Report Finds that Privatizing Houston EMS would Save Money

[46Young]

Anyone who thinks it's a good idea to cut a FF off the apparatus has never fought a fire in an urban setting.

You simply can't do this job safely with 3 guys on a truck unless you sit around waiting for the next in truck. Even then, you still have to wait for them to arrive to be RIT before the first crew can even make entry to perform a search/rescue.

And as has already been mentioned, HFD rotates FFs off the ambulance/squad to the pumper/ladder every few shifts. So, to do away with this system is only going to force more OT somewhere.

Lastly, after having worked in the "private" industry for a company that provided both FIRE and EMS I can honestly state that the training of a municipal service and the training of a private are light years apart. The city I work for now requires training every shift (except on Saturdays/Sundays) as opposed to maybe once a month for the private I worked for.

In my opinion, there's no comparison. And I'm certainly not saying EVERY private is bad. I'm just pro-city.<_<

My department's truck staffing video illustrates the importance of proper staffing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_K-K6o5cGc

We also have mandatory monthly training, as well as inservice and OOS multi company drills. People still think we lounge around all day playing X-box and watching movies though.

 

[Fish]

Hey 46, you work for Fairfax right?

 

[Shishkabob]

My department's truck staffing video illustrates the importance of proper staffing:

One could argue that if you didn't do interior attacks, you really wouldn't need the extra man as there would be no need for a 2 in 2 out mentality.



Staffing 3 instead of 4 not only saves the yearly salary for the 4th (per truck, per shift), but also the risk of injury or loss of life (and associated monetary costs) from doing interior attacks when unwarranted (ie, no confirmed trapment)

 

[RocketMedic]

Isn't Houston full of oil industry stuff?

DrParasite, quite a few privates are just as good or better than fire departments or thidd-services. AMR, Paramedics Plus, Arcadian, and MedStar come to mind.

 

[usalsfyre]

Anyone who thinks it's a good idea to cut a FF off the apparatus has never fought a fire in an urban setting.

Actually I have.

You simply can't do this job safely with 3 guys on a truck unless you sit around waiting for the next in truck. Even then, you still have to wait for them to arrive to be RIT before the first crew can even make entry to perform a search/rescue.

In life safety situations 2 in 2 out doesn't apply. You cant do 2 in 2 out with a four man crew as your 2 out cant be engaged in other activities (incident commander and engineer)You can maintain 2 in 2 out with 6 people, but you can't mount a full interior attack. Which may keep people from thinking with their balls and having roofs fall on their head.

And as has already been mentioned, HFD rotates FFs off the ambulance/squad to the pumper/ladder every few shifts. So, to do away with this system is only going to force more OT somewhere.

Explain. If the positions are privatized the city is not responsible for staffing them. Therefore the employees are no longer needed.

Lastly, after having worked in the "private" industry for a company that provided both FIRE and EMS I can honestly state that the training of a municipal service and the training of a private are light years apart.

Yep, most privates refuse to accept 10 weeks of paramedic school.

The city I work for now requires training every shift (except on Saturdays/Sundays) as opposed to maybe once a month for the private I worked for.

Training on what? If the majority of time is spent on FD training (or the guys on the EMS unit aren't allowed time to train) then it's kinda worthless when we're talking about EMS service delivery right?

In my opinion, there's no comparison. And I'm certainly not saying EVERY private is bad. I'm just pro-city.

Of the places I've worked, one of the FDs I was at did the worst job, the other did the best. Just because a city is involved means nothing.

 

[Shishkabob]

quite a few privates... MedStar ....

MedStar isn't a private :glare:

 

[usalsfyre]

MedStar isn't a private :glare:

Y'all are just AMR rejects .

 

[Shishkabob]

Last I checked, the Ambulance Authority kicked out their under-performing private contractors years ago

 

[usalsfyre]

Last I checked, the Ambulance Authority kicked out their under-performing private contractors years ago

Details details

MedStar is self supporting though, right?

