HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 7202
City of Palo Alto (ID # 7202)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 8/29/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: PAFD Performance Report FY16 Q4
Title: Acceptance of the Palo Alto Fire Department Quarterly Performance
Report for the Fourth 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 Fourth 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 Q4 Peformance Report_Final (DOCX)
Attachment C_Customer Survey (PDF)
Attachment D_Thank you letters (PDF)
1 | P a g e
Palo Alto Fire Department
Quarterly Performance Report
Fiscal Year 2016, Fourth Quarter
Calls for Service
The Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) responded to a total of 2,237 calls for service in the fourth 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,
sixteen percent (16%) 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 percent (60%) 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 Q4 FY16 Q4
Emergency Medical Service 1347 1352
Good Intent 366 377
False Alarm & False Call 254 281
Service Call 109 118
Rescue & Hazardous Material 43 69
Fire 43 40
Explosion, No Fire 2 0
Grand Total 2164 2237
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 fourth 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 sizeable fifty-eight percent (58%) 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 Q4 FY16 Q4
NFIRS Code Description
321 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 1275 1235
322 Vehicle accident with injuries 47 86
324 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries 10 16
323 Motor vehicle/pedestrian accident 15 12
381 Rescue or EMS standby 0 3
Total 1347 1352
Transports
Number of Transports 990 960
Percent of EMS Calls resulting in transport 73.5% 71.0%
Response Times
Percent of first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 8 minutes 94.4% 90.6%
Percent of paramedic responder arriving on scene to EMS calls within 12 minutes 98.7% 98.3%
Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to EMS calls 04:51 04:48
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-one percent
(91%) 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. A slight variance is normal for quarterly data, and the Department
typically meets this goal when looking at annual data sets.
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 40 calls where fire was
present, with 8 occurring in neighboring cities. There were three major fire incidents that occurred
during this period, and fortunately only one resulted in a minor injury of a resident and no injuries to
first responders.
In early April, a neighbor called 911 stating that there was a Fire Alarm going off next door at a house
under construction at the 800 block of Boyce Avenue. The Police Department arrived at scene stating
there was an odor of smoke present. The call was upgraded to a structure response. Upon entering the
structure, the remains of a plastic container was found with rags and some type of paint/oil finishing
product cans. All of the contents had combusted and the sprinkler head activation had controlled and
extinguished the fire. Engine 63 completed a primary search of the first and second floors, and provided
an "all clear." Truck 66 assisted with ventilation of the structure. The sprinkler system was drained and
water evacuation was started.
3 | P a g e
In late May, Engine 65 responded to a reported post fire investigation at the 4000 block of Miller Court.
The residents were awakened by the activation of the smoke detector. A resident’s homemade electric
bicycle was found actively burning and the resident began to move it towards the front door in an effort
to minimize the impact and extinguish the fire. The fire became too hot and the bike was dropped to the
floor. The resident then ran to the kitchen and began filling tubs of water and throwing it on the fire.
The resident was able to knock down the flames enough to allow him to throw the bike out of the house
through the front door. He then completed fire extinguishment. The family evacuated prior to Engine
65's arrival. The living room sustained water and burn damage to the wood floors, stereo, TV, and couch
as well as smoke damage.
In late June, Engine 66 and Truck 66 responded to a water flow alarm at the 700 block of Escondido on
Stanford campus. Upon investigation, Engine 66 determined a sprinkler had activated in due to a small
cooking fire. The sprinkler system extinguished the fire. Engine 66 shut off and drained the sprinkler
system and Truck 66 personnel began salvage work. Enigine66 contacted the Resident Advisor and
investigated for further damage. Water was found to have leaked into multiple apartments. PAFD
replaced the sprinkler head and placed the building sprinkler system back in service, completed salvage
work and confirmed that a Stanford Housing salvage crew had been contacted. The resident responsible
for the fire received a slight burn to his left hand during the incident. He was examined by a PAFD
paramedic and indicated he would seek his own aid for the burn.
