Benchmarking The Fire Service: Focusing On Results and Improvements

BENCHMARKING THE FIRE SERVICE: FOCUSING ON RESULTS AND
IMPROVEMENTS
EXECUTIVE PLANNING
By: Rowland Herald

Fire Chief
Clearwater Fire and Rescue
Clearwater, Florida
An applied research project submitted to the National Fire Academy

as part of the Executive Fire Officer Program
December 2000
2
ABSTRACT
In an effort to provide accountability to the elected officials and the community,
the City of Clearwater, Florida, initiated a new budgetary process for fiscal year 2000.
The change was intended to reflect a total quality management effort that prioritized
program funding based on citywide strategic goals. Of primary concern to Fire
Department administration were the depleted condition of the apparatus, the outdated
facilities, and the diminished staffing levels. These problems were counterproductive to
the success of the organization and the resulting poor morale was widespread. The
problem for Clearwater Fire and Rescue was that no system for measuring efficiency
and effectiveness was in place to assist with justifying a proposed budget increase.
The purpose of this research project was to identify a system of measures and
standards to be utilized first by Clearwater Fire & Rescue and eventually by all Fire
Departments within Pinellas County, Florida, for the purposes of comparison and
monitoring improvements in performance. The action research methodology was used.
The following research questions were posed:
1. Were there any local area Fire Departments utilizing a formalized program to
monitor their performance or assist them with planning?
2. Why is the public sector lagging behind the private sector in the development
and use of benchmarking and performance measurement?
3. Is there a nationally recognized model of measures available that can be
applied locally?
3
4. How can the measurement and comparison data be utilized once it has been
collected?
The procedures used to complete this research included a literature review and
Internet search that examined the current discussions on funding, providing
accountability, and systems to evaluate organizational performance. A survey was also
conducted within Pinellas County Florida and elicited a variety of ideas utilized by
various organizations. Personal interviews were also conducted with local government
fire officials interested in quality improvement programs.
The results indicated that there is a fair amount of agreement that the level of
accountability for the fire service is increasing. As individual departments continue to
compete with other general fund departments for budget dollars, there is also a need to
aggressively explore alternative methods for funding as well as demonstrate
effectiveness (doing the right thing) and efficiency (doing things right). Today’s fire
service executives have a difficult task before them. They must balance the needs of
their three customer groups by determining the types and levels of services the
community requires, support their personnel with the necessary training, equipment,
and facilities to complete the mission, and demonstrate accountability and positive
outcomes to the management and electorate of the jurisdiction.
It was recommended that as public safety organizations evolve to meet the
needs of the changing community, their adopted process for accountability must first
4
emerge as a cohesive management system that guides decision making as it is
inculcated into the culture of the organization. Clearwater Fire & Rescue must assume
a leadership role in the county and become the proponent for a system of benchmarking
and measurement criteria. The results of a successful local program could conceivably
improve fire and EMS services dramatically and hopefully stimulate improvement
processes regionally. Tomorrow’s fire service leader will need to be accomplished in
accepted business practices and personnel management. Excellent communication
skills will be essential. Managing expectations is key.

5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………… 2
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………... 5
Introduction……………………………………………………………………….. 6
Background and Significance…………………………………………………... 8
City of Clearwater.............................................................................. 9
Clearwater Fire and Rescue.............................................................. 10
Literature Review………………………………………………………………… 11
Procedures……………………………………………………………………….. 18
Assumptions……………………………………………………………… 20
Limitations………………………………………………………………… 20
Results……………………………………………………………………………. 21
Discussion………………………………………………………………………… 28
Recommendations……………………………………………………………….. 33
References………………………………………………………………………... 37
Appendix A Fire Department Survey.….……………………………………… 40
Appendix B Benchmark Survey Results..……………………………………… 43
Appendix C Data Collection Template………………………………………… 49

6
INTRODUCTION
As a result of a nationwide revolt from taxpayers that began in the early to mid
eighties, governments have been challenged to do more with less, even as the
purchasing power of the tax dollar has diminished. This was consistent with a two-part
philosophy that:
• believed there was significant waste in government and an increase in operating
costs, such as employee wage adjustments, could be absorbed by a more
efficiently-run organization, and;
• the taxpayer approved of and supported a lean but well-run government, as long
as there wasn’t any negative impact on services.
In support of this philosophy locally was an organizational culture at the senior
management level that encouraged and even rewarded department managers who
under-spent their budgets. As a result, there was little or no commitment to planning for
the future and, at best, the resources available were directed at maintaining services at
the status quo level.
In retrospect, it appears that an attempt to maintain services in an atmosphere of
increased operating costs could only have been funded by reallocating resources
originally designated for infrastructure needs and subsidizing a significant portion of
increased personnel costs with raised franchise and service fees. It is this author’s
belief that a lack of planning, coupled with several years of doing more with less, has
7
depleted the organization’s ability to provide the necessary programs that support the
basic-level public safety needs.
The problem for Clearwater Fire and Rescue was that no system for measuring
efficiency and effectiveness was in place to assist with justifying a proposed new
budget. Because Clearwater is a built-out community and growth-related revenue was
stagnant, the elected officials were now confronted with prioritizing community needs in
a resource-constrained environment. Although the voters had approved a local option
tax increase in the recent past, the Fire Department had failed to submit any substantive
requests in anticipation of future needs.
The purpose of this research project was to identify a system of measures and
standards to be utilized by all Fire Departments within Pinellas County for the purposes
of comparison and monitoring improvements in performance. The action research
methodology was used. The following research questions were posed:
1. Were there any Fire Departments within the county utilizing some form of
measurement to monitor their performance?
2. Why is the public sector lagging behind the private sector in the development
and use of benchmarking and performance measurement?
3. Is there a nationally recognized model of measures available that can be
applied locally?
4. How should the measurement and comparison data be utilized once it has
been collected?
8
BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE
On October 1, 1999, the City of Clearwater, Florida, increased property taxes
after eight consecutive years without a millage increase to taxpayers. Although labor
contracts continued to provide increased salaries and benefits for employees, a careful
evaluation of the franchise and service fees collected by the City over this time period
indicated that the significant increase in this revenue was used to offset a major portion
of the annual budgetary shortfall. By continually delaying projects identified in the
capital improvement programs, such as the purchase of apparatus and the renovation
of fire stations, the infrastructure and the ability to provide basic services to the
community was in jeopardy. In hindsight, this now seems to have been a band-aid
solution with long-term negative consequences.
The real economic engine for the City is primarily tourism, with a secondary
emphasis on economic development for information and serviced-based industries.
These are two very competitive arenas for many communities throughout the state. As
any experienced planner would soon realize, to continue to ignore the basic necessities
that allow this community to remain a destination place for tourists and light industry
may well signal what begins as a decline of neighborhoods and eventually the demise
of the community.
Law enforcement agencies have been able to keep pace with the continued
demand for new and increased services in large part through the funding made
available at the federal level. The fire service, however, would seem to be the forgotten
9
component of the public safety equation. As a result, locally-operated fire departments
now find themselves competing with other general fund departments, such as police,
parks and recreation, and libraries, for tax dollars.
In many respects, the fire service is guilty of not operating under a more
business-like framework. A private sector organization would certainly not survive for
very long without a business plan that considered its market and made projections for
the internal needs of the organization. The City of Clearwater has grown significantly
over the past twenty years, without evaluating how that growth impacts the current and
future services of its Fire and Rescue Department.
To believe that costs have remained fixed over the past several years is to be
naïve. The provision of public safety services in the form of police and fire protection is
a basic service mandate of the City charter. As executive leaders in our communities,
fire chiefs have an obligation to determine and implement programs to address these
service needs. Inherent in these planning efforts is the identification of viable funding
sources and systems of accountability to provide assurances to the community that we
acknowledge our fiduciary responsibilities.
City of Clearwater
Originally an agricultural and fishing village, the City of Clearwater, Florida, has
grown rapidly both as a tourist destination and as a business center. Clearwater is
located on the central west coast of Florida and is one of the largest cities in the rapidly-
10
expanding Tampa Bay area. It is the county seat of Pinellas County, widely regarded
as one of the Southeast’s most industrialized counties, focusing on clean, light industry
in a semi-tropical environment.
On May 27, 1915, the City of Clearwater was incorporated. The City has a
commission/city manager form of government. Over 1600 employees, part-time and
full-time, are employed by the City (City of Clearwater, Office of Management and
Budget, 2000, p.3).
Clearwater Fire and Rescue
The Clearwater Fire and Rescue Department was founded in 1911. The
Department responds to approximately 21,500 calls per year and provides fire
protection, fire prevention, emergency medical rescue, emergency management and
public education services. The assigned fire protection district is about 42.5 square
miles in area and serves a permanent population of 105,000, as well as a seasonal
population increase of approximately 35,000. The Department has seven stations
strategically located to provide three-to-five minute responses to incidents. The total
staff under the Fire Chief’s supervision is 185 and includes a fiscal year budget of
approximately 15.1 million dollars (City of Clearwater, Office of Management and
Budget, 2000, p.3).

