Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 02 - Public Safety Communications Center 2_ MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRUNO RUMBELOW, CITY MANAGER a6R MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 6, 2009 SUBJECT: PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER UPDATE BACKGROUND: During the summer of 2008, while preparing the budget for the current fiscal year, there was lengthy discussion about the needs of the Public Safety Communications Center. Part of that discussion focused on the metrics used to measure the success of the center and where we were in relation to national standards for answering, processing and dispatching emergency calls for service. At the culmination of that discussion Council approved the hiring of six additional dispatchers for the center. Chief Salame will make a presentation on the current status of the Communications Center and the impact the additional positions have had on the overall operation of the center. Attached is the report that Chief Salame will present to Council on Tuesday night. ES/nl October 1,2009(17:26a10/p10) MEMORANDUM CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS TO: Eddie Salame, Chief of Police Steve Bass, Fire Chief CC: Ben Flanagan, Assistant Chief of Police FROM: Mark Bills, Technical Services Manager SUBJECT: Staffing Analysis DATE: September 30, 2009 In a memo dated August 12, 2008 I presented the following list of items I felt would be directly affected, in a positive way, with the addition of six (6) Dispatchers. Following the list is an explanation of how each was affected by the additional staff. Please keep in mind that while the positions were authorized on October 1, 2008, the first person wasn't hired until January 12, 2009. Additionally, due to normal attrition we have not been able to fully staff the center this year. At this time we have two dispatchers in training and two vacancies. 1. Incoming Call Time to Answer 2. Call Processing Time 3. Supervision/Quality Assurance 4. Training/EMD 5. Increased Morale 1. Incoming Call Time to Answer One of the primary measurements of a Public Safety Dispatch Center that is directly related to staffing levels is how long it takes to answer the phone during the center's busiest hour of the day. National standards from the National Emergency Number Association (NENA) state this time should be ten (10) seconds. In 2007 our center's average time to answer was 17 seconds while all of the area agencies who responded to our survey were operating just above the national standard, at 11 seconds. The additional personnel have allowed us to increase our minimum staffing levels to three (3) dispatchers/supervisors on duty during the busiest time. So far in 2009, our average time to answer a call is 12 seconds 2. Call Processing Time How long it takes for a dispatcher to process an incoming call and dispatch appropriate units is another primary measurement of a Public Safety Dispatch Center. In 2007, our center's average time to process a call (answer to dispatch time) was 5 minutes (300 seconds) while the goal according to the NFPA standards is to have 99% of all calls dispatched in under 90 seconds. So far in 2009 (Jan. 01 — Sept. 20) our call processing time is 2:30 (150 seconds). While still outside of the NFPA standards, the additional personnel have made a significant impact on our call processing time and that should continue to improve as trainees become more proficient. 3. Supervision/Quality Assurance This item is difficult to measure at this time. Supervisors are spending the majority of their time working a console and training the new dispatchers. Recently, supervisors have started spending a little less time on the console and more time listening and observing how the dispatchers are processing and dispatching calls. As the rest of the positions are filled and those dispatchers are trained and released to full duty, I expect the supervisors will spend the majority of their time supervising instead of dispatching, however, even when all six positions are filled, we still won't have supervision on all shifts around the clock. The need for supervision around the clock is increasingly important with the lack of experience associated with new dispatchers. The need still exists for a quality assurance person to develop and oversee a d"' true quality assurance program. Having a true quality assurance program will certainly increase the level of customer service provided by the center to the citizens and visitors of Grapevine as well as the police and fire units on the street. 4. Training/EMD At present, all non-probationary employees are EMD (Emergency Medical Dispatch) certified. 5. Increased Morale Morale in the center is already better. The tense atmosphere has been replaced by a more relaxed one. A contributing factor is the dramatic decrease in the number of calls for service per dispatcher, which dropped by over 2500 calls from 2008 to 2009. The additional staff has also allowed personnel on certain shifts, on certain days of the week, to have breaks away from the console. Once the final positions are hired and trained, this will become the norm rather than the exception. 6. Future Budget Years While progress has been realized over the past several months, there are still several issues that must be considered to continue to improve the center. The primary concern is the lack of adequate supervision. With a center that employs so many inexperienced dispatchers it is critically important that adequate supervision be provided. We currently have 3 dispatch supervisors but in order to provide supervision on all shifts, an additional 3 supervisors will be needed. This additional expenditure will have a significant impact on the communications center and the quality assurance program we would like to have in place as we move forward. Additionally, having adequate supervision provides a mechanism whereby formal and on-the-job training can be increased. This increase in training will help to improve the capabilities of the newer dispatchers in a sterile environment instead of on the radio where mistakes can have dire consequences. The additional training will also help the dispatchers to improve their capabilities in a shorter amount of time. Once adequate supervision is provided and training is increased, we will then be in a position to evaluate whether additional dispatchers are needed. As we continue to review and improve the capabilities of the communications center we should also consider the topic of consolidation. It is believed that shared services with other municipalities can provide some budgetary relief while also improving efficiency. While we may not be able to cut our budget because of consolidation, we may not have to add additional resources. I recommend that we broach the topic of shared services with surrounding agencies and explore the costs associated with such a venture. Communications centers have been consolidated in communities throughout the country and have proven to be very successful. I expect that we may be able to achieve that same success right here in Northeast Tarrant County. Grapevine Police and Fire Dispatch Center Performance Comparison AVG from Grapevine Grapevine Grapevine Survey (Jan 2007 (Jan 01 - 2008 (Jan 01 - 2009 (Jan 01 - 01, 2007-Dec Sep 20) Sep 20) Sep 20) 31, 2007 Po.ulation 48,744 49,635 49,797 64,038 # Calls for Service •er Dis•atcher 6,209 7,466 4,881 4,658 # Calls for Service •er Citizen 1.02 1.20 1.37 0.97 Total Full Time (Authorized Positions) 11 11 17 17 Dis•atchers 8 8 14 14 Shift S•vr/Leads 3 3 3 3 Incomin• 911 25,706 29,340 31,970 38,342 Calls for Service 49,673 59,731 68,337 56,426 Priorit One Calls for Service 5,083 5,306 5,617 3,644 Call Answer Time 00:17 00:12 00:12 00:11 Call Answer to Dis•atch Time 05:00 03:26 02:30 02:16 Call Dissatch to Arrive Time 05:47 05:45 05:39 04:50 Total Response Time 10:47 09:11 08:09 07:06 DEFINITIONS Call Answer Time: The time it takes to answer an incoming call, measured during the busiest hour of the day. Call Answer to Dispatch Time: Measured from the time the call is answered to the time a call is dispatched. The time referred to on this chart is for Priority One calls only. Call Dispatch to Arrive Time: Measured from the time a call is dispatched to the time the unit arrives on scene. The time referred to on this chart is for Priority One calls only. Total Response Time: A combination of the "Answer to Dispatch Time" and the "Dispatch to Arrive Time" and is measured from the time the call is answered to the time a unit arrives on scene. The time referred to on this chart is for Priority One calls only. Averages: Compare the cities of Allen, Bedford, Coppell, Euless, Farmer's Branch, Flower Mound, Frisco, Grapevine, Keller-Southlake, Lewisville, NRH, Richardson & Rowlett. Averages: cover the full year of 2007 (Jan 01, 2007 - Dec 31, 2007) Populations: Populations are set by City Council Resolutions