 98.56 94.39 93.18 98.21
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 100.00 100.00 95.42 96.88 95.00 97.22 94.27 96.88 100.00 99.11 97.64 92.43 100.00
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing 86.67 91.67 87.88 91.67 90.91 90.79 85.23 89.58 50.50 92.39 89.58 92.50 86.00
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your 86.67 83.33 90.63 83.33 92.86 90.28 90.33 85.42 50.50 92.86 83.75 91.67 84.00
How well did our staff work together to care for you 96.77 100.00 94.74 90.63 96.88 95.11 95.10 95.63 100.00 98.61 95.10 96.88 97.62
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical 97.58 85.00 93.86 90.63 96.88 94.44 96.50 96.34 95.00 99.07 94.61 95.83 99.38
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 99.17 100.00 94.92 90.63 97.06 96.20 93.37 93.90 100.00 99.07 95.37 95.83 96.98
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees 92.00 93.75 91.50 84.38 83.33 87.18 83.79 89.39 81.25 90.98 86.84 88.80 89.00
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 97.66 95.00 95.61 90.63 95.59 96.11 94.27 95.12 100.00 99.54 95.28 94.79 98.84
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 97.66 100.00 94.92 90.63 96.88 96.02 92.24 94.87 93.75 97.50 94.27 95.83 98.75
Your Master Score 96.46 96.64 94.38 90.03 94.19 95.10 93.39 93.53 93.73 97.08 94.39 94.30 97.65
Your Total Responses 42 7 66 9 17 48 52 45 5 64 65 29 49
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
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
Monthly tracking of Overall Survey Score
Page 13 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
Greatest Increase and Decrease in Scores by Question
Increases
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance
arrived
90.56 3.00 90.8793.56
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 92.86 2.86 92.4995.71
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 94.54 1.49 92.6196.03
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your
treatment
95.48 1.17 92.5096.65
Comfort of the ride 92.38 0.78 87.7593.16
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.19 0.54 91.9495.74
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 96.84 0.53 93.6697.38
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 96.46 0.49 93.4796.96
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 95.11 0.29 90.7095.41
Skill of the medics 97.06 0.07 94.0597.13
Decreases
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 87.89 -2.40 88.8185.49
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 89.89 -1.83 87.7088.07
Medics' concern for your privacy 97.11 -1.53 93.0595.58
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical
Transportation service
97.75 -1.29 93.4296.46
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 97.75 -1.23 93.4796.52
How well did our staff work together to care for you 97.47 -1.11 93.3396.37
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 97.00 -0.98 93.2796.02
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 98.25 -0.74 94.1497.51
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions
(if applicable)
94.82 -0.46 92.2894.35
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 89.22 -0.20 88.7489.02
Page 14 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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 94.143.3697.51
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 94.183.297.38
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 93.663.7297.38
Skill of the medics 94.053.0897.13
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 94.012.9997
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 93.473.4996.96
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 92.54.1596.65
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 93.473.0596.52
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service 93.423.0396.46
How well did our staff work together to care for you 93.333.0496.37
Page 15 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
Highest and Lowest Scores
Highest Scores
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 97.5198.25 -0.74 94.14
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 97.3896.84 0.54 93.66
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.3897.33 0.05 94.18
Skill of the medics 97.1397.06 0.07 94.05
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 97.0097.12 -0.12 94.01
Lowest Scores
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 85.4987.89 -2.40 88.81
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 88.0789.89 -1.82 87.70
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 89.0289.22 -0.20 88.74
Comfort of the ride 93.1692.38 0.78 87.75
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance
arrived
93.5690.56 3.00 90.87
Page 16 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable).84740179994.35
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service .81465575496.46
Skill of the medics .81030955197.13
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others .80804860796.21
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility .78952713596.52