11
This research brief was completed in accordance with the applied research
guidelines of the National Fire Academy’s Executive Fire Officer Program. The issue
addressed by the research relates specifically to the Executive Planning course, which
stressed the importance of Applied Strategic Planning (Goodstein, Nolan, Pfeiffer
model) and a process for continuous quality improvement. Benchmarking best
practices in other organizations and monitoring performance measures internally will lay
the foundation for continuous self-inspection and evaluation of community needs. The
mission of the fire service is evolving to meet the changing needs of the community.
The problems inherent with change are especially significant to the fire service because
of long-standing tradition. This research is completed with the hope of facilitating the
transition of change.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature review began with a comprehensive review of information that
focused not only monitoring performance and modeling best practices, but also on the
need to critically look beyond today’s issues.
Today’s communities continue to challenge the decisions made by even local
governments and the methods by which they make them. These same citizens are
constantly demanding new and improved services and have increasingly higher
expectations for efficiency and value. All levels of government are now compelled by
their constituents to provide higher-quality services as they expand the number and
12
types of services. This costs money. These same citizens, however, are opposed to
any increases in taxes, creating a dilemma for officials: how, given budget shortfalls,
can they be responsive to citizen needs (Withers, 1994, p.3). Ideally, a methodology
such as benchmarking and performance monitoring that demonstrates accountability,
efficiency and effectiveness would provide the citizenry and elected officials with
qualified, easy to understand data that can be used to make informed decisions.
Benchmarking and performance measuring are not synonymous terms.
Benchmarking generally refers to the process of comparing an organization’s
performance to some standard. The benchmark can be the previous performance of
that same organization, or other organizations. The term can also be used in a more
specific sense and refer to the process of comparing with the best performers in an
industry. Where do we stand in relation to others? What are they doing that we are not?
The essence of measuring performance is getting answers to these questions (Fischer,
1994, S-3). Comparative performance information allows for the development of
indicators to measure effectiveness (doing the right thing), and efficiency (doing things
right) (Glover, 1992, p.1). Defining key performance indicators is essential, along with
the right level of detail. While police and fire services are said to be leaders in the data
collection arena of the public sector, they have been surprisingly difficult to measure
because of the inconsistency in the application of definitions for something as basic as
response times (Hatry, et al., 1992, p.93). Supplementing any data collection effort
should be a guide to the indicators or measures sought. It should provide the readers
13
with definitions of the indicators, information on how performance is measured, and how
the indicators are selected (Towers, Hague, McCawley, 1997, p3).
Although programs for measuring of an organization’s performance and
evaluating the processes of other organizations have garnered considerable attention of
business and government since the 1970’s, they have been around for a lot longer. The
International City Manager’s Association began providing service delivery information in
1938, when it published Measuring Municipal Activities. W. Edward Deming, who was
instrumental in helping the Japanese rebuild their country following World War II, used
statistics to gather base-line information that subsequently helped refine and improve
systems that made Japan a worldwide economic leader (Fischer, 1994, p.S-2). Over
50 years ago, as a result of the Hoover Commission, an effort to streamline a
government that had become too unwieldy as a result of the Great Depression and
World War II was conducted. Recently, we have the Gore Commission, best known for
its work on Reinventing Government, also working to streamline government at the
federal and state levels (Fischer, 1994, S-3). There are other examples in the history of
this and other countries that strongly indicate the need to develop initiatives for
continuous evaluation of systems, especially bureaucracies, to prevent the passive
maintenance of the status quo. Staying the same improves nothing and ignores the
dynamics of change.
Richard J. Fischer states that, “The obvious purposes of benchmarking are three:
to establish the criteria that underlie performance, to identify problem areas with
14
respective services, and to improve service delivery by importing best practices. Of
course, effective performance measurement is the key” (Fischer, 1994, S-4). The
private sector has used benchmarking and performance measures for a long time.
Most notable may be the effort of the Motorola Company, which learned benchmarking
from Xerox and then used the process so effectively that it was granted a Malcolm
Baldridge Quality Award before Xerox (Fischer, 1994, S-7). Because the main purpose
of the fire service is to prevent or reduce loss of life and property, it is difficult to
measure or even estimate what was averted. The key to successful measuring of fire
protection effectiveness lies in the selection of appropriate measures, and proper
evaluation of collected data (Hatry, Blair, Fisk, Greiner, Hall, Schaenman, 1992, p. 93).
Ideally, objective measures consisting of criteria that are easily understood, readily
quantified, and standardized within a service delivery region will insure a fair and
accurate comparison.
The main purpose for benchmarking is to focus on results and improvement, not
to create a reporting system. For example, the Prince William County, Maryland, Police
Department identified the county’s ten most dangerous intersections based on a
reported-accidents indicator (measure) they developed. With this information, the
department analyzes each intersection to identify accident causes and contributing
factors. The department develops responses for each intersection that has causes on
which the police can act, such as excessive speed, driving under the influence, failing to
stop, etc. The success of the enforcement strategy then is tracked using subsequent
accident data. This approach has led to a reduction in accidents, personal injuries, and
15
property loss at the targeted intersections, even though overall traffic volume has
increased (Hatry, Gerhart, and Marshall, 1994, p. S16).
Benchmarking is the application of the Consumer Reports concept to the public
sector (Gay, 1993, p.1). Public sector benchmarking is thought to be as much as 15 or
more years behind that of the private sector. One reason for this may be the lack of
competition or financial pressure on public service organizations to improve. Robert
Rielage, Assistant Chief in Colerain Township, OH, states, “After reading ‘Reinventing
Government’ and hearing comments by the public, I don’t believe the average citizen
will allow the genie back in the bottle. The fire service will be held to a higher standard
of productivity” (Baltic, 1994, p.68). The fire suppression component of our service
continues to be a very labor-intensive operation and relies on the occurrence of
incidents as the measure of productivity. Are these valid measures of fire-service
productivity today? John Lawton, City Manager of Great Falls, Montana, says that the
real issue is determining what change the fire service needs to make to meet the
demands of the customers (Baltic, 1994, p.70). What will eventually have to become
commonplace is a bottom line attitude toward efficiency, productivity, innovation,
customer service, revenue generation, and competitiveness (Murphy, 1992, p.42).
The difficulty for the fire service is not in the development of a continuous improvement
process, but in integrating this process into the management and decision-making
systems of the leadership. Before these systems can be used to explain budgetary
proposals, they must be successful as a management tool.

16
One of the unanticipated benefits of a successful benchmarking and performance
measurement program can be improved morale. At the New York City Transit Authority
morale has soared because all employees and managers close to the activities being
benchmarked were involved throughout the process, some through interviews and
others through day-to-day responsibility and accountability for results (Bruder and Gray,
1994, S-10).
One fear of performance measurement is that the data will be misinterpreted.
While a reliable and trusted system of performance measures and benchmarking can
aid citizens, elected officials, and fire departments in determining service levels and
justifying expenditures, it can also create false expectations that outcome information
will indicate the causes of the outcomes. Outcome indicators are a measure of an
actual program, reporting whether it was effective or not. They do not indicate why a
program works or doesn’t. Unfortunately, many public employees, elected officials, and
media people believe that regularly-collected outcome information tells whether the
government program and its staff were the primary causes of the outcome. A clearer
understanding of the limitations of outcome data can reduce the tendency to blame
public employees immediately when performance indicators show a negative outcome.
Local governments need to do a good job of explaining the nature of outcome data
internally, to elected officials, and particularly to the media, so those agencies are not
blamed prematurely and unfairly for negative outcomes (Hatry, Gerhart, and Marshall,
1994, p. S-18).
17
Benchmarking and performance measurement is an appropriate step for
increasing accountability in government operations and to help improve performance.
All levels of government are finding a growing need to adopt systems that continually
assess processes and improve their services. Accountability at the local level can be
more complex than that of other levels of government. The local electorate may be held
responsible for planning, regulation, expenditure and revenue-raising decisions in
addition to mandatory compliance from higher levels of government, yet there is
considerably less data available on local government than other levels of government.
In a well-functioning marketplace, pricing changes provide signals about the quality and
demand for services and goods. These same free-market conditions do not exist
among government services providers. The primary indicators from the citizenry to
signal their satisfaction with government are voting, and choosing whether to live or
conduct business in the jurisdiction. Because these are infrequent decisions, an
alternative such as performance measurement can be used to determine acceptable
performance standards, help guide decisions, and demonstrate acknowledgement of
government’s responsibility to the community. (Towers, Hague, McCawley, 1997, p. 3).
In summary, virtually all of the literature admittedly reported that the public sector
in general, along with the fire service, is well behind the private sector in its
establishment of objective program management. Although there seems to be readily
available data for fire and police department programs, there are widespread
differences of opinion concerning standardized definitions of measurement criteria.
History shows us that there have been several substantive efforts put forth in the
18
development of criteria and data collection templates over the past 20-30 years that
yielded minimal results. If the fire service cannot reach consensus on the establishment
of industry standards, we run the risk of continued budget cutting or perhaps even
privatization. This may ultimately place our communities and our personnel at risk.
In addition, the literature also emphasized the positive organizational benefits of
implementing a consistent program of benchmarking. Among those benefits are
program accountability to the public and the electorate, the inevitable necessity for
strategic planning, and the eventual shift in organizational culture as the benchmarking
process improves services or programs and creates organizations that can adapt to
change dynamically.
PROCEDURES
The action research methodology guided this project and included a literature
review, personal interviews with local government fire officials, and the use of a survey
instrument.
Literature Review
Preparing this research brief began with an extensive literature review at the
Learning Resource Center at the National Emergency Training Center in June 2000.
Additional literature reviews were conducted at the City of Clearwater Public Library in
Clearwater, Florida, and the Saint Petersburg Junior College Library, also in Clearwater,
19
Florida, and were completed by October 2000. The review of available literature from
these sources included books, journals, newspapers, and available applied research
projects. The author also conducted a search for available information on the Internet
over a period of time during the months of July and August 2000.
Personal Interviews
Personal interviews were conducted with fire service representatives of several
local municipalities and special taxing districts that provide fire and rescue services
throughout Pinellas County, Florida. The larger departments usually provided input
through a budget specialist or division manager who is tracking data linked to anecdotal
performance measures.
Survey Instrument
A survey was developed to collect information from various-sized fire and rescue
departments throughout Pinellas County to determine the commonly collected data
gathered by the departments, along with a query of their benchmarking efforts. Input for
the content of the survey included material currently being used by Clearwater Fire and
Rescue in the development of a business plan but was primarily derived from a model
originally authored by the International City/County Managers Association (see
Appendix A). This is, in part, a component of a larger citywide effort to do benchmark
comparisons with other organizations.