 

[Shishkabob]

Yup, self-supporting, pretty much all from patient billing (even though as we all know, most bills go unpaid...)


Less than 0.12% of the budget comprises of subsidies from it's member cities. Infact, the amount of subsidies coming in doesn't even pay for my salary for the year.

 

[usalsfyre]

Yup, self-supporting, pretty much all from patient billing (even though as we all know, most bills go unpaid...)


Less than 0.12% of the budget comprises of subsidies from it's member cities. Infact, the amount of subsidies coming in doesn't even pay for my salary for the year.

So in essence, you operate as a non-profit private entity .

I will admit it's easier to run a kickass system when you don't have to show a profit. That said, it's also nice when you can convince the owner of a need and it's ordered a week later rather than six months of committees and budget concerns later.

 

[Shishkabob]

In all technicality, it's a government entity based off the Public Utility Model idea, just not owned by any single city government




Your and mine LAST employer was a non-profit... do you REALLY want to put these 2 agencies grouped together?

 

[Fish]

So in essence, you operate as a non-profit private entity .

I will admit it's easier to run a kickass system when you don't have to show a profit. That said, it's also nice when you can convince the owner of a need and it's ordered a week later rather than six months of committees and budget concerns later.

Are you with ETMC?

 

[Shishkabob]

No, he's not there

 

[Fish]

Champion?

 

[RocketMedic]

My mistake, us Far West Texans literally have nothing like that. El Paso Fire does a good job in the city and UMS does a *reasonable* job on federal installations out here, but our private 911 for the county doesn't even carry benzodiazepines and analgesics are entirely a LOL moment (don't go status-epilepticus in El Paso County), and the other privates here are smallish IFTs. To our east, we've got volunteers, my part-time employer, and a few small privates and city departments and more volunteers, and to the north and west, we've got AMR (by far the most progressive system in the Borderland). Pay is best at the federal contractor UMS, then AMR/EPFD, then the hinterlands, with the IFT and county IFT/911 at the far bottom (some of their paramedics work 24 hours for $130 if they're unlucky and the company doesn't count their hours).

Compared to out here, Central and East Texas look like EMS paradises. Southern NM doesn't look too bad though.

Privatizing Houston screams Acadian, Paramedics Plus or AMR, does it not?

 

[46Young]

Hey 46, you work for Fairfax right?

Yes.

 

[46Young]

One could argue that if you didn't do interior attacks, you really wouldn't need the extra man as there would be no need for a 2 in 2 out mentality.



Staffing 3 instead of 4 not only saves the yearly salary for the 4th (per truck, per shift), but also the risk of injury or loss of life (and associated monetary costs) from doing interior attacks when unwarranted (ie, no confirmed trapment)

Not that simple. Just because there are no reported trapped doesn't mean that there's no one inside. Also, many structures are multiple dwellings. If the fire is discovered early enough, we're going to handle it, instead of letting a whole row burn down just because everyone got out.

Many fires can be handled before they involve enough of the structure to warrant a defensive operation. That's the decision of the first due officer, and then whoever they transfer command to. We're not going to let a room and contents fire burn a whole house down just because everyone got out. That's just silly. Things we look at when deciding whether or not to go in would be the type of structure, how long it's been burning, how much is involved, among other things. Rural departments may do surround and drown most of the time due to lack of resources.

Here's the recent NIST study that shows how much quicker a four person crew can perform 22 essential firefighting tasks than a three person crew (hint: a lot more goes on than just squirting water and breaking windows):

http://www.nist.gov/el/fire_research/residential-fire-report_042810.cfm

 

[Veneficus]

Not that simple. Just because there are no reported trapped doesn't mean that there's no one inside. Also, many structures are multiple dwellings. If the fire is discovered early enough, we're going to handle it, instead of letting a whole row burn down just because everyone got out.