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family .78290662897.38
How well did our staff work together to care for you .76314877496.37
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment .75381578396.65
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person .7494033397.51
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs .72458343385.49
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously .7091974597.00
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged .70856512688.07
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service .67448593995.71
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service .66133806596.03
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance .65936912697.38
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment .63533109696.02
Cleanliness of the ambulance .62496510496.30
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort .62069813495.41
Skill of the person driving the ambulance .59025937296.96
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office .5752494989.02
Comfort of the ride .53571760693.16
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived .52661581693.56
Medics' concern for your privacy .51155196195.58
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner .40960483595.74
Page 17 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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 92.31 89.95 95.77 92.12 90.0291.0696.03
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 92.86 90.14 94.06 91.00 88.3991.2295.71
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 88.40 88.70 92.83 87.86 86.7990.0693.56
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 91.94 89.24 96.67 90.90 85.0389.8995.74
Cleanliness of the ambulance 93.10 91.49 97.14 91.77 91.5694.4296.30
Comfort of the ride 87.93 77.66 87.63 86.07 82.5988.7893.16
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 93.10 90.73 96.65 91.36 89.0193.6596.96
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 94.03 93.44 97.19 93.22 91.1794.4397.38
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 93.75 92.51 97.21 92.28 92.4893.1697.00
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 93.25 91.43 97.97 92.91 92.8793.5497.38
Skill of the medics 93.55 92.36 96.93 93.32 92.2093.8397.13
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 91.36 90.70 96.43 90.37 90.6893.1296.65
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if 90.91 87.51 97.42 91.61 90.1093.8494.35
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 93.33 89.50 95.52 90.20 85.0091.1795.41
Medics' concern for your privacy 92.27 91.30 96.99 91.62 88.3292.8095.58
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 93.75 92.54 97.50 92.31 92.0893.4997.51
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 89.71 86.18 90.00 88.57 81.2885.4589.02
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 87.90 85.00 85.52 86.80 81.2886.6885.49
How well did our staff work together to care for you 92.74 89.33 97.10 91.03 89.0592.9296.37
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 92.92 90.80 97.22 91.46 88.2995.0096.52
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 92.50 89.75 96.47 91.12 90.6494.3096.02
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 86.32 80.93 93.65 88.24 81.6086.4388.07
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 93.46 89.04 96.78 91.47 89.9493.5996.46
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 92.83 87.80 96.72 92.33 88.8492.1096.21
Overall score 95.52 92.14 92.06 89.40 95.85 91.02 88.63
National Rank 7 44 45 75 6 64 79
Comparable Size (Medium) Company Rank 1 13 25
Page 18 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
Yo
u
r
Co
m
p
a
n
y
Total Score
Benchmark Comparison
95.52
To
t
a
l
D
B
Si
m
i
l
a
r
S
i
z
e
d
92.46 91.8
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 96.03 92.61 92.44
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 95.71 92.49 92.13
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 93.56 90.87 90.66
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.74 91.94 91.19
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.30 93.94 93.53
Comfort of the ride 93.16 87.75 88.26
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 96.96 93.47 92.95
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.38 94.18 93.72
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 97.00 94.01 93.47
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 97.38 93.66 93.28
Skill of the medics 97.13 94.05 93.51
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 96.65 92.50 92.05
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions 94.35 92.28 91.72
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 95.41 90.70 90.15
Medics' concern for your privacy 95.58 93.05 92.94
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 97.51 94.14 93.78
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing 89.02 88.74 88.47
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your 85.49 88.81 88.02
How well did our staff work together to care for you 96.37 93.33 93.05