20
The results of the surveys were compiled in a database format that grouped the
respondents by their jurisdiction and population (see Appendix B).
Assumptions
The assumptions used to gather information and determine results are based on the
following:
• The literature review was thorough and represents the most recent and
applicable information available.
• The experience and credentials of the fire service professionals consulted are
undeniable.
• The survey was written to elicit objective responses and limit any subjective
influences.
• The conclusions of the author are logical and reasonable.
Limitations
There was not a significant amount of literature available for review outside the
public sector. That body of information is further limited when it is applied to emergency
services.
When evaluating other governments that have initiated efforts to measure and
monitor performance, it is apparent that the political will and community’s demand for
accountability is normally only achieved after funding and service levels have reached a
21
crisis point. There is very minimal evidence that government has taken a proactive
position in providing comprehensive systems of accountability.
The accuracy of survey results is also a limiting factor. Although the surveys
were sent to the attention of the Fire Chief, persons other than the addressee
completed a majority of the responses received. Because many of these individuals
failed to identify their positions within the organization, follow-up contact was made to
assure that these persons could reasonably be assumed to have first-hand knowledge
or access to the requested information. A number of the returned surveys contained
blanks or incomplete responses, which further limits the accuracy of survey results. It
was therefore assumed that the requested information was not applicable or not
available.
RESULTS
1. Was there any local area Fire Department utilizing a formalized program to
monitor their performance or assist them with planning?
Although the fire service is a long-standing institution that is evolving to meet the
ever-increasing demands of the community, it has not consistently adopted the practice
of meaningful performance monitoring. While all local fire departments contacted
indicated that they were measuring their performance, further discussion revealed that
these departments were usually tracking inspection data, along with the data normally
collected, by using the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS). This system is
clearly focused on statistics rather than gathering information to evaluate performance.

22
The fire department in St. Petersburg, Florida (the largest city in Pinellas County), has
used performance measures informally more so than any other department in the
county, and found them useful in making budget decisions to support more public
education.
Consistent with much of the literature reviewed was a tendency to report
information that was better defined as outputs or workload figures, such as number of
calls, population served, and inspections. There was a unanimous lack of true outcome
indicators, or true measures of actual programs, to indicate whether or not they’re
getting the intended results. While all the departments had some sort of long-range
plans, it was difficult to tell if any of these plans were tied to any empirical evidence that
either supported the enhancement or discontinuance of existing programs, or justified
the creation of new ones.
Many of these jurisdictions, Clearwater included, are also contracted by the
county to provide fire and EMS services within the unincorporated pockets of their fire
district. During negotiation of these contracts with municipalities, the county
incorporated fractal response time requirements rather than average response time
performance criteria as part of an effort to create financial incentives for the provider
that either meets or exceeds the parameters. This was done with the intent of mirroring
a nationally-accepted response time criterion established by the American Ambulance
Association. While the actual parameters in the local agreements were more restrictive
than that of the national standard, they are very easily met by the local providers and
23
other than providing some statistical value, are of minimal use in planning the future
needs of the local system.
2. Why is the public sector lagging behind the private sector in the
development and use of performance measures and benchmarking?
Benchmarking within the public sector is being utilized, but on a much more
limited basis than in the private sector. While the term benchmarking is increasingly
used in the fire service, the efforts are often better described as networking or modeling.
Private sector benchmarking is much further developed and is often seen as a
necessary component of the strategic planning process. Competition forces the private
sector to stay current and continuously improve and innovate in order to survive. This
also results in the private sector placing more emphasis on research and development
than does the public sector. Perhaps because the private sector has seen a more
immediate need to benchmark, there are many widely-accepted standards available for
making comparisons. The development of these same industry-wide standards for the
fire service has not yet been realized. There are many examples, even on a local level,
that demonstrate inconsistencies in the few areas that are being measured and
compared. Development of standardized criteria is critical in order to determine who the
industry leaders are (Walker, 1994, p.10).
Public sector agencies usually provide more service-related products to their
customers (constituents), which consumes the majority of their resources. The culture
24
within public sector organizations is often a barrier, as these employees are skeptical
about the need to change and may consider benchmarking and measuring to be
burdensome or the current management fad (Hartry, Gerhart, Marshall, 1994, p. S-17).
While historically there has been no financial pressure on public sector organizations to
show a profit, the current trend is to demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness. There is
also evidence that the public sector lacks a clear mission due to the variety of ever-
changing priorities established by the citizens (Bogan and English, 1994, 238).
During informal discussions with survey respondents, all parties seemed to agree
that a formalized benchmarking process would allow each provider an opportunity to
better substantiate existing programs and budgets. The demographic makeup of this
area of Florida has a higher median age than is found nationally. When questioned
about whether their respective communities are demanding that the Fire Department
demonstrate more accountability, most respondents felt that the older population
strongly supported their Fire Departments but were slowly requiring more empirical
evidence of accountability.
3. Is there a nationally-recognized model of measures available that can be
applied locally?
The problem with trying to apply a national model to local service providers is
that nearly everyone providing service does so within the constraints of local
circumstances. There is evidence, however, of past efforts to standardize models and
allow service providers to compare performance. The Research Triangle Institute

25
published a workbook in 1977, titled the Municipal Fire Service Workbook, for the
purpose of “providing a means of measuring the total organizational performance of a
local fire service delivery system” (Research Triangle Institute, 1977, p. xi). Upon
review of the workbook, the effort was intended to establish benchmarks and
performance measures that organizations could use to compare themselves with, based
on population size and demographics. For reasons undetermined, the effort was never
fully realized.
On behalf of the National Science Foundation, the ICMA organization issued a
separated joint publication in 1977 to provide a way to measure the overall performance
of fire protection delivery systems. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA),
one of the coauthors, previously released material in 1974 on the utility of measuring
fire protection productivity (Fischer, 1994, p. S-3).
Many of the local Fire Departments are aware of and actively monitor issues
through the International City/County Manager’s Association (ICMA), but were unaware
of the pilot program through the ICMA Performance Measures Consortium undertaken
to build a standardized data collection template for benchmarking purposes. That effort
seems to have been the most substantive process to date in that it made considerable
efforts to define the criteria being surveyed. It was originally designed for use in larger
cities (greater than 200,000 population), but there is no evidence of a continuance or
follow-up to that effort.