Many fires can be handled before they involve enough of the structure to warrant a defensive operation. That's the decision of the first due officer, and then whoever they transfer command to. We're not going to let a room and contents fire burn a whole house down just because everyone got out. That's just silly. Things we look at when deciding whether or not to go in would be the type of structure, how long it's been burning, how much is involved, among other things. Rural departments may do surround and drown most of the time due to lack of resources.

Here's the recent NIST study that shows how much quicker a four person crew can perform 22 essential firefighting tasks than a three person crew (hint: a lot more goes on than just squirting water and breaking windows):

http://www.nist.gov/el/fire_research/residential-fire-report_042810.cfm

Not to turn this into a fire forum but...

A 4-5 man crew in an independant functioning unit on the fire ground.

1 pump/ladder operator
1. officer
2. crew members

A 3 man engine or ladder forces the use of a second engine/ladder to be effective.

If you are using your officer as a crew member, he is not providing oversight command and control.

That is exactly how people get into situations where they are not aware of surroundings, what else is going on.

I am not sure how anyone can argue a 3 man crew is enough for anything related to structural firefighting.

I am also not sure how needing 2 engines or ladders to perfomr the job of 1 is money saving or efficent?

The reason many smaller departments cannot save buildings is multifactorial.

1. type of building construction
2. experience of the officers and crew (ability/efficency)
3. not enough initial response resources.

If you haven't done it, fighting a fire takes manpower to effectively do multiple simultaneous tasks if you plan to do anything more than save a basement.

The very idea of 2 in 2 out is stupid.

Firstly, a rescue of a firefighter cannot be done by 2 men. I haven't been involved in fire for some time but the last I heard It was something near 20 men to effectively maintain ongoing operations and search/rescue a firefighter.

Secondly, the longer you wait before starting interior operations, the more dangerous it becomes to do so. Waiting on 1/2 dozen or more partial strength companies to start interior operations is just a multiple fatality waiting to happen.

Thirdly, The very idea of searching for victims while dragging around a charged line and hoping to effect a save is stupid beyond reason.

Finally, if your municipality cannot afford to staff the required fire suppression persons for, search, interior, and structure saving operations, then you should definately not be risking peoples lives playing games with mutual aid arriving from 100 miles distant in order to get enough people on a fire ground.

Just call any structure and life a loss and prevent any more fatalities. Particularly firefighters responding.

 

[46Young]

Not to turn this into a fire forum but...

A 4-5 man crew in an independant functioning unit on the fire ground.

1 pump/ladder operator
1. officer
2. crew members

A 3 man engine or ladder forces the use of a second engine/ladder to be effective.

If you are using your officer as a crew member, he is not providing oversight command and control.

That is exactly how people get into situations where they are not aware of surroundings, what else is going on.

I am not sure how anyone can argue a 3 man crew is enough for anything related to structural firefighting.

I am also not sure how needing 2 engines or ladders to perfomr the job of 1 is money saving or efficent?

The reason many smaller departments cannot save buildings is multifactorial.

1. type of building construction
2. experience of the officers and crew (ability/efficency)
3. not enough initial response resources.

If you haven't done it, fighting a fire takes manpower to effectively do multiple simultaneous tasks if you plan to do anything more than save a basement.

The very idea of 2 in 2 out is stupid.

Firstly, a rescue of a firefighter cannot be done by 2 men. I haven't been involved in fire for some time but the last I heard It was something near 20 men to effectively maintain ongoing operations and search/rescue a firefighter.

Secondly, the longer you wait before starting interior operations, the more dangerous it becomes to do so. Waiting on 1/2 dozen or more partial strength companies to start interior operations is just a multiple fatality waiting to happen.

Thirdly, The very idea of searching for victims while dragging around a charged line and hoping to effect a save is stupid beyond reason.

Finally, if your municipality cannot afford to staff the required fire suppression persons for, search, interior, and structure saving operations, then you should definately not be risking peoples lives playing games with mutual aid arriving from 100 miles distant in order to get enough people on a fire ground.

Just call any structure and life a loss and prevent any more fatalities. Particularly firefighters responding.

Pretty much....