The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSubmittal-2010 Fire Department Survey Comparison2010 FIRE DEPARTMENT SURVEY COMPARISON MIAMI VS. OTHERS Prepared by: City of Miami Fire -Rescue May 2010 RECORDFOR ON 008.27-5()bo-).1 al- 2010 Fire, 2010 MFR Comparison Survey erir Ccrnpz SCh Significant Issues When comparing Miami with other departments with a similar population, the City ofMiami Fire- Rescue: m Res pondsto5G96moreca|bforservice w Has 44Y6fewer Fire Stations w Has 4Z%fewer Fire Engines � Has 57%fewer Aeria|s When comparing Miami with other departments with a larger population average of6OO,000to l million, the City of Miami Fire -Rescue: � Responds to approximately 8% more calls for service in a city that has about half the population � Has 4796fewer sworn Firefighters � Has O7%fewer Fire Stations p Staff 65% fewer Fire Engines Conclusion When comparing the City of Miami to other cities of comparable population, Miami Fine -Rescue responds to 56% more alarms than the departments with 44% fewer fire stations. Even with these shortcomings, we still have 76% lower fire loss. When comparing Miami with other cities with a much larger population, the City mfMiami Fire - Rescue responds to 8% more calls, with 47%fewer personnel. Moreover, we do this with 6796 fewer fire stations, and 65% fewer Fire Engines. Submitted into the public record inconnection with item SPA �pn 07'22'10 Priscilla A.Thompson City Clerk 2010 MFR Comparison Survey Fire Department Comparison to Like Sized Municipalities CITY POPULATION SWORN FF PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO RESPONSE DUTIES # OF PERSONNEL ON DUTY # OF FIRE STATIONS # OF ENGINES # OF AERIALS # OF ALARMS 2009 # OF ALARMS per FF MIAMI, FLORIDA * 500,000 699 610 143 14 14 3 88,254 126 BUFFALO, NY 293,000 719 635 122 20 19 9 33,500 47 COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 418,100 433 406 107 20 20 6 49,883 115 RALEIGH, NC 400,000 540 540 122 28 28 8 49,971 92 PITTSBURGH, PA 300,000 615 615 159 29 25 3 25,849 42 NEW ORLEANS, LA 400,000 656 656 161 30 29 10 23,426 36 OAKLAND, CA 511,000 62 492 137 25 25 7 62,353 Avg FF's Avg S a's Avg Alarms Avg AI/FF Dept averages *** 588 25 40,830 69 Fire Department Comparison to Larger Municipalities CITY POPULATION SWORN FF PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO RESPONSE DUTIES # OF PERSONNEL ON DUTY # OF FIRE STATIONS # OF ENGINES # OF AERIALS # OF ALARMS 2009 # OF ALARMS per Firelight er BOSTON, MA 600,000 1,575 1467 264 35 33 18 69,435 44 MEMPHIS, TN ** 643,329 1,874 1628 854 57 57 27 119,611 64 CHARLOTTE, NC 726,284 1,018 1004 254 40 41 14 91,309 90 FT. WORTH, TX 736,200 879 618 206 41 36 14 80,800 92 DETROIT, MI 951,270 1,171 1171 240 44 38 22 28,312 24 FAIRFAX, VA 1,056,422 1,397 1397 334 37 37 7 97,863 70 Avg FF's Avg Sta's Avg Alarms Avg AI/FF Dept averages*** 1319 43 81,222 64 *NOTE: Miami population data is derived from the Social Compact Drill Down Report as of 2009. **NOTE: The only department above that provides ALS transport services is Memphis. All others municipalities incur greater costs by funding a separate EMS Service. The Miami Service Delivery Model reduces redundancy and saves money. ***NOTE: Miami averages twice as many alarms as departments in like sized communities. Submitted into the public record in connection with item SP.1 on 07-22-10 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk 2010 MFR Comparison Survey Comparison to Like Sized Municipalities CITY POPULATION 5VVORNFF PERSONNEL ABS|GN[DnO RESPONSE DUTIES #QF PERSONNEL ON DUTY #QFF|RE STATIONS #QP ENGINES #OF AERIALS #OF ALARMS 2009 #OF ALARMS per Firefighter xm4/r515 rN|Am4|,FLORIDA * 500,000 599 610 143 14 14 3 88,254 1%6 New York City, NY 8.4N1i||ion 16,053 14,308 198 143 472,352 79 Third service EMS. Two tier dispatch. (0nn EN6'TR[K'SO, RES'Chief Aides) Los Angeles, [A 3.8K4iUion 2,722 180 167 32 296'433 109 Third service EMS augmented by two tiered dispatch (Engine with l medic + squad with Zmedics) Chicago, IL 2.8K4iUinn 5,000 lOO 96 51 683,604 137 Have BLS transport units with FF/FkxT's; Ai5transport units are NONfFPmramedio. Phi|ide|ph)a,PA 1.5N1iUion 2,174 1,988 497 56 27 268,996 123 7 ParamedidFFom EMS but run two tier with (4onENG'5nn4ER' honSQand 6nnKES) San Francisco, [A 815'358 1'458 307 42 42 19 103'482 70 Both Fire Service Q Private Ambulance transport. Austin, TX 786,300 1'074 866 789 44 41 13 73,446 58 Third service EMS (Travis County EMS ]OAmbv|anoes) Boston, Mass 645,169 1,412 764 33 35 21 69'435 49 Third service EMS. First responder only pD.(No 4iSunits).[lave minimum manning. Nashville TN 605,473 1'150 256 37 39 lI 128'784 112 Third service EMS provided hy Nashville Public Safety (non-FF's) Virginia Beach, VA 440.575 447 435 I29 19 20 7 28,000 62 Third service EMS (Paid /Vo|). FD has noEMS vehicles. A"KFp's Avg Sta's Avg Alarms AvgAVpp Dept averages ~~~ �,�OV 65 236'060 84 Data Accurate as of: 712212010 Submitted into the public record inconnection with |tmnn SPA on 07'22'10 Priscilla A'Thompson City Clerk Contact Deputy Fire Chief Fernandez for more information 305 772 0595