26
While conducting local surveys, Fire Chiefs were asked if they felt that they had
good departments. The reply was always affirmative. When proceeding further and
asking how they knew this, a multitude of differing responses was obtained. Most of
their assumptions were based on comparisons that focus on resources rather than
performance. While most local fire departments could readily produce statistics on
firefighters per 1000 population, average response times, minimum staffing, and per
capita costs, relatively few efforts were designed to gauge effectiveness.
There are some positive indicators that progress is being made on the
evolvement of standardized criteria. The development of the accreditation system by
the Commission of Fire Accreditation International is a great leap forward. Because the
functional responsibilities of the fire service have expanded exponentially over the past
20-30 years, the current standard of comparison, the Insurance Services Organization
or ISO rating, no longer accurately evaluates the true capabilities of modern-day fire
and rescue departments. Clearwater Fire and Rescue has recently moved to ‘applicant
status’ in its quest for accreditation.
4. How can the measurement and comparison data be utilized once it has
been collected?
The key purpose in benchmarking is to document the current state of services
and provide a guide on how it should be improved. Because there are very few public
sector agencies, if any, that truly believe they are resourced and funded at levels to
allow them to address every need, benchmarking can allow a systematic approach to
27
guide managers in where to concentrate scarce resources. Eventually, a targeted
approach on resource allocation will yield empirical evidence that demonstrates high
effectiveness and efficiency. Additionally, by comparing processes with other select
agencies, a considerable knowledge base will be developed that will allow organizations
the opportunity to review and learn how other agencies approached similar issues.
Benchmarking also offers a unique opportunity for public fire and emergency
medical agencies to adapt to a changing world and provide their customers with
superior services by imitating top performers and developing an organizational
commitment to continuous improvement. Particularly in the fire and EMS services, the
potential benefits are:
• Developing a culture that understands necessary change.
• Developing a commitment to continuous improvement to meet and exceed
citizen expectations about service costs and service quality.
• Identifying and prioritizing agency processes and procedures that need
improvement.
• Breaking down not-invented-here barriers to improvement based on the
experiences of others.
• Adopting procedures, processes, and technologies that have proven effective in
other jurisdictions.
• Sharing locally-invented best practices with benchmark partners (Gay, 1993,
p.16).
28
Locally, there was consistent agreement that there is considerable advantage to
participating in a well-defined consistent benchmarking process. The fire and EMS
services in Pinellas County are functionally consolidated even though municipalities,
special districts, and municipal service taxing units provide the services. Countywide
automatic aid and closest unit dispatch agreements have resulted in a voluntary
adoption of emergency operating guidelines and even purchasing co-ops. It is because
of this inter-agency cooperation that a successful, formalized system of benchmarking is
possible.
It should, however, be recognized that in the public sector all benchmarking
takes place in a political environment, which may affect the objectivity of any exercise in
which the performance of government agencies is examined.
DISCUSSION
In every part of this country, on a daily basis, there is a very visible battle being
fought by fire departments. Fire engines, ladder trucks, and rescue units respond to a
variety of emergencies, some more serious than others. The more spectacular of these
find their way into the media. However, there is another battle raging behind the scene
that is potentially the most dangerous: the struggle for financial survival (Furey, 1995,
p.62). Among the factors contributing to these funding dilemmas confronting fire and
rescue services today is a lack of trust. People are not convinced that maximum use
has been made of current tax dollars. Only when they become convinced of that are
they willing to be taxed.

29
For example, Orange County, California, supported a 0.5% sales tax for
transportation by a wide margin. The measure clearly demonstrated in quantifiable
terms just what the improvements would be and how they would benefit traffic and
transportation (Baltic, 1994, p.67). It would seem logical that applying a similar process
to a public safety initiative would yield the same results, yet many departments today
aren’t organized in a manner to facilitate these processes. In many communities, the
fire chief is the only one providing management to the department and looking at the
needs of the department, the local government, and the community as a whole. The
fire service has been accused of not operating within a more business-like framework,
and today’s fire chiefs would greatly benefit from an established system of program
measurement that quantifies their efficiency and effectiveness.
As a result of the 1993 Government Results and Performance Act, select federal
agencies must continually demonstrate positive results in order to receive funding.
Unlike the past, there are no automatic appropriations for funding just because a
program was previously in place. As an offset for the greater requirement of
accountability, these agencies have been given more administrative authority in order to
get things done. These changes were made so that government could manage for
results, instead of blindly following written rules and procedures (Fisher, 1994, p. S-3).
With the advent of reinventing government, many public sector agencies are
focused on increasing their accountability to the public they serve. While there is a
legitimate role for comparative analysis in improving public services, the use of
30
performance measures can be a two-edged sword. Favorable results identify high
performers—jurisdictions that are renowned for cost efficiency, high quality services, or
innovative practices—resulting in popular acclaim for top managers, officials and
workers. On the other hand, poor results identify poor performers, and can add fuel to
the movement for contracting out or even eliminating certain services in those
jurisdictions (Collective Bargaining Report, 1998, p.1)
If done incorrectly, an emphasis on data collection may erroneously shift the
focus of benchmarking to an exercise that produces data, but little else. When
benchmarking is planned effectively, when it focuses on the right targets, and when its
recommendations are implemented and monitored correctly, the results are significant
and sustainable (Bruder and Gray, 1994, p. S-9). Any benchmarking program that does
not result in a targeted effort to redirect resources and programs to improve a service or
product is not worthwhile. For those organizations that are just beginning their business
analysis efforts, keep in mind that it is a learning experience. Building a successful
system in an incremental and long-term process. Only through a commitment to this
process will the desired results be achieved.
Results of this study were clearly in line and consistent with material referenced
in the Literature Review. The private sector is a decade or two ahead of the public
sector in its development and utilization of benchmarking systems. In all likelihood, this
is because the public sector has enjoyed a monopoly on the products or services it
provides. The private sector, with the necessity to generate a profit, has had to invest in
31
research and development, along with the need for management systems, to evaluate
efficiency and effectiveness. The level of development for benchmarking in the public
sector has been a drawback to its limited use. There is a lack of objective standards
and defined measures for use in the fire service. W.C. Enman states that, “Government
agencies need to hold off until the prerequisite quality and data analysis processes are
in place” (Bogan and English, 1994, p.237). What is the fire service waiting for?
In the mid 1990’s a subcommittee of the ICMA joined with several volunteer
agencies to develop a data collection template with well-defined measures. This should
have been a defining moment in the history of the fire service, but the momentum
seems to be lost. Today, a baseline template for widespread use still does not exist.
Granted, there are a variety of local circumstances that influence how fire and rescue
services are provided, so one template couldn’t begin to cover the volume of data that
would need to be assessed. To read in the literature that the efforts in the fire service
were initiated as much as thirty years ago, but today we can’t agree on the definition of
“response time,” is discouraging. Within the last five years there have been many
volumes of literature published extolling the virtues of benchmarking programs within
the resource-constrained environment of the public sector. To continue to conduct
business as usual when the tax-paying public demands more accountability in spending
from their government is shortsighted. Today’s fire chiefs must initiate meaningful
change.
32
Locally, the implications for Clearwater Fire and Rescue are just beginning to
manifest themselves. The fire departments in Pinellas County enjoy a unique
functionally consolidated relationship, yet we fail to take advantage of a unified
comparative analysis process. Every department participates in the mutual aid
agreement, which by default results in consistent emergency operating procedures. A
countywide medical director provides oversight for EMS. All fire and EMS dispatch
operations for the entire county are consolidated and operate from one facility. The
County Fire Chief’s Association even oversees various purchasing co-ops. In spite of
these advantages, we still don’t have one department that can objectively quantify the
outcomes of their various programs. The largest city in the county has approached its
maximum tax levy as permitted by State law, yet very nearly closed a fire station in
recent years because of limited funding. While many local fire chiefs agree with the
advantages and seem to appreciate the added value a benchmarking program provides
a department, there has been minimal interest in pursuing a formal countywide
program. It is my hope that the creation of a countywide template will eventually result
in regular on-going program with one hundred percent participation from the fire
departments in the county.

33
RECOMMENDATIONS
As the public becomes more and more discontent with the status quo and
personal agendas of the professional politician, they are applying pressure to these
elected officials to be more responsive to their needs. Today’s fire service executive
should take a queue from the private sector and consider developing systems of
measurement. The fire service must shift its focus from comparative resource analysis
to benchmarking. Benchmarking seeks to identify best practices and implements those
practices to enhance performance (Gay, 1993, p.2). Only through benchmarking can
you begin to focus on needed improvement.
Every organization, regardless of size, should develop and implement a strategic
plan that outlines its future goals and objectives. Included in that effort should be an
impartial evaluation of the organization’s current structure and method of conducting
business. As part of a desire to improve the quality and image of public service and
deliver a service in the best interests of all of the people, you should ask some very
difficult questions. Because “We’ve always done it that way,” are you still devoting
resources to processes that serve no real need? Are there certain efficiencies or best
practices in other departments or the private sector that can be adopted by your
organization? Is the fire chief still the lead firefighter, or is he/she practiced in the
budgetary process and demonstrated his/her accountability to the elected officials and
the community? Present day fire executives can no longer ignore these questions. To
do so is clearly archaic thinking that will ultimately be counterproductive to the entire