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical 96.52 93.47 92.90
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 96.02 93.27 92.88
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees 88.07 87.70 86.84
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 96.46 93.42 92.89
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 96.21 93.01 92.40
Number of Surveys for the period 143
Page 19 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
91.6794.78Overall Facility Rating
Dispatch 94.41 91.46
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 92.2295.50
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 91.9394.84
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 90.2292.89
Ambulance 95.3 91.26
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 91.5995.67
Cleanliness of the ambulance 93.7796.64
Comfort of the ride 87.0192.62
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 92.6996.28
Medic 95.91 92.68
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 93.7097.18
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 93.6096.87
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 93.3496.50
Skill of the medics 93.7796.78
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 91.7995.30
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if 91.6094.14
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 90.2194.27
Medics' concern for your privacy 92.5795.24
Page 21 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
Cumulative Comparisons (Continued)
Your Score Total DB
91.6794.78Overall Facility Rating
Medic 95.91 92.68
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 93.5396.90
Billing Staff Assessment 89.03 88.06
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 88.0488.95
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 88.0889.11
Overall Assessment 94.85 91.74
How well did our staff work together to care for you 92.7696.36
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 92.9696.39
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 92.7196.11
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 86.6087.88
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 92.8896.51
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 92.5395.83
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
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
City of Palo Alto
EMS DB %
Very Good
Company
% Very
Good
Very
GoodGoodFairPoor
Very
Poor
Overall Company Rating 6 9 41 330 75.21%85.06%2198
Dispatch 0 1 4 49 73.95%82.52%255
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance
service 0 0 1 15 91 85.05%75.54%
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance
service 0 0 1 16 88 83.81%75.03%
Extent to which you were told what to do until the
ambulance arrived 0 1 2 18 76 78.35%71.28%
Ambulance 0 1 7 68 73.55%84.03%400
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely
manner 0 1 1 17 110 85.27%73.90%
Cleanliness of the ambulance 0 0 1 15 99 86.09%78.06%
Comfort of the ride 0 0 5 22 90 76.92%64.56%
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 0 0 0 14 101 87.83%77.66%
Medic 1 4 10 105 78.37%88.36%911
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the
ambulance 0 0 1 11 112 90.32%80.86%
Degree to which the medics took your problem
seriously 0 2 0 9 114 91.20%81.08%
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or
your family 0 1 0 10 113 91.13%80.05%
Skill of the medics 0 0 1 12 109 89.34%80.26%
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about
your treatment 0 0 1 13 98 87.50%76.13%
Page 23 of 28
Top Box Comparisons
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
City of Palo Alto
(Continued)
EMS DB %
Very Good
Company
% Very
Good
Very
GoodGoodFairPoor
Very
Poor
Overall Company Rating 6 9 41 330 75.21%85.06%2198
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment
decisions (if applicable)0 1 4 10 78 83.87%76.29%
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or
discomfort 0 0 1 16 81 82.65%72.32%
Medics' concern for your privacy 0 0 2 16 95 84.07%76.78%
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 1 0 0 8 111 92.50%81.57%
Billing Staff Assessment 2 0 6 27 63.25%62.37%58
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service
billing office 1 0 2 14 33 66.00%62.89%
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address
your needs 1 0 4 13 25 58.14%63.60%
Overall Assessment 3 3 14 81 76.20%85.04%574
How well did our staff work together to care for you 0 0 1 15 101 86.32%77.71%
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the
medical facility 0 0 1 14 100 86.96%78.11%
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation
treatment 1 0 1 13 104 87.39%77.72%
Extent to which the services received were worth the
fees charged 2 2 9 12 67 72.83%66.14%
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency
Medical Transportation service 0 1 0 14 105 87.50%78.76%
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to
others 0 0 2 13 97 86.61%78.76%
Page 24 of 28
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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 96.03 92.61 9.757 14.971 5.21