Table 3. Fire Performance Measures
Calls for Service FY15 Q4 FY16 Q4
NFIRS Code Description
113 Cooking fire, confined to container 6 7
142 Brush, or brush and grass mixture fire 1 6
111 Building fire 4 6
154 Dumpster or other outside trash receptacle fire 2 5
150 Outside rubbish fire, other 5 3
140 Natural vegetation fire, other 1 3
131 Passenger vehicle fire 4 2
100 Fire, other 1 1
162 Outside equipment fire 1 1
135 Aircraft fire 0 1
141 Forest, woods or wildland fire 0 1
118 Trash or rubbish fire, contained 9 1
170 Cultivated vegetation, crop fire, other 1 1
143 Grass fire 1 1
112 Fires in a structure, other than a building 0 1
151 Outside rubbish, trash or waste fire 2 0
160 Special outside fire, other 2 0
130 Mobile property fire, other 1 0
112 Fires in structures other than in a building 1 0
163 Outside gas or vapor combustion explosion 1 0
Total 43 40
Response Times
Percent of first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls within 8 minutes 86.2% 86.3%
Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to Fire calls 05:31 05:39
Fire Containment
Percent of building and structure fires contained to the room or area of origin 100% 100%
4 | P a g e
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-six percent
(86%) 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 measures to reduce response times.
Fire Containment Goal Met: At least 90% of building and structure fires contained to the room or
area of origin.
This quarter there were two building fires within Palo Alto and one on Stanford. In all cases, the fire was
contained to the original area. PAFD also responded mutual aid to two building fires in Mountain View.
Rescue and Hazardous Materials
The Fire Department responded to a total of 69 rescue and hazardous material calls. The most common
rescue call is for the removal of victims from a stalled elevator, which accounts for twenty percent (20%)
of these call types. Gas leak calls account for the second largest type of call, making up seventeen
percent (17%) of the total.
Table 4. Rescue and Hazardous Materials Measures
Calls for Service FY15 Q4 FY16 Q4
NFIRS Code Description
353 Removal of victim(s) from stalled elevator 5 14
412U Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) - PA Utilities Related 1 9
411 Gasoline or other flammable liquid spill 9 8
331 Lock-in (if lock out , use 511 ) 6 7
440 Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other 2 6
463 Vehicle accident, general cleanup 0 3
444 Power line down 0 3
412 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 6 3
400 Hazardous condition, other 0 3
442 Overheated motor 1 3
445 Arcing, shorted electrical equipment 1 2
462 Aircraft standby 0 2
451 Biological hazard, confirmed or suspected 1 1
443 Light ballast breakdown 1 1
421 Chemical hazard (no spill or leak) 1 1
356 High angle rescue 0 1
420 Toxic condition, other 0 1
441 Heat from short circuit (wiring), defective/worn 2 1
410 Flammable gas or liquid condition, other 3 0
413 Oil or other combustible liquid spill 2 0
365 Watercraft rescue 1 0
460 Accident, potential accident, other 1 0
Total 43 69
Response Times
Median response time for first responder arriving on scene to
Rescue & Hazardous Materials calls
5:43 05:44
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, which is due to the virtual consolidation effort with the cities of
Mountain View and Los Altos completed in 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 113 incidents. Five
agencies provided mutual or automatic aid for calls within Palo Alto or Stanford on a total of 93
incidents.
Table 5. Mutual and Automatic Aid Performance Measures
Mutual and Auto Aid Provided FY15 Q4 FY16 Q4
Agency
Mountain View Fire 100 88
Santa Clara County Fire 21 24
Menlo Park Fire 0 1
All Mutual and Auto Aid Provided 121 113
Mutual and Auto Aid Received
Agency
Mountain View Fire 77 68
Menlo Park Fire 18 12
Santa Clara County Fire 4 3
Woodside Fire 4 9
Moffet Fire 0 1
Cal Fire 1 0
All Mutual and Auto Aid Received 104 93
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 continued to build out the records management system (Accela) to meet inspection data
storage and billing needs. The fee schedule was completed this quarter and is still pending approval
from Council. Two of the Bureau personnel completed Fire Investigation training to join the Santa Clara
County Arson Task Force.
In comparison to the third quarter of this year, there was a slight rise in total plans reviewed coinciding
with rise in total inspections. We saw an increase in Solar Permits and small drops in Electric Vehicle
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 Q4 FY16 Q4
Fire Permits Issued - 152
Electric Vehicle Permits Issued 24 15
Solar Permits Issued 34 30
Inspections
Hazardous Material Inspections Completed 171 137
Number of Hazardous Material Inspections for the year 270 207
Percent of Hazardous Material Facilities Inspections Complete to date 150.7% 206%
State Mandated Inspections Completed 117 99
Number of State Mandated Inspections for the year 290 397
Percent of State Mandated Facilities Inspections Complete to date 103.8% 100%
Fire and Life Safety Plan Review
Plans Reviewed 261 473
Percent of Reviews Completed On-Time 99.0% 98.0%
7 | P a g e
Workforce Planning
The Department operates daily emergency response operations with a total of 96.0 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 12.0 positions vacant and 6.0 employees off-
line creating a total of 18.00 FTE positions that require backfilling.