34
organization and the communities we serve. Fire administrators should conduct a
systematic review of community needs and develop a pragmatic system for their
delivery. This forward-thinking approach will allow for change to be managed from
within. It should include:
• Citizen surveys to determine needs, desired services, and their willingness to pay
for services.
• A timely introduction that explains what is being considered and how it will benefit
the recipients.
• An understanding of the planning involved in determining this particular means,
along with any other options considered.
• Input from employees to allow for their buy-in and understanding of the needs.
They will frequently be in a position to explain these to the community.
• A public hearing process, to allow for input that includes key-decision timelines.
• A program evaluation, to review actual results and subsequent need to
implement any revisions.
For Clearwater Fire and Rescue, the requirement for better accountability has
become a priority. Beginning with the FY ’01 budget process earlier this year, we were
asked to develop a business plan. Included with that business plan was the
development of measures labeled “key intended outcomes.” Initially, these consist
primarily of data that we are already gathering. While this year’s data will serve as a
baseline for future comparison, it does not allow us to conduct a comparative outcome
analysis with other departments in the county or even the state. Although it has always
35
been difficult for the fire service to quantify productivity, it is imperative that the criteria
be developed that will allow a systematic process to be implemented and easily utilized
by participating organizations. The information gathered by the survey will be compiled
and returned to all departments in Pinellas County, along with the final product of this
research, a data collection template (Appendix C). Because the emergency service
providers in this area are functionally consolidated, the opportunity to compare
programs and measures is very viable and may easily provide information on program
improvements.
Of equal importance to any organization is a strategic plan. Over the next year it
will be necessary for Clearwater Fire and Rescue to update its five-year plan. Included
in this effort for the first time will be a separate section on succession planning for all
levels of employees in the department. The Department recognizes the need to
prepare the future leaders of the fire service to eventually take over not only the key
leadership positions, but also the variety of middle management and line supervisor
vacancies that will occur. It is also necessary to closely align our future goals and
objectives with the expectations of the community and the priorities they have
established.
Further research should be conducted to evaluate the constraints of long-
standing tradition on contemporary providers of emergency services. Organizations
today are moving from being rule-driven to customer service-driven. If we are truly to
become customer service-driven, shouldn’t we put the needs of the public we serve at
36
the head of the list? As the fire service continues to take on added responsibilities, is it
fair to assume that we can continue to pass these new responsibilities on to existing
personnel? Although we continue to raise the issue of inadequate staffing, we continue
to get the job done. At what point does our efficiency become a liability to the
community?
Further study is also indicated for managing the expectations of change for long-
standing employees as well as the public. The transition of change is uncomfortable for
most people. The idea of operating a fire department like a business is just as radical a
thought for the employee as it is for the community. Yet, with the demands for new and
improved services, this change may be unavoidable. An understanding of the effective
management of change as it applies to the organizational psyche and culture of
employees may prove beneficial. After all, these employees are the front-line
ambassadors to the community.
Change in the fire service should be viewed as evolutionary and innovative. It is
recommended that executive officers recognize the implications of change, both internal
and external to their organizations. Programs should be developed that reflect sound
business practices and enhanced communication.

37
REFERENCES
Baltic, S. (Ed.) (1994, August). Funding fire protection Fire Chief, 60-74.
Bogan, C.E., & English, M.J. (1994). Benchmarking for Best Parctices: Winning
Through Innovative Adaptation
Bruder, Jr., K.A., & Gray, E.M. (1994, September). Public Sector Benchmarking:
A Practical Approach Public Management, S9-S14.
City of Clearwater. (2000). Annual operating and capital budget. Clearwater,
FL: Office of Management and Budget
Collective Bargaining Report. (1998 Number 2). Measuring Up: Benchmarking
Public Services. [On-line] Available: http://www.afscme.org/wrkplace/cbr298_1.htm
Fischer, Richard J. (1994, September). An Overview of Performance
Management Public Management, S2-S8.
Furey, B. (1995, March). Making Ends Meet Firehouse, 62-66.
Gay, William. (1993, February). Benchmarking: Achieving Superior
Performance in Fire and Emergency Medical Services MIS Report, 1-23.

38
Glover, Mark (1992). A Practical Guide for Measuring Program Efficiency and
Effectiveness in Local Government.
Hatry, Harry P., Blair, Louis H., Fisk, Donald M., Greiner, John M., Hall, John R.,
Jr., and Schaenman, Phillip S. (1992). How Effective Are Your Community Services?
The Urban Institute Press.
Hatry, Harry P., Gerhart, Craig, and Marshall, Martha (1994 September). Eleven
Ways to Make Performance Measurement More Useful to Public Managers Public
Management, S15-S18.
Murphy, D. (1992, May). Fire Department, Inc. Fire Engineering, Vol. 145,
No.5. 41-48.
Pinellas County. (1998). Pinellas County EMS Agreement
Research Triangle Institute, International City Management Association, &
National Fire Protection Association. (1977). Municipal Fire Service Workbook.
Towers, F., Hague, N., McCawley A., (1997). Benchmarking Local Government
Performance in New South Wales. IPART Paper. [On-line]. Available:
http://www.ipart.nsw.gov.au/papers/lgot/Index.html
39
Walker, A. G. (1994, March). Benchmarking: A Survey for the Fire Service The
Voice, 5,10.
Withers, G. (1994, December). Fees for Service in Public Safety MIS Report, 1-
14.
40
APPENDIX A
CLEARWATER
Fire & Rescue
610 Franklin Street
Clearwater, FL 33756
August 16, 2000
Dear Pinellas County Fire Chiefs:
Attached is a survey that I have developed as an initial step to collect available existing data from
Pinellas County Fire and EMS service providers. My purpose is twofold:
• First, I would like to begin tracking the information on the survey annually in order to establish a
baseline of comparative data. As it is completed each year, I will return to each respondent the
results of the collection effort, with the hope that you will find it a useful tool for comparative
analysis as you plan for your Department’s needs.
• Second, the completion of this project will provide me the remainder of the information needed
to finalize my third year Applied Research Project for the Executive Fire Officer program at the
National Fire Academy.
Because our Fire and EMS services are ‘functionally consolidated,’ we have a unique opportunity in
Pinellas County to establish a meaningful system of benchmark comparisons. I would ask that you
please take the time to have this completed by October 1, 2000. My goal is a 100% return rate.
This will allow me the opportunity to provide you with the best possible data available as we plan
for the future of the Fire Service in our respective communities.
If you have any questions at all, please don’t hesitate to contact me at 562-4326. Thank you for your
participation!
Sincerely,
Rowland E. Herald
Fire Chief
41
APPENDIX A, Continued
FIRE DEPARTMENT SURVEY
Name & Location Of Organization: ______________________________________
Service Area (Sq Mi):______ Population Served:________ # Sworn Personnel:_____

(Circle Type of Stations Below)
# Stations: _______ Career Volunteer Combination
1. Please enter the number of companies by type and their minimum staffing level.
Number of each type Minimum Staffing each
of Company: Company Type:
___1.Engine Companies: #: #:
___2.Truck/Aerial Companies: #: #:
___3.Shift Command Units: #: #:
Please List Any Other Type Companies of each Minimum Staffing
Units Below: type (enter below): each Company Type:
___a. #: #:
___b. #: #:
___c. #: #:
___d. #: #:
2. Please Check All Services You Provide and Circle the Types of Services at right.
___1. Fire Suppression
___2. EMS BLS First ALS Both Transport?
Responder Y or N
___3. HAZMAT First Specialty
Responder Response
___4. Confined Space First Specialty
Responder Response
___5. Water Rescue First Specialty
Responder Response
___6. Life Safety Prevention/ Fire Both
Inpsection Investigation
___7. Public Ed Fire EMS Both
___8. Other (Identify Types Below) (Please Describe Below)
___a.
___ b.
___c.
42
3. Please provide your current and proposed total budget amounts:

Current/Proposed FY Budget: FY 99/00: $ FY 00/01: $
4.Please describe your community risk reduction efforts. If possible please include
information on structure fires and any associated life and property loss.
5. Please provide any available information on structure fire “outcomes”.
6. Please provide any available information on firefighter/civilian injuries.
Would you like a copy of the summary results? Yes No

43
APPENDIX B
BENCHMARKING SURVEY 2000 – RESULTS
RESPONDING MUNICIPALITIES: Clearwater F&R Palm Harbor FR Safety Harbor FD East Lake F&R Largo F&R Tarpon Springs FD
1. SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTORS
Primary pop. served: Residential/Est. Daytime 105,000/unk. 62,000/same-county 17,546/same 27,000/20,000 123,000/same (page not returned)
Square Miles Served: 42.5 22 5.5 33 22 “
Residential Single-Family Dwelling Units: 6834 18,720 5,877 32,759 “
Residential Multi-Family Dwelling Units: 5923 5,233 1,137 22,000 3,388 “
Commercial Structures: 246 4,000 660 6,054 “
Industrial Structures: 112 0 0 39 “
High-rise (75’ or more): 63 0 0 18 “
Median age of structures: “
Residential/Commercial/Industrial Res. 15 years Res. 30 years Unknown
Median age of population: 43 25-44 39.5 Unknown 47 “
2. SERVICE PROVIDER DESCRIPTORS