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 95.71 92.49 10.034 14.859 4.82
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance
arrived
93.56 90.87 13.565 16.741 3.18
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.74 91.94 11.277 15.667 4.39
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.30 93.94 9.466 12.39 2.92
Comfort of the ride 93.16 87.75 13.327 19.725 6.40
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 96.96 93.47 8.175 13.83 5.66
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 97.38 94.18 8.291 13.756 5.47
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 97.00 94.01 11.225 14.484 3.26
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 97.38 93.66 9.429 14.945 5.52
Skill of the medics 97.13 94.05 8.587 13.763 5.18
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 96.65 92.50 9.146 15.539 6.39
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if
applicable)
94.35 92.28 14.26 16.435 2.17
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 95.41 90.70 10.318 17.926 7.61
Medics' concern for your privacy 95.58 93.05 10.638 14.467 3.83
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 97.51 94.14 10.823 14.488 3.67
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 89.02 88.74 18.721 17.122 -1.60
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 85.49 88.81 20.949 17.328 -3.62
How well did our staff work together to care for you 96.37 93.33 9.397 14.302 4.90
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 96.52 93.47 9.259 14.10 4.84
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 96.02 93.27 12.481 14.508 2.03
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 88.07 87.70 22.781 20.796 -1.99
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical
Transportation service
96.46 93.42 10.356 14.778 4.42
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 96.21 93.01 10.138 16.191 6.05
Overall Survey Rating 95.52 92.46 11.77 15.55 3.78
Page 25 of 28
City of Palo Alto
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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
January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2016
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 Bay Village Employee null
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 Care EMS null
Community EMS MI Southfield, MI Community EMS OH Columbus, OH
CoxHealth EMS Springfield, MO Cumberland Carlisle, PA
Cy-Fair Houston, TX Cypress Creek Spring, TX
DMC Care Detroit, MI Edward Naperville, IL
Emergent Health Partners Ann Arbor, MI Emergent Health Partners null
Employee Survey Emergent null Employee Survey-LifeCare null
Emp.Survey Medstar 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 Loyola Medicine Transport Melrose Park, IL
Madison Heights Fire Madison Heights, MI Malvern Malvern, AR
MCHD Conroe, TX Medcare Ambulance Columbus, OH
Medic 1 Ambulance Canton, MI Medic Ambulance Service Vallejo, CA
Medic Ambulance Service Vallejo, CA Medic EMS Davenport, IA
Medstar Clinton Twp., MI Medstar Mobile Healthcare Fort Worth, TX
Medstar Mobile Healthcare null Mercy Flights Medford, OR
Mercy Ohio Cincinnati, OH Metro West Hillsboro, OR
MMR null 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 Northwell Health 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
Page 27 of 28
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
SkyHeath Syossett, NY SMCAS Niles, MI
Snohomish County Fire Snohomish, WA Southfield Soutthfield, MI
St. Charles St. Peters, MO Stillwater Stillwater, OK
Suburban Palmer, PA Swartz Flint, MI
Texarkana Texarkana, TX Tri-Hospital Port Huron, MI
Umpqua Health Alliance null University Medical Center Lubbock, TX
Van Buren EMS Paw Paw, MI Waterford Regional Fire Waterford, MI
West Bloomfield Fire West Bloomfield, MI WestSide Community Newman, CA
York Regional EMS Yoe, PA null null
Page 28 of 28
1
Cameron, Amber
To:Tognozzi, Brian; Fanchiang, Shaohsuan; Krusing, Jennifer; Conners, Sean; Poarch, Adam
Cc:Cameron, Amber; Lee, Frank
Subject:Prolific Oven - Februaury 4, 2016
I want to take this opportunity to thank you for your exceptional efforts in serving Philip Schultz February 4, 2016 at
Prolific Oven incident. These words of praise will be included in your personnel file to serve as a reminder of your
valuable and hard work. I, on behalf of the organization wish to express my gratitude for a job well done.
Sincerely,
Eric Nickel, Fire Chief
Palo Alto Fire Department
From: Fire
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 12:13 PM
To: Nickel, Eric
Subject: Thank you
Hi Chief!
Resident Philip Schultz called to express his gratitude to the crew that assisted him last night at the Prolific Oven. His
words – “I was impressed with the rather incredible and loving way in which they addressed me. I truly appreciate
that. The guy in charge was quite splendid as well.”
This gentleman is 81 years old. His contact number is 650‐384‐6196.
Incident number 0340026
M61
Brian Tognozzi
Shaohsuan Fanchiang
E61
Jennifer Krusing
Sean Conners
Adam Poarch
Please share as you see fit.
Thanks!
Shannon