This quarter the Training Division led a joint Fire Academy with the City of Sunnyvale for our new hires
brought on in the previous quarter. Department-wide training focused on First Aid and AED skills, Fire
and Weather Behavior, Wildland Urban Interface Training, and infrequently used EMS skills.
Table 7. Vacancies and Off-Line Employees FY16 Q4
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 1.00 21.00 95%
Fire Apparatus Operator
& Fire Fighters
70.00 12.00 5.00 53.00 76%
TOTAL 96.00 12.00 6.00 78.00 81%
Table 8. Succession Planning
FY15 Q4 FY16 Q4
Number of Line Personnel Currently Eligible to Retire 16 23
Number of Line Personnel Eligible to Retire in Five Years 25 17
Percent of all Line Personnel Eligible to Retire within Five
Years
47.7% 45.5%
Number of Acting Battalion Chief Hours 236 581
Number of Acting Captain Hours 5,132 1,535
Number of Acting Apparatus Operator Hours 7,231 5,832
Training
Hours of Training Completed 8,566 7,826
Average Hours per Line Personnel 105.75 100.34
Number of Your Patients in this ReportYour Score
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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
16394.46
Number of Patients in this Report
18,138
Number of Transport Services in All EMS DB
121
Page 1 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
Executive Summary
This report contains data from 163 City of Palo Alto patients who returned a questionnaire between
04/01/2016 and 06/30/2016.
The overall mean score for the standard questions was 94.46; this is a difference of 2.39 points from the
overall EMS database score of 92.07.
The current score of 94.46 is a change of -1.06 points from last period's score of 95.52. This was the 13th
highest overall score for all companies in the database.
You are ranked 3rd for comparably sized companies in the system.
81.88% of responses to standard questions had a rating of Very Good, the highest rating. 99.23% of all
responses were positive.
Page 2 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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 3 0 03 7114 0
18 to 30 0 2 02 352 0
31 to 44 1 3 04 242 0
45 to 54 2 4 06 385 0
55 to 64 11 7 018 3107 0
65 and older 49 61 0110 7412545 6
Total 66 77 0143 163 65 92 6
Gender
Page 3 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 01, 2016 to June 30, 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
94.45
92.41
2.04
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service
93.76
92.25
1.51
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived
93.27
90.61
2.66
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
2.10
100
91.75
Variance
0
Your Score
93.84
Page 4 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 01, 2016 to June 30, 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
95.23
91.73
3.50
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Cleanliness of the ambulance
96.22
93.81
2.41
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Comfort of the ride
93.75
87.12
6.63
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Skill of the person driving the ambulance
94.64
93.10
1.54
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
3.50
100
91.46
Variance
0
Your Score
94.96
Page 5 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 01, 2016 to June 30, 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
96.43
93.79
2.64
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously
96.62
93.75
2.87
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family
96.70
93.40
3.30
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Skill of the medics
96.10
93.78
2.32
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment
94.46
92.16
2.30
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable)
93.86
91.78
2.08
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort
92.50
89.97
2.53
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Page 6 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 01, 2016 to June 30, 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
94.18
92.74
1.44
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person
95.74
93.70
2.04
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
2.50
100
92.78
Variance
0
Your Score
95.28
Page 7 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 01, 2016 to June 30, 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
87.33
88.14
Your Score
Total DB
Variance
-0.81
Variance1000
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs
86.26
88.25
Your Score
Total DB
Variance
-1.99
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
Variance
100
-1.40
88.20
0
Your Score
86.80
Page 8 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 01, 2016 to June 30, 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
95.07
92.95
2.12
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility
95.04
92.91
2.13
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment
95.00
92.77
2.23
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged
88.36
86.93
1.43
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service
96.18
93.12
3.06
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others
96.09
92.55
3.54
Your Score
Total DB
Variance1000
Overall Section Score
Total DB
2.57
100
91.87
Variance
0
Your Score
94.44
Page 9 of 28
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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 94.45-1.58 92.4196.03
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 93.76-1.95 92.2595.71
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived 93.27-0.29 90.6193.56
Ambulance Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.23-0.51 91.7395.74
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.22-0.08 93.8196.30
Comfort of the ride 93.750.59 87.1293.16
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 94.64-2.32 93.1096.96
Medic Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 96.43-0.95 93.7997.38
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 96.62-0.38 93.7597.00
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 96.70-0.68 93.4097.38
Skill of the medics 96.10-1.03 93.7897.13
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 94.46-2.19 92.1696.65
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable)93.86-0.49 91.7894.35
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 92.50-2.91 89.9795.41
Medics' concern for your privacy 94.18-1.40 92.7495.58
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 95.74-1.77 93.7097.51
Billing Staff Assessment Analysis Last Period Change This Period Total DB
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 87.33-1.69 88.1489.02
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 86.260.77 88.2585.49
Page 10 of 28
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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 95.07-1.30 92.9596.37
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 95.04-1.48 92.9196.52
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 95.00-1.02 92.7796.02
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 88.360.29 86.9388.07
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation 96.18-0.28 93.1296.46
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 96.09-0.12 92.5596.21
Page 11 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
Jun
2015
Jul
2015
Aug
2015
Sep
2015
Oct
2015
Nov
2015
Dec
2015
Jan
2016
Feb
2016
Mar
2016
Apr
2016
May
2016
Jun
2016
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 85.71 95.00 93.93 96.51 92.36 100.00 95.83 94.57 97.00 97.22 100.00 95.03 93.75
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 85.71 95.00 94.87 95.35 89.29 91.67 95.65 94.32 96.00 97.22 100.00 93.95 93.18
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 85.71 91.67 93.42 92.68 89.29 100.00 91.13 93.59 87.50 97.22 95.83 93.08 93.15
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 91.67 100.00 96.88 94.12 95.35 100.00 94.77 94.74 92.31 98.91 94.44 97.28 94.33
Cleanliness of the ambulance 94.44 96.43 96.67 95.74 95.00 80.20 98.73 93.09 96.15 100.00 93.75 97.56 95.83
Comfort of the ride 83.44 94.64 92.44 91.33 89.23 80.20 95.76 90.63 92.31 96.51 93.75 94.51 93.41
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 94.44 100.00 95.35 93.88 93.89 100.00 98.25 95.31 96.00 99.40 96.88 95.24 94.17
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 91.67 95.31 97.87 97.50 95.63 100.00 98.28 97.81 93.75 98.84 97.22 96.43 96.35
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 91.67 95.00 96.20 97.00 95.12 100.00 98.28 96.05 94.79 99.43 97.22 96.43 96.65
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 94.44 93.33 96.74 94.79 95.12 100.00 97.81 96.05 95.83 100.00 97.22 97.02 96.51
Skill of the medics 91.67 93.33 95.65 96.88 95.00 95.00 98.68 95.98 96.74 98.84 97.22 96.95 95.60
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 91.67 90.00 95.56 90.56 92.11 95.00 98.04 96.00 95.45 98.13 94.44 96.15 93.75
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions 90.63 86.36 95.39 88.12 90.91 100.00 97.22 93.29 94.32 95.83 100.00 96.55 92.31
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 83.33 88.64 95.00 91.46 92.86 100.00 96.43 94.32 92.86 98.48 89.29 93.38 92.41
Medics' concern for your privacy 89.29 92.31 95.83 91.67 95.39 95.00 98.56 94.39 93.18 98.21 87.63 95.14 94.38
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 96.88 95.00 97.22 94.27 96.88 100.00 99.11 97.64 92.43 100.00 97.22 95.39 95.74
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing 91.67 90.91 90.79 85.23 89.58 50.50 92.39 89.58 92.50 86.00 100.00 87.50 86.48
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your 83.33 92.86 90.28 90.33 85.42 50.50 92.86 83.75 91.67 84.00 100.00 87.50 84.94
How well did our staff work together to care for you 90.63 96.88 95.11 95.10 95.63 100.00 98.61 95.10 96.88 97.62 97.22 96.53 94.29
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical 90.63 96.88 94.44 96.50 96.34 95.00 99.07 94.61 95.83 99.38 97.22 95.17 94.78
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 90.63 97.06 96.20 93.37 93.90 100.00 99.07 95.37 95.83 96.98 96.88 94.74 94.95
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees 84.38 83.33 87.18 83.79 89.39 81.25 90.98 86.84 88.80 89.00 100.00 91.91 85.55
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 90.63 95.59 96.11 94.27 95.12 100.00 99.54 95.28 94.79 98.84 97.22 96.05 96.13
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 90.63 96.88 96.02 92.24 94.87 93.75 97.50 94.27 95.83 98.75 100.00 95.30 96.07
Your Master Score 90.03 94.19 95.10 93.39 93.53 93.73 97.08 94.39 94.30 97.65 96.47 95.18 93.97
Your Total Responses 9 17 48 52 45 5 64 65 29 49 10 48 105
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
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
Monthly tracking of Overall Survey Score
Page 13 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
Greatest Increase and Decrease in Scores by Question
Increases
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 85.49 0.77 88.2586.26
Comfort of the ride 93.16 0.59 87.1293.75
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 88.07 0.30 86.9388.36
Decreases
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 95.41 -2.91 89.9792.50