Total operating expen. - Actual/Period ended: 13.3 mil /FY’00 4,495,830/FY’99 173,877/FY’99 1,730,160/FY’99 7,443,159/FY’99 2,021,717/FY’99
Debt serv. pay. past FY – Actual/Period ended: 330,422 133,544 0 126,000/FY’99 0 0
Capital expenditures for last FY: 312,298 702,569 40,354 36,550/FY’99 156,470 126,629
Personnel overtime expen. Last FY: 279,598 173,201 105,000 32,100/FY’99 190,657 100,305
Number of Stations: 7 4 2 3 5.5 EMS only substa. 2
Staff by type - Sworn: FTE Paid/Volunteer/Total Paid 169 Paid 58 Paid 30 Paid 35 Paid 129 Paid 37
Staff by type - Civilian: FTE Paid/Vol./Total Paid 16 Paid 4 Paid 2 Paid 9 Paid 2
Number of STAFFED Units
Ladder Trucks: BLS/ALS 2 1 ALS 1 BLS
Pumper Trucks/Engines: BLS/ALS 5 3 ALS 1 ALS 3 ALS 2 ALS 2 ALS
Airport Crash Rigs: BLS/ALS
Technical Rescue Rigs: BLS/ALS 1
Chiefs’ Vehicles: BLS/ALS 15 6 BLS 2 BLS 3 BLS 12 BLS 4 BLS
Incident Command Vehicles: BLS/ALS 2 1 BLS 1 BLS 3 BLS
Hazmat Vehicles: BLS/ALS
Quints – Combinations: BLS/ALS 1 ALS 1 ALS 3 ALS
Other BLS/ALS 2 Heavy Rescue,
6 ALS Rescues 1 ALS Squad 4 EMS Units
Number of UNSTAFFED Units (Standby)
Ladder Trucks: BLS/ALS
Pumper Trucks/Engines: BLS/ALS
Technical Rescue Rigs: BLS/ALS 1 BLS
Chiefs’ Vehicles: BLS/ALS
Incident Command Vehicles: BLS/ALS
Hazmat Vehicles: BLS/ALS 1 ALS 1 BLS
Quints – Combinations: BLS/ALS 2 ALS
44
Other BLS/ALS BLS Brush/Marine BLS Brush/Marine BLS Brush/Marine
Number of RESERVE Units (Spares)
Ladder Trucks: BLS/ALS
Pumper Trucks/Engines: BLS/ALS 3 2 ALS 1 ALS 1 ALS 1 BLS
Technical Rescue Rigs: BLS/ALS
Chiefs’ Vehicles: BLS/ALS 1 BLS
Incident Command Vehicles: BLS/ALS
Hazmat Vehicles: BLS/ALS
Quints – Combinations: BLS/ALS 1 2 ALS
Other BLS/ALS 4 ALS Rescues 1 EMS Unit-ALS
Minimum Staffing Per Unit
Ladder Trucks: BLS/ALS 3/2 ALS 3
Pumper Trucks/Engines: BLS/ALS 3 ALS 3 ALS 3 ALS 3 BLS 2
Airport Crash Rigs: BLS/ALS ALS 3-4
Technical Rescue Rigs: BLS/ALS 2
Chiefs’ Vehicles: BLS/ALS 1 BLS 1 BLS 1
Incident Command Vehicles: BLS/ALS 1 BLS 1 BLS 1 BLS 1
Hazmat Vehicles: BLS/ALS ALS 2
Quints – Combinations: BLS/ALS 3 ALS 3 ALS 4 ALS 3
Other BLS/ALS BLS Brush (2)
Marine (3)
Total Daily Minimum Staffing Requirement: 43 15 8 10 31
3. COMMUNITY RISK REDUCTION

Requirements for detection/suppr. Systems? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
If Yes, what year was fire code incorporated? Annual/City Code 1970 1984 11/17/98
Total Hazards (within reporting period:
#Found/#Corrected/%Hazards Corrected: 580/580/100% 539/539/100% 1360/unk./99% 1009/866/86%
Total Inspected Occupancies: 4,500 1,118 3,089 cal. ‘99
% of Fires in Previously Insp. Occupancies:
Within 1 yr/ Within 3 yrs/Within 5 yrs: 6% Unknown
% Total Inspect.Occupancies Experiencing Fire:
Within 1 yr/ Within 3 yrs/Within 5 yrs: 6% Unknown
Total Dollar Value Lost to Fire:
Structural/Contents/Nonstructural $4.5 mil $368,271 $331,930 $795,850 $605,283
Percentage of Total Market Value Lost to Fire:
Structural/Contents/Nonstructural Unknown
Total Cost of Community Risk Reduction Efforts: Included in
$476,233 operating costs Unknown $350,000
Cost of Community Risk Reduction Efforts per
$100 Million in Property Protected: Unknown $11,294
Cost of Community Risk Reduction Efforts per
Capita Protected: Unknown $2.85
45
Structure Fires by Occupancy Type
Residential Single-Family:
Number/Per 1,000 Occupancies 125 21 Total 13 Total 75/ 8/
Residential Multi-Family:
Number/Per 1,000 Occupancies 1/ Unk. 8 Total 1 Total 110 36/ 3/
Commercial:
Number/Per 1,000 Occupancies 1/Unk. 8 Total 5 Total 15/ 5/
Industrial:
Number/Per 1,000 Occupancies 1/Unk. 0 1 Total 0 0 0
Deaths by Occupancy Type
Residential Single-Family: 0
Number/Per 100,000 Population 0 0 0
Residential Multi-Family: 0
Number/Per 100,000 Popoulation 0 1 0
Commercial: 0
Industrial: 0
Death/Injury in residential structures with

detection systems: Number/Per 100,000 pop. 2 Total 4 Injuries 2
Death/Injury in residential structures without
detection systems: Number/Per 100,000 pop. 0 0
Dollar loss in structures with suppression
systems: Unknown
Dollar loss in structures without suppression
systems: 288,479 Unknown
Total Arson Fires 26 13 6 0 15
Total Arson Fire Arrests: Number/% of Arsons: 5/20% 1 4 0 Unknown 21
Total Arson Cases Cleared:Number/% of Arson: 5/20% 1 4 0 Unknown
4. FIRE SUPPRESSION
Total Responses to Fire Calls:
Structure/Outside Structure 863 37 In/91 Out 256 In/74 Out 490 In/77 Out 839 268 In
Actual Fires:
Structure/Outside Structure/False Alarms 238 / /418 17/50/Unknown Unk/77/Unk 134/50/2,156
Fire Calls Responded to Within 5 Minutes (%):
Dispatch to Arrival/Call Entry to Arrival 100% 63.6%
Structure Fires by Outcome
Out on Arrival:
Number/Percent Unknown 10 Unknown 3
Confined to Structure:
Number/Percent Unknown 2/2.5% 110 22 7
46
Confined to Room of Origin:
Number/Percent Unknown 9/11.6% Unknown 103 4
Spread Beyond Structure:
Number/Percent Unknown 0 0 2 2
Firefighter: Fire-related Injuries:
TOTAL: Lost Time/No Lost Time 6/17 2/2 7(Lost Time) 1 (No Lost Time)
Firefighter: Fire-related Deaths:
TOTAL: Lost Time/No Lost Time: 0 0 0 0
Firefighter: Fire-related Injuries:

