HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04012014 - FPD D.2RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT a report from the fire chief on the District’s preliminary response to the Fitch Evaluation and Options Study
as well as initial findings on the District’s own internal assessment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
The Fire District’s managers have reviewed the Fitch Evaluation and Options study and evaluated all options
provided. The evaluation took into consideration the District’s current fiscal situation, historical performance,
incident data, and other potential impacts including AB 197, the critical fire season forthcoming, and the receipt of
the FEMA SAFER grant.
In addition, the Fire District’s managers have reviewed preliminary findings from their internal Strategic Planning
Committee including contract review, best practices, community relations, and revenue sources.
The Fire Chief will provide a brief presentation on the District’s plan to implement change and assure efficiencies at
all levels of the organization, including some changes that have already been implemented.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/01/2014 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:See Addendum
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, Director
Candace Andersen,
Director
Mary N. Piepho, Director
Karen Mitchoff, Director
Federal D. Glover, Director
Contact: Fire Chief Jeff Carman,
925-941-3500
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 1, 2014
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
D.2
To:Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Board of Directors
From:Jeff Carman, Chief, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
Date:April 1, 2014
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Fire District's Preliminary Response to the Fitch Evaluation and Options Study
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
This report is informational only.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
No impact.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Speakers: Pat Frost, Director of Office of Emergency Services. ACCEPTED a report from the fire chief on the
District’s preliminary response to the Fitch Evaluation and Options Study as well as initial findings on the
District’s own internal assessment; and DIRECTED staff to return to the Board in 30 days with a
recommendation on authorizing the contracting of a feasibility study regarding Fire-based ambulance service.
ATTACHMENTS
PowerPoint Presentation
Fitch Study/ Internal ReviewOptions & Priorities1
Incident StatisticsNational Average Contra Costa2129190820302008190417571550154818121911278602967429924310453037429772291762957130452301032004200520062007200820092010201120122013FiresEMS2
Fire StatisticsNational Average390300378200356200362100364500480,50001000002000003000004000005000006000002007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012FiresContra Costa2008190417571550154818121911050010001500200025002007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Fires3
Incident Trends278602967429924310453037429772291762957130452301033331534979366773876837645374333704436969384753815340013418754359645945449564460644265441204595345530050001000015000200002500030000350004000045000500002004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013EMS/ RescueCode‐3Total4
Fire Trends by Type78167572769567162160155064353243337242538737331626725532539691586187892686082068274384498321291908203020081904175715501548181219110500100015002000250030003500400045002004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Structure FiresWildlandOtherTotal5
Incident Trends44%56%Time on TaskFire/ OtherEMS26%66%7%1%Incident Percent by TypeFiresEMSOtherAid6
Other Statistics0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35FatalitiesInjuriesNational AverageState AverageConFire7
Fitch Study Options•Status Quo•Misleading•3/2 Option•Does nothing for the district financially•May adversely affect fire response•Will provide minimal improvement to response times•Squads ARE beneficial if used strategically•Single Patch•Definition•Case studies8
Fitch Study Observations•Other observations‐•Data was erroneous, unable to be used•Communication center issues•District is under‐resourced•Fire Prevention Bureau is well‐run•Response times extended•No capital investment•Auto/ Mutual Aid•MSR calls for “out of the box” service delivery models9
Internal Review•Strategic Planning Committee•6 focus groups•Standards of Coverage•Data and Statistics•Community Relations•Finance•Governance•Best Practices10
Preliminary Plan•Priority Group One – Establish a New Baseline•The game has changed, new budget, fewer resources, increasing workload, •Priority Group Two – Establish a Reconstruction Plan•Risk based deployment, data driven, marketing, relationships, efficiencies, enhanced services•Priority Group Three –Sustainment•Live within our resources, plan for peaks and valleys, diversify revenues, bleeding edge, anticipate change before it arrives11
Priority One – Establish a New Baseline•Cultural Change ‐The new norm•Move from crisis to business mode•Resources are limited•Our customers demand efficiency•Call volume/ workload continue to rise•Analyze response data•Did we close the correct stations?•Are we providing adequate service county wides•SAFER Deployment•Review existing agreements/ contracts/ operations•Auto‐aid agreements•Comm center operations•Emergency operations•Empowerment at all levels•Encourage personnel to be part of the solution•Pride‐in‐ownership12
Priority Two – Reconstruction•Risk based deployment•Establish the baseline•How do we rebuild?•Peak activity staffing•High‐risk staffing•Drop‐border deployment•Task specific apparatus•SAFER•Rebuilding public trust•Transparency•Accurate data reporting•Accountability at all levels•Communication•Reinvesting in capital•Apparatus•Stations•Communication Center•Technology•Community Relations•Public Information•Website Reconstruction•Civic Engagement13
Priority Three – Sustainability & Vision•Diversification of revenues•Property taxes are variable•Fees for services•Enterprise opportunities•Future parcel tax/ beneficial assessment•Contracts for service•Special sales tax•Developer fees•Anticipate change•Lead, don’t follow•Doesn’t happen by chance•Seeking Opportunities to Serve•Innovation•Affordable Healthcare•Mobile Integrated Healthcare•Public/ Private partnerships•Public/ public partnerships•Community Preparedness (FPB)•Efficiency•Total resource management•Fire based ambulance•Agility & Flexibility•Trust change•Management/ Labor/ Public Cooperation•Respect, trust, cooperation14
Tangibles•New fleet management program ‐$85,000.00 savings annually•Auto‐aid agreement review ‐$150,000.00 savings annually•Joint operations with MOFD ‐(FS46) $1.2M savings annually•San Pablo squad proposal ‐$1M savings annually•Pittsburg developer fees•College/ Fire facility agreement ‐$100K projected annually•Communication center user fees ‐$900K annually•Prevention services to neighboring districts ‐$225K annually•EMS fee for service –Projected $1M annually•Lease/ purchase agreements on apparatus15
On the horizon…•Potential enterprise programs•Fleet maintenance•Mobile mechanic services•Service beyond ConFire•Technology services•Computer/ Radio service•Regional training•Enhance current relationship with local college(s)•Provide training opportunities with regional partners16
On the horizon…•Mobile integrated healthcare•Treat and refer•Treat and release•Treat and transfer•Reduces unnecessary 911 calls•Reduces Emergency Room crowding•Provides for treatment without transport•Low/ no cost preventative healthcare•Fire‐based ambulance (single role)•Current contract ends 2015•Promotes efficiency•Provides the 2‐person squad concept•Increases agility•Allows for “end‐to‐end” pre‐hospital care•Feasibility study17