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 96.96 -2.31 93.1094.64
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your
treatment
96.65 -2.19 92.1694.46
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 95.71 -1.96 92.2593.76
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 97.51 -1.76 93.7095.74
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 89.02 -1.69 88.1487.33
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 96.03 -1.58 92.4194.45
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 96.52 -1.48 92.9195.04
Medics' concern for your privacy 95.58 -1.39 92.7494.18
How well did our staff work together to care for you 96.37 -1.29 92.9595.07
Page 14 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
Greatest Scores Above Benchmarks by Question
Highest Above Benchmark
This
Period Variance
Total DB
Score
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 93.43.396.7
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 93.752.8796.62
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 93.792.6396.43
Cleanliness of the ambulance 93.812.4296.22
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service 93.123.0796.18
Skill of the medics 93.782.3296.1
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 92.553.5496.09
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 93.72.0595.74
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 91.733.595.23
How well did our staff work together to care for you 92.952.1295.07
Page 15 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
Highest and Lowest Scores
Highest Scores
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 96.7097.38 -0.68 93.40
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 96.6297.00 -0.38 93.75
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 96.4397.38 -0.95 93.79
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.2296.30 -0.08 93.81
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical
Transportation service
96.1896.46 -0.28 93.12
Lowest Scores
Last
Period
This
Period Change
Total DB
Score
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 86.2685.49 0.77 88.25
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 87.3389.02 -1.69 88.14
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 88.3688.07 0.29 86.93
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 92.5095.41 -2.91 89.97
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance
arrived
93.2793.56 -0.29 90.61
Page 16 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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 the medics kept you informed about your treatment .90482908794.46
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance .88224322496.43
Skill of the medics .87720329796.10
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical Transportation service .873774396.18
How well did our staff work together to care for you .86290892495.07
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person .86121477295.74
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously .85847689496.62
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family .84976552596.70
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others .83755547396.09
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility .83688291195.04
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment .83676062395.00
Medics' concern for your privacy .82585812894.18
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort .79495117692.50
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if applicable).76973133893.86
Cleanliness of the ambulance .69128485496.22
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance arrived .6827440993.27
Skill of the person driving the ambulance .66834143894.64
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner .66282385895.23
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service .64168668493.76
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service .61467089594.45
Comfort of the ride .56044476493.75
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged .47858358488.36
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office .47322600187.33
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs .45077005786.26
Page 17 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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 91.67 92.45 92.59 92.41 89.9290.9894.45
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 91.22 93.07 92.55 93.22 90.6491.5793.76
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 85.52 92.20 89.67 91.92 88.9886.2293.27
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 90.66 89.89 94.55 91.01 88.5888.1695.23
Cleanliness of the ambulance 91.90 94.17 96.37 92.08 90.1891.4396.22
Comfort of the ride 84.83 86.29 92.63 87.28 82.3883.1893.75
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 91.18 93.21 94.48 93.64 89.5991.1094.64
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 89.84 94.63 96.64 92.91 91.3990.1396.43
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 88.93 95.97 96.05 93.02 90.5690.3996.62
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 89.32 93.76 96.00 91.94 91.2091.7896.70
Skill of the medics 89.94 93.75 95.05 94.87 91.4692.1396.10
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 87.79 92.71 95.37 92.07 87.5189.9794.46
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if 88.25 92.61 94.45 92.07 88.1388.5193.86
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 86.01 91.58 92.83 88.08 86.7587.0792.50
Medics' concern for your privacy 90.08 93.53 95.60 92.25 89.1890.9694.18
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 90.13 95.01 95.99 92.46 91.3991.6995.74
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 82.16 89.80 92.26 84.93 84.9784.2887.33
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 84.62 91.85 90.27 85.09 85.8786.0886.26
How well did our staff work together to care for you 89.50 92.90 96.19 92.19 90.7288.3495.07
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 89.75 93.68 96.00 92.44 91.3389.1595.04
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 89.69 94.20 96.44 92.15 91.3289.4695.00
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 81.37 84.36 92.60 86.68 85.3178.7488.36
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 90.28 91.22 95.95 91.62 91.5690.1896.18
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 89.32 89.58 95.99 91.46 89.3888.3796.09
Overall score 94.46 88.94 88.79 92.29 94.67 91.55 89.26
National Rank 13 75 77 42 12 55 74
Comparable Size (Medium) Company Rank 3 23 21
Page 18 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
Yo
u
r
Co
m
p
a
n
y
Total Score
Benchmark Comparison
94.46
To
t
a
l
D
B
Si
m
i
l
a
r
S
i
z
e
d
92.07 91.05
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 94.45 92.41 91.79
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 93.76 92.25 91.59
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 93.27 90.61 89.96
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.23 91.73 90.96
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.22 93.81 93.21
Comfort of the ride 93.75 87.12 86.78
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 94.64 93.10 92.32
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 96.43 93.79 93.19
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 96.62 93.75 92.98
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 96.70 93.40 92.62
Skill of the medics 96.10 93.78 92.93
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 94.46 92.16 91.38
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions 93.86 91.78 90.87
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 92.50 89.97 89.33
Medics' concern for your privacy 94.18 92.74 92.12
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 95.74 93.70 92.91
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing 87.33 88.14 86.94
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your 86.26 88.25 86.81
How well did our staff work together to care for you 95.07 92.95 92.32
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical 95.04 92.91 92.22
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 95.00 92.77 91.96
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees 88.36 86.93 85.84
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 96.18 93.12 92.53
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 96.09 92.55 91.55
Number of Surveys for the period 163
Page 19 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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
91.6894.64Overall Facility Rating
Dispatch 94.3 91.48
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance service 92.2395.31
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 91.9594.64
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance 90.2592.96
Ambulance 95.24 91.27
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 91.6095.59
Cleanliness of the ambulance 93.7796.56
Comfort of the ride 87.0292.83
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 92.6995.98
Medic 95.77 92.69
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 93.7197.04
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 93.6196.82
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 93.3596.53
Skill of the medics 93.7896.65
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your treatment 91.8195.14
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if 91.6194.08
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 90.1993.94
Medics' concern for your privacy 92.5895.04
Page 21 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
Cumulative Comparisons (Continued)
Your Score Total DB
91.6894.64Overall Facility Rating
Medic 95.77 92.69
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 93.5496.69
Billing Staff Assessment 88.56 88.06
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 88.0488.63
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 88.0988.50
Overall Assessment 94.74 91.74
How well did our staff work together to care for you 92.7796.12
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 92.9596.14
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 92.7295.90
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 86.6287.97
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical 92.8996.45
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 92.5295.88
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
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
City of Palo Alto
EMS DB %
Very Good
Company
% Very
Good
Very
GoodGoodFairPoor
Very
Poor
Overall Company Rating 11 13 67 472 74.43%81.88%2544
Dispatch 3 0 9 59 73.23%80.33%290
Helpfulness of the person you called for ambulance
service 1 0 1 22 102 80.95%74.96%
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance
service 1 0 3 20 96 80.00%74.08%
Extent to which you were told what to do until the
ambulance arrived 1 0 5 17 92 80.00%70.65%
Ambulance 0 0 7 101 72.82%81.09%463
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely
manner 0 0 2 25 125 82.24%73.58%
Cleanliness of the ambulance 0 0 0 21 118 84.89%77.72%
Comfort of the ride 0 0 3 29 108 77.14%63.23%
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 0 0 2 26 112 80.00%76.75%
Medic 1 6 32 146 77.70%84.93%1043
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the
ambulance 0 1 2 14 130 88.44%80.11%
Degree to which the medics took your problem
seriously 0 1 3 11 133 89.86%80.78%
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or
your family 0 0 4 11 129 89.58%79.73%
Skill of the medics 0 0 3 16 122 86.52%79.95%
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about
your treatment 0 0 6 19 115 82.14%75.65%
Page 23 of 28
Top Box Comparisons
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016
City of Palo Alto
(Continued)
EMS DB %
Very Good
Company
% Very
Good
Very
GoodGoodFairPoor
Very
Poor
Overall Company Rating 11 13 67 472 74.43%81.88%2544
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment
decisions (if applicable)0 0 5 18 91 79.82%75.32%
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or
discomfort 0 2 3 24 91 75.83%70.91%
Medics' concern for your privacy 1 1 3 18 110 82.71%76.30%
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 0 1 3 15 122 86.52%80.57%
Billing Staff Assessment 3 3 3 46 61.74%60.14%83
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service
billing office 1 1 2 24 41 59.42%61.37%
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address
your needs 2 2 1 22 42 60.87%62.11%
Overall Assessment 4 4 16 120 75.41%82.20%665
How well did our staff work together to care for you 0 1 1 22 113 82.48%76.80%
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the
medical facility 1 1 1 18 115 84.56%76.92%
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation
treatment 0 0 4 20 116 82.86%76.98%
Extent to which the services received were worth the
fees charged 2 1 9 26 80 67.80%65.39%
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency
Medical Transportation service 0 1 1 17 125 86.81%78.30%
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to
others 1 0 0 17 116 86.57%78.08%
Page 24 of 28
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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 94.45 92.41 13.266 15.22 1.95
Concern shown by the person you called for ambulance service 93.76 92.25 14.47 14.89 0.42
Extent to which you were told what to do until the ambulance
arrived
93.27 90.61 15.525 17.056 1.53
Extent to which the ambulance arrived in a timely manner 95.23 91.73 10.627 16.037 5.41
Cleanliness of the ambulance 96.22 93.81 8.953 12.579 3.63
Comfort of the ride 93.75 87.12 11.999 20.207 8.21
Skill of the person driving the ambulance 94.64 93.10 11.094 14.332 3.24
Care shown by the medics who arrived with the ambulance 96.43 93.79 10.911 14.541 3.63
Degree to which the medics took your problem seriously 96.62 93.75 11.123 15.184 4.06
Degree to which the medics listened to you and/or your family 96.70 93.40 10.311 15.487 5.18
Skill of the medics 96.10 93.78 10.435 14.407 3.97
Extent to which the medics kept you informed about your 94.46 92.16 12.701 16.201 3.50
Extent to which medics included you in the treatment decisions (if
applicable)
93.86 91.78 13.063 17.093 4.03
Degree to which the medics relieved your pain or discomfort 92.50 89.97 15.00 18.82 3.82
Medics' concern for your privacy 94.18 92.74 14.936 15.08 0.14
Extent to which medics cared for you as a person 95.74 93.70 11.894 15.228 3.33
Professionalism of the staff in our ambulance service billing office 87.33 88.14 18.788 17.573 -1.21
Willingness of the staff in our billing office to address your needs 86.26 88.25 22.223 17.754 -4.47
How well did our staff work together to care for you 95.07 92.95 11.636 14.854 3.22
Extent to which our staff eased your entry into the medical facility 95.04 92.91 13.783 15.02 1.24
Appropriateness of Emergency Medical Transportation treatment 95.00 92.77 11.65 15.58 3.93
Extent to which the services received were worth the fees charged 88.36 86.93 20.169 21.86 1.69
Overall rating of the care provided by our Emergency Medical
Transportation service
96.18 93.12 10.753 15.425 4.67
Likelihood of recommending this ambulance service to others 96.09 92.55 11.711 17.034 5.32
Overall Survey Rating 94.46 92.07 13.21 16.14 2.94
Page 25 of 28
City of Palo Alto
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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
April 1, 2016 to June 30, 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 Beaumont Medical 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 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
F-M Ambulance Fargo, ND 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 Hillsboro Fargo, ND
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 McKinney Fire Department McKinney, 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
Page 27 of 28
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 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
Thief River Falls Fargo, ND 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
Dave Price
Editor and Co-Publisher
The Daily Post
385 Forest Ave.
Palo Alto CA 94301
(650) 328-7700
price@padailypost.com
Dear Editor: I want to tell you about a wonderful experience a
group of Cub Scouts had at Palo Alto Fire Station 4. My son had
always wanted to visit a fire station and now that he needs his
merit badge from the scouts, he knocked on the door of Palo Alto
Fire Station 4 on Middlefield Road with trepidations. A firefighter
opened the door to him and welcomed him with warm smile. The
firefighter introduced himself and showed my son around the
station before introducing the captain and his co-firefighter. The
firefighter wanted to make the most out of my son’s experience
there and invited him back so that he could prepare for a good
lesson on fire safety.
We invited other scouts to come along and returned on May 13.
Not only was Firefighter Kevin Walsh there to welcome the
scouts, Capt. Albright was also there to make sure that all scouts
are safe and comfortable while visiting the station. Firefighter
Kevin prepared props for CPR demonstration, chocking help. His
friendly, engaging mannerism put the scouts at ease and his
knowledge certainly captured the attention of this group of 8-9
years old, which is no small task.
Not only did the scouts learned their lesson in fire safety, the
parents there enjoyed learning about the fire engine and the life of
the firefighters, too.
We appreciate so much that the Fire Station took the time for the
scouts and made the efforts to help the boys learn.
Daniella Luo
Palo Alto
1
Gonzalez, AnaBella
Subject:FW: APPRECIATION FOR CARING SERVICE
Hi Chief,
I'm not sure if this email was forwarded to you during my absence.
Shannon
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Barbara Platt [mailto:plattbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 8:32 AM
To: Fire
Subject: APPRECIATION FOR CARING SERVICE
Hello
Thank you to the EMT staff that was rapidly dispatched and arrived at our home at 490 El Capitan about 9:10 pm last
evening in response to a call after my husband gently landed on the floor as we were walked up his ramp at home. He
and I strategized that it would be unsafe for me to try to pull him up off his butt where I eased him down when he lost
his balance.
The firefighters were very thoughtful, calming and thorough as they stayed with us to establish that my husband was
stable after getting him up off the floor and assisting him to his hospital bed.
I am very thankful and appreciative for this life‐saving service that we have received from Palo Alto Fire over the few
years.
Barbara Platt for Alvin Platt
490 El Capitan
1
Cameron, Amber
From:Nickel, Eric
Sent:Thursday, June 09, 2016 2:50 PM
To:Villarreal, David
Cc:Lee, Frank; Castor, Grace; Cameron, Amber; Crump, William; Davis, Bobby; Keene,
James; Capriles, Catherine
Subject:Letter of Appreciation: Rescue Systems Class
Dave,
I want to take this opportunity to thank you for your exceptional efforts teaching the RS1 training course. 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
Eric Nickel, EFO, CFO, CFC | Fire Chief
250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301
Desk: 650‐329‐2424
Email: eric.nickel@cityofpaloalto.org
www.cityofpaloalto.org
Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | Nextdoor
From: Steve Drewniany [mailto:sdrewniany@sunnyvale.ca.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 8:00 AM
To: Nickel, Eric
Subject: Kudos
Chief Nickel
Recently SNY hosted a RS1 course. One of the assistant instructors was PAF FF Dave Villarreal. I received this email from
one of the attendees and wanted to make sure your organization was aware of the fine work accomplished by one of
your members.
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 9:43 AM, James Boone <jboone@sunnyvale.ca.gov>
wrote:
HI Chief,
Over the last two weeks, I had the privilege to attend the LARRO and RS1 class hosted by SNY. I wanted to express my sincere appreciation
for the time, effort and high level of instruction the entire staff provided throughout the two weeks of training. Although the course was
physically demanding, the high level of instruction and enthusiasm displayed by all the instructors made this course even more
memorable. Every instructor had a high degree of knowledge and demonstrated patience through the two weeks of training.
In my 25 years of experience, this is the best group of instructors and course I have ever attended!
Sincerely,
To: Yovan Sierra
From: Ken Cardinale, Fire Chief
Date: May 18, 2016
Subject: Thank You
Captain Ferry I just want to thank you for the training that you provided to Lewis County this past
weekend. The course was outstanding by providing knowledge from historic door systems to the most
up to date modern security door we may in counter in both residential and commercial occupancies.
The class room instruction and the multimedia aspects where invaluable and laid the foundation for the
hands on training which the bulk of the curriculum is.
The manipulative portion of the course provided by Fire Fighter Yovan Sierra was so valuable to all of
the firefighters. You can have lectures, read books and see videos, but the most valuable is the hands on
training. It is where the tire meets the road. The unselfish hours of the instructors providing their
guidance and instruction as well their experience will have a long and lasting impression with all the
firefighter in attendance.
Thank you so very much for the outstanding and excellent course.
Sincerely,
Ken Cardinale,
Fire Chief,
City of Chehalis, WA