PER 1,000 INCIDENTS: Lost Time/No Lost
Time
Firefighter: Fire-related Deaths:
PER 1,000 INCIDENTS: Lost Time/No Lost 0
Time:
Civilian: Fire-related Injuries:
TOTAL: Require Transport/No Transport 2 1 Req. Transport 0 27 5 Req. Transport
Civilian: Fire-related Deaths:
TOTAL: Require Transport/No Transport: 0 0 1 0
Civilian: Fire-related Injuries:
PER 1,000 INCIDENTS: Require Transport/No 0
Transport
Civilian: Fire-related Deaths:
PER 1,000 INCIDENTS: Require Transport/No 0 0
Transport:
Civilian Fire-related Injuries: Occupancies
Without Detection/Suppression: 0 1
Civilian Fire-related Injuries: Occupancies With
Detection: 0 4 0
Civilian Fire-related Injuries: Occupancies With
Suppression: 0 0
Civilian Fire-related Deaths: Occupancies
Without Detection/Suppression: 0
Civilian Fire-related Deaths: Occupancies With
Detection: 0
Civilian Fire-related Deaths: Occupancies With
Suppression: 0
EMS –Firefighter: EMS-related Injuries:
TOTAL: Lost Time/No Lost Time 4/5 1 1 0
EMS -Firefighter: EMS-related Deaths:
TOTAL: Lost Time/No Lost Time: 0 0 0
EMS -Firefighter: EMS-related Injuries:
PER 1,000 Incidents: Lost Time/No Lost Time 0
EMS -Firefighter: EMS-related Deaths:
PER 1,000 Incidents: Lost Time/No Lost Time: 0
47
Special Operations
Total Technical Rescues Performed:
Responded to/Performed 0
Technical Rescues Per 100,000 Pop.:
Dedicated Technical Rescue Teams
Total High Angle:
Responded to/Performed 0 0
High Angle Per 100,000 Population:
Total Confined Space/Trench:
Confined Space/Trench, Per 100,000 Pop.:
Total Water Rescue:
Responded to/Performed 16/ 15/15 1/1 11 Responded to
Water Rescue Per 100,000 Population:
Responded to/Performed Unknown
Total “Other”:
Responded to/Performed
“Other” Per 100,000 Population
Responded to/Performed
5. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Number of HazMat Calls by Incident Type Unknown Unknown 0
Intentional: 0
Motor Vehicle: 0
Unintentional/Other 0 1
Container Failure 0 1
Act of Nature 0
Under Investigation: 0
Undetermined: 0
Number of HazMat Site Inspections Conducted:
Local/Tier II 0
Number of HazMat Calls by UN Classification
Class 1: 0
Class 2: 0
Class 3: 0
Class 4: 0
Class 5: 0
Class 6: 0
Class 7: 0
Class 8: 0
Class 9: 0
Resources Committed (Inputs)
48
% of dept. response personnel trained to
HazMat Technician level: 25% 0
# of FTEs committed to the HazMat Program: 16% 0
Total cost of the HazMat Program: $5,760 0
Resources Committed (Outputs)
# of total HazMat incidents for the year: 0
% of HazMat Program costs reimb. for the year: 0
6. EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES COUNTYWIDE

Calls Responded to Within:
BLS – 4 Minutes/ALS – 8 Minutes
Unit Dispatch to Arrival:
Call Entry to Arrival:
Average PSAP Processing: 23 Seconds
Average On-Scene-To-Patient Time: 2:44
Time on Scene: 20:28
Total Time: 24:20
Total Responses (Incidents) 121,315
BLS Transport:
Responses/Patients 52,030/20,520
ALS Transport:
BLS Non-Transport:
ALS Non-Transport:
Responses/Patients 2/23/1,329
49
APPENDIX C
JURISDICTION: __________________________
BENCHMARKING FIRE & EMS SERVICES

(PINELLAS COUNTY DATA COLLECTION TEMPLATE)
Adapted from the Fire Technical Advisory Committee of the

International City Manager’s Association (ICMA)
Please return Template by

December 1, 2001, to:
Fire Chief Rowland Herald

Clearwater Fire & Rescue
610 Franklin Street
Clearwater, FL 33756
Phone: (727) 562-4334 EXT. 4326 Data Collection Period:

FAX: (727) 562-4328 FY 2001 (unless otherwise noted)
E-mail: rherald@clearwater-fl.com
50
Data Collection Period: FY 2000
Please also provide a narrative description of your service area,
including weather, topography, bodies of water, or other factors that
SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTORS affect your operation DEFINITIONS
Residential Daytime (Estimated) Population Served is the total number of residents counted as
living within the service area, as reported by the most recent
reliable source. Daytime population is the estimated population
Primary Population Served: % % of the service area during a typical workday
Square miles = total # of square miles contained within the

Square Miles Served: boundaries of the service area.
Service Area Description Number
Residential Single-Family
Dwelling Units:
Residential Multi-Family
Dwelling Units:
Commercial Structures:
Industrial Structures:
High-rise (75’ or more):
Residential Commercial Industrial

Median Age = Median age of structures as reported in the most
Median Age of Structures: recent census.
Demographic
Median Age = Median age of population as reported in most
Characteristics recent census.
Median Age of Population:

51
SERVICE PROVIDER
DESCRIPTORS
DEFINITIONS
Actual Period Ended
Total operating expenditures: $ Actual costs include personnel costs (salaries and fringe benefits)
and other actual direct expenses for most recent fiscal year
Debt service payments completed, such as materials and supplies, utilities, professional
for last FY: $ and consulting services. Does not include capital expenditures or
debt service payments.
Capital expenditures
for last FY $
Personnel overtime expendi-
tures for last FY: $
Number of Stations:
Actual FTE Paid Volunteer Staff Total Staff
Staff (FTE) (FTE) FTE = Report full-time positions based on full-time workweek.
Staff by Type: Overtime and Volunteer FTE: Convert to FTE using equivalent
production hours.
Sworn:
Civilian
Staffed Unstaffed Reserve Minimum ALS = Vehicles equipped to respond to
Number of Units by Type (Standby (Spares used Staffing/Unit
vehicles - to when regular situations requiring advanced life support.
be deployed vehicles being BLS = Vehicles equipped to provide first responder services or
when needed) repaired) the ability to provide basic life support.
BLS ALS BLS ALS BLS ALS #
Ladder Trucks: Vehicles that carry a variety of equipment, such
as ladders, forcible entry tools, and rescue equipment
Ladder Trucks:
Pumper trucks/Engines: Basic firefighting vehicle equipped with a
pump capable of supplying a minimum of 500 gallons per minute,
Pumper Trucks/Engines: fire hose, and a water tank.
Airport Crash Rigs: Specialized vehicles capable of immediate
fire suppression, using foam or other extinguishing agents.
Airport Crash Rigs:
Technical Rescue Rigs: Vehicles equipped to perform swift water,
high angle, confined space, or heavy extrication rescues.
Technical Rescue Rigs:
Chiefs’ Vehicles: Sedans and light trucks for staff and command
officers, including F.D. management, Fire Prevention officers and
Chiefs’ Vehicles inspectors, training officers, and communication officers.
52
SERVICE PROVIDER
DESCRIPTORS, continued
DEFINITIONS
Staffed Unstaffed Reserve Minimum ALS = Vehicles equipped to respond to

Number of Units by Type, continued (Standby (Spares used Staffing/Unit
vehicles - to when regular situations requiring advanced life support.
be deployed vehicles being BLS = Vehicles equipped to provide first responder or transport
when needed) repaired) services with the ability to provide basic life support.
BLS ALS BLS ALS BLS ALS #
Vehicle used to transport Command Officers and used for storage
of pre-fire plans and other significant data in order to effectively
Incident Command Vehicles: establish Emergency Scene Command.
Vehicles staffed and equipped to mitigate hazardous material

Hazmat Vehicles: emergencies.
Specialized vehicles designed and equipped to provide multiple
fire suppression capabilities, including aerial, pump, hose, ground
Quints/Combinations: ladders, and water supply support functions.
Other (specify)
(Please provide a brief description of your Personnel on duty is sum of all 24-hour positions (minimum) plus
Total Daily Minimum staffing approach.) a prorated share of those positions filled for less than 24 hours.
Staffing Requirement: Example: 16 hour ambulance = 1.32 24-hour positions (16/24x2).
If Yes, what year Do your building or other requirements include mandatory

Do you have requirements for Yes ____ No ____ did you incorporate detection and/or suppression equipment?
detection/suppression systems?
fire code?
_________
53
COMMUNITY RISK
REDUCTION DEFINITIONS
Found Corrected % Hazds Corrected Hazard found are code violations or other safety
hazards resulting in issuance of a citation or order to
correct within the reporting period.
Total Hazards (within Hazards corrected are hazards found that result in
# # %
reporting period: appropriate corrective action.
% Hazards Corrected = # of hazards found, divided by
number of hazards corrected.
Total Inspected Occupancies inspected either by Fire Prevention or

Fire Suppression personnel.
Occupancies:
Within 1 Year Within 3 Years Within 5 Years

% of Fires in Previously Percent of fires in occupancies that have been
Inspected Occupancies: % % % inspected within the past 1, 3, or 5 years. Intended to
demonstrate the relationship between inspection
% of Total Inspected frequency and fire experience. Even if you can
provide only one year at the present time, 3 and 5
Occupancies Experiencing % % % years can be reported in the future.
Fire:
Structural Contents Nonstructural

Total Dollar Value The assessed value of improvements lost as a result
of fire. Not the replacement value.
Lost to Fire:
Percentage of Total
Market Value Lost to Fire:
The total Costs of all personnel, buildings, and
vehicles and equipment directly involved in providing
Cost of Community Risk
or overseeing the delivery of community risk reduction
Reduction Efforts: services. See attached for detail (Page ?)
Cost of Community Risk

Reduction Efforts
-per $100 Million in

Property Protected:
- per Capita Protected:

54
COMMUNITY RISK
REDUCTION, Cont’d. DEFINITIONS
Structure Fires by Occupancy types are based on the code matrix
Number Per 1,000 Occupancies templates attached at the end of the template
Occupancy Type
Commercial:
Industrial:
Deaths by
Occupancy Type Number Per 100,000 Population
Commercial:
Industrial:
Death/injury in residential structures

with detection systems:
Death/injury in residential structures

without detection systems:
Dollar loss in structures with
suppression systems: $
Dollar loss in structures without
suppression systems: $
Arson Fires Number Percent of Arsons
Total Arson Fires: 100%
Total Arson Fire Arrests:
Total Arson Fire Cases Cleared:

55
FIRE SUPPRESSION DEFINITIONS

Structure Outside Structure
Total Responses Response = Response to an incident regardless of
the number of units or personnel required to respond.
to Fire Calls: # #
Actual Fires: # # # False Alarms-
Dispatch to Arrival Call Entry to Arrival Dispatch to arrival = Time from dispatch of unit to arrival at the site of
the fire; % arriving within 5 min.
Call Entry to arrival = Time from the call being answered at the first
public safety answering point (PSAP) to the arrival of the first
Fire Calls Responded to % %
appropriate unit at the site of the fire; % arriving within 5 minutes.
Within 5 Minutes:
Structure Fires by Outcome Number Percent
Responses to fire calls where the fire that initiated the call is
completely extinguished when the responding unit arrives at the
%
scene of the fire.
Out on Arrival:
contained to the structure or structures that were engaged when the
%
responding unit first arrived at the scene.
Confined to Structure:
contained to the room or rooms that were engaged when the
Confined to %
responding unit first arrived at the scene.
Room of Origin:
Responses to fire calls where the fire that initiated the call spreads
beyond the structure or structures that were engaged when the
%
responding unit first arrived on the scene.
Spread Beyond Structure:
Total Per 1,000 Incidents

Lost Time No Lost Time Lost Time No Lost Time Lost time injury = Fire-related firefighter injuries resulting in time lost
Firefighter from work, as reported to NFIRS. Incidents are dispatched incidents.
No lost time injury = Fire-related injuries resulting in no time lost from
work.
Death = Fire-related firefighter or civilian injuries as reported to
Fire-related Injuries: NFIRS up to one year after the incident causing the injury or death.
Fire-related Deaths:
56
FIRE SUPPRESSION, DEFINITIONS

continued
Per 1,000 Incidents
Require
Civilian Require Transport No Transport Transport No Transport Civilian injury requiring transport = An injury requiring the
transport for medical attention.
Fire-Related Injuries: Civilian injury requiring no transport = An injury not requiring

transport for medical attention.
Fire-Related Deaths:
Occupancies without Occupancies with Occupancies with

Civilian detection/suppression detection suppression
Detection = A system installed in the occupancy for the purpose
of sensing the presence of a fire and sounding an alarm.
Fire-Related Injuries:
Suppression = A system installed in the occupancy for the
purpose of sensing the presence of a fire and initiating action to
Fire-Related Deaths: extinguish the fire.
Emergency
Total Per 1,000 Incidents
Medical Services - Lost Time No Lost Time Lost Time No Lost Time
Firefighter
EMS-Related Injuries:
EMS-Related Deaths:
Total Per 100,000 Population

Total rescues performed = The total number of technical rescue
incidents responded to where some type of rescue service was
Responded to Performed Responded to Performed actually performed.
Special Operations
Technical Rescues
Performed: # # # #
Dedicated Technical
Rescue Teams Responded to Performed Responded to Performed
High Angle: # # # #
Confined Space/Trench: # # # #
57
FIRE SUPPRESSION, continued DEFINITIONS

Total Per 100,000 Population
Responded to Performed Responded to Performed
Water Rescue:
Other: _______________
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Motor Uninten- Con- Under

Intentional Vehicle tional/ tainer Act of Investi- Undeter-
Area Descriptors Accident Other Failure Nature gation mined
Number of HazMat Calls by
Incident Type:
Number of HazMat Site

Inspections Conducted: Local:__________________ Tier II: ________________
Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Number of HazMat Calls by UN
Classification System:
Resources Committed (Inputs)

Percent of Department response personnel
trained to the HazMat Technician level, as %
described in NFPA 472:
Number of FTEs committed to the HazMat Program: #
Total cost of the HazMat Program: $
Outputs
Number of total HazMat incidents for the year: #
Percent of HazMat Program costs
Reimbursed for the year: %
58
EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES DEFINITIONS
BLS – 4 Minutes ALS – 8 Minutes A response is a response to an incident, regardless of
the number of units or personnel required to respond.
Calls responded to within:
Time from dispatch to arrival at the site of the

individual(s) in need of medical assistance. % arriving
within 4 minutes for basic life support and 8 minutes
Unit dispatched to arrival: % % for advanced life support calls.
Time from call being answered at the first public
safety answering point, (PSAP), to the arrival of the
first appropriate unit at the site of the individual(s) in
% % need of medical assistance. % arriving within 4
Call entry to arrival: minutes for basic life support and 8 minutes for
advanced life support.
The average time it takes to transfer calls from the

point they are initially answered, typically the 911
Average PSAP processing:
system, to the point where EMS can be dispatched.
Average On-scene-to- Average time it takes to actually reach patient in need
of care after arriving on the scene of the call.
patient time:
Arrival on scene until you leave the scene.
Time on scene:
Total time is from dispatch to clear.
Total Time:
Basic Life Support Advanced Life Support

Total responses (incidents)
Transport Responses Patients Responses Patients Basic Life Support = Primary level of pre-hospital
(Responses that result in one or care, which includes the recognition of life-threatening
more individuals being conditions and the application of simple emergency
transported to a medical facility.) lifesaving procedures, including the use of adjunctive
equipment aimed at supporting life.
Non-Transport Responses Patients Responses Patients Advanced Life Support = A sophisticated level of pre-
(Responses where no individuals hospital care that builds upon basic life support
are transported to a medical procedures, and includes the use of invasive
facility.) techniques, such as airway management, cardiac
monitoring and defibrillation, intravenous therapy, and
the administration of specified medications, to save a
patient’s life.

Benchmarking The Fire Service: Focusing On Results and Improvements

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benchmarking The Fire Service: Focusing On Results and Improvements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BENCHMARKING THE FIRE SERVICE: FOCUSING ON RESULTS AND

By: Rowland Herald

An applied research project submitted to the National Fire Academy

In an effort to provide accountability to the elected officials and the community,

program funding based on citywide strategic goals. Of primary concern to Fire

monitoring improvements in performance. The action research methodology was used.

The following research questions were posed:

monitor their performance or assist them with planning?

and use of benchmarking and performance measurement?

3. Is there a nationally recognized model of measures available that can be

Internet search that examined the current discussions on funding, providing

accountability, and systems to evaluate organizational performance. A survey was also

fire officials interested in quality improvement programs.

accountability for the fire service is increasing. As individual departments continue to

aggressively explore alternative methods for funding as well as demonstrate

outcomes to the management and electorate of the jurisdiction.

It was recommended that as public safety organizations evolve to meet the

emerge as a cohesive management system that guides decision making as it is

processes regionally. Tomorrow’s fire service leader will need to be accomplished in

accepted business practices and personnel management. Excellent communication

skills will be essential. Managing expectations is key.

Background and Significance…………………………………………………... 8

Clearwater Fire and Rescue.............................................................. 10

Appendix A Fire Department Survey.….……………………………………… 40

Appendix B Benchmark Survey Results..……………………………………… 43

Appendix C Data Collection Template………………………………………… 49

• believed there was significant waste in government and an increase in operating

costs, such as employee wage adjustments, could be absorbed by a more

efficiently-run organization, and;

as there wasn’t any negative impact on services.

In support of this philosophy locally was an organizational culture at the senior

the status quo level.

In retrospect, it appears that an attempt to maintain services in an atmosphere of

originally designated for infrastructure needs and subsidizing a significant portion of

basic-level public safety needs.

budget. Because Clearwater is a built-out community and growth-related revenue was

a resource-constrained environment. Although the voters had approved a local option

requests in anticipation of future needs.

of comparison and monitoring improvements in performance. The action research

methodology was used. The following research questions were posed:

measurement to monitor their performance?

and use of benchmarking and performance measurement?

3. Is there a nationally recognized model of measures available that can be

BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE

On October 1, 1999, the City of Clearwater, Florida, increased property taxes

of the annual budgetary shortfall. By continually delaying projects identified in the

solution with long-term negative consequences.

emphasis on economic development for information and serviced-based industries.

component of the public safety equation. As a result, locally-operated fire departments

parks and recreation, and libraries, for tax dollars.

future services of its Fire and Rescue Department.

sources and systems of accountability to provide assurances to the community that we

acknowledge our fiduciary responsibilities.

grown rapidly both as a tourist destination and as a business center. Clearwater is

commission/city manager form of government. Over 1600 employees, part-time and

Budget, 2000, p.3).

Clearwater Fire and Rescue

protection, fire prevention, emergency medical rescue, emergency management and

miles in area and serves a permanent population of 105,000, as well as a seasonal

population increase of approximately 35,000. The Department has seven stations

strategically located to provide three-to-five minute responses to incidents. The total

approximately 15.1 million dollars (City of Clearwater, Office